If you want to review parts of my book, I welcome comments and suggestions. 

Make a comment and I will send you a draft of those topics that are the most interest to you. 

Contents
Contents
Introduction
Do Federal Laws apply to you?
Buck Act
14th Amendment citizens
Congressional intent
Your right to work and contract
A right cannot be charged a fee
Employment with a US Employer
bad legal advice
SSNs not required to work in U.S.
Privacy Act
Paperwork Reduction Act
Are you required to have a SSN
W-4 Employee’s Withholding Certificate
Backup Withholding
What United States?
I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification
Credentials
8 USC 1324a
Rules of Statute Construction
8 CFR 274a
Confronting your employer
Write letters to get answers
Independent Contractors
Summary
Exhibit A: Claiming to be a person not subject to withholding
Exhibit B: Employer E-Verify manuals
Exhibit C: EIB102 
Exhibit D: Expatriation Act
Exhibit E: Privacy Act
Appendix: Employment is not employment

In Revelation 13:16 we will see that the beast (the second beast that is introduced in Revelation 13:11) causes all to give (Greek didomi, Strong’s Concordance reference G1325) a mark (credential).

 If you are caused to give a mark, name or number of a beast in order to buy or sell -- then the mark is here.

A BEAST is a government.  A Beast issues a mark. 

Revelation 13 predicts that a two-horned beast issues the Mark. Nowhere in Revelation 13 is there a one-man world leader. If you want to insist that a one man world leader issues the mark, then you must first explain away three angels' messages:

1. Angels insist that horns symbolize kings while beasts symbolize governments. Angels (in Daniel 7:24, Daniel 8:20 and in Revelation 17:12) tell us that the horns symbolize kings that came out of the beast kingdom, perhaps successive kings. Or perhaps concurrent kings. (Or perhaps, as implied by Isaiah 33:22, kings refer only to the executive branch of government).

2. An angel, in Daniel 7:23 equates Daniel's fourth beast with a fourth (final) world government, not a church, not a man, not an antichrist. The word "antichrist" is not even in the book of Revelation.

3. The two-horned beast causes all to worship the seven headed ten-horned beast. Unless these angels lied, all you can conclude is that the final world government is two loosely knit confederations of worldly powers totaling 8 heads.

They are confused by the translators. 

The Mayflower Pilgrams fled from King James and his government published Bible. You should too.

They have two confusions. The word "receive" in Revelation 13:16 and the "should be killed" in verse 15.

In Revelation 13:16 we will see that the beast (the second beast that is introduced in Revelation 13:11) causes all to give (Greek didomi, Strong’s Concordance reference G1325) a mark (credential). Don’t believe the English mistranslations. Nowhere else in the Bible is the Greek didomi (same Greek prefix mentioned above) translated as receive. You do not receive a mark, you give a mark. The second beast of Revelation 13 forces all to give (Greek didomi) a mark on his right hand or on his forehead so that no one could buy or sell without it, (with the possible exception of those who overcome the mark.)
In the five occurrences in the Bible of marks that are both in the right hand and forehead, all of them mention the training of children to instill traditional values of the Lord.

Revelation 13:15 KJV “Should be killed” NOTES

This Revelation 13:15 verse does not necessarily mean that everyone who refuses the mark will be killed. We know this because there will be survivors who do not accept the mark. Some of them will have victory over the mark in Revelation 15:2. Some will be rewarded with the harps of God, and sing the song of Moses BEFORE the seven last plagues. And before the fall of Babylon, 144 thousand do not receive the mark, which occurs BEFORE the third angel of Revelation 14:9 warns those who dwell on earth not to receive the mark of the beast. And saints patiently endure the beast’s persecution in Revelation 14:12.

Don’t presume that the words “should be killed” refer to a lawful execution. Your Bible has three other Greek words that are translated as “should be killed” that refer to lawful executions. (Matt 10:21, Mark 13:12, Luke 21:16, Luke 23:32, Acts 26:10, Acts 12:19 and 1 Peter 3:18) But this Revelation 13:15 does not refer to a lawful execution. The Revelation 13:15 terminology “should be killed “ is the translation of the Greek word apokteino. It means to abolish or destroy (as, for example, in Ephesians 2:16). (Although this apokteino never refers to a lawful execution of a convict, it did refer to the massacre of innocents – perhaps eradicate or abolish would be a better translation).

The same Greek apokteino as it is used in Ephesians 2:16 means to reconcile, put to death the enmity/hostility. Do you know of any existing mark, name, or number system that is required to buy or sell, and the requirement is intended to reconcile (put to death the enmity/hostility, to force into the fold) those people who are inclined to refuse the mark, name or number?

Christ often spoke of living people as being already dead. Perhaps this Revelation 13:15 verse is referring to weak Christians being converted into unbelievers.

Perhaps it is an idiom that means people will be mortified (as in Matthew 28:4). And indeed you will be dumbfounded, speechless and stupefied at the worship required by the welfare culture that permeates your once-great nation. Black's Law Dictionary definition of Allegiance: "Obligation of fidelity and obedience to government in consideration for protection that government gives.”

If you don’t take the mark, you will indeed live as an abolished (apokteino) fugitive.

The W-4 form has a Privacy Act Statement that does not meet the requirements of the Privacy Act. 

Here is a copy of the Privacy Act. Save a copy because it is no longer available from the government. 

Attached is a paragraph from the Legislative History of the Privacy Act. It says that the Privacy Act applies to private employers. 

Attached is another paragraph from the Legislative History of the Privacy Act that says the law for Privacy Act Statements are to use the specific word "Mandatory" or the word "Voluntary". 

Another law requiring the disclosure request to use the word mandatory is the Paperwork Reduction Act Section 3506(c)(1)(B)(iii) (IV). They must disclose whether responses are voluntary, or mandatory, or required to obtain a benefit. If you don’t see these words, then it is a bootleg form that can be ignored according to the Legislative History of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

And the Social Security Administration has a brochure entitled "Your Card and Number". Publication 05-10002 warns that "Giving your number is voluntary even when you are asked for the number directly." and gives advice on what to ask when requested for a number.

Get a copy of SSA publication SSA-05-10002 Your Social Security Number and Card.  Their on-line PDF is not sufficient, government publications are admissible as evidence according to Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 902. Try to get several copies. Give one to your new Employer and point out what SSA tells people to do. Ask your new Employer why your number is needed, how it will be used, what happens if you refuse, and what law requires you to give your number. (Hint: the law requires some employers to ask, it does not require you to give a number).

If they do not give you a specific law, section or paragraph to read, then remind them that a federal case determined in Doe v. Sharp 491 F.Supp. 346 (1980):
“The disclosure requirements of the Privacy Act are not fulfilled if citizens must pry required information from an agency by initiating a civil action and propounding specific interrogatories ...; neither does an agency cure an initial failure to disclose by supplying citations to an unrevealing passage from an agency handbook.” 

Internal Revenue Code section 6109 requires employers to ask for a number (if they are subject to that particular law).  It does not require you to have a number or give a number. Also know that there are court cases where SSNs were never to be used for identification. See SSN IS NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION - Do Not Be Fooled by Government (notfooledbygovernment.com) 

You might also be interested in the Bruce Hanson EEOC determination that a SSN is not needed. NotFooledByGovernment.com/essay-files/EEOC_determination.pdf 

And there is a federal law that punishes those who compel a SSN from someone in violation of federal laws. Title 42 U.S. Code section 408(a)8. But don't mention this to your employer because it might be a threat. See your State's definition of the word threat. 

For more information, get my book Resisting the W-4 and I-9