Law links and verification status · Blank forms. Citation links are generated from extracted text; unverified links, image-only pages and incomplete citations require review. Reference-book links open publisher resources, not exact definitions.

v10n1-federal-v-national

PDF page numbers count from the first file page; printed labels may differ.

Open document online · Download source file

32 AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@gte.net    972-418-8993
The most perplexing ques-
tion facing constitutionalists in-
volves the hypothesis that we
somehow have two “layers” of
government.  That is, there ap-
pears to be a “corporate” govern-
ment that has usurped the pow-
ers of the constitutional govern-
ment established under the Fed-
eral Constitution.
Although government “dual-
ity” has been dogma among con-
stitutionalist for at least a de-
cade, average Americans dismiss
the idea as incredible. Nonethe-
less, there is growing acceptance
of the idea that government
speaks with “forked” (constitu-
tional/ corporate) tongue.
For example, in the June 4,
2000 Fox News TV program,
Ralph Nader (candidate for the
presidency) explained that he
was critical of Al Gore’s subser-
vience to corporate America.
Nader said he was concerned by
the “takeover of our political gov-
ernment by corporate govern-
ment.”  Nader’s notion of a “po-
litical” (I’d say “constitutional”)
government being overwhelmed
by a “corporate government” ex-
actly parallels the dual-govern-
ment hypothesis espoused by
constitutionalists.
Nader also warned, “There’s
a permanent government in
Washington that continues to
rule regardless of whether a Re-
publican or Democrat is elected
to the Presidency.”
Mr. Nader’s “permanent gov-
ernment” is the administrative
bureaucracy and corporate inter-
ests it represents.  Again,
Nader’s criticism parallels that of
constitutionalists.
More importantly, Nader’s
comments weren’t challenged by
the other four panelists on the
national TV news program.  Ap-
parently, the panelists found the
idea of a dual government domi-
nated by corporations to be un-
remarkable.
Point:  The fundamental con-
cerns and values espoused by
“patriots” for most of a genera-
tion are seeping into mainstream
thought.
Prima facie evidence
Although the mechanisms
responsible for establishing and
implementing the second “corpo-
rate” government remain to be
precisely identified, we know
absolutely that “this” de facto
government is not “the” de jure
government of the Federal Con-
stitution.
We know that a second “kind”
of government is operating be-
cause we routinely observe gov-
ernment-sanctioned denials of
the “unalienable Rights” which
are supposed to be guaranteed
by the Federal Constitution.
For example, if you are pros-
ecuted by the IRS, you do not
enjoy the constitutional protec-
tions against unreasonable
search and seizure or self-in-
crimination found in the Bill of
Rights.  Likewise, your common
law  presumption of innocence
is not merely lost, it’s reversed –
you are presumed guilty (not in-
nocent) and compelled to at-
tempt a logical impossibility –
proving the negative statement
that your are “not guilty”.
How they’re doin’ it to us re-
mains to be precisely under-
stood.  The fact that they’re doin’
it to us is undeniable.
The new word order
We know that government
uses subtle and deceptive terms
to conceal the distinctions be-
tween what appear to be two
“forms” of government.  For ex-
ample, “District Courts of the
United States” are the Article III,
judicial courts where virtually all
federal litigants assume their
cases are heard.
However, virtually all “fed-
eral” cases are heard in “ United
States District Courts” which are
administrative (rather than judi-
cial) and operate under the 1st
(legislative) or 4th (territorial)
Articles of the Constitution – but
not under the 3rd (judicial) Ar-
ticle.
Note the subtle difference in
terms:  “District Courts of the
United States” and “United States
Federal v. National
by Alfred Adask

AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@ gte.net    972-418-8993 33
District Courts”.  Not one man in
100 would dream that those two
terms identified different courts,
with different jurisdictions and
different duties to recognize (or
ignore) a litigant’s unalienable
Rights.
A similar distinction exists
between the “Supreme Court of
the United States ” and “ United
States Supreme Court”.  The two
terms are not synonymous.  Each
term identifies an entirely differ-
ent court.
Before and after
Generally speaking, when
you see a document (Constitu-
tion of the United States ) or in-
stitution (District Court of the
United States) that includes the
trailing phrase “ of the United
States,” you are looking at an
artefact of the original “federal”
government that exists directly
under the Constitution and un-
der We the People (see the dia-
gram at the end of this article).
However, when you see a
document (“United States Consti-
tution”) or institution ( United
States  Supreme Court) where
“United States” is the first ele-
ment of the title, you are usually
looking at an artefact of the Na-
tional government.  This National
government is ruled directly by
Congress and all “
U.S. citizens”
(note the “U.S.” in front of the
term “ citizens”) are subject
thereto.
citizens of the United States
There’s one seeming excep-
tion to the rule that “U.S. first”
signals the National Govern-
ment. That exception is found in
the 14th Amendment’s designa-
tion for those subject to Con-
gress:  “
citizens of the United
States”.  This classification ap-
pears to apply within the Na-
tional, not Federal government
structure.
This subtle exception to the
“U.S. first” rule was perhaps in-
tended to fool the newly eman-
cipated Negroes into believing
their diminished capacity status
as 14th Amendment “
citizens of
the United States” was identical
to that of White “
Citizens of the
United States” specified in the
body of the Federal Constitu-
tion.
1
Federal v. National
Just as there are two court
systems, constitutionalists be-
lieve that there are also two “gov-
ernments”.  Within the patriot
community, those governments
are variously identified as “con-
stitutional” (good) and “corpo-
rate/ territorial/ martial” (bad).
Although these alternative
governments are easily “sensed,”
they have not yet been precisely
defined. In fact, I’m not sure pre-
cise definition is possible since
the second (bad) government ap-
pears to be derived from – and
therefore part of – the first (good)
constitutional government.
I believe the most appropri-
ate designations for the two al-
ternative forms of government
are  “Federal” and “National”.  The
“Federal” corresponds to the
“constitutional” designation used
by patriots.  The “National” cor-
responds to the “corporate/ ter-
ritorial/ martial” designations.
Further, it’s possible that
there aren’t two “governments”
so much as  two governmental
“capacities”.  That is, perhaps
Congress has both the original
(1788) Federal capacity to regu-
late state governments and the
relatively new (post-1865) Na-
tional capacity to rule “
citizens
of the United States”.
 But even if these two “gov-
ernments” can’t be absolutely
separated, they can still be dis-
tinguished as opposite ends of
a single government “spectrum”.
There may be a “gray area” in the
middle of the spectrum where
elements of both government
polarities may seem confused.
Nevertheless, the obvious con-
trasts between the extremes of
this spectrum should help clarify
a host of patriot and constitu-
tionalist observations and theo-
ries.
I suspect that what started
with the 13th Amendment as a
limited National “capacity” in
1865 has grown until today, that
“capacity” has evolved into a “de
facto” National government.
Whatever the full explana-
tion, I’m presenting this “Federal
vs. National” hypothesis to en-
courage dialogue and further in-
vestigation.
Political subdivisions
Although the division may
not be legally precise, there are
two “governments” in Washing-
ton (and at the state level):  one
constitutional, the other fre-
quently described as “corporate”.
In order to evaluate the pos-
sibility of a “dual” government,
it’s necessary to first understand
how government is divided.
Black’s Law Dictionary  (7
th
ed.; 1999) defines “census,” as
Bradford, Shirley
101 PAID
1/6 5K
“Secret Tools for Post Conviction Relief”
2000 Edition, by Joe Bounds
A comprehensive research reference book with favorable federal case
law.  Over 5000 quick reference topics for Ineffective assistance of
counsel claims covering:  pretrial, motions, defenses, guilty please, tri-
als, sentencing, appellate proceedings, post-verdict, conflict of interest,
evidentiary hearings, and “cause” for procedural default.  ORDER NOW!
$50.00, PLUS $5.00 S&H. (T exas residents please add 8.25% sales tax.)
Send SASE for FREE BROCHURE!
Zone Publishing  POB 1944 Dept. AS    Vernon, TX 76384

34 AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@gte.net    972-418-8993
“The official counting of people
to compile social and economic
data for the political subdivision
to which the people belong.  . . .”
[Emph. add.]
The meaning of “political
subdivisions” seems obvious –
it’s the “states,” right?  However,
the term may be more subtle
than most people imagine.
A “subdivision” of anything is
necessarily a subcomponent of
a larger, greater, and usually pre-
existing whole.  As a crude illus-
tration, the United States (which
is comparatively small and new)
could theoretically be a political
subdivision of the Earth (which
is larger and older).  However, the
older, larger Earth could not be
a political subdivision of the
small, newer United States.
It’s a chicken/ egg phenom-
enon that generally boils down
to “which came first”.  Thus, a
little understanding of history
helps explain which political en-
tity came first and subsequently
created its various political sub-
divisions.
Creator-creation principle
There is one master principle
that applies to all political sub-
divisions:  the creation is always
subject to its creator.
Just as man is obligated to
serve his Creator, so a govern-
ment “of the people, by the
people and for the people” must
always be subject to the people
who created that government.  If
the people created Congress,
Congress must serve the people.
But – if Congress were to create
an agency like the FBI, that
agency would be bound to di-
rectly serve Congress (it’s cre-
ator) – rather than the people that
created Congress.
The creator-creation prin-
ciple lies close to the heart of our
problem with “dual” govern-
ments.  Patriots know that we
were created by God – and that
we, in turn, created our Federal,
State – and National – govern-
ments.  Therefore,  we demand
that our government serve us as
all creations must serve their cre-
ators.
But as you’ll see, we have
foolishly allowed a third kind of
citizenship to be created by the
14th Amendment that is directly
subject to Congress rather than
God.  By allowing ourselves to
appear or be presumed to be
“
citizens” created by and subject
to Congress (as opposed to Citi-
zens subject to God and supe-
rior to government) we have un-
wittingly traded our role as cre-
ator-sovereigns for 
citizen-sub-
jects.
Creative history
! On July 4th, 1776 A.D.,
We the People – acting as sover-
eigns –  created the thirteen
(united) States of America.  That
creation was achieved with “The
unanimous Declaration of the
thirteen united States of
America”.  (That  instrument is
also incorrectly known as the,
“Declaration of Independence”.)
Later, those newly created
sovereign States (associations of
people) wrote State Constitutions
and thereby created their own
State governments within their
various States.
This creation lineage illus-
trates a subtle but important dis-
tinction:  The Declaration did not
create State governments; it only
created  Sovereign “States” – as-
sociations comprised of natural
people.
Later, these sovereign States
(people) created their own State
governments which (as cre-
ations) had to serve – not rule –
the people/creators. As a result,
State governments created by
States (people) were truly “pub-
lic servants”.
! On Nov. 17th, 1777, a
Congress of those thirteen sov-
ereign States adopted the “Ar-
ticles of Confederation” – our first
federal constitution. These “Ar-
ticles” established a weak federal
government to act as agent for
the thirteen sovereign States in
their collective war against Great
Britain.
2
After the Revolutionary War,
the federal government created
by the Articles of Confederation
was found to be too weak to ef-
fectively settle disputes between
the thirteen sovereign States.
Therefore, in 1787, a new “Con-
stitution for the United States of
America” was proposed by a con-
vention of people (not State gov-
ernments).
! In 1788, that Constitu-
tion was made operative when it
was ratified by a convention of
the ninth State (New Hampshire).
Again, note that the Consti-
tution was ratified by a conven-
tion of the State’s people – not
by some official act of that State’s
government.  This is an impor-
tant point since the “creation”
(the Constitution and resulting
government) is always subject to
and must serve its “creator” (the
natural, God-created people).
Your Ad Here!
$75   for  5,000 downloads
$200 for 20,0000 downloads (1 cent/ download)
Current ad sizes & prices at  http://www.antishyster.com
under the “advertising” link
Send ad and check to:  AntiShyster  POB 540786  Dallas,
Texas  75354-0786  The United States of America
or email to: adask@gte.net
MC, Visa, & Amex call:  972-418-8993

AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@ gte.net    972-418-8993 35
The chart at the end of this
article illustrate the history and
evolution and variety of our po-
litical subdivisions.
The Feds are our friends?
The Federal Government is
the one created by the Constitu-
tion adopted in 1788.  Although
some of us despise all things,
“Federal,” so far as I can see,
that’s the good one.
If you look up  “federal” in
Black’s Law Dictionary  (7th),
you’ll find:
“Of or relating to a system of
associated governments with a
vertical division of governments
into national and regional com-
ponents having different respon-
sibilities; esp., of or relating to
the national government of the
United States.”  [emph. add.]
This definition is somewhat
confusing since “federal” is “of or
relating to” national government.
Still, while the two terms may be
related and somewhat similar,
they are “divided” and not syn-
onymous.
Hypothetically speaking
I suspect that while the  “Fed-
eral” government was created by
and subject to “We the People”
(see the following two-page dia-
gram), the National Government
was created incrementally by the
13th, 14th, 15th and various later
Amendments which, for the first
time, granted Congress “national”
power to “enforce” these amend-
ments “by appropriate legislation”
within the formerly sovereign
States.  These amendments
ended the “division” of “national
and regional compontes” men-
tioned in Black’s definition of
Federal government.  Relatively
speaking, the National Govern-
ment is the bad one – the “evil
twin,” so to speak.
The difference between the
Federal and National govern-
ments is implied by the terms
themselves.  If you reconsider
Black’s 7th definition of “Federal”
you’ll see that refers to a “sys-
tem of associated governments”.
The implications are fascinating.
The Federal government in Wash-
ington D.C. didn’t regulate the
States (people), it regulated the
State governments.
“National,” on the other hand,
refers to a single government of
the entire “nation” – i.e., of all the
people who comprise the “nation”
under a single jurisdiction.
See the difference?  The “Fed-
eral” government in Washington
D.C. was intended to regulate
State governments (not State 
Citi-
zens), to settle inter-State dis-
putes, and represent all of the
States as a single entity in for-
eign relations.  But the Federal
government could not pass laws
and regulations or impose pen-
alties directly upon the individual
Citizens of the several States.
Under the federal system, only
State governments dealt directly
with the People.
This arrangement of State
governments associated with the
Federal government directly pro-
tected the People from abuse by
the Federal government (in
Washington D.C.).  The State gov-
ernments had more than ample
power to stop any Federal assault
on individual liberties and
“States’ rights”.
Likewise, this interlocking
but divided governmental struc-
ture also protected the People
from abuse by their own State
governments.  If your State’s gov-
ernment violated your constitu-
tionally-guaranteed unalienable
Rights, you could petition your
Congressman and/or the Federal
courts for redress.  (That’s what
“constitutionally-guaranteed
rights” means: the Federal gov-
ernment guarantees to protect
your “unalienable Rights” against
violation by State governments.)
Thus, the Feds protected the
People from State governments,
State governments protected the
People from the Feds, and both lev-
els of government were designed
to serve the People rather than rule
101Paid
From: “Ken Adler”
Ad for Scott Rosenstiel
1/3 10k
Banking Without A
Social Security Number
Attorney With 10 Years Experience
Bank / Brokerage Accounts:   Open accounts with-
out using your social security number.  No Books.
No fancy theories.  No IRS reporting or withholding.
We open the account or you get your money back.
Home Owners:    Establish a trust to shield prop-
erty from creditors -including IRS liens.
Tired of Being  an “Employee? ”:    We can help arrange
your workplace relationship to avoid:  ALL withholding,
social security, disability, hospital taxes, workman’s comp,
and shield your pay from garnishments and levies.
Legal In Every State.  Reliable.  Affordable.
Fortress Protection Co.Fortress Protection Co.Fortress Protection Co.Fortress Protection Co.Fortress Protection Co.
(310) 594-5294

36 AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@gte.net    972-418-8993
them.  The federal system was an
extraordinarily ingenious.
Post-Civil War revolution
But after the Civil War, a new
“national” governmental capacity
was created when the 13th
Amendment was ratified. Con-
gress, for the first time, was
granted power to enforce the
13th Amendment directly upon
People within the States.
Do you see the difference?
Prior to the 13th Amendment,
the Federal Government only
regulated State governments .
After the 13th Amendment, the
government took on a “national
capacity” that allowed direct
regulation of the nation; i.e., of
all the People in all of the States.
This national legislative ca-
pacity marked the beginning of
the end for “States’ Rights” and
the foundation for all the oner-
ous rules, regulations, and admin-
istrative agencies that currently
emanate from our “National” Gov-
ernment in Washington D.C..
Mis-directions
In the federal system of gov-
ernment, We the People are sov-
ereign and the government is our
servant.  But under the national
system of government (aka, “leg-
islative democracy”), the Con-
gress becomes sovereign, and
We the People are reduced to
subjects.  In the federal system
you are expected to be free and
independent.  Under National
Government you are expected to
live as a dependent in regulated
bondage to that government.
While a National Government
might still offer some protection
against abuse by corporate state
governments, it left little re-
course to protect the People from
abuse by the National govern-
ment, itself.
The federal system is where
most of us think we live.  The na-
tional system is where most of
us probably are.
Corporate government
The 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th,
19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th
Amendments all granted national
powers of enforcement to Con-
gress – but not to the existing Ex-
ecutive and Judicial branches of
the Federal government.
I believe these Amendments
created a “national” governmen-
tal capacity for Congress that has
evolved into a virtual National
Government.  That National gov-
ernment is probably operating ex-
clusively under Congress (not di-
rectly the People).  If so, this “sec-
ond” National government could
not use the existing enforcement
apparatus that was created by
the People under the Executive
and Judicial branches of the Fed-
eral government.
Why?  Because Federal bu-
reaucracies may be exclusively
empowered to regulate State
governments – but not State 
Citi-
zens.
Therefore, Congress might
have to create its own National
bureaucracy to enforce its Na-
tional regulations.  As a result,
there’d be two “bureaucracies”:
Federal (operating under the Ex-
ecutive Branch) and National (op-
erating under Congress).
How could Congress create
a bureaucracy directly under it-
self?  How ‘bout by incorporat-
ing agencies (like the IRS or FBI)
or chartering trusts (like the Fed-
eral Reserve System or the Na-
tional Highway Trust)?
Thus, the Federal govern-
ment would operate and control
the constitutional Post Office but
Congress would have to create
its own corporation (U.S. Postal
Service) to handle postal affairs
for the National government and
“national” (14th Amendment) 
citi-
zens.
The possibility that corpo-
rate bureaucracies are agencies
of National (not Federal) govern-
ment raises some intriguing
questions:
! If the U.S. Postal Service
and similar corporations are
Zelinsky, Phil  101PAID 1/3 page 5K
HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW
NO ENZYMES – NO LIFE!
All Commercial food sold in this country , whether organic or not, is
picked green (unripe) and subjected to gassing and irradiating to make
it look ripe.  This process guarantees that no (or few) enzymes remain
in the food!!  Preserving and cooking destroys what might be left.  With-
out enzymes you slowly starve to death . . . First you develope degen-
erative diseases . . . Then you die . . . After you’ve spent you life’s sav-
ings on drugs and surgery trying to alleviate your chronic pain . . . .
ATTENTION, BABY BOOMERS
It’s not too late to save your body from further pain
CALL (626) 963-5023 for your FREE AUDIO TAPE
Or call the Info Line 800-779-0895
Visit my website thehumanmachine.com
or e-mail ihss@earthlink.net
My name is Phil Selinsky, N.D. (Naturopathic Doctor).  If I’m not
home, leave your name, address and phone # on my machine and I
will immediately send you the free audio tape  and supporting
information.  (Nothing will be sent without a phone #)
HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW    HEALTH NOW

AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@ gte.net    972-418-8993 37
agencies of the National govern-
ment, then is it possible that
Congress/ National government
is the principal?  If so, is Con-
gress somehow liable  for its
agents’ and agencies’ errors?
! Is it remotely possible
that my Congressman (Senator?)
is the local registered agent for
the national government’s corpo-
rate agencies?
! If so, does notice to prin-
cipal (legislative democracy/
Congress/ National government)
constitute legal notice to agent
(corporate bureaucracies)?  That
is, should I send my administra-
tive notices to my Congressman
(National government’s regis-
tered agent?) rather than some
onerous corporate agency?
Hypothetical answers?
The proposed distinction be-
tween Federal and National govern-
ments might explain several legal
“anomalies” that have perplexed
the constitutionalist community for
some time.  For example:
! A Federal/ National dis-
tinction could explain why some
agencies (like the IRS and FBI) are
missing from government’s list
of bureaucracies and seem to
have “magically appeared” with-
out being enacted into law by
Congress.  Perhaps these lists
record legitimate Federal  bu-
reaucracies (which were enacted)
while the mysterious un-enacted
agencies (IRS, FBI, etc.) were in-
corporated under of the National
government as corporate bu-
reaucracies.  This might also ex-
plain what some people regard
as the “corporate” government.
! The distinction between
Federal and National govern-
ments might explain why some
of the laws passed by Congress
are recorded in the “positive”
titles of the United States Code,
while other (like Title 26 dealing
with income tax) are not.  Perhaps
the “positive” Titles list those laws
passed by Congress acting in its
Federal capacity while the “non-
positive” Titles list those regula-
tions passed by Congress acting
in its National capacity.
! The distinction between
Federal and National govern-
ments might also explain the
OMB anomalies we’ve seen where
government forms — which are
mandated by law to include valid
OMB numbers — don’t.
For example, the Census 2000
D-2(UL) form and the IRS 1040
form reportedly lack valid OMB
numbers.    Could it be that forms
used by the Federal government
require valid OMB numbers while
the “bootleg” forms of National/
corporate government do not?
The 14th’s great deception
Government has used “ben-
efits,” voter’s registration, Social
Security and other devices to lure
and deceive the People into “vol-
untarily” (but unwittingly) trad-
ing their sovereign status and
God-given “unalienable rights” as
“
Citizens” for the servitude of
14th Amendment “citizens”.
Prior to the 14th Amendment,
our unalienable Rights had been
granted by God, declared in the
Declaration of July 4th, 1776, and
guaranteed by the Federal gov-
ernment created by the Federal
Constitution (made operative in
1788).  After the 14th Amend-
ment, Americans slowly accepted
the subject status of “
citizens of
the United States” and the tem-
porary privileges (benefits) called
“civil rights” under the National
government.
But note that the Federal
government has not disap-
peared.  It’s been supplanted by
the National government, but not
replaced.
However, our real problem is
not that we have two “govern-
ments,” but that we have several
forms of citizenship.  We the
People have unwittingly aban-
doned our sovereign status as
“natural born 
Citizens” and “Citi-
zens of the United States” (rec-
ognized by the Federal Consti-
tution in 1788) and accepted the
Grossack, David 101PAID 5K 1/3
(actually paid for 1/3 + 1/6, not 2 1/3 page ads)
How To Win A Lawsuit Without Hiring A Lawyer
... a course in pro se justice by Attorney David Grossack
Don’t be intimidated by bureaucrats, sue them! Find out when and how
you can sue prosecutors, judges and other public parasites. Find out when
racketeering statutes may apply to your favorite bureaucrat. Master com-
plex legal concepts . . . we’ll make them simple; i.e., most lawyers don’t
know the principles behind the Ninth Amendment or the difference be-
tween procedural and substantive due process . . . Y ou Will!  Find out what
is meant by equitable relief, e.g. declaratory judgment or injunction Un-
derstand selective prosecution and equal protection of the law. Learn to
use the law library, write like a lawyer and use the procedural rules. Y ou’ll
be able to prepare pleadings, use the law library and obtain evidence
from your opponents. Be one of the few
people in the courtroom who
know what they’re doing.
Read this valuable book now.
250 pgs, Ringbound $89
How To Win A Lawsuit
Without Hiring A Lawyer
send $89 to:
Citizens Justice Programs Box 90, Hull MA 02045

38 AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@gte.net    972-418-8993
subject status of “citizens of the
United States” created by the
14th Amendment in 1868.  By
doing so we voluntarily became
subjects of the National
government’s jurisdiction.
The fault, Horatio, is not in
our governments, but in our-
selves.  If you’ll study the follow-
ing chart, perhaps you’ll agree.
1It’s only conjecture, but since
the vast majority of Negroes were
probably illiterate in 1870, they’d
be unable distinguish between
“
citizen” and “Citizen” since the
words sound the same.  Thus, if an
emancipated but illiterate Negro
appeared in court and a judge
asked if he were a “
citizen,” the
Negro (thinking the judge had
asked if he were a “
Citizen”) would
surely swear Yes.  In theory, the
judge could rule accordingly and
deny the Negro 
citizen-subject any
claim to a Citizen’s unalienable
Rights.
I don’t know if any Negroes
were ever actually exploited with
such deception, but it’s easy to
imagine the possibility.  Through
the use of 14th Amendment
citizenship, government could
simultaneously “free the slaves”
and still treat the emancipated in
court like a “bunch of niggers”.
Over the years, it’s likely that
judges and government learned to
trick poor, illiterate Whites with
the same question:
“Do you swear you’re a 
citizen,
Mr. Whiteboy?”
Yessir, yer honor!
“OK [you dumb white trash],
then I find you guilty as charged!”
By assuming the judge said
“
Citizen” when he really said
“citizen,” the illiterate White
unwittingly accepted the status of
subject and thereby agreed to be
railroaded by the court.
Historians promote a noble
cause for the Civil War (freeing the
slaves) and no doubt, for some,
that was true.  But it’s also true
that the Civil War was fought for
ignoble reasons that are today
“politically incorrect” and even
forgotten.
For example, I’ve never
believed the North was primarily
motivated to suffer the horrific
Civil War just to free a bunch of
Southern slaves.  That may’ve
been an excuse or even a real (but
secondary) reason.  But no nation
in history has ever inflicted the
kind of carnage upon itself that
took place in the Civil War for the
sake another race, let alone a race
of slaves.
I suspect an additional reason
for emancipation was not to free
the slaves but to confine them to
the South.  When you think about
it, it’s obvious that if it weren’t for
slavery, Negroes would never have
reached the USA in significant
numbers.  Africans didn’t have the
resources to cross the Atlantic on
their own.  However, as slaves
(property) they moved in massive
numbers to the New World.
Why?  Because slave owners
paid for their transportation.
Similarly, Negroes in the deep
South could never move to New
York in substantial numbers
except as slaves.   I.e., so long as
Negroes were property, it was
inevitable that some New York
farmer or factory owner could buy
some slaves and pay the costs of
transporting them up from
Georgia.
But if the slaves were freed,
they could not be owned, they’d
have no value as property, and
therefore no northern business-
men would pay to import them
from the South.  Thus, freeing the
slaves was not necessarily an act
of humanity and invitation but
rather an attempt to prevent
immigration and confine Negroes
to the South.
The public might not have
recognized the relationship
between slavery and Negro
immigration when the 13th
Amendment “freed the slaves”.
But I’ll bet astute northern politi-
cians understood clearly that by
freeing the slaves, they’d slow or
prevent the influx of Negroes from
South to North.
If so, it follows that at least
some of the politicians of the
several northern States which
prohibited slavery before the Civil
War may have been motivated less
by abhorrence for slavery than
abhorrence for Negroes.
2The “Articles of Confedera-
tion” also created the “perpetual
Union” styled “The United States
of America.”
According to Bouvier’s Law
Dictionary (1856), a “union” is an
“unincorporated association” of
natural persons.  It’s virtually
certain that the perpetual Union
(“The United States of America”)
created by the Articles of Confed-
eration identifies virtually all of
the natural people inhabiting all
the several united States.  Thus,
“The United States of America” is
not precisely a collection of
several independent States, but
rather an single unincorporated
association of all the people who
comprise the several States.  In
other words, even though a man
living in Newark might be a
Citizen of New Jersey and a man
living in Buffalo might  be a
Citizen of New York, both would
be members of perpetual Union
styled “The United States of
America”.
Eliminate All Debts
LEGALLY!
Guaranteed Process   *   Money Back Guarantee
For Information send (Postage & Copy Costs Donation)  $10  to:
No  Tax Academy
1624 Savannah Road  AS    Lewes, Delaware   (19958) - 9999
www.peoples-rights.com or call toll-free (877) 544-4718

AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@ gte.net    972-418-8993 39
< < < < <
< < < < <
< < < < < <
< < < < < < <
< < < < <
< < < < <
#7(A).  Weak “FEDERAL” government
over the pre-existing Thirteen Sovereign
State governments.  This weak federal
government was discontinued when it was
replaced in 1788 by stronger “Federal”
government under the Constitution.
# 6.  Articles of Confederation   (1777 A.D.)
(Continued on the next page)
#4.  Thirteen Sovereign States   These “States” are associations of
People, not State governments.  The People who comprise these “States”
retain their “unalienable rights” and would later create their own thirteen
State governments to serve the sovereign People.
#2.  People  Created by God in the womb (not at birth;
Isaiah 43:1) and directly subject to God and His law.  They
are identified by Capitalized names like “ Alfred Adask”
#3.  “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States”
July 4, 1776 A.D.  (aka incorrectly as the “Declaration of Independence”).
Created by the People (not government), this instrument was more than a radical
political document that severed our former ties and obligations to Great Britain’s
Monarchy.  It was a also revolutionary spiritual document since it declared that “all men
are created equal”.  This equality included Kings and thereby simultaneously 1)
rendered all men legally equal to “sovereigns” and therefore capable of owning
property;  and 2) destroyed the “Divine Right of Kings” premise on which European
monarchies and Western civilization had rested for over 1,000 years.
This instrument also declares God is the source of our “unalienable Rights”.  As such,
this is a spiritual document, a statement of faith and arguably a church charter.
#5.  Thirteen governments of the States
In 1788, these State governments were modefied by the
Constitution to become “federal” State governments.   In
1913, with the passage of the 17th Amendment (popu-
lar election of Senators), these State goverenments were
so radically altered that they ceased to exist as “federal”
State governments.  They were later supplanted by
“National” corporate state governments.
#7(B).  Union styled “The United States of America”.
This “perpetual Union” was composed of the sovereign
States/People – not State governments – and was
continued and made “more perfect” under the
subsequent Constitution (# 8).
< < < < < <
#1. God This is “Nature’s God”, “Creator” of “all men,” and source of all “unalienable rights”
referred to in the July 4, 1776 “unanimous Declaration” (#3, below).  His 1st Commandment is, “Thou
shalt have no other gods before me.”  This commandment might be interpretted to mean no other
gods “between” you and God.  That is, God’s People must be 
directly subject to Him and his Law only.
National Gov’t
& Corporate
Bureaucracies
Federal &
State
Governments
Documents &
Instruments
of Creation
14th Amend.
citizens
 subjects
Creator to Creation relationship
(Creator) > > > > > > > (Creation)
Ruler to Subject relationship
(Ruler/ Agent) – – – – – > (Subject)
God-made,
Sovereign
People/ Citizens
LEGEND for hypothetical Federal/National government relationships

40 AntiShyster      Volume 10, No. 1     www.antishyster.com    adask@gte.net    972-418-8993
< < < < < < < < < < < <
< < < < < < < < < < < <
< < < < < < << < < < < < <
<– – – –
<– – – – – – – – – –
<– – – –
< < < < < < < < < < < < < < <
< < < < < < <
< < < < < < <
< < < < < < <
< < < < < < <
< < < < < < <
(Continued from the previous page)
#10.   13th Amendment (Dec 18, 1865 A.D.)
National Governmental Capacity
Ratified just 8 months after Gen. Lee’s surrender
(April 9) and Lincoln’s assassination (April 14),
Section 1 of this Amendment abolished slavery and
involuntary servitude.  But Section 2 granted 
Con-
gress (not the executive or judicial branches) “power
to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”
This grant extended Congressional jurisdiction far
beyond the Constitution’s “federal” limits and, for the
first time, allowed Congress to directly reach State
Citizens within the (formerly) sovereign States.
#14.  “citizens of the United States”
The 14th Amendment created an entirely
new class (“nation”) of “persons” called
“citizens of the United States” who would
be “subject” to the single jurisdiction of
the “United States” (National government/
legislative democracy).  These “citizens”
are not the People created by and
directly subject to God.  As a result,
these “citizens” have no clear claim to
God-granted “unalienable rights”.  These
“citizens” have voluntarily become subject
to Congress rather than God.  Remember
the 1st Commandment?  “Thou shalt have
no other gods before me?”  This status is
the modern equivalent of serf or slave.
These “citizens” are “born” (not created)
and identified with upper case names like
“ALFRED N. ADASK”.
#13.  Corporate Bureaucracies were created to
administer with near-absolute authority over the “citi-
zens of the United States,” “U.S. citizens” and other
beneficiaries who comprise the “nation” subject to direct
Congressional jurisdiction.  These National/corporate
bureaucracies Includes FBI, FEMA, OSHA, FCC, IRS, ATF,
STATE OF TEXAS (not “Texas”), U.S. District Courts, U.S.
Postal Service etc.. AKA “corporate government”. These
agencies do not include legitimate Federal bureaucracies
that operate directly under the executive branch of the
Federal government like the Post Office.
#12.   National Government/ Legislative Democracy
The 13th Amendment’s direct jurisdiction over all Americans (as
individuals) created a new National (not Federal) legislative “capac-
ity” in Congress.  Based on additonal powers of national govern-
ment granted by the 
14th, 15th, 16th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th
Amendments,  that national legislative capacity has evolved into a
National Government to rule directly with amost unlimited power
over the 14th Amendment’s newly-created nation of “citizens of the
United States” (rather than the Federal governments rule over
State governments).
#7(B).  Union styled “The United States of America”.  This
“perpetual Union” was composed of the sovereign States/
People – not State governments – and was continued and
made “more perfect” under the subsequent Constitution (# 8).
# 8.  Constitution for the United States of America (1788 A.D.)
Created and ratified by conventions of the People of the Union, not existing State
governments to serve the People (creators) and regulate State governments.  (State
governments were also created by the People to serve – not rule – the People.)
# 9A.  Three Branches of FEDERAL Government:  The
Federal Goverenment exercised strong, but limited autority
over the “federation” of the several State governments.
However, the Federal Government had virtually no direct
jurisdiction over the sovereign States/People (State Citizens,
natural born Citizens & Citizens of the United States).
 Legislative          Executive           Judicial
#11.  14th Amendment July 28, 1868
“All persons born or naturalized in the
United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State wherein
they reside.”
By referring to “the [singular] jurisdiction”
of the “United States,” the 14th
Amendment conceded the the pre-
existance of single, “national” jurisdiction
to rule over the new “nation” of “citizens
of the United States”.  This single, nation-
wide government (aka “Legislative
Democracy”) is ruled exclusively by
Legislators ostensibly elected to serve in
the Legislative branch of the Federal
government.
# 9(B) “Federal” State governments.
While the People remained sovereign,
these “Republican form” State govern-
ments are not, since they are largely
subject to the Federal government.
These State governments would later
be supplanted by the corporate state
“governments” identified in #13 (below).
< <