On November 6, 2006, a federal judge issued an order enjoining, prohibiting and restricting the IRS from enforcing a summons the IRS had served on the Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company demanding WTP Chairman Bob Schulz’s personal bank records.
On November 1st Schulz petitioned the Court to Quash the Summons on the ground that it was issued in spite of constitutional prohibitions barring retaliation by the government against those exercising Constitutionally protected Rights, including the First Amendment Right to Petition.
Schulz also charged the Summons was a brash act of insolence by IRS for violating a 2005 ruling from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals which defined the Due Process requirements for enforcing IRS administrative actions, and that IRS had acted in bad faith. Like Schulz, the bank is question is also domiciled in the Second Circuit.
On November 3rd Schulz asked the Court to order the IRS to Show Cause why the IRS should not be enjoined from enforcing the Summons until the case was finally determined, including any appeal thereof. Schulz also asked the Court to include a TRO in its order.
The District Court Order granted Schulz all the protections he requested, including ordering IRS to immediately notify the Bank by telephone that it was not to comply with the demands of the Summons.
Click here to read the June 2005 ruling from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Schulz v. IRS barring IRS from enforcing any administrative enforcement action without first filing suit to enforce such administrative action in federal district court and providing the enforcement target an opportunity for a full, adversarial Article III judicial hearing.
just to make things clear - Freedom to Fascis is a propagnda movie deflecting people from important things like Rothschilhds and moreover important solutions like printing our own money without any backup...
There are many legal arguments made which are all valid regarding the income tax issue, but if you don't build a strong case for yourself with documents clearly declaring yourself as not being obligated to file a 1040 then your playing a game of russian roulette with the government. Even still, it's russian roulette, but after doing your homework and following through with some time tested measures, there are many more chambers from which you'll fire the blank.
I'd suggest anyone looking into this matter to look into Robert Clarkson's untaxing packet. Clarkson has fought and beaten the IRS personally 3 times, and helped many others do the same!
Well having hear E Mullins on this, apparently he wrote a piece which I have not found but he shows that the US treasury legally has not been a branch of the US government since it was dissolved by the either the amendment or federal reserve act can't recall which, he also mentioned that his method of beating the IRS was proactive him going to court to get some sort of declaration.
As to the film freedom to fascism, it certainly is a control film as evidenced by the fact that Bircher G. Edward Griffin's and 'his' book Creature from Jekyll island is used instead of Eustace Mullins and Secrets of the federal reserve however this notwithstanding it is a powerful film with enough facts in it that can be used although I would not advise anyone to join Russo's 'club' that I guess would be a dead end and you never know who might call! there is currently on torrent two William Copper broadcasts, one in which Copper is interviewing Russo about his involvement with the constitution party in the 90's and the second is Copper apologising for being had by Russo, both poor quality audio since they are shortwave recording rather than studio tapes.
Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:26 am
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8183 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
1040 Checkmate?
Quote:
1040 Checkmate?
DOJ Dismisses Felony Tax Prosecution
-- With Prejudice -- After PRA Defense Raised
Evidence OMB Complicit In Income Tax Fraud
DOJ & IRS Petitioned To Explain
On May 12, 2006 in Peoria, Illinois, the attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) begged the court to dismiss all charges against IRS victim Robert Lawrence in federal District Court.
The motion for dismissal came on the heels of a surprise tactic by Lawrence’s defense attorney Oscar Stilley.
The tactic threatened exposure of IRS’s on-going efforts to defraud the public. The move put DOJ attorneys in a state of panic that left them with only one alternative: beg for dismissal, with prejudice.
Stilley’s tactic paid off. Sixty days earlier, the DOJ had indicted Lawrence on three counts of willful failure to file a 1040 form, and three felony counts of income tax evasion. The federal Judge dismissed all charges with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot charge Lawrence with those crimes again.
The trial was to have started on Monday morning, May 15th.
On Wednesday, May 10, Stilley mailed a set of documents to the DOJ in response to DOJ’s discovery demands. The documents revealed to DOJ for the first time that Lawrence was basing his entire defense on an act of Congress, 44 U.S.C. 3500 – 3520, also known as the "Paperwork Reduction Act" (PRA).
In Section 3512 of the Act, titled "Public Protection," it says that no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with an agency’s collection of information request (such as a 1040 form), if the request does not display a valid control number assigned by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in accordance with the requirements of the Act, or if the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of information that he is not required to respond to the collection of information request unless it displays a valid control number.
In Section 3512 Congress went on to authorize that the protection provided by Section 3512 may be raised in the form of a complete defense at any time during an agency’s administrative process (such as an IRS Tax Court or Collection and Due Process Hearing) or during a judicial proceeding (such as Lawrence’s criminal trial).
In sum, the PRA requires that all government agencies display valid OMB control numbers and certain disclosures directly on all information collection forms that the public is requested to file. Lawrence's sole defense was he was not required to file an IRS Form 1040 because it displays an invalid OMB control number.
Government officials knew that if the case went to trial, it would expose the fraudulent, counterfeit 1040. They also must have known that a trial would expose the ongoing conspiracy between OMB and IRS to publish 1040 forms each year that those agencies knew were in violation of the PRA. That would raise the issue that the Form 1040, with its invalid control number, is being used by the Government to cover up the underlying constitutional tort -- that is, the enforcement of a direct, unapportioned tax on the labor of every working man, women and child in America.
Any information collection form, such as IRS Form 1040, which lacks bona fide statutory authority or which conflicts with the Constitution, cannot be issued an OMB control number. If a control number were issued for such a form, the form would be invalid and of no force and effect.
Under the facts and circumstances of the last 24 years, it is safe to say that IRS Form 1040 is a fraudulent, counterfeit, bootleg form. Government officials responsible for this fraud should be investigated and face indictment for willfully making and sponsoring false instruments.
Caught between a rock and a hard place, the DOJ and IRS decided not to let the Lawrence case proceed because it would reveal one critical and damning fact:
The PRA law protects those that fail to file IRS bootleg Form 1040
The DOJ knew that it stood a significant chance of losing the case, and if that happened, the press and others would quickly spread the word, and leave only fools to ever file a 1040 again. Oscar Stilley’s pleadings and documents made these points quite clear:
* IRS Form 1040 violates the federal Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and is therefore a legally invalid form.
* Under the Public Protection clause of the PRA, no person can be penalized for failing to file a 1040 if the IRS fails to fully comply with the PRA.
* The PRA statutes explicitly provide that a PRA challenge is a complete defense and can be raised in any administrative or judicial proceeding.
* The IRS Individual Form 1040 has not and cannot comply with the requirements of the PRA because no existing statute authorizes the IRS to impose or collect the federal income tax from individuals. That lack of bona fide authority makes it impossible for IRS to avoid violating the PRA.
We The People Foundation has researched the facts, law and circumstances surrounding this case, and has determined that:
* A public trial would have opened a “Pandora’s Box” of legal evidence and government testimony under oath that would establish the IRS 1040 form as both fraudulent and counterfeit.
* Oscar Stilley’s PRA defense “checkmated” the DOJ and IRS
* The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) appears to have been complicit with IRS in deceiving the public and in helping perpetuate the 1040 fraud by promulgating federal regulations that negate the plain language of the PRA laws passed by Congress and by allowing the IRS to continually skirt the explicit requirements of those statutes
Accordingly, We The People Foundation has petitioned the U.S. Attorney General, the IRS Commissioner, and Director of the OMB, requesting an official explanation of their conduct in Peoria.
See the petition below. It includes links to all relevant statutes, regulations, court decisions, Federal Register publications, law review articles, Lawrence case pleadings, and the discovery documents sent by defense counsel Stilley to the DOJ.
Biggest Tax Cheat in History Sentenced to 9 Years in Prison, But IRS Won't Be Repaid Because of Botched Plea Agreement
Interesting article in the Washington Post: Mogul Sentenced to 9 Years For Tax Evasion and Fraud, by Carol D. Leonnig:
Eccentric Washington telecommunications mogul Walter C. Anderson was sentenced yesterday to nine years in prison for failing to pay $200 million in taxes -- but a federal judge ruled the IRS won't be repaid for now because prosecutors botched the plea agreement. Anderson, the biggest convicted tax cheat in U.S. history, received the longest punishment ever given in a tax crime case for his admitted effort to hide $365 million in personal income in the 1990s. He avoided paying taxes by using aliases, shell companies, offshore tax havens and secret drop boxes abroad. ...
In a major embarrassment to the government's seven-year prosecution of Anderson, the judge ruled he could not order Anderson to make restitution to the IRS for an estimated $140 million of his unpaid federal income taxes. Friedman blamed prosecutors for making a sloppy plea agreement with Anderson.
Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:11 am
postcardsfrompalestine VIP
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 1737 Location: It means good luck - a chinese symbol
ON APRIL 5, 1933, then president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, under Executive Order, issued April 5, 1933, declared: "All persons are required to deliver ON OR BEFORE MAY 1, 1933 all GOLD COIN, GOLD BULLION, AND GOLD CERTIFICATES now owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System."
James A. Farley, Postmaster General at that time, required each postmaster in the country to post a copy of the Executive Order in a conspicuous place within each branch of the Post Office. On the bottom of the posting was the following:
CRIMINAL PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER
$10, 000 fine or 10 years imprisonment, or both,
as provided in Section 9 of the order
Section 9 of the order reads as follows: “Whosoever willfully violates any provisions of this Executive Order or of these regulations or of any rule, regulation or license issued thereunder may be fined not more than $10,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both; and any officer, director or agency of any corporation who knowingly participates in any such violation may be punished by a like fine, imprisonment, or both.
NOTE: Stated within a written document received September 17, 1997, from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Office of the Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Richard L. Shiffin, in response to a FOIA, was the following:
"A fact that is frequently overlooked is that Executive orders and proclamations of the President normally have no direct effect upon private persons or their property, and instead, normally constitute only directives or instructions to officers or employees of the Federal Government.
The exception is those cases in which the President is expressly authorized or required by laws enacted by the Congress to issue an Executive order or proclamation dealing with the legal rights or obligations of members of the public. Such as issuance of Selective Service Regulations, establishment of boards to investigate certain labor disputes, and establishment of quotas or fees with respect to certain imports into this country."
NOTE: IT SEEMS RATHER OBVIOUS THAT PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT WAS NOT "EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED OR REQUIRED” TO "ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER OR PROCLAMATION" DEMANDING THE PUBLIC (PRIVATE) TO RELINQUISH THEIR PRIVATELY HELD GOLD.
The order (proclamation) issued by Roosevelt was an undisciplined act of treason. Two months AFTER the Executive Order, on June 5, 1933, the Senate and House of Representatives, 73d Congress, 1st session, at 4:30 p.m. approve House Joint Resolution (HJR) 192: Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard And Abrogate The Gold Clause, Joint resolution to assure uniform value to the coins and currencies of the United States.
HJR-192 states, in part, that "[E]very provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports to give the obligee a right to require payment in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in any amount of money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy, and no such provision shall be contained in or made with respect to any obligation hereafter incurred. Every obligation, heretofore or hereafter incurred, whether or not any such provisions is contained therein or made with respect thereto, shall be discharged upon payment, dollar for dollar, in any such coin or currency which at the time of payment is legal tender for public and private debts."
HJR-192 goes on to state: "As used in this resolution, the term ‘obligation’ means an obligation (including every obligation of and to the United States, excepting currency) payable in money of the United States; and the term ‘coin or currency’ means coin or currency of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations."
HJR-192 superseded Public Law (what passes as law today is only "color of law”), replacing it with public policy. This eliminated our ability to PAY our debts, allowing only for their DISCHARGE. When we use any commercial paper (checks, drafts, warrants, federal reserve notes, etc.), and accept it as money, we simply pass the unpaid debt attached to the paper on to others, by way of our purchases and transactions. This unpaid debt, under public policy, now carries a public liability for its collection. In other words, all debt is now public.
The United States government, in order to provide necessary goods and services, created a commercial bond (promissory note), by pledging the property, labor, life and body of its citizens, as payment for the debt (bankruptcy). This commercial bond made chattel (property) out of every man, woman and child in the United States. We became nothing more than "human resources" and collateral for the debt. This was without our knowledge and/or our consent. How? It was done through the filing (registration) of our birth certificates!
The United States government -actually the elected and appointed administrators of government -took (and still do, to this day) certified copies of all our birth certificates and placed them in the United States Department of Commerce ... as registered securities. These securities, each of which carries an estimated $1,000,000 (one million) dollar value, have been (and still are) circulated around the world as collateral for loans, entries on the asset side of ledgers, etc., just like any other security. There's just one problem, we didn't authorize it.
The United States is a District of Columbia corporation. In Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. § 1785 we find "The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a State" (see: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S. 0.1973, 14 L. Ed. 287). Since a corporation is a fictitious "person" (it can not speak, see, touch, smell, etc.), it can not, by itself, function in the real world. It needs a conduit, a transmitting utility, a liaison of some sort, to "connect" the fictional person, and fictional world in which it exists, to the real world. Why is this important?
LIVING people, exist in a real world, not a fictional, virtual world. But government does exist in a fictional world, and can only deal directly with other fictional or virtual persons, agencies, states, etc.. In order for a fictional person to deal with real people there must be a connection, a liaison, a go-between. This can be something as simple as a contract.
When both "persons," the real and the fictional, agree to the terms of a contract, there is a connection, intercourse, dealings, there is a communication, an exchange. There is business!
But there is another way for fictional government to deal with the real man and woman: through the use of a representative, a liaison, the go-between. Who is this go-between, this liaison that connects fictional government to real men and women? It's a government created shadow, a fictional man or woman ... with the same name as ours.
This PERSON was created by using our birth certificates as the MCO (manufacturer's certificate of origin) and the state in which we were born as the "port of entry." This gave fictional government a fictional PERSON with whom to deal directly. This PERSON is a strawman.
STRAMINEUS HOMO: Latin: A man of straw, one of no substance, put forward as bail or surety. This definition comes from Black's Law Dictionary, 6th. Edition, page 1421. Following the definition of STRAMINEUS HOMO in Black's we find the next word, Strawman.
STRAWMAN: A front, a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purposes of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines the term "strawman" as:
1: a weak or imaginary opposition set up only to be easily confuted
2: a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction.
The Strawman can be summed up as an imaginary, passive stand-in for the real participant; a front; a blind; a person regarded as a nonentity. The Strawman is a "shadow," a go-between.
For quite some time a rather large number of people in this country have known that a man or woman's name, written in ALL CAPS, or last name first, does not identify real, living people. Taking this one step further, the rules of grammar for the English language have no provisions for the abbreviation of people's names, i.e. initials are not to be used.
As an example, John Adam Smith is correct. ANYTHING else is not correct. Not Smith, John Adam or Smith, John A. or J. Smith or J. A. Smith or JOHN ADAM SMITH or SMITH, JOHN or any other variation. NOTHING, other than John Adam Smith identifies the real, living man. All other appellations identify either a deceased man or a fictitious man: such as a corporation or a STRAWMAN.
Over the years government, through its "public" school system, has managed to pull the wool over our eyes and keep us ignorant of some very important facts. Because all facets of the media (print, radio, television) have an ever-increasing influence in our lives, and because media is controlled (with the issuance of licenses, etc.) by government and its agencies, we have slowly and systematically been led to believe that any form/appellation of our names is, in fact, still us: as long as the spelling is correct. WRONG!
We were never told, with full and open disclosure, what our government officials were planning to do ... and why.
We were never told that government (the United States) was a corporation, a fictitious "person."
We were never told that government had quietly, almost secretly, created a shadow, a STRAWMAN for each and every AMERICAN . . . so that government could not only "control" the people, but also raise an almost unlimited amount of revenue - so it could continue ... not just to exist, but to GROW.
We were never told that when government deals with the STRAWMAN it is not dealing with real, living, men and women.
We were never told, openly and clearly with full disclosure of all the facts, that since June 5, 1933, we have been unable to pay our debts.
We were never told that we had been pledged (and our children, and their children, and their children, and on and on) as collateral, mere chattel, for the debt created by government officials who committed treason in doing so.
We were never told that they quietly and cleverly changed the rules, even the game itself, and that the world we perceive as real is in fact fictional -and it's all for their benefit.
We were never told that the STRAWMAN -a fictional person, a creature of the state -is subject to all the codes, statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, etc. decreed by government, but that WE, the real man and woman, are not.
We were never told we were being treated as property, as slaves (albeit comfortably for some), while living in the land of the free -and that we could, easily, walk away from the fraud.
WE WERE NEVER TOLD WE WERE BEING ABUSED!
How does that make YOU feel?
There's something else you should know: Everything, since June 1933, operates in COMMERCE! Why is this important?
Commerce is based on agreement, contract. Government has an implied agreement with the Strawman (government's creation) and the Strawman is subject to government rule, as we illustrated above. But when we, the real flesh and blood man and woman, step into their "process" we become the "surety" for the fictional Strawman. Reality and fiction are reversed. We then become liable for the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Strawman, relinquishing our real (protected) character as we stand up for the fictional Strawman.
So that we can once again place the Strawman in the fictional world and ourselves in the real world (with all our "shields" in place against fictional government) we must send a nonnegotiable (private) "Charge Back" and a nonnegotiable "Bill of Exchange" to the United States Secretary of Treasury, along with a copy of our birth certificate, the evidence, the MCO, of the Strawman. By doing this we discharge our portion of the public debt, releasing us, the real man, from the debts, liabilities and obligations of the Strawman. Those debts, liabilities and obligations exist in the fictional commercial world of "book entries," on computers and/or in paper ledgers. It is a world of "digits" and "notes," not of money and substance. Property of the real man once again becomes tax exempt and free from levy, as it must be in accord with HJR-192.
Sending the nonnegotiable Charge Back and Bill of Exchange accesses our Treasury Direct Account (TDA). What is our TDA? Let's go to Title 26 USC and take a look at section 163(h)(3)(B)(ii), $1,000,000 limitation:
"The aggregate amount treated as acquisition indebtedness for any period shall not exceed $1,000,000 ($500,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return). "
This $1,000,000 (one million) account is for the Strawman, the fictional "person" with the name in all caps and/or last name first. It is there for the purpose of making book entries, to move figures, "digits" from one side of ledgers to the other. Without constant movement a shark will die and quite ironically, like the shark, there must also be constant movement in commerce, or it too will die. Figures, digits, the entries in ledgers must move from asset side to debit side and back again, or commerce dies. No movement, no commerce.
The fictional persona of government can only function in a fictional commercial world, one where there is no real money, only fictional funds ... mere entries, figures, digits.
A presentment from fictional government -from traffic citation to criminal charges -is a negative, commercial "claim" against the Strawman. This "claim" takes place in the commercial, fictional world of government. "Digits" move from one side of your Strawman account to the other, or to a different account. This is today's commerce.
In the past we have addressed these "claims" by fighting them in court, with one "legal process" or another, and failed. We have played the futile, legalistic, dog-and-pony show -a very clever distraction -while the commerce game played on.
But what if we refused to play dog-and-pony, and played the commerce game instead? What if we learned how to control the flow and movement of entries, figures and digits, for our own benefit? Is that possible? And if so, how? How can the real man in the real world, function in the fictional world in which the commerce game exists?
When in commerce do as commerce does, use the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The UCC-1 Financing Statement is the one contract in the world that can NOT be broken and it's the foundation of the Accepted For Value process. The power of this document is awesome.
Since the TDA exists for the Strawman -who, until now, has been controlled by government -WE can gain control (and ownership) of the Strawman by first activating the TDA and then filing a UCC-1 Financing Statement. This does two things for us.
First, by activating the TDA we gain limited control over the funds in the account. This allows US to also move entries, figures and digits ... for OUR benefit.
Secondly, by properly filing a UCC-1 Financing Statement we can become the holder in due course of the Strawman. This gives us virtual ownership of the government created entity. So what? What does it all mean?
Remember earlier we mentioned that a presentment from government or one of its agents or agencies was a negative commercial claim against the Strawman (and the Strawman’s account, the TDA)? Remember we told you entries, figures and digits moved from one side of the account to the other, or to a different account? Well now, with the Strawman under our control, government has no access to the TDA and they also lose their go-between, their liaison, their "connection" to the real, living man and woman.
From now on, when presented with a "claim" (presentment) from government, we will agree with it (this removes the “controversy”) and we will ACCEPT IT FOR VALUE. By doing this we remove the negative claim against our account and become the "holder in due course" of the presentment. As holder in due course you can require the sworn testimony of the presenter of the "claim" (under penalty of perjury) and request the account be properly adjusted.
It's all business, a commercial undertaking, and the basic procedure is not complicated. In fact, it's fairly simple. We just have to remember a few things, like: this is not a "legal" procedure -we're not playing dog-and-pony. This is commerce, and we play by the rules of commerce. We accept the "claim," become the holder in due course, and challenge whether or not the presenter of the claim had/has the proper authority (the Order) to make the claim (debit our account) in the first place. When they cannot produce the Order (they never can, it was never issued) we request the account be properly adjusted (the charge, the "claim " goes away).
If they don't adjust the account a request is made for the bookkeeping records showing where the funds in question were assigned. This is done by requesting the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return for this claim. Since the claim has been accepted for value and is prepaid, and our TDA account is exempt from levy, the request for the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return is valid because the information is necessary in determining who is delinquent and/or making claims on the account. If there is no record of the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return, we then request the individual tax estimates and individual tax returns to determine if there is any delinquency.
If we receive no favorable response to the above requests, we will then file a currency report on the amount claimed/assessed against our account and begin the commercial process that will force them to either do what's required or lose everything they own -except for the clothing they are wearing at the time.
This is the power of contracts (commerce) and it should be mentioned, at least this one time, that a contract overrides the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and any other document other than another contract. We should also mention that no process of law -"color" of law under present codes, statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, etc. - can operate upon you, no agent and/or agency of government (including courts) can gain jurisdiction over you, WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT. You, (we) are not within their fictional commercial venue.
The Accepted For Value process, however, gives us the ability to deal with "them" -through the use of our transmitting utility/go-between, the Strawman -and hold them accountable in their own commercial world, for any action(s) they attempt to take against us. Without a proper Order, and now we know they're not in possession of such a document, they must leave us alone ... or pay the consequences.
Yes, this process IS powerful.
Yes, it CAN set us free from government oppression and control.
But remember: "What goes around, comes around." "Do unto others, as you have others do unto you."
It's simple, folks, DO NOT ABUSE THIS PROCESS ... if you do it could come around and bite you.
Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:58 pm
Sponsor
alexclaton VIP
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 638 Location: Hell on earth
@.@ anyone tryed this and wanna explain it a little better for us...
also i dont think its gonna stop 5+ cops with guns from smashing through my door when i decide not to pay the speeding ticket they gave me >.<
Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:17 am
postcardsfrompalestine VIP
Joined: 05 Sep 2006 Posts: 1737 Location: It means good luck - a chinese symbol
it seems to be the same method
same method as cracking the code and they have the checks to prove it
Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:06 am
false flag VIP
Joined: 15 Jul 2006 Posts: 443 Location: melbourne, Australia
Quote:
ON APRIL 5, 1933, then president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, under Executive Order, issued April 5, 1933, declared: "All persons are required to deliver ON OR BEFORE MAY 1, 1933 all GOLD COIN, GOLD BULLION, AND GOLD CERTIFICATES now owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System."
Guess that's how the Rothchild's got the gold to fund Adolf Hitler's third reich.
Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:02 pm
Sponsor
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8183 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
The Internal Revenue Service has lost a lawyer's challenge in front of a jury to prove a constitutional foundation for the nation's income tax, and the victorious attorney now is setting his sights higher.
"I think now people are beginning to realize that this has got to be the largest fraud, backed up by intimidation and extortion and by the sheer force of taking peoples property and hard-earned money without any lawful authorization whatsoever," lawyer Tom Cryer told WND just days after a jury in Louisiana acquitted him of two criminal tax counts.
And before you consign him to the legions of "tin foil hat brigades" who argue against paying taxes, and then want payment to explain how to do that, he addresses the issue up front.
(Story continues below)
"These snake oil peddlers have conned millions of dollars out of many well-intended patriots and left a trail of broken lives in their wake. … These charlatans should be avoided, not only because they will lead you to bankruptcy and prison, but because by association they discredit those who are telling the truth," he said.
The truth, he said, is where he comes in, with the launch of a new Truth Attack website that is intended to build on his victory, and create a coalition of resources to defeat – ultimately – the income tax in the United States.
Although the legal citations in the case tend to run the length of paragraphs, Cryer told WND the underlying issue is not that complicated. Essentially, he argued that income is not necessarily any money that comes to a person, but rather categories such as profit and interest.
He said the free exchange of labor for compensation has been upheld as a right by the Supreme Court, but that doesn't necessarily make the compensation income.
If ever such an argument were to be presented widely, Cryer said, the income to the federal government would plummet. But not to worry, he said, the expenses could be reduced equally by eliminating programs, departments and agencies that also have no foundation in the Constitution.
"The Founding Fathers intentionally restricted the taxing powers of the new federal government as a measure of restraint on its size. By exceeding that limited taxing authority the federal government has been able to obtain resources beyond its intended reach, and that money has enabled the federal government to exceed its authority," he said.
For example, he said, the Constitution does not empower the federal government to regulate education, or employment, and agriculture, yet it does so.
The jury in U.S. District Court in Louisiana voted 12-0 to find Cryer, of Shreveport, not guilty of failure to file income taxes for two years. He had been indicted in 2006 on charges of failing to pay $73,000 to the IRS in 2000 and 2001. The next step in his personal case will be up to the IRS and prosecutors, if they choose to continue the issue, he said.
But for the rest of the nation, he's working with Save-a-Patriot, the Free Enterprise Society, Live Free Now and his own Lie Free Zone to spread the message of the truth.
"There are three points that are important," he told WND. "There's no law making the average working man liable [for income taxes], there's no law or regulation that allows the IRS to contend that earnings are 100 percent profit received in exchange for nothing, and the right to earn a living through any lawful occupation is a constitutionally protected fundamental right, and it is exempt from taxation."
Spokesman Robert Marvin in Washington's IRS office told WND the Internal Revenue Code provides for taxation on salaries or wages, but when pressed for a specific citation, or constitutional provision, he said, "I can't comment."
Cryer's encounter with tax law began more than a decade ago when a friend told him the income tax was sham. Cryer started researching, hoping to keep his friend out of trouble. But his conclusions, after years of research, were exactly what his friend told him.
He researched not only tax laws, but also the documents pertaining to the drafting of the U.S. Constitution as well as the first income tax.
He said throughout his battle, he's offered at every turn to pay taxes if the IRS could show him the authorization, and that never has happened.
"The Criminal Investigation Division and Department of Justice both responded only with 'your position is frivolous.' I had never stated a position, so how could they know whether it was frivolous?" he said. "Imagine my sending you a bill for $1,000 and when you call me and ask what the bill was for I simply said, 'that position is frivolous, just write the check and send it in.'"
His acquittal, he said, was a precedent because it means "people can see and recognize the truth."
He said multiple Supreme Court opinions have affirmed an individual's ownership of his or her own labor, and "exercising your fundamental rights" is not taxable. "It is definitely a trade. What most people receive in the form of wages, salaries or in my case fees that they personally earned for their labor is not received in exchange for nothing."
He said there might be a profit that should be taxable, but there might not.
"The IRS lets Wal-Mart sell a trillion dollars worth of goods, but they can back out their cost of goods [before being taxed,]" he said. "The IRS considers, in the case of a Wal-Mart wage earner, 100 percent of what he takes in is profit."
"But he's using his life, energy and work lifespan, and depleting it as he goes," Cryer told WND. "[Working] is a God-given fundamental right that is protected under the Constitution and can't be taxed any more than exercising freedom of speech."
While he waits to see what, if anything, the IRS and Justice Department will do next in his case, he's working to coordinate the groups that are battling taxation as unconstitutional.
"I have started a campaign to unify [the work] and we've got a number of organizations that are sponsoring and supporting this campaign," he said. The goal is to get everyone "who is aware of the truth" organized so they can spread the word.
He warned without a restoration of constitutional basics, the nation is lost.
"Read your Constitution and you will see that the federal role does not include ANY authority to regulate or tax any citizen directly and that WE expressly reserved the right to rule and govern ourselves as States, not as mere political subdivisions," his website says.
"The Constitution does not allow the government to run your lives, but the money it is stealing from millions of Americans is the fuel for its over-reaching and kibitzing. Take the money back and we and our states and communities can again be free," he said.
The fight is over "our FREEDOM from rule by a DISTANT RULER, just as we fought to free ourselves of a distant England over 200 years ago," he said.
Thu Jul 26, 2007 10:01 am
alexclaton VIP
Joined: 05 Mar 2006 Posts: 638 Location: Hell on earth
actually main reason is not drunk drivers but insurance companies lobbying for more restrictions , fact is stupid ppl not paying attention cause accidents.... hell ppl on their cell phone are more of a threat than drunks...
also from what ive heard , if u sign under duress, the judge has to throw it out, if u goto court say the cop threatened u with violence and imprisonment and it will negate the ticket cuz they forced u to sign
