DECEPTION IN

DECEPTION IN “OUR” COURTS

How International Admiralty/Maritime Law Subverts Our Rights

Please Note: The following document explains how “our” courts operate under Article I, maritime law, instead of under Article III, Constitutional Law intended for Citizens. Because the courts conduct proceedings under the wrong jurisdiction, without informing the Citizens, our Rights guaranteed in the Constitution are not honored, upheld and protected. Under this deception, our best efforts are wasted and our just causes are presented in vain.

INTRODUCTION

Over the last six years the authors and researchers on this project have reviewed hundreds of pounds of material, traveled to other countries and interviewed persons within and without government about the current apparent disregard for our COI1.stitution and god-given rights. Because of innumerable man hours, this research team has uncovered a different or covert "Modus Operandi" and this mode of operation or MO has been to conduct a type of quiet war against the 'People of America.

The authors present the information as educational material only and we do not hold out the material in this book to be the basis of a legal opinion, nor should the reader. It is hoped that the information presented will spark many conversations around the kitchen table; with the Constitution in one hand and the BIBLE (the basis of our law) in the other, (see Public Law 96-1211).

It is recommended, before undertaking any legal action, you consult a QUALIFIED person to review and advise you (and your attorney) In International Law/Admiralty-Maritime Process.

This book has NO COPYRIGHT! You may copy and share the information with all who may be in need. The authors operate under two commandments:

1. Love God. 2. Love His kids.

Blue skies, no sea gulls (or wear a hat), clear sailing!

P.S. Watch for Sharks (IRS)

CHAPTER ONE

THE LAMB TO THE SLAUGHTER

Ask yourself how many people each year loose their property, or how often a family is broken up. Sometimes, there is even loss of life as a direct result of the actions of the Agency known as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). No matter what the answer is, just one such loss is one too many. It seems that there is no way to stop this damage to our country, our families and our lives.

Now, put yourself into this equation. The IRS has begun to send you letters, and it demands money that is beyond your means. Then, while you are in the middle of distress, Al Smith tells you how to stop the IRS. In order to have this information, it will cost you a few thousand dollars. (Al Smith is not a real person but a composite of several so-called Patriots for profit).

This whole process is new to you. At this point you still trust the folks at IRS and you try to work out your problems. So, like thousands before you, you make a trip to the local IRS office and explain that someone has made a mistake. Although you do not know the tax laws, there is something very wrong. The IRS agent, smiling from ear to ear, tells you that you can handle the tax easily, pay the tax! You again explain, to deaf ears, that you do not have the money which they claim, nor did you ever make enough money to have been charged with such a tax. So, your friend, the IRS agent, tells you that you can pay the tax and then sue the IRS, or that you can petition the Tax Court. In Tax Court you will meet a new friend, the judge, another IRS Agent. Of course, you can file bankruptcy.

After this experience, you remember Al Smith, and you call him up. Al gives you more Information than you can handle at first, but you rely upon him. Al will lead you out of all these tax problems. All you have to do is send a few letters out, pay Al for all his secret knowledge and claim the 5th Amendment.

At this point Al is a hero. Then the IRS seems to go into overdrive and events happen which overcome your senses. The boss at work receives a letter from the government. The boss does not understand why he must send all, or the biggest part of your pay check, to the IRS. All he knows is that, if he does not, he will lose his business. This same action takes place at the bank, credit union, etc Al has an answer, send another letter and all will be well. Nothing happens.

A few weeks later, a letter arrives from the government. After opening the brown envelop you discover a "NOTICE OF TAX LIEN UNDER REVENUE LAWS". Quickly you rush to the phone to call Al. AI sends you another letter to stop the problem, secure in your belief that Al knows what he is doing, you follow his instructions. You go on about your business, except that now, no pay is coming from work. Your family and friends are beginning to look at you as if you are crazy. By this time you have read all of the information that AI has sent you. You find that there are hundreds if not thousands of people out there, just like you that know the truth. But the Courts, the local Sheriffs, members of Congress, and even Church leaders, refuse to hear the truth.

Several months pass. You change jobs, and a few dollars are beginning to come in again. Al has suggested that you do away with your driver’s license, social security number, birth certificate and marriage license. You have learned that all of these documents, numbers, etc. are meant to make you a slave. The more you study the more you are convinced that you know the truth and despite the outcome, you can never go back to believing in the government or any institution that supports this type of outlaw activity. You have become a “Patriot”. You have become a 'Tax Protestor."

(Note: this was received with some missing text. Sorry.) …

country, Of course, there are some things that are in common and some things that do not match everyone's particular situation. For example, in our little story we did not petition the tax court, nor was a ninety day letter (Notice of Deficiency) discussed, we did not talk about the bankruptcy issue although many people flee to the Bankruptcy court to escape the disaster.

What we intend to introduce for your consideration is a newer view of the activities of the IRS and a possible remedy to this seemingly impossible situation, which is destroying our country. It is hoped that our courts and responsible people in government may still have the moral courage to stand for what is right in these dark days.

Since the chances of winning in the courts are limited, we must look at different areas of the law to see if any possibility has been over looked. Also we must not rely on Al any longer. We must check every document and every position presented to us in order to understand the process. How is ' it that the IRS can take-away our property and the U.S. Constitution is powerless to protect us. The answer may be found in the study of International Law-Admiralty/Maritime Law.

Most people have some understanding of the different types of law such as Criminal or Civil. For example, as this is being written, the O. J. trial is on the TV. Talk radio seems like nothing more than the O. J. soap opera. This circus deals with criminal Law. Civil Law has been used when dealing with tort claims, such as a fend,er-bender or your propefty rights. Very few people (including attorneys and even the courts) have an understanding of Admiralty/Maritime Law. The supreme court of the united States has declared:

"To the extent that admiralty procedure differs from civil procedure. It is a mystery to most trial and appellate Judges, and to the non-specialist lawyer who finds himself, sometimes to his surprise, involved in a case cognizable only on the admiralty "side" of the court. “Admiralty practice”, said Mr. Justice Jackson, “is a unique system of substantive laws and procedures with which members of the Court are singularly deficient in experience." Black Diamond S.S. Corp. v. Stewart & Sons, 336 U.S. 386, 403, 69 S. Ct 622.93L Ed. 754 (1949) (dissenting opinion).

Is it any wonder that the State Courts do not have any concept of Admiralty process, when they rule against you in favor of the purchaser of the IRS tax lien, in a Quiet Title action? Note, more on this later.

, "The Federal District courts are the accustomed forum in which actions in admiralty are tried and in the absence of some special reason therefore, no effort should be made to divert this type of litigation to judges less experienced in the field.” Calmar S.S. Corp. v. United States. 345 US 446, 97 L ed 1140 73 S Ct. 733.

NOW, before we start looking at every action as an Admiralty action, we need to consider the following:

2 Am Jur. Vol 2. ADMIRALTY section 15 - Limited

Admiralty is a limited jurisdiction, depending for its

existence on whether or not the cause involved is an

admiralty or maritime matter. There is no statutory

definition of admiralty jurisdiction, and difficulties

attend every attempt to define its exact limits. The

extent of the admiralty jurisdiction, as conferred by the

Constitution, is not limited by the scope of admiralty

Jurisdiction as it existed under English law, nor was it

extended_as far as_the admiralty jurisdiction then;

reached in the civil law countries. The scope of

admiralty jurisdiction in this country is to be determined

In the light of the Constitution, the laws of Congress,

and the decisions of the Supreme court....

At this point, you maybe asking yourself, what does this have to do with the IRS and tax laws? Keep in mind that, when an action has been filed in the courts, it is 'necessary to file in the proper jurisdiction, venue.

The Huntress, 12 Fed. case 984@992 & 989, (Case No.

6,914) (D. ME. 1840): "In this country revenue causes had so long

. been the subject of!Admiralty cognizance, that congress

Considered them as CIVIL CAUSES OF ADMIRALTY AND MARITIME

JURISDICTION, and to preclude any doubt that might arise,

carefully added the clause, ‘including,’ etc. This is clear proof that

congress considered these words to be used in the sense they

bore in this country and not in that which they had in England.

The Act gives exclusive admiralty maritime Jurisdiction to

the district court. As a court of the law of nations, … But

in cases wher the courts of common law have always exercised

concurrent jurisdiction, the jurisdiction is not, and was never

intended by the constitution to be, exclusive, though the subject

matter be maritime…. The common law, and of course the sense

in which the technical words of that law are used, WAS NEVER IN

FORCE IN THIS COUNTRY, any further than as it was adopted by

common consent, or the legislature. BEYOND THIS, IT WAS

AS MUCH A FOREIGN LAW AS THAT OF FRANCE OR HOLLAND.”

Although this case is from .1'840,it is still_in operation today. Reread that opening line again -revenue causes … the subject of Admiralty…

Let us move ahead to this century, for those readers who are concerned about old law, and take note of a case from the recent past, United States of America v. $3,976.62 in Currency, One 1960 Ford Station wagon Serial No. OC66W145329:

“Although presumably for purposes of obtaining jurisdiction, action for forfeiture under internal Revenue Laws is commenced as PROCEEDING IN ADMIRALTY, after jurisdiction is obtained proceeding takes on character, of civil action at law, and at least

at such stage of proceedings, Rules of Civil Procedures control.”

Has the light started to come on, or are we still in the dark? The point being made is that all revenue activity is controlled by Admiralty process. The Supreme Court often quotes Benedict on Admiralty, and it seems that if the highest court in the land quotes from it, then we should take a look.

1 Benedict (6th Edition) section 17, p. 28:" As no court other than

a court of admiralty can enforce, maritime liens, no other court can

displace, discharge or subordinate them. Neither the State courts nor

the United States courts on their common law, equity and bankruptcy sides can divest, transfer to proceeds or adjudicate the maritime liens uriless the maritime -lienors

voluntarily submit themselves to the jurisdiction.

Let us now examine the NOTICE OF FEDERAL TAX LIEN UNDER INTERNAL REVENUE LAWS. Turn the document over and what do you see. "United States v. __________” If you do not find this on the notice which you have, keep in mind that in some countries, the recorders do not record the back side of the document. The IRS usually will not send-the complete document to you. It is very important that you find such a document because on the back side we find that the lien has been filed pursuant to 26 USC 6321. What does this mean?

"…(I)t is now generally held that government tax claims under 26 USC§ 6321

'upon all property and rights of property whether real or personal rank below all other maritime liens….” I

Benedicts's “admiralty." 7th ed., Vol2 Cehapter IV § 51 footnote

Open a copy of Black's Law Dictionary to IN REM and we see something that may shed some light on the above quotation from Benedict's Admiralty:

In rem – A technical term used to designate proceedings

or actions instituted against a thing,........... It is true that, in a strict

sense, a proceeding In rem is one taken_directly;against property,

and has fori itsobject the disposition of property, without

reference to the title of individual claimants;........... (See: Quasi In

rem)

Is it possible that the NOTICE OF TAX LIEN[S] is an In rem action? Unless

someone can come up with a better idea or another reading of the Notice,

it clearly states “rights to property”.

Now it is time to turn on the computer because in order to do a word search

it would take days, weeks, or even months to find In rem ,in the Internal

Revenue Code. I will only help you one time. Open a copy of Title 26 and turn

to § 7323 which reads:

(a) Nature and venue,- the proceedings to enforce such

Forfeitures shall be in the nature of the proceeding In rem

in the United States District Court for the district where such

seizure is made.

Stop for a moment and let’s recap what we have learned so far.

1. The District Court for the United States is the court

of nations having_exclusive and limited Admiralty jurisdiction

venue.

2. Revenue actions are Admiralty as pointed out in "The

Huntress" and other cases listed above. See Benedicts on Admiralty.

3. NOTICE OF TAX LIEN UNDER REVENUE LAWS are Admiraltv

_ actions pursuant to 26 USC § 6321 against property and the rights to_property

in rem (see 26 USC §.7323 also § 7401 to be discussed later. '

4. Inj.rem deals with rights to property not with the "person".

Because so many people have prob1ems with the word person, the one we are talking about has blood in his veins.

We have a few other areas to cover and then we will get into the "how to" section, since, you are going to make a trip to the Law Library, look at Title 28 §§ 2461-2465. In §2463 we read:

" All property taken or detained UNDER ANY REVENUE LAW

of the United States … shall be deemed in the custody of the law

and subject only to the orders and decrees of the courts of the

United States having jurisdiction thereof.”

How many people have asked the IRS agent or Sheriff for a court order while they drive away with the persons car or they sell the home at a tax sale. The Sheriff, when questioned, has replied “the IRS does not need a court order". Now folks, is it possible that our Sheriff cannot read, or does he fear the IRS. Again we ask that you look at the basis of our law, the Bible, King James Version. In Hosea, 4:6, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge…”

Back in 1861 there was a civil war in this country. The President had a problem. The Southern States were in rebellion and the Federal Government could not declare war against the Southern States for the Federal Government would have recognized the sovereignty of the South. If it had recognized the sovereignty of the South, it would have no claim to any of the property of the States or the People, (see, Black's Law for Prize and Booty), therefore, the President was granted power under 12 stat 319 over the property of person’s in rebellion against the United States.

Today we have people in rebellion against the United States, as defined by 12 stat 319 and the Trading with_the Enemy Act of October 6th, 1917. This is also an undeclared/silent war against thePeopleof this country, being waged by the IRS agents not on1y for the united States,'but for "the Bank and the Fund", see 22 USCA § 286 et. seq.

In a letter to members of Congress dated January 13, 1995, Congressman

James A. Traficant Jr. pointed out:

“The IRS is an agency out of control.” … “Last year, I described

length on the House floor the cases of everyday American

families whose lives were ruined without cause by the IRS. I

received thousands of letters from all over the country from

people who told me their IRS horror stories.”

How many people have been declared “tax protestors"? Once the title "tax protestor is used, 12 stat 319 can be used to take your property. Please take the time to look this up and share it with your friends. In the State of Utah, it is common, in dealing with the State Tax commission, for the Commission to place the letters TP after any case number involving tax issues. The Judges in the state courts hearing these actions; when questioned "what does the TP stand for," simply say they do not know.

The Clerks of the court responsible for issuing the number for the tax cases claim they do not know what the two letters TP mean. Do you think Forrest Gump could figure this out? Life is like a box of Chocolates...

In the 5^th Amendment to the Constitution it says:

“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"

Back in 1933 the President declared a "state of emergency," and we are still under, this declared state of emergency today. Since a state of emergency is existing, and on1y the President can end such; ,we must be in "public danger”. So much for the 5^th Amendment!

"I believe there are more instances of abridgement of freedom

of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in

power than by violent and sudden usurpations... "

James Madison

In Congressman Traficant's letter quoted above, he is attempting to introduce a bill into Congress to shift the burden of proof from the “taxpayer” to the Internal Revenue Service. The burden of proof is always on the plaintiff, so when you petition the tax court, bankruptcy court, or district court, you are in fact the plaintiff and the burden of proof falls on you. However, in the Admiralty process, the burden of proof falls to the one filing a libel (Notice of Tax Lien in the county record), and in this Instance, you are not the, Plaintiff, but a Petitioner filing an Answer (Libel of Review).

Could this, then, be the key?

********************

Please take the time to go to the local law library and check out each quotation for yourself, do, not ask Al. Many people make a mistake when they find a case or part of a statute and use this as a basis for an action. Laws change and rules change from state to state and from court to court. Remember, that just because a case is quoted it, may not apply to you or your case.

CHAPTER TWO

THIS IS THE KEY?

For the moment let’s say that you are the owner of a ship and you have taken on a cargo in France. You sail to the port of New York, USA to unload your cargo but when you arrive in the port your vessel is seized by the government for violation of some revenue statute. The US Marshall serves an

arrest warrant at the direction of the Federal District Court, signed by a magistrate/judge for the district where the “res" (ship) is located. The Marshall posts a notice on the res of the seizure. "

You have been served a copy of a complaint made upon “an oath of solemn affirmation”, upon review of the complaint it is clear that the circumstances from which the claim arises states with such particularity that the defendant (you) will be able, without moving for a more definite statement, to commence an investigation of the facts and to frame a responsive pleading. See Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims (SR Fed Civ P) E2a.

Let’s review the elements of what just took place. But, before we do so, take out a pencil and a clean sheet of paper. At the top of the paper write THINGS NECESSARY TO PERFECT A LIEN.

In our example, was the Captain, agent for the owner, or the owner served a copy of a complaint made upon an oath of solemn affirmation?

Point # 1. (On your paper.) Of course the answer to our question is YES.

Point # 2. How was the complaint and/or arrest warrant served? "Study aid" see Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rule 4. In our example the process was served by the US Marshall. You should have point two on your paper by this time.

Point # 3. Is the information clear on the complaint so that it will not be necessary to move for a more definite statement ... so that you may frame a responsive pleading.

Point#4. Has the Court for the District where the res is located been served?

Point #5. Was the notice properly posted?

As you can see, there is a definite process that must be followed in order to perfect a lien under Admiralty process. However, what do you do if there a defect in the service of process? So much so that you or the court have been improperly served or no service of any kind has been performed .

One answer is. When a person finds to his surprise, that he has not been served, or improperly served, he may petition the District court for the United States for the District where the res is located (in rem) for a Libel of Review to determine-the basis, (foundation) if any, for the libel. [Notice of Tax Lien under Revenue Law, filed in the county record absent a court order or oath of solemn affirmation]

See 2 Benedict (6^th Edition), section 275,pg. 119, 120: "But where

a party discovers that … he has had no proper notice... and has thereby

been deprived of property; or where there has been fraud of any kind … so that no regular remedy is left him, he may obtain redress by filing a libel of review. The subsequent proceedings will be the same as in any suit and the decree of the court will be such as equity demands. There is no corresponding provision in the Civil Rules.” (Emphasis mine.)

Stop. Pencil down. Before we go into more detail on our two examples so far, we must take a look at the District Court that signed the warrant for the arrest of the property. Also, it is important to understand who the parties of real interest are.

The District court is divided into three separate sections. The first section is devoted to criminal law. The second section is devoted to civil law. The third section and the one least understood by the judges and attorneys, as noted in Chapter One. is the Admiralty division.

The Admiralty section of the curt has its own distinct set of court rules. It would be wise to check with the District court in your area or local law library to acquire the rules that govern the actions of the court. It is a must to have a copy of the supplemental rules of admiralty. These are numbered A-F, instead of the numeric system familiar to most people. We will discuss some of these supplemental rules later on. (Emphasis added.)

One of the researchers on this project had an interesting conversation a couple of years ago with a nationally known attorney. This attorney had been a government employee for nearly thirty years. The attorney made this observation about the rules of court. It was his opinion that the rules of court were designed to quickly dispense with the novice, "pro se attorney”, thereby cutting down on the work load that the courts were under. As the attorney explained, whenever a complaint/answer was presented to his department and had been placed on his desk, the things he wuld check wer the Rules of Court. As he explained, the work load is so great that we look for any way to disqualify a Plaintiff-Defendant.

It is extremely important that you read and understand the rules of court. Unfortunately, many people are never heard in our court system because they do not know or understand the rules. It is quite possible to win your case based solely on rules and never have the merits of the case heard. It is because of these rules that the admiralty process becomes viable.

In order to understand the admiralty court we need to look at some of the other courts and the position the ‘taxpayer’ is placed in when he enters their jurisdiction.

The first court is an Administrative Court. It is known as the United States Tax Court. This court operates under the authority of the Executive Branch of the United States Government. (the President). The Secretary of Treasury (the Governor of the International Monetary Fund) provides the regulations that govern the operation of the tax court and this court does not operate under the same set of rules as the District, Circuit or Supreme Court.

The IRS uses a type of trickery (Modus Operandi) in order to move their victim into the tax court This is done by sending the victim a Notice of Deficiency also known as a ninety day letter. In this Notice of Deficiency letter the target is informed that he has 90 days to petition the tax court if he

disagrees with the amount that they have decided the target is going to pay. Note: the term “target” is a term used in the United States Attorney’s Manual in referring to the “taxpayer”.

By the way, in the Notice of Deficiency, it is common to see penalties and interest attached to the taxpayer for the manufacture, sale or distribution machine gun parts pursuant to 26 USC § 6651(a) and of course one of their favorites, civil fraud 26 USC § 6662. In Cramer v The Commissioner of Internal Revenue, case # 11718.94, the petitioner, Mr. Cramer, pointed out to the court that the claim of civil fraud by the IRS reversed the burden of proof. The Court agreed. The Attorney for the government (currently under investigation by the inspector General's Office for criminal misconduct in this case, and the court was notified of this on the record before the hearing began) said, that upon review of the record, no fraud was present. However, the government did not remove the fine imposed under 26 USC § 6662. This is a fun case and one that Congress decided to review, not by choice, but just because Mr. Cramer pushed his way in through letter writing, thereby placing it on the record. Judge Powell was so unprepared for Mr. Cramer that several times the Judge claimed that the internal Revenue code is found in Title 28. Please find this case and study it. Review Mr. Cramer’s opening statement.

If we look at 26 U.S.C. § 7401, we will find that before any penalty, civil or criminal, can be applied, it requires the sanction (O-Kay) of the Attorney General or his/her delegate and the Secretary of the Treasury. Many a patriot has wasted their time going into tax court and arguing that 6651 (a) and 6662 could not and did not apply to them because they were a non-taxpayer, non- resident alien, did not deal in alcohol tobacco or firearms, etc. Remember, this is an Administrative Court and the Judge will remind you that this is a court of limited Jurisdiction. The court will not allow the “taxpayer” to go behind the Notice of Deficiency to determine if there is any basis in faCt for the deficiency.

What is meant by “go behind the deficiency”? When you petitioned the Tax Court to hear your complaint, you took on the position of the Plaintiff. The burden of proof became your responsibility. The government on the other hand, was the innocent Defendant. Yes, I said innocent. Under our form of (in)justice, the Defendant Is Innocent until proven guilty. The Defendant is not required to testify against himself. Also, the court is eager to grant a protective order denying the Petitioner any access to any records that would support his position and be embarrassing to the government. If you find yourself as the Plaintiff (petitioner), the burden of proof always falls on your shoulders. It is impossible to prove a negative. For those of you who have had the sad experience of going to Tax court, you realize what a mistake it was to take the bait and petition the Tax court. By doing so, you merely rubber stamped the IRS lie.

Some of you may have appealed the Tax Court decision to the Federal District Court. You also could have gone to this court in the first place by paying the tax first and then suing for a recovery. Fat chance! Just like our illustration, in the Tax court you are the Plaintiff. The burden of proof is on you. Again they played their trick and you took the bait. The government trots out the Anti-injunction Act 26 USC § 7421 and you are barred from stopping the collection process while you attempt to have your day in court. Again court rules play an important part. Pursuant to Rule 64 of the Civil Rules they may continue their collection process and you can do nothing more than watch your car, bank account, job, home and family go away. The American that brings a suit against the government in the Federal District Court only stands about a 12% chance of winning.

Well, you see everything leaving and you are trying to hold on to what little you have left, so you file bankruptcy. Congratulations, you just took the bait and are in their trap again. When you filed bankruptcy, you were able to bypass the Anti-injunction Act for a short time. However, depending upon how aggressive the U. S. Attorney is, the automatic stay can be lifted in a matter of a few weeks. Again, the property can be seized and sold off. If the judge has a small understanding of the law he will require the IRS to supply the court with an inventory list of the property taken and any monies to be deposited with the registrar of the court.

Remember 28 U.S.C. § 2463? Along with doing battle with the U. S. Attorney, you will also find his helper, the Trustee for the Bankruptcy Court. By the way, the Trustee is the de facto owner of all your property. Again, because you petitioned the Bankruptcy Court, the burden of proof falls on your shoulders and the government can play hide and seek while they destroy you.

In Chapter One, our little lamb received a Notice of Lien. If he had taken the time to look at the signature line, it is quite likely that he would have found that it was never signed. In most cases the IRS uses a stamp for another party. For example: rubber stamp Jim Jones for James Doe Question: Is it possible for another person to testify for you as to your personal first hand knowledge? See FRCP Rule 56(e)(g). .

In Admiralty, there is no court which has jurisdiction unless there is a valid international contract in dispute. If you know it is Admiralty jurisdiction, [see the HUNTRESS, Benedict on Admiralty, and 26 U.S.C. § 6321 as noted above.], and they have admitted on the record that you are in an Admiralty Court, you can demand that the international maritime contract to which you are supposedly a party and which you supposedly have breached, be placed into evidence. However it is the practice (Modus Operandi) of the IRS to bypass the court altogether and trick you into becoming the moving party. The IRS never ever admits on the record that they are moving in Admiralty.

No court has Admiralty/Maritime jurisdiction unless there is a valid international contract that has been breached. And generally speaking only the parties of REAL INTEREST may bring an action.

"A cardinal principle, in which the practice of admiralty courts differs

from that of courts of common law, permits the parties to a suit to

prosecute and defend upon their rights as such rights exist at the

institution of the action; the assignment of a right of action being

deemed to vest in the assignee all the privileges and remedies

possessed by the assignor. According to the rule of common law the

injured party alone is permitted to sue for a trespass, the damages

being deemed not legally assignable; and if there be an equitable

claimant, he may sue only in the name of the injured party. In

admiralty, however, the common practice is to have the suit

conducted in the names of the real parties IN INTEREST." 1 R.C.L.

§ 33. pg. 424 (1914); "…and when a statute of the United States so

provides, an action for the use or benefit of another shall be brought

in the name of the united States." F.R.CN.P. 17. The district courts are

prohibited from granting venue where the united States has less than

"one-half of its capital stock…" of the respondents/Libelants Principal

the Fund and Bank. 28 USC § 1549; The government by becoming a corporator.

(See: 28 USC § 3002(15)(A)(B)(C), 22 USCA 286(e) lays down its

sovereignty and takes on that of a private citizen, it can exercise no

power which is not derived from the corporate charter. (See: The

Bank of the United States vs. Planters Bank of Georgia. 6 L Ed.(Wheat)

244; U.S. vs. Burr. 309 U.S. 242). The REAL PARTY IN INTEREST is

not the de jure "United States of America" or "State", but "The Bank" and "The

Fund". (22 USCA 286, et seq.). The acts committed under fraud, force

and seizure are many times done under "Letters of Marque and .

Reprisal" i.e. "recapture." (See: 31 USCA 5323). such principles as "Fraud

and Justice never dwell together.” Wingate's Maxims, 680. and, "A right

of action cannot arise out of fraud." Broom's Maxims, 297, 729.

Sometimes it is helpful if we take the time to draw a diagram of the steps taken in the process. (See Diagram I)

At the left hand top of the page you will note that a box containing the USA appears. Then, across from that box to the right a box containing The Governor of The International Monetary Fund AKA Secretary of the Treasury. These two boxes are not linked at this point Inasmuch as the Governor is not an agent for the USA and is therefore intra government as opposed to inter government.

The United States is a part owner of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and holds about 19 to 20% of the stock in this private corporation. (See: 22 USCA 286 et seq.) The Governor of the Fund can not be paid by the United States. Question: from where does the pay for the Judges of the Federal District Court come? BATF?

Below the box containing the Governor of the IMF we find the IRS. The Secretary makes the rules that the IRS must follow and Delegates authority to the Commissioner on down the line to the agents in the field. The Secretary, as the Governor of the IMF, is then in charge of the IRS. It follows that the agents in the field must be under his direct command if we have read the statues correctly.

Under his direction, some of the functions of the IRS are to send letters, make demands, visit and victimize their victims. This is done under the color of law. The phrase "color of law", means “something that appears to be genuine, but is not. These IRS agents are in fact, agents for the Governor of the IMF not the USA. Question: Why are there two separate sections in the Internal Revenue Code dealing with misconduct? (See: 26 USC §§ 7214 & 7433). Why are the Noticeso Lien "under Revenue Laws" not signed, but stamped for a third party? MODUS OPERANDI!'

Just to the left of the box containing the IRS we see a box around (DOJ) Department of Justice and arrows connecting these two entities. In the United States Attorney’s Manual (USAM), we find that the IRS and DOJ must work in harmony. .

USAM 6 - 4.010 reads in pertinent part - The Federal Tax Enforcement Program is designed to protect the public interest in preserving the integrity of this nation's self-assessment tax system...the Federal Tax Enforcement Program is designed to have the broadest possible impact on compliance attitudes by emphasizing balanced enforcement not only with respect to the types of violations prosecuted but also the geographic location and economic and vocational status…However, the tax enforcement program can only work effectively If the IRS, Department of Justice, and U.S. Attorneys work in harmony. (Emphasis mine.)

Below the IRS, is the beginning of the pattern or MO that the service follows, i.e., the Notice of Deficiency or 90 day letter. From this point, the arrows show the path between the various courts. If we follow this pattern, the United States becomes a party to the Action[s] and this allows the DOJ/U.S. Attorneys to come to the aid of their buddies. At this time, the government will spend any amount of money it needs, or if need be, threaten harm to you or someone or something close to you, outside of the hearing of the court. Yes, just like the NAZI party in Germany, these agents, misguided as they are, believe they are protecting our country. I t was reported that an 84 year old woman was forced out of a rest home for a tax due from 1975 in 1994. (see: 26 U.S.C. § 650l(a)). It makes me feel sick every time this happens. One person can change this and it may be you! Remember commandments: 1&2.

There is another set of boxes connected to the IRS on our diagram. One box shows the Notice of Lien filed with the county recorder.

Then, follows the Notice of Seizure, Tax Sale and finally the Quiet Title Action in the State Court. This is the path we want to follow.

First of all, the Notice of Lien was a Libel on the public record. This Libel was not filed with the District court for the United States where the “res” is located. (You should go to the Court and request a Certificate of Search to use as proof of no claim filed.)

Next to follow in the Modus Operandi is the Seizure. (See: 28 U.S.C. §§ 2463 - 2465). If the Court has not been notified of the seizure, how can it have control over any property taken under any revenue law, unless it was not for the benefit of the United States of America. It must have been for the use and benefit of another.

What happens at the tax sale? (Sale of home). The Special Procedures Function Officer is the agent that represents the governor of the International Monetary Fund, AKA Secretary of the Treasury. He is the grantor on a deed to the United States Internal Revenue Service. Question: why was it necessary for the IMF to transfer the lien to the United States Revenue Service? Answer: until this transaction took place the United States was not a party to the action. Finally, a Quit Claim Deed is given to the 'purchaser of the lien (private Party).

Just a note on Quit Claim Deeds: A Quit Claim Deed does not transfer any property rights. In point of fact, a Quit Claim Deed declares that the grantor of the deed holds no interest or equity in the property. For example, the reader of this book could issue a Quit Claim Deed for the State Capitol and this deed would be just as valid as the deed issued by the IRS for the home sold at the tax sale.

Finally, we arrive at the last segment of our diagram: Quiet Title action in the State court. The next thing that happens after the tax sale is that the purchaser of the lien realizes he does not have title to the property he supposedly purchased. Therefore, in order for him to perfect his title, it requires a Court Order. Now, from our studies, does the State Court have jurisdiction to hear this Quiet Title Action? Can the purchaser of the lien produce the court Order that authorized the sale? Is the purchaser the real party in interest? Can the real party in interest transfer said interest? If you have followed the Information so far, you can easily answer each one of these questions.

SAMPLE PLEADINGS

FEDERAL

Name

Address

City, State & zip

Pro se

DISTRICT COURT FOR THE UNITED STATES

DISTRICT OF _______________________

)

and ) Admiralty case #

)

Petitioner/Claimant, )

) IN ADMIRALTY,

v. )

) IN RE

)

) LIBEL OF REVIEW, ANSWER

) OF___________ ,AND_____________

)COMPLAINT OF INVOLUNTARY

IAGENTS FOR INTERNATIONAL MONETARY ) SERVITUDE AND PEONAGE.

FUND, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, ) IN RE

DISTRICT DIRECTOR, SPECIAL ) ALL PROPERTY AND RIGHTS TO

PROCEDURES FUNCTIONOFFICER and ) PROPERTY OF THE (LAST NAME'S

THEIR PRINCIPAL, GOVERNOR OF ) OF PETITIONERS) THEIR ESTATE

INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND ) AND TRUST.

AKA SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY )

)

) Judge:

)

. Respodndents/Libelants.

ANSWER AND VERIFIED COMPLIANT OF LIBEL

COMES NOW____________and____________,Pro Se, appearing specially, Supplemental Rule Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (SFRCP), Rule (E)8, "Restricted Appearance," in the original in the alternative, as a matter of right and Privilege and enter their answer SFRCP (B)3(b), to alleged rights under maritime liens and notice of intent to levy by Respondents/Libelants as Libelant in the first instance absent their verified oath or solemn affirmation of complaint pursuant to Supplemental Rules (B)(l). (C)(2) & (E)(4)(f) or in the alternative F.R.Civ.P.(e ),thereby denying Claimants procedural due process.

1. In the interest of law and justice mandates a hearing of Libel of Review pursuant to the Law of Nations and that said Petitioners/Claimants as Petitioners and for the protection of their person, property, estate, and trust hereby enters their Complaint of Involuntary Servitude and Peonage due to wanton and malicious acts and threats, duress, coercion, fraud by Respondents/Libelants as Respondents in violation of the Laws of the forum United States of America and the Law of Nations pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 3, 4 113(b) 219, 241, 242, 371, 654, 661, 709, 951, 1001, 1028, 1341, 1346, 1581, 1621, 1622, 1961, 2111, 2382, 2384, 42 U.S.C. § 19834th, 5th, 7th. 9th, 10th, 13th & 16th Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America.

JURISDICTION

2. This is an admiralty/maritime cause of action within the meaning of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(h). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2461 and 2463 "all property taken or detained under any revenue law of the united States....shall be deemed in the custody of the law and subject only to the orders and decrees of the courts of the United States havin2iurisdiction thereof." Emphasis added.

3. The United States District Court is the mandated district court of the United States having de Jure venue to hear a cause of action etc., pursuant to 5 Stat. 516, Chapter 188, § 5 enacted, August 23, 1842 pursuant to the Act of September 24.1789, Chapter 20: and, The Constitution for the United States of America. Article III§ 2; and, in that the Respondents/Libelants et al., are directed by the Governor of the Fund (I.M.F.) AKA Secretary of the Treasury, alien custodian for Prize and Booty, and are foreign agents of their principal The Fund and Bank et al., a fortiori mandates pursuant to the law of the United States of America Title 22 U.S.C. Foreign Relations and intercourse - international Organizations Chapter 7 § 286g. Jurisdiction and venue of actions - "...any such action at law to which either the Fund or Bank shall be a party shall be deemed to arise under the laws of the united States, and the District Courts of the United States shall have original Jurisdiction of any such action." Emphasis added.

4. The united States is not a proper party to this action even though the Principal's agents come in its (UNITED STATES) name on the "Notice of Federal Tax Lien[s] under Revenue Laws" and the like, therefore, the Petitioners/Claimants do not make the united States pursuant to F.R.Civ. P 17. or in the alternative the United States attempts to make an appearance, the Petitioners/Claimants reserves their righ