Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

discuss - Re: [opennic-discuss] Amazon Hosting

discuss AT

Subject: Discuss mailing list

List archive

Re: [opennic-discuss] Amazon Hosting

Chronological Thread 
  • From: Andrew Norton <ktetch AT>
  • To: discuss AT
  • Subject: Re: [opennic-discuss] Amazon Hosting
  • Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 22:38:22 -0400

Hash: SHA1

On 6/6/2012 10:22 PM, mike wrote:
> Sigh...
> There's a lot of background that I could get into, and I would like to
> get into that, however I have time restraints so I'll try to keep it
> short.
> What it boils down to is that I operate my personal life (which
> OpenNIC is part of) as a sovereign human of planet Earth, for that
> part of my life I answer to nobody except my creator. I file no taxes
> of any kind related to any transactions when I am operating as a
> sovereign human (why should I? nobody owns me personally).
> My argument boils down to; nobody has jurisdiction over me when I am
> not operating as an agent of a corporation or a government (ask
> yourself how do they get authority over you?...), and/or any signatory
> to any of those things, in other words, when I operate as Mike of the
> family Sharkey, I answer to nobody, and pay no toll for doing so.
> So first of all, as you see I have no need for a 501.C3 and neither do
> you.
> By signing onto 501.C3 you are doing two things. You are providing
> prima facie evidence that you owe tax money in the first place (which
> you've already lost me at this point, because I don't owe any taxes to
> anybody despite what "officials" might seemingly claim).
> Then secondly 501.C3 puts you in a binding contract with the federal
> government whereby they get to set the rules. In other words, you are
> in effect asking the government to rule over you in exchange for not
> stealing as much money from you.
> It just does not compute for me.
> I should not really use the word "steal" as in theft when referring to
> Government taxation because most people just go along with it
> voluntarily and don't question a thing, it's more of a deception, a
> con job, a slight of hand, than it is really an outright theft, but on
> the other hand to deprive a person of his property by deception is
> also theft.....
> As a general rule I try to avoid in any way, associating my sovereign
> person (that I have worked so hard to untangle from the web of
> seemingly benign contracts with the government) with anything that
> might be consider evidence that I agree to any of the "offers" being
> put forth by them.
> Generally speaking anything you sign with the government will give
> them authority over you in some way. That's the core of my concern,
> like I said I've spent a considerable amount of effort getting back to
> being sovereign within my own life domain.
> In any case, I could write a book, but hopefully I've clarified my
> position sufficiently.

I've always loved the "sovereign human" argument, for it's simplicity.
And like all such simple arguments related to law, it's one that can
only be made to stand when certain facts are omitted.

Problem is the 'no-one has jurisdiction over me when not operating as'
argument is false. If you have US citizenship, for instance, part of
that is a submission to jurisdiction. So, have you given up your US
citizenship, Mike? (note, they frown on people renouncing citizenship to
avoid the tax consequences of citizenship) If so what country do you now
claim citizenship of, and where are you resident.

A friends ex-husband was of this same position. It's one of the reasons
my friend divorced him (another was refusing to allow their daughter to
get an SSN card to avoid more 'contracts with the US', which was a
problem since she has REALLY bad Downs). Last I heard, he was doing 15
years for tax evasion. Mainly because the 'contract' you are thinking
about, exists with citizenship, resident alien status etc.

No mountain man, pseudo-legal mumbo jumbo about 'sovereign citizens' is
going to change it, mostly because that trick was known in the 1780's
('Americans' used it on the British Government before then) and so the
laws were written to ensure that loop hole didn't exist in the US. I'm
sure any tax attorney will find the relevant provisions in law for you.


> --Mike
> On 06/06/2012 06:55 PM, Julian DeMarchi wrote:
>> On 06/07/2012 08:50 AM, mike wrote:
>>> The day OpenNIC is 501:C3, is the day I bail out.
>> Share your thoughts please?
>> --julian
>> -------- You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. You may
>> unsubscribe by emailing
>> discuss-unsubscribe AT
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT

- --
Andrew Norton
Tel: +1(352)6-KTETCH [+1-352-658-3824]
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page