* Must Read *: It *is* just a damn piece of paper!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:04 AM
link   
We've all noticed the frivolous claims. People always fall for it. "No way, there is no tax!"

"That's *my* work, I don't have to pay anything!" Sure, sure...

This is absurd. Apples and oranges I say! - and you *will* see why it is as such. There *is* a tax. It just doesn't work the way you think it does.

Logic and reasoning prove it. It only takes a few minutes to understand, and the answer is hidden in plain sight as everything else is. You see, the government is smarter than you.. They know people attempt to be clever. They know people want the secrets, and they know people will follow roads that go around in circles to get them.

I will show you how to identify misinformation and propaganda associated with these cases. All these internet cult creating tax scammers are nothing but frivolous disinfo agents with *one* goal: to seperate the people into belief systems.

It works well, and it is a typical disinfo red herring. How many arguments are there for tax scams? Tons, right? Well the simple truth of the matter is that these scams are perpetrated by the very system that you seek to battle - they actually trick people into paying court costs and more fines - they profit because you have allowed them to manipulate your mind. This, like the Holocaust, like equal rights, like feminism and civil rights, it all aims to seperate us into belief systems. Divide and conquer is the key.
Divide and confuse is the result.

You see, the government is smarter than you.. Those of us who are intimidated by law manuals, mathematics, courts, credit, and money, are not clever. There are certain kind of people who feel that they *must* get a lawyer, and they *must* see a doctor, and *must* get vaccines and take medication for their OCD - you know, the typical American that lets a higher aristocracy determine their path in life.

To quote my best friend, Thomas Jefferson:


"It would seem impossible that an intelligent people with the faculty of reading and right of thinking should continue much longer to slumber under the pupilage of an interested aristocracy of priests and lawyers, persuading them to distrust themselves and to let them think for them... Awaken them from this voluntary degradation of mind! Restore them to a due estimate of themselves and their fellow citizens, and a just abhorrence of the falsehoods and artifices which have seduced them!"


Well, Thomas, I'm gonna help you out. I'm going to show these people another instance of how our government exploits us.

If you look at the constitution - it is not a large document, only around 4,400 words.

Article I, section 1:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included

within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole

Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed,

three fifths of all other Persons ...


This is the biggie. Because the constitution is open to interpretation, whoever is in power can believe that this says virtually anything for their own power hungry agenda.

This says that direct taxes shall be apportioned among the serveral States, and more, according to the population This means that if a direct tax is to be paid to the federal government from wages, every State has to pay - not just one or two! It's either all States or no States collect taxes

from their citizens and pay the Union. Each State is also expected to pay in proportion to its population. In the end, you'd be paying a Tax to your State, and the State would be paying that to the federal government. The only difference is that you wouldn't be paying based on how much your wages were - you'd be paying based on how many people were in your State!

You have to understand that at the time, territories that were not part of the union still had their own constitutions. They were sovereign, independent countries. Also, many States drafted their own constituions - or modified their current - in order to join the Union. For example, Florida established a constitution in 1838, but was not a member of the Union until 1845. New York state drafted it's own state constition 1 year after the declaration of independence, and 11 years before joining the Union. These States were, in fact, their own countries. Have a look at the declaration of Independence:



We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America ... [announce] that all political connection between [the States] and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor


12 days later, of course, a Union was created between them in the form of a Confederated Union. After all,

they had been through so much together... tear


I made a thread about this that was pretty much ignored here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...


State of Great Britian... and the Independent States in America. They were all countries, the same as Great Britian. In a sense, they still are countries, trapped in a Union that they are forbidden to leave. If they try, well, "civil war." It's like joining a gang that you can't leave. The shadow government has been around for a while.


The founding Fathers looked as if they wanted to make sure that if the Union passed a direct tax, it would pass one equally among all States in the Union, and as such - all citizens. It's a State payment to be in the club.

Now, pay attention to this. This will resemble the typical rollercoaster that disinfo agents lead you on, and the one that disinfo cult members propagate. There is a difference: this one will take you to to the simple, elegant truth.




posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:07 AM
link   
Article I, section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


The second mentioning says congress has the power to collect Taxes... okay, great.

Article I, section 9:

... but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person. and ... No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.


That is of no relavence to our case...

Amendment 14

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.


Again, not really important here.

Amendment 16

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.



So,

Article I, section 1:
"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States"

Article I, section 8:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes"

Amendment 16:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes"

So it is apparent that Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes on income. Now, this really has no meaning beyond your belief of the definition of the word income. If you believe the word income means
what you get paid for working, then so be it - if you believe it doesnt, fine. What we need to do is find out what the government believes this word to be. We also need to find out who this tax is imposed upon.

We find out what the government believes by looking through it's belief system - the law.

First, who is this tax imposed upon?

TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1

There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of—
"every married individual" ... "head of household" ... "every individual"


When we look at the Internal Revenue Code of the US Code, we find that there are different types of income:

Gross income, Adjusted gross income defined, Taxable income defined, Ordinary income.

We probably want to have a look at Taxable income, because that is apparently what we are questioning:


(a) In general - Except as provided in subsection (b), for purposes of this subtitle, the term “taxable income” means gross income minus the deductions allowed by this chapter (other than the standard deduction).


Great, so "taxable income" is gross income minus deductions.. what is "gross income" ?


Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:

(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;
(2) Gross income derived from business;
(3) Gains derived from dealings in property;
(4) Interest
...


The list goes up to (15), but they have nothing to do with wages for labor. Okay, so what does the above say?

"gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to)"

So.. it includes "all income from whatever source", and many more things - on top of being from "whatever source" !

It seems to say that "income" is "income from anywhere" and gives some examples of where "anywhere" could be.

TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter B > PART II—ITEMS SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN GROSS INCOME lists a bunch more, but none of them have anything to do with wages or payment.

The only 2 on the list that may fall under wages are:


(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items;

(2) Gross income derived from business;


So while we have the definitions of various types of income, we are never actually given the definition of "income" itself as used in the definition if "gross income". Just as we had to leave the constitution to find a definition, we have to leave the US code, because it does

not contain the definition we are looking for. Where do we look? The next subserviant authority on the matter - the IRS.

Form 1040 has, under inclusions of "Income" the following


Wages, salaries, tips, etc.


Ok, so it does look like "every married individual" ... "head of household" ... "every individual" can have an income tax imposed on their wages. Again, the word "individual" must be defined, and we have to look for what
the government dogma believes this word to mean.

We look at TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1101 Definitions, doing a search for "individual," we find that:



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:08 AM
link   
TITLE 8 [Aliens and Nationality] > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1101 Definitions


(3) The term “person” means an individual or an organization.


So this equates "person" with "individual"


Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.


The above equates person with citizen

and your birth certificate, drivers license, SS card, etc.. equates you (or at least, your name) as a citizen.

The thing is, you can trace this all the way back to a CAPITAL LETTER name if you want to, or whatever. All you're doing is operating within the bounds of the system that has been set up - you are operating within the governments belief system and being exploited by government propaganda and red herrings.

In the end, the constitution is an amendable document, and it was amended as such so that congress could collect an "income tax." "Income" only appears in the constitution one time, it it's very own amendment. You can believe all you want that an income tax is a "direct tax" as mentioned in the constitution. It's not. The words "Direct Tax" never appear in the US code or the Internal Revenue code.


This is exactly the same method that is being used to allow the Federal Reserve to issue "Federal Reserve Notes" as "Currency". We know full well that Congress is given the power to issue "money" per the constitution, but so what? Just because Congress has the power, doesn't mean they use it!

The Federal Reserve does not issue money as per the constitution - just as the IRS does not collect a direct tax per the constitution.

"Federal Reserve Notes" and "Income Tax"

[edit on 27-12-2007 by benign.psychosis]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:24 AM
link   
The problem arises from the fact that the 16th Amendment did not follow the appropriate ratification process, and was in fact not ratified by every state.

The Constitution can be amended, but there are some stringent requirements for such amendment, and those requirements were not met by the 16th amendment.

There have been court cases fought and WON on this particular historical fact; The 16th Amendment is unconstitutional, and besides it there is no law which dictates that income tax is legal... or that it is illegal to refuse payment of it to the IRS.

They can, essentially, say anything they like... they are ignoring the rules that they've sworn to uphold, and obeying an unconstitutional (And illegally appropriated) amendment by perpetuating the lie.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:31 AM
link   
Okay, then put your money where your mouth is.

And get used to hearing the words “Will the defendant please rise…”



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by MurderSmurf
Okay, then put your money where your mouth is.

And get used to hearing the words “Will the defendant please rise…”


How exactly does that fit into this thread? If you'd like to start another topic about tax scams and their cases, you may do so.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by TheColdDragon
 



Hey, Cold Dragon, you've hit the nail on the head. Yes, there have been people who fought the income tax and won, based on exactly what you said; the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified.

There is an excellent film called "Freedom to Fascism" by the late Aaron Russo. It goes into detail about this whole thing.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by forestlady

Hey, Cold Dragon, you've hit the nail on the head. Yes, there have been people who fought the income tax and won, based on exactly what you said; the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified.


Hi forestlady, I couldn't find any articles about citizens fighting the income tax and winning, could you please link to some of these? Please tell us how they "won" so others can win as well. I would think if there is evidence thats shows people are not required to pay the income tax, many more people would follow and do the same, right?



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I do not have a problem paying taxes, and the logical need is there. For anyone that lives and works in this country to think there is not a need for taxes or that there is no cost to live here is a fool.

The problem is how the Government spends it, and I think we are all to blame for that. If we as the people put more weight on pork barrel spending and other costly self interest waste there would be no issue about taxes.

benign.psychosis,

I'm more in favor of the flat tax due to the extreme fairness of it and the low cost of operation to do it. As of right now IRS is a huge drain off taxes that should be going back to the people who pay it.

How does a flat tax fit within constitutional restraints?


[edit on 27-12-2007 by Xtrozero]



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Forget about the fact that the 16th amendment was never properly ratified because it is inherently unconstitutional. It states that all income taxes are not to be apportioned to any states. So that means no state programs to be funded by this tax money leaving it free for other things and wait a sec.....it was passed the same year the federal reserve act was which put us in debt to the central banking system. Since article 8 describes direct taxes to be used towards all debts....2 plus two equals 4 and WHAM! Our income taxes are used to pay back that huge government loan that we are collateral for. Doesnt anyone see this connection? I mean it doesnt take a freakin genius....this isnt an issue of the legality of tax as a whole. Its an issue of life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The irs has persecuted and prosecuted so many people to their demise because of defaulting on income taxes and that situation is created and perpetuated by the national debt.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Yes, taxes are legitimate. However, "income" is never defined. I trade my time and effort for a wage, evenly. If I make 15 bucks an hour, that's what my time is worth. It's an even trade, no profit, no income to tax.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unit541
Yes, taxes are legitimate. However, "income" is never defined. I trade my time and effort for a wage, evenly. If I make 15 bucks an hour, that's what my time is worth. It's an even trade, no profit, no income to tax.


If you make 15 bucks a hour, that would mean you actually make 10 bucks a hour - income tax involved.

Would that be correct enough?



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   
What exactly is the logic behind taxing? According to the constitution it is supposed to be used for the general well being of the country, national debts on behalf of the people (the thing is that the debt it refers to is supposed to benefit this country as a whole and not force people into terrible economic positions). What else are they for? Social services? Government programs? Absolutely but all these programs have to be for the people and by the people!



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 10:25 AM
link   
Most people wouldn't mind paying taxes if they were used for the good of the nation. As it stands now less than half of what we pay the IRS is helping us Americans.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Thats the whole point....the 16th amendment takes our own taxes away from us and forces them to be used for other means which you can pinpoint if you connect all the dots. Once again i will say that it was no coincidence that the federal reserve act of 1913 was passed right before the 16th amendment also in 1913. They didnt make it as specific as possible but it was made so that they had the freedom to use the taxes in this way.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 02:04 PM
link   
You are right but no change will happen until someone or something hits the reset button.

Look back in history, has any big sudden change EVER happened without a revolution of some kind? Do you think the administration is going to wake up tomorrow and say " oh, gee, we have created a country exactly like the one our ancestors fought so hard too free themselves from"? No because they have become those tyrants themselves, corrupted by greed.

Is there hope? Not until the government pushes harder and strips even more freedoms away until it is so obvious to everyone they are playing for keeps and the only thing you are to the government is $, then the reset button will be hit. They will push past the logical and intelligent man that has been upset and in WTF mode for years already and finally reaching the mass idiocracy that has become our society. Then we may have a revolution.

So, yeah half your life's work going to the government who spends it on everything you voted them not too. The internet will be heavily taxed, you will need "papers" to go anywhere outside the US which will include Mexico and Canada and with some luck one of the hundreds of cancers they are giving you someday will kill you, controlling the population a little and finally allowing you to stop paying them with you life's work. God Bless America



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Are you kidding? I know that we need a revolution but the revolutionaries will be perceived as terrorists and will be crushed violently with the support of the country unless we properly educate people as to what exactly is going on. If you have credit card debt and you want out just look up the federal debt relief system.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by GUICE2
Are you kidding? I know that we need a revolution but the revolutionaries will be perceived as terrorists and will be crushed violently with the support of the country unless we properly educate people as to what exactly is going on. If you have credit card debt and you want out just look up the federal debt relief system.


Have you ever heard of the Civil War or Revolutionary War? How are you going to educate people who won't even help themselves?

Who is going to crush us? The Government and the handful of soldiers who choose the administration's side over their own family? Do you know how many gun owners there are in America? A lot more than soldiers that will support the Government over the constitution? We have the numbers to literally made ANY change we want. All we need is leadership and coordination. People are going to die, no way around it, some of them and some of us, maybe you or I. It's only way it can happen unless you know of a way to get every greedy soulless ass on Earth to just get along for what's best for the world as a whole instead of what best for themselves.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   
My stance on this issue is a philosophical one, and it rings true to the site name here, ABOVE politics.
The legal and patriotic and political issues can be debated to no avail until the death of this species, because the simple fact is that NO ONE has the right to be able to tax you for being alive.
Taxes are all a scam. You want a government by the people, for the people? It's not gunna happen as long as you think you owe some piece of your life to it's existence.
As soon as people come along and go "well I don't mind if the govt has to do this and this indecent thing, as long as they use it the right way."
Uhhhh, they've already done you wrong by taxing your livelihood! Do you think that them making you feel guilty enough to give up some of your life essence to them is gunna equate to something positive in the end?
NO, because two wrongs DO NOT equal a right.
You have the right to live without servitude. Taxation is exactly that, a subtle slavery.
There's no debating natural law. This is not a political issue.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
The two wrongs, in my previous post, was referring to:

indecent people + indecent acts = more indecency!





 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join