From: nlnr-101.9fm To: rep.paul@mail.house.gov Subject: FCC Fraud Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 16:36:37
Message-ID: <19980107.163434.8471.0.nlnr-101.9fm@juno.com>
To: Representative Ron Paul.
Good Day Sir:I am writing this to you, since it seems that you sir, are the
only one in government who actually understands the limitations placed upon agents & agencies of
government by We the People, as enumerated by the various states Constitutions, & the federal
Constitution.My concerns are multi-fold, however, the issue I will attempt to point out at this time is one
that effects a specific group of Americans of which I am one.The issue is this; The FCC engages in
deception, coercion, tyranny, abuse of power, & un-authorized enforcement of statutory regulations
outside of their scope & purviewby enforcement of their regulations upon radio stations that are engaged
in community service broadcasting. (Intra-state) I speak specifically of the Micro-Broadcasters in America.
These micro-stations are generally under the minimum power requirement that is recognized by the agency
& could not possibly even come up with the fee's that the agency requires for what they term as "Legal Operation".
While there are a few micro-stations out there that engage in questionable activities i.e., broadcasting obscenities,
bleeding over to areas specified for air traffic, TV, or other so-called Licensed stations, for the most part, the average
micro-broadcaster has carefully setup & monitors his/her station for unwanted harmonics, and makes the necessary
corrections if they occur. Generally, micro-stations broadcast materials that cannot be heard over the Big 4 network
stations. Our station broadcasts materials that the FCC has stated to be anti-government, although that couldn't be
further from the truth. This radio station is dedicated to revealing info that is Pro-Government. We are anti- deception,
coercion, tyranny, abuse of power, & the inflicting of the regulations of the District upon the Citizenry of the several States,
unless those regs are specifically promulgated with a parallel table of authorities to include the Citizenry of the several
States of the Union.When the "Agency" busts what they term as a "Pirate" operation, they quote specific statutory
regulations that, upon examination of "the code", (those regs), we find that those regs include only those stations that
fall under the categories of being engaged in "Interstate & Foreign Commerce" per 47 USC 151-152, & any station
that has filed an application for broadcast license and/or construction permit.None of the regs that the "agency"
attempts to impose have ever been posted in the Federal Register, or have any parallel table of authorities in the
CFR.Therefore, the agency, its agents or co-parties have no Delegation of Authority to impose its statutory regulations
upon those micro-broadcast stations that are not engaged in "Interstate & Foreign Commerce", or any station that has
not made an application to the agency for the "privilege" to engage in the business of broadcastby venue of "Interstate
& Foreign Commerce".And yet, the Pains & Penalties for what the Agency, its agents or co-parties calls "Illegal &
unauthorized radio transmissions" is approximate to three times that of murder, even though no-one has ever been
denied their right to Life, Limb, Liberty, property, or the pursuit of happiness due to micro-broadcasting.The agency,
its agents & co-parties have termed anyone who broadcasts outside of their scope & purview of the "privilege License"
as a "pirate" so that they will fall under the piracy jurisdiction of the U.S. of D.C. Congress. The Airwaves have been
classified as being "The High Seas". (A possible theft by conversion?)Sir, while this issue may seem to be a minor
one, it is an important one, since the micro-station is certainly the last venue of truly Free Speech available to all Americans.
The National Press (both TV & Newspapers) are no longer free to engage in the First Amendment's Guarantee of revealing
all sides to any issue,and we frequently find that so-called "Politically Correctness" is the order of the day.The freedoms
of the Internet are slowly being swallowed up by those who desire to remove all Rights from the once great body of free
Americans.That leaves the community based micro-broadcast station as the last bastion of hope for Freedom Of the
Press.There is one case pending in the Ninth Judicial District, (Dunifer vs. FCC) that may effect some measure of change
in the way the the agency may view the micro-broadcaster, however, this case is based upon the falsehood of the
so-called Democracy, which has no bearing upon a Constitutional Republic of a Nation of Sovereign Nation/States.
There are three (3) supporting memo's to follow this letter:FCC_Exposed.FCC_Fraud-1.FCC_Fraud-2.As stated at the
first, if there is anyone in America who can put these issues to task,It is you, Sir, and I most humbly & gratefully thank
you for your time & consideration in these matters.
Sincerely B. Oliver James III, Esq.
From: Burton James, PD. Free Radio NLNR-101.9 FM Seattle.
#%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%#
# State Citizen B. Oliver James III, Esquire, Sui-Juris, #
# Jus-Sanguinis, Sua-Proteste-Esse. #
# Citizen at Law, At common-Law. #
#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=##=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#
# ** N_L_N_R ** - "Neither Left Nor Right" -101.9 FM - #
# (2nd Chronicles 34:2) #
#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=##=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#
# This Free Radio Station is Not engaged in #
# "Interstate & Foreign Commerce" #
# per 47 USC 151-152 #
# - Seattle, Washington Republic - #
# Not a fictitious federal area as defined by 4 USC 105-113. & 47 USC 153 #
#%%%%%%%%% An American Freedom Network Affiliate %%%%%%%#
# Send E-mail to: nlnr-101.9fm@juno.com - or - #
# nlnr_101_9_fm_@_hotmail.com. #
# See our website at: #
# http://www.geocities.com/heartland/hills/3764 #
#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=##=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#=#
#"The Rights of the (C)itizens of the several States, as such, #
# are NOT under consideration in the Fourteenth Amendment. #
# They stand as they did before the adoption of the Fourteenth #
# Amendment, and are fully guaranteed by other provisions. #
# "UNITED STATES vs. Anthony, 24 FED.Cas. 829, 830 (1873). #
#%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%#
And Further;
The three types of law:
B. Oliver James III, Esq.
Sui-Juris, Jus-Sanguinis
Sua-Proteste-Esse.
First, let's establish some ground that ALL of us can (hopefully)
agree upon. The following is a list of what I believe there
should be little or no disagreement with:
1) The Statutes at Large are prima facie evidence of the
intent of Congress, and must be cited below the regulation
in order to have force and effect of law.
2) When there is a conflict between the law as published in
the Statutes at Large or Revised Stat's, (i.e. the FCC statutory
Code) and the statute(s) (i.e. 47 U.S.C.),
the Statutes at Large [or Revised Statutes] prevail.
3) In order for the statutes of (47 U.S.C.) to have full force and
effect of law to be used in the PRIVATE SECTOR, there must be a
SUBSTANTIVELY PROMULGATED REGULATION, it MUST be printed in the Federal
Register, and the authority for that particular regulation MUST be cited
directly below the regulation.
The statutory regulations most often quoted by agents of the foreign
principle (FCC),
were never posted in the Federal Register. PERIOD!
4) There are 3 types of regulations: a) LEGISLATIVE:
Generally, legislative regulations have the force and effect
of law unless the regulation exceeds the scope of the delegated
power,
is contrary to the statute, or is unreasonable.
Although Congress is to pass into law the acts authorized to be
done, the Commissioner, under the direction of the Secretary,
is authorized to prescribe the operating rules.
b) INTERPRETIVE:
Explain the FCC's position on the various sections of Code.
Interpretive reg's do not have the force and effect of law.
c) PROCEDURAL:
Procedural reg's do not have the force and effect of law,
and are considered to be directive rather than mandatory.
These reg's pertain to the FCC and its officers and outline
the operation of the FCC in carrying out the administration
and enforcement of the Federal Communication statutes "in"
or "within" the jurisdictional boundaries of "The District".
Only the LEGISLATIVE regulations operate on the general public
and have been given the force and effect of law.
Neither INTERPRETIVE nor ADMINISTRATIVE reg's constitute
regulations which have been SUBSTANTIVELY promulgated.
5. A regulation cannot enlarge the language of the statute, and both -
the statutes and regulations must be based upon authority derived
from the Statutes at Large or Revised Stat's, and be in conformity
with the intent of Congress.
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations
affecting 47 U.S.C., see the List of CFR Sections
Affected in the Finding Aids section of this volume. "
And further;
1] Very few understand that "licensed" individuals are no longer
protected by the constitution. License is a grant by an
authority to do that which without the license would be unlawful
(I did not say illegal). Illegal is to violate the rules set for the
license. License is "nuisance per se" or "trespass per se." Well,
that's the way the courts prior to 1938 explained it. So what's the
problem. Licensed individuals must have it determined that they are
entitled to granted rights. They have no inalienable rights. What
about you? Are you licensed, permitted, under special capacity,
going to a municipal court (created by legislature). Have you any
rights (or civil liberties since rights are now a government grant).
Would you rather have civil liberties, civil rights, or, UN-alienable
Rights?
Of course "we" as individuals do not need the FCC or anyone else,
including the government, to "approve the First Amendment." But,
the FCC statutes simply recognizes that agents of the foreign principle,
when practicing enforcement of said statutes are not acting as
*individuals* with rights under the First Amendment but are practicing
selective enforcement under licence issued by government.
No one would argue that a doctor's writing a prescription for a drug or
medicine is a form of communication. If a doctor writes a prescription
for a drug that has been banned by law or disapproved by the FDA, would
you say that the government violated the doctor's First Amendment right
to free speech by such law or FDA ban? Anyone who accepts a
government's
licence agrees to abide with the restrictions that go with the licence.
Let us assume that abortions are illegal for all purposes. If one
doctor advises a patient to have an abortion and that patient goes to
another doctor who performs an abortion on that patient, would you say
the first doctor had a First Amendment right to free speech in advising
the patient to have the abortion or would the first doctor's advise
amount to aiding and abeting a crime?
Anyone who operates under a licence issued by government forfeits to
some extent one or more constitutional right. As I understand
constitutional principles, First Amendment rights apply in their
fullness only to people acting solely in their natural capacities as
individuals.
From: NLNR-101.9 FM - Seattle. Burton James, PD. And Further;
FCC COMMUNICATIONS ACT - EXPOSED!
Where and to whom does the Wire & Radio Communications
provisions of the Communications Act (47 United States Code
[USC] Chapter 5) apply? Hopefully my analysis below will shed
some light on this question, and I'm sure that my answer will
shock you!
The avowed purpose of the Federal Communications Commission (47
USC Sec. 151){1} is to regulate "interstate and foreign
commerce in communication by wire and radio ... for the purpose
of securing a more effective execution of this policy by
centralizing authority ...". That sounds real good,
'centralizing authority,' that's just what a free society
needs, centralized authority. But I digress.
The above quote from 47 USC Sec. 151, leads one to ask some
questions, specifically what is meant by "interstate and
foreign commerce," and indirectly, what is meant by "United
States"?
UNITED STATES DOES NOT MEAN UNITED STATES OF AMERICA{2}
I'll start with the easy one, United States, which 47 USC
defines as follows:
47 USC Sec. 153 (g) - 'United States' means the several
States and Territories, the District of Columbia, and the
possessions of the United States, but does not include the
Canal Zone.
That's straight forward enough, isn't it? But, what does
Congress mean by 'State'? I know what a 'State' is, don't you?
Well, lets see what Congress means by 'State':
47 USC Sec. 153 (v) - 'State' includes the District of
Columbia and the Territories and possessions.
Why is the definition for 'State' at "(v)" instead of right
after "(g)"?
Now another question, at the moment I'm writing this, I'm
sitting in Montana, am I in a 'State' as Congress has defined it
above?
NO!!! The reason is because of the word 'includes'. The
[s]upreme Court had this to say about 'includes':
"'includes' means to 'comprise as a member,' to 'confine,'
and 'to comprise as the whole part.'" -- Montello Salt
Company v. Utah, 221 US 452 at 466
What this means is, every time you see 'includes' in a statute,
it is used in a restrictive sense (i.e., it is equivalent to
'means').
So, what Congress has said is:
When used in this Act "'United States' means the 'District
of Columbia and [its] Territories and possessions' and
Territories, the District of Columbia, and the possessions
of the 'District of Columbia and [its] Territories and
possessions', but does not include the Canal Zone."
Is that a mouthful or what. I'm sure glad that the 'Canal Zone'
got out of it. Now use a whining voice to say "BUT Congress
would never do anything underhanded like that!"
Well, Congress does know how to write a clear definition for
"United States," for example:
7 USC Sec. 2702 - (h) The term 'United States' means the
forty-eight contiguous States of the United States of
America and the District of Columbia.
If, in fact, that is what the President and Congress wanted to
say in the Communications Act, then they would have written it
that way! Note, above it says "States of the United States of
America" versus "United States" as stated in 47 USC Sec. 153
(g).
INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE
What does 'interstate' mean:
Interstate means "Pertaining to relations between ... the
states of a federal government." -- Webster's Dictionary
Now, we know what the states of the [federal] United States
government are in relation to this section of the USC, they are
just the District of Columbia and the Territories and
possessions of the [federal] United States!
To get an idea of what is meant by 'foreign,' I'll use some
definitions out of Title 26 of the USC:
26 USC Sec. 7701 (a)(4) - The term 'domestic' when applied
to a corporation or partnership means created or organized
in the United States or under the law of the United States
or of any State.
26 USC Sec. 7701 (a)(5) - The term 'foreign' when applied
to a corporation or partnership means a corporation or
partnership which is not domestic.
So, 'foreign,' means anything that isn't in the [federal]
United States. (Pretty wild, ain't it!) (Hint, Hint, Hint,
this is typically the case for all federal statutes.)
CONCLUSION
The Wire & Radio Communications provisions of the
Communications Act only applies to citizens [as defined in the
14th Amendment to the Constitution] and nationals of, and the
geographic areas comprised of, the District of Columbia and the
Territories and possessions of the [federal] United States,
which are Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The Communications Act is not MANDATORY, does not apply to, or,
in any of Union State or to their Citizens! (Remember, each
Union State is a foreign nation with respect to the federal
United States).
If you wish to be bound by the provisions of the Communications
Act, you can, simply by VOLUNTEERING!! That is, going out and
getting a license, or voluntarily giving them jurisdiction over
you and/or your property.
HOMEWORK: Do you "own" any stuff you bought that has an FCC
TYPE ACCEPTANCE on it? If you own it, why can they demand to
see it, or even take it away from you? (Hint, Hint, Hint,
Constitution, Amend. 4 & 5; That is, unless you are just
renting it.)
---ENDNOTE---
{1} - 47 USC Sec. 151: Purposes of chapter; Federal
Communications Commission created - For the purpose of
regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by
wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to
all the people of the United States a rapid, efficient,
Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication
service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, for the
purpose of the national defense, for the purpose of promoting
safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio
communications, and for the purpose of securing a more
effective execution of this policy by centralizing authority
heretofore granted by law to several agencies and by granting
additional authority with respect to interstate and foreign
commerce in wire and radio communication, there is created a
commission to be known as the 'Federal Communications
Commission', which shall be constituted as hereinafter
provided, and which shall execute and enforce the provisions of
this chapter.
{2} - Per the U.S. [s]upreme Court:
"The term 'United States' may be used in any one of
several senses. [i] It may be merely the name of a
sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of
other sovereigns in the family of nations. [ii] It may
designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the
United States extends, or [iii] it may be the collective
name of the States, ... united by and under the
Constitution." -- Hoover & Allen Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S.
652 (1945)
So, according to the [s]upreme Court, the term "United States"
has three meanings:
[i] That the term "United States" can refer to the
'nation' with respect to other nations.
[ii] The term "United States" can be used as a singular
noun ("The United States is...") which refers to the
'internal federal area' created by Article I, Section 8,
Clauses 17 & 18 of the Constitution which establishes the
District of Columbia as its seat of government:
"[Congress shall have Power...] To exercise
'exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over
such district' (not exceeding ten miles square) as
may, by cession of particular States, and the
acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the
Government of the [not 'these'] United States, and
to exercise like authority over all places purchased
by the consent of the legislature of the State in
which the same shall be, for the erection of forts,
magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful
buildings; - And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper
for carrying into execution the foregoing powers,
and all other powers vested by this Constitution in
the 'Government of the United States', or in any
department or officer thereof."
[iii] And the term "United States" can refer to the '50
sovereign States' which are united under the Constitution
for the United States of America. In this third sense,
the term is a plural, collective noun ("These United
States..." or "The United States are...") and does not
include the federal area.
From the above, we can conclude that: "United States" does not
mean "United States of America" in federal statues; and that
acts of Congress (and Presidential executive orders) are
powerless over you unless they deal with (1) treason in time of
war; (2) to provide punishment for counterfeiting the coin
(money); and (3) to punish Piracies and Felonies committed on
the high Seas (Powers granted to Congress in Article I, Section
8, Clause 1 through 18).
Return to
Index Click Here 
Get your own "FREE" Homepage from Geocities.