What addresses are federal?

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. on September 17, 1998 at 21:33:23:

This is a good question, which has arisen
several times in various contexts within
this forum.

To answer this question, you must first
understand that the U.S. Post Office
was supplanted, for most purposes,
by the U.S. Postal Service ("USPS").

The USPS is a municipal corporation.
It advertises on network television.
It has copyrights on its literature.
It has trademarks on its logos.

Congress can ONLY create a corporation
in its capacity as legislature for the
federal zone. For authority, see
Daly v. The National Life Insurance
Company of the USA, Indiana Supreme Court

To create a corporation with nationwide
jurisdiction invades the province of
the several states, reserved by the
Tenth Amendment. Thus, ALL federal
corporations are domestic, "federal zone",
MUNICIPAL corporations, BY LAW!!

Thus, the USPS is a "foreign corporation"
with respect to the organic laws of
the several states. Confer at "Domestic
corporation" and "Foreign corporation"
in Black's Law Dictionary, as quoted
in Chapter 11 of "The Federal Zone,"
for extremely clear definitions that
explain this all-important difference
in unequivocal terms.

The USPS is domiciled in D.C., and that
domicile will persist, as long as the
USPS persists.

Now, all 2-letter capitalized abbreviations
for the states are an invention of the USPS,
and they create the presumption that the
addressee is subject to federal municipal law,
because lawful USPS jurisdiction is strictly
domestic (read "limited to the federal zone").

"Domestic", under federal municipal law, means
"inside the federal zone"; it does NOT mean
"inside the USA".

This important distinction is one of the ways
in which we have all been brainwashed.

"Domestic" has a completely different meaning
when we use colloquial English to distinguish
foreign and domestic flights in and out of
airports, for example.

Thus, if you want to utilize "foreign addresses",
as that term is defined by the USPS, you must
read USPS Publication #221 to find the format
for "foreign" addresses.

Here it is:

Paul Andrew Mitchell
c/o general delivery at:
2509 North Campbell Avenue, #1776
Tucson 85719/tdc

The term ", USA" is optional. I have
also added the line which reads
"c/o general delivery at:" because
My mail is actually delivered
to a building which says "Post Office" [sic]
on its front facade (facing the street).

Finally, I am using the ZIP code
under "threat, duress, and coercion"
("tdc"), because Congress prohibits
discrimination against the non-use of
ZIP codes, but the USPS does discriminate
anyway. For further elaboration of these
points, see what we did on the ZIP code
question in State of Alabama v. Kemp,
particularly when the case was removed
into federal court (pleadings now loaded
into the Supreme Law Library).

Note how the "country" is in ALL CAPS
and on its own line, below the city and
postal zone, which are on the same line,
immediately above the "country".

(ALL CAPS used here for emphasis ONLY :)

In sum, the USPS is a mini-FRB. When it
was created as a municipal corporation,
the transition from USPO to USPS was financed
by selling bonds -- you guessed it! -- to overseas
(mostly European) banks. They obtained,
in return, liens on future postal revenues.

An interesting exercise, for which I sadly
do not have time at present, is to do a
multiple linear regression of the Consumer
Price Index, against the changes in first
class postage. I predict that the change
in first class postage has increased faster
than the CPI.

If you throw a frog into boiling hot water,
he will jump out immediately.

If you boil a frog slowly ....

Now you know why courts makes such a big
deal about service of process via U.S. Mail!
If you accept service of process with an
address in a "domestic" format, you are
accepting service under federal municipal

Once that presumption is established, the
courts then proceed to treat you as a
subject of Congress, and not as a Sovereign.


You bet it is! :)

Sincerely yours,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

Counselor at Law, Private Attorney General

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]