Skip to comments.Vanity- If I renounce my U.S. Citizenship will that make me an illegal Allen and qualify me for
Posted on 09/17/2012 4:36:20 PM PDT by gunsequalfreedom
If I renounce my U.S. Citizenship will that make me an illegal alien and will that then qualify me for government benefits that are provided to illegal aliens? And if they tried to deport me, where would they deport me since I was born in the U.S.?
Illegal Allen ?
Puerto Rico? One of those little Pacific Atolls?
They would deport you to California.
Certainly not Guam its about to capsize
Maybe you could run for president.
I remember those movies.... Allen... Allen 2, Allen Vs Tax Predator
My middle name is Allen but I am quite legal.
As a public service I think you should do it and find out where they ship you to. That’s the only way we’ll know for sure. We’ll miss you but don’t worry about us, we’ll be fine.
I don’t think you’ve quite the hang of it. You want to do things by the book by first renouncing your citizenship in order to legally be an alien. You’re not going to get very far as an illegal alien or a welfare leech with that attitude. Just steal some cholo’s identity.
Actual footage of Guam capsizing with horrified look on the face of Democrat Hank Johnson - an Obama supporter?
Well, that may be axiomatic.
Garfield? S40, have you catnapped Garfield from Jon?
Just go in and apply for the benefits, tell them you’re from Mexico and you don’t have ID. If they say you don’t look or sound Mexican, sue them for racial profiling.
Just be sure you don’t plan on travelling out of the country. You won’t be able to get a passport. Or they might put you on a ship in the middle of the ocean and you could become the Man (or woman)without a Country.
Almost as intrigueing as figuring out ozero's validity and the EO's signed.
MY question is:
If you renounce your citizenship in the quietness of your bedroom or bathroom or mosque ... is it valid?
Only if your name is Allen.
Dont bother if you are a white Christian heterosexual male. Everybody else has some kind of special rights, but you.
No. You have to renounce your citizenship while in the process of obtaining other citizenship. in order to be successfully shut of your USA citizenship.
Several years ago, a man angry with President Reagan for bombing Libya renounced his citizenship as a protest while residing in Australia, but failed to try to obtain citizenship in Australia or a third country. As a result, he was deported to the US, where he became a homeless drifter. Last I heard, he was headed to Washington after Clinton was elected to try to get back his citizenship.
If you want to renounce your citizenship, this State Department website will tell you how. Be forewarned that if you do so, it cannot be reversed.
Any religion or justice system that doesn't have an exception clause for confessions to the porcelain throne just isn't being fair. ;^)
You cannot renounce US citizenship while in the US. You can only do it in person at a US embassy or consulate, and you often have to make at least two appearance there over at least two months.
In the movie French Kiss, Meg Ryan renounced her American citizenship without first acquiring Canadian citizenship.
Only if your first name happens to be Allen.
Congratulations! You can now vote for 0bama.
Boy did you ever eff that one up. We all make mistakes.
Fat fingers typing on a small keyboard combined with auto spell correct. I dont want to be an illegal Allen. Or even an alien. Glad to see most of you got my point. Love all the replies, even the ones about the typo. Glad I was able to add some laughs to the boards today.
I thought for a moment you were going to accuse Col. Allen West of being an illegal Allen.Whew!!
Yeah,it was pretty funny
What if he tells State he’s a citizen of the World? He can prove it by singing the global anthem.
The Three United States
In the previous chapter, a handy matrix was developed to organize the key terms which define the concepts of status and jurisdiction as they apply to federal income taxation. In particular, an alien is any individual who is not a citizen of the “United States**”. The term “citizen” has a specific legal meaning in the Code of Federal Regulations (”CFR”) which promulgate the Internal Revenue Code (”IRC”):
Every person born or naturalized in the United States** and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.
[26 CFR 1.1-1(c), emphasis added]
What, then, is meant by the term “United States” and what is meant by the phrase “its jurisdiction”? In this regulation, is the term “United States” a singular phrase, a plural phrase, or is it both?
The astute reader has already noticed that an important clue is given by regulations which utilize the phrase “its jurisdiction”. The term “United States” in this regulation must be a singular phrase, otherwise the regulation would need to utilize the phrase “their jurisdiction” or “their jurisdictions” to be grammatically correct.
As early as the year 1820, the U.S. Supreme Court was beginning to recognize that the term “United States” could designate either the whole, or a particular portion, of the American empire. In a case which is valuable, not only for its relevance to federal taxes, but also for its terse and discrete logic, Chief Justice Marshall exercised his characteristic brilliance in the following passage:
The power, then, to lay and collect duties, imposts, and excises, may be exercised, and must be exercised throughout the United States. Does this term designate the whole, or any particular portion of the American empire? Certainly this question can admit of but one answer. It is the name given to our great republic, which is composed of states and territories. The District of Columbia, or the territory west of the Missouri, is not less within the United States* than Maryland or Pennsylvania ....
[Loughborough v. Blake, 15 U.S. (5 Wheat.) 317]
[5 L.Ed. 98 (1820), emphasis added]
By 1945, the year of the first nuclear war on planet Earth, the U.S. Supreme Court had come to dispute Marshall’s singular definition, but most people were too distracted to notice. The high Court confirmed that the term “United States” can and does mean three completely different things, depending on the context:
The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses.  It may be merely the name of a sovereign* occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations.  It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends, or  it may be the collective name of the states*** which are united by and under the Constitution.
[Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)]
[brackets, numbers and emphasis added]
This same Court authority is cited by Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, in its definition of “United States”:
United States. This term has several meanings.  It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in family of nations,  it may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends, or  it may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, U.S. Ohio, 324 U.S. 652, 65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 89 L.Ed. 1252.
[brackets, numbers and emphasis added]
In the first sense, the term “United States*” can refer to the nation, or the American empire, as Justice Marshall called it. The “United States*” is one member of the United Nations. When you are traveling overseas, you would go to the U.S.* embassy for help with passports and the like. In this instance, you would come under the jurisdiction of the President, through his agents in the U.S.* State Department, where “U.S.*” refers to the sovereign nation. The Informer summarizes Citizenship in this “United States*” as follows:
1. I am a Citizen of the United States* like you are a Citizen of China. Here you have defined yourself as a National from a Nation with regard to another Nation. It is perfectly OK to call yourself a “Citizen of the United States*.” This is what everybody thinks the tax statutes are inferring. But notice the capital “C” in Citizen and where it is placed. Please go back to basic English.
[Which One Are You?, page 11]
Secondly, the term “United States**” can also refer to “the federal zone”, which is a separate nation-state over which the Congress has exclusive legislative jurisdiction. (See Appendix Y for a brief history describing how this second meaning evolved.) In this sense, the term “United States**” is a singular phrase. It would be proper, for example, to say, “The United States** is ...” or “Its jurisdiction is ...” and so on. The Informer describes citizenship in this United States** as follows:
2. I am a United States** citizen. Here you have defined yourself as a person residing in the District of Columbia, one of its Territories, or Federal enclaves (area within a Union State) or living abroad, which could be in one of the States of the Union or a foreign country. Therefore you are possessed by the entity United States** (Congress) because citizen is small case. Again go back to basic english [sic]. This is the “United States**” the tax statutes are referring to. Unless stated otherwise, such as 26 USC 6103(b)(5).
[Which One Are You?, page 11]
Thirdly, the term “United States***” can refer to the 50 sovereign States which are united by and under the Constitution for the United States of America. In this third sense, the term “United States***” does not include the federal zone, because the Congress does not have exclusive legislative authority over any of the 50 sovereign States of the Union. In this sense, the term “United States***” is a plural, collective term. It would be proper therefore to say, “These United States***” or “The United States*** are ...” and so on. The Informer completes the trio by describing Citizenship in these “United States***” as follows:
3. I am a Citizen of these United States***. Here you have defined yourself as a Citizen of all the 50 States united by and under the Constitution. You are not possessed by the Congress (United States**). In this way you have a national domicile, not a State or United States** domicile and are not subject to any instrumentality or subdivision of corporate governmental entities.
[Which One Are You?, pages 11-12]
Author and scholar Lori Jacques summarizes these three separate governmental jurisdictions in the same sequence, as follows:
It is noticeable that Possessions of the United States** and sovereign states of the United States*** of America are NOT joined under the title of “United States.” The president represents the sovereign United States* in foreign affairs through treaties, Congress represents the sovereign United States** in Territories and Possessions with Rules and Regulations, and the state citizens are the sovereignty of the United States*** united by and under the Constitution .... After becoming familiar with these historical facts, it becomes clear that in the Internal Revenue Code, Section 7701(a)(9), the term “United States**” is defined in the second of these senses as stated by the Supreme Court: it designates the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends.
[A Ticket to Liberty, Nov. 1990, pages 22-23]
[emphasis added, italics in original]
It is very important to note the careful use of the word “sovereign” by Chief Justice Stone in the Hooven case. Of the three different meanings of “United States” which he articulates, the United States is “sovereign” in only two of those three meanings. This is not a grammatical oversight on the part of Justice Stone. Sovereignty is not a term to be used lightly, or without careful consideration. In fact, it is the foundation for all governmental authority in America, because it is always delegated downwards from the true source of sovereignty, the People themselves. This is the entire basis of our Constitutional Republic. Sovereignty is so very important and fundamental, an entire chapter of this book is later dedicated to this one subject (see Chapter 11 infra).
The federal zone, over which the sovereignty of the United States** extends, is the District of Columbia, the territories and possessions belonging to Congress, and a limited amount of land within the States of the Union, called federal “enclaves”.
Sorry, but no--it's not as easy as a Muslim divorce (Repeat three times after me...).
Great post! This is the kind of study I love to see on FR
You asked, so I gave you the answer...
Check out the whole website at the link I provided and I hope you spread it around.
Paul Mitchell is THE authority when it comes to the IRS.
He is the expert witness you want.
[notice my tagline]
Are the ships in that video really U.S. ships or are they Russian ships?
I was not complaining. It really was a good answer.
Sorry, I didn’t mean it that way.
I hope you put the info to good use and please do spread it around for all to learn.:-)
The State Department requires proof that one attempting to renounce his/her citizenship has another citizenship.Failure to present such proof means that your application will be denied.IIRC,those who *do* successfully renounce their US citizenship are then deemed to be “excludable”,meaning that you cannot enter the country.
Actually fantasized about selling my identity on e-bay just to cause a fuss.
I'm a white male over 50. Since California demographics put white people in the 'minority' nowadays can I go there and get an affirmative action quota filler job since I'd be a 'minority' there?
Inquiring minds and all that....
In the mind of Democrat Hank Johnson, the U.S. warships drop off sailors, too many of course, and the island tips over and capsizes (of course he was specific about that).
But given that Hank is a Democrat, they apparently can’t tell Russian ships from American ships, so he wouldn’t be able to discern. Just like at the DNC gathering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.