Income Tax Dissention

Do you really owe NO income tax???

This is becoming an extensive page that keeps growing as new information becomes available on this huge scandal.

There is a definite movement  for those of you following this sort of thing against paying US federal income tax because it is supposedly against the constitution to have to do so.  Supposedly up to 60% of Americans will NOT be filing an income tax return this year. Although some  people have successfully defended this position in the courtroom and won; many others who tried to do so have lost their shirt, their home and even ended up in jail for the attempt to evade a tax that truly appears to be against our constitution. Just remember that today what is right normally is not what prevails.   Here's some sides, education, and resources on the issue.

I am not yet willing to not pay income taxes  to the IRS; first I don't make enough to warrant such a position and jeopardize my family; and secondly because even if it is wrong and against the constitution our government and judicial system today will twist things whatever way they want to and you could very well  end up losing  what little you may have including your freedom. If you own nothing; go for it.   But if you have any net worth; you probably won't have by the time it's over. That may be about to change. Read the below with interest and follow the issue, but be careful with the plans you put into effect because of such.

May 2, 2001
Dear liberty activist,

A citizen can verbally oppose the federal income tax or he can take action to abolish it. The constitutional amendment (H.J. Res. 41) that would have made it more difficult to raise federal taxes by increasing the majority requirement from a simple majority to a 2/3 majority, failed to pass on Wednesday, 4/25/01. There were 232 votes in favor, 189 votes against, with 11 members not voting. (A 2/3 majority was required to pass H.J. Res. 41.)

Our fight to lower taxes, however, is just beginning. Shortly after H.J. Res. 41 failed to pass, another constitutional amendment was introduced: H.J. Res. 45 - The Liberty Amendment. This amendment was introduced by Congressman Ron Paul (Texas). The Liberty Amendment would repeal the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution, thus eliminating the federal income tax. In addition, it would eliminate federal capital gains and estate taxes. Now that's real tax relief!

H.J. Res. 45 - The Liberty Amendment would also prohibit the federal government from engaging in any business activity that competes with private businesses (except as provided by the Constitution) and require the federal government to sell properties that were used in those business activities.

Is eliminating the federal income tax impossible? No. Millions of Americans still believe in liberty. They, therefore, question the validity of the federal tax code, the I.R.S. and the Sixteenth Amendment itself.

They understand that the federal leviathan is out of control. The Liberty Amendment can serve as a flashpoint for all of these millions of voices. The Liberty Amendment is not an academic exercise. It is not a political statement or an abstract ideal. It is real legislation before the U.S. House of Representatives now. It can become law. It will become law if every liberty-minded American tells his U.S. representative that his re-election will depend on his support of the Liberty Amendment.

Please urge your U.S. representative to support real tax relief by cosponsoring the Liberty Amendment and working for its passage. Go to  http://capwiz.com/liberty/issues/bills/?bill=28657 

Kent Snyder
The Liberty Committee
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org
*****
To send a message to our office, please go to

http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/contact.htm 

Dear Friends,

I have been asked to explain to you how the Ultimate Lawsuit came to be. A renouned Constitutional legal expert by the name of Dale Livingston from SLC, Utah discovered that in the Treasury Regulation 861 it describes what a taxable sourse of income is. It also explains that as in the 16th amendment too, a interstate or intrastate source of commerce is not a taxable source of income. Since our domestic source of income falls under the intrastate commerce source, it is not a taxable source of income. This of course has helped to win many cases in court especially in Bankruptcy court.

Dale was inspired and felt too that there had to be something regarding interstate and intrastate commerce in the IRS code book. As he began his search he was shocked to find absolutely nothing in the current code books regarding these issues. He didn't give up. After spending thousands of hours studying the back issues of the IRS code books he finally found not just a few codes but 7 whole sections of information in the 1949 code book. He was extremely happy but also became angry and disgusted has he found out that between the 49 and 53 code books, all 7 sections were illegally and fraudulently deleted. In fact the IRS was so afraid to have this found out they did not print the 54 code book until 1959. When they did this they printed it as a revised edition. Strange, how can it be a revised edition if it was not printed in 54.

This fraud and many other obvious patterns of deciet and fraud have been found in the 50's and 60's code books. In other words there is absolutely no way the IRS can wiggle out of this fraud case because it is in black and white what the did. This information has made this Mass action lawsuit to be the lawsuit of the CENTURY.

To validate this, Dale filed a lawsuit in the Eastern Federal District of Oklahoma under the name of Lawrence Buckner. This case was filed to find out two things, how the courts would respond and how the IRS would respond. The IRS became so freaked out that they tried every avenue available to them to declare this a frivolous lawsuit and have it thrown out. We countered their motions and the Judge refused to let it drop because the evidence was so overwhelming.

The IRS is so upset and freaked out over this little evidence that they are currently trying to seek a settlement out of court so that the evidence presented cannot be found out by the American public.

We of course will not do this, what will be done is that the lawsuit will be evetually dropped and then in August be refilled with all the the damaging evidence that has been found. I can't wait to see the IRS fill their drawers over this case. All of those who get involved with this lawsuit will be allowed to get back all of their back taxes since 1954 at 3% compounded interest. Also anyone who has had their homes taken, or any other assets taken will be compensated for them too. On top of that, you will never have to pay Federal Income Taxes ever again in your life.

If you would like more information regarding this case feel free to contact Les Hollingshead at 480-558-3346.

Looking forward to hearing from you. "THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE"  Les Hollinghsead

An ad that came to me recently-
THE SECRET the IRS is *TERRIFIED* you'll learn! YOU OWE NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX - and never have! Millions of Americans already have learned the truth and have dropped OUT of the system - (the IRS itself now admits that at least 85 MILLION "taxpayers" are no longer filing!) - AND SO CAN YOU!

The Federal Courts themselves, and even the US Supreme Court have verified that it's true!     L@@K!

"Simply put, pay from a job is a 'wage', and wages are not taxable. Congress has taxed INCOME, not compensation (wages and salaries)." - Conner v. U.S. 303 F Supp. 1187 (1969) And there're MANY other cases, all of which AGREE that the reward for your labor, wages, salaries, and compensation for personal services (commissions) IS NOT, and never have been, TAXABLE!

You MUST get this FREE information! Put "NOTAX" in the Subject Box and return this message to: mailto:t4m1@bigfoot.com?Subject=NOTAX

Please Note... Should this email address be down,

Please "Fax" your response instead, with your name__,

email address___, and the words "Send NOTAX Info"

to: 305-425-3205.

I would suggest you to go to Bill Conklin's web site http://www.anti-irs.com/  download his book "Why No One is Required to File Tax Returns" read it and draw your conclusions. In one of Conklin's cases, he filed a 1040 without signing it, along with it, he sent opinion letters from Attorneys saying that Bill could not file a return without waiving his 5th Amendment right. He gave the IRS power of Attorney to sign for him if it did NOT violate his 5th. The IRS then charged him with a $500 frivolous filing. Bill paid it and then file suite against the IRS. It took the judge a long time to answer Mr. Conklin. I think it was about 5 years, the judge said that Mr. Conklin was wrong and ruled against him. Basically the judge said that it did NOT waive Mr. Conklins 5th Amendment right because his is NOT compelled to FILE a TAX RETURN. So, either way the judge ruled, Mr.Conklin WINS. Pretty sharp guy. I have a copy of the

"HANDBOOK FOR SPECIAL AGENTS",CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION INTELLIGENCE DIVISION, IRS. On the front cove it say "AGENTS... Our tax system is based on individual self assessment and voluntary compliance....."

If you happen to have a 1993 1040 pull it out and look on page 3, there is a letter by Margaret Milner Richardson, Commissioner In the first paragraph she says "Thank you for making this nation's tax system the most effective system of voluntary compliance in the world."

Who And What Is The IRS?

History & New Evidence That It Is A Foreign Agency

By Dan Meador
April 1, 2000
dmeador@poncacity.net

"Evan" (Internet name) forwarded the following article by Bill Cooper, published in the September 1995 issue of Veritas Magazine. As I understand it, Wayne Bentson of Arizona was largely responsible for research referenced in the article.

Since I'm suffering the fatigue of not getting home from Tulsa until the wee hours of the morning, and can't seem to get kick-started to do what I should be doing, I'm going to take the opportunity to provide context for the lengthy Cooper article, and add information gleaned from research since. For those who haven't seen it, the Cooper article should be enlightening. Additionally, evidence revealed in my portion of this compiled article is going to floor many readers. However, before disclosing new evidence, I'm going to present something of a history.

Gail and I had just finished what we called the "monster" tax index when someone sent the Cooper article via FAX shortly after it was published in September 1995. Our index went through the Internal Revenue Code section-by-section, listing regulations as they appear in the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, then we listed the regulation headings for the regulations. Because of our index, I was able to verify many of the references in the Cooper article without having to go to actual texts, and what I found was that many Cooper-Bentson conclusions were verified by the index. Of particular importance, we found that there are no implementing regulations for 26 U.S.C. Section 7621, which authorizes the President to establish revenue districts. Consequently, there are no revenue districts in States of the Union.

However, there was a significant gap in Cooper-Bentson research. At that point, they hadn't found origins of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico. I documented it in late 1998 even though I knew where to look when I read the Downs v. Bidwell decision in 1997: The first civil governor of Puerto Rico established five bureaus in the Puerto Rico Dept. of Treasury on May 1, 1900. The five bureaus were eventually to become the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico, predecessor to the Internal Revenue Service. The name change of BIR to IRS was in 1953 in advance of implementing the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, based on Reorganization Plan 26 of 1950 and Reorganization Plan 1 of 1952. Early Puerto Rico legislation, beginning with the gubernatorial and executive committee acts of May 1900, are published in Senate Documents for the period, so it's just a matter of going through the publications to complete the merger history. Bentson and Cooper located origins of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Philippines, and the Philippines special fund, in 1904 documents. The Philippines gained independence in 1946, leaving BIR, Puerto Rico as the only Bureau of Internal Revenue that was legislatively created, and not by Congress at that. The first Puerto Rico legislature in 1901 legislatively enacted executive acts of May 1900.

In 1934, Congress stipulated that the various special funds maintained by the Department of the Treasury would be known as trusts, i.e., Philippines Trusts ! & 2, and Puerto Rico Trust 62, all three of which are still in the books in Title 31 of the United States Code.

In his article, Cooper cites the Federal Register and the Internal Revenue Manual acknowledgment that Congress never created a Bureau of Internal Revenue. Someone else has since located a Supreme Court decision where justices of the Supreme Court affirm that Congress never created a Bureau of Internal Revenue or Internal Revenue Service. Consequently, IRS has no lawful authority to enforce anything in the Union as Congress is charged with responsibility for establishing any government department or agency that the Constitution itself does not establish.

At the tail end of this article, we're going to share disclosures attorneys in Illinois and Idaho have secured that constitute astounding revelations that should give everyone cause to rethink strategy relating to the Internal Revenue Service. Read on. I will continue the account of the research effort that lays the factual foundation.

In the historical account by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue published in the Federal Register and the Internal Revenue Manual, the Commissioner alleges that Congress clearly intended to create a Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1862 legislation that established the office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. But reading the 1862 legislation reveals that there was no need for a Bureau of Internal Revenue or Internal Revenue Service. Congress established the offices of assessors and collectors, with one of each to be appointed for each revenue district. These offices were on the order of current U.S. Attorneys appointments. They were political patronage positions. The offices continued to exist until implementation of Reorganization Plan 26 of 1950.

In order to understand what happened via the reorganization plans behind the current Internal Revenue Code, we need to review what happened with respect to prohibition.

In 1933, the Twenty-first Amendment repealed the Eighteenth. However, Federal enforcement people continued to enforce state laws relating to alcohol to the point of the Constantine decision in December 1935. In the decision, the Supreme Court said that once the Eighteenth Amendment was repealed, State and Federal enforcement ceased to have concurrent jurisdiction for enforcement of alcohol-related laws as the Eighteenth Amendment contained the grant of authority. Once it was repealed, concurrent jurisdiction was repealed.

Until summer 1935, the Feds had operated on the alcohol administration act of 1926. That was replaced by the Federal Alcohol Administration Act of 1935, enacted that summer several months in advance of the Constantine decision. In the wake of the Constantine decision, a director was appointed, but the Federal Alcohol Administration wasn't established to administer the Alcohol Administration Act. Via Reorganization Plan 3 of 1940 administration of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act was transferred to the Bureau of Internal Revenue, predecessor of the Internal Revenue Service.

As the Cooper article suggests, BIR, Puerto Rico and/or BIR, Philippines had already encroached into States of the Union via China Trade Act legislation, which implemented maritime (customs) laws relating to trade in opium, cocaine and citric wines. The first drug-related law was passed in 1914, then with the 1918 amendment, the Feds began to enforce drug laws in the several States.

The timing was ideal. There was significant political mobilization responsible for the Eighteenth Amendment and alcohol prohibition, so the Feds took advantage of empathy for purging any kind of intoxicating substance. In his letter supporting the 1940 Reorganization Plan, Roosevelt said that BIR had been enforcing provisions of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, anyway, so the transfer of responsibility didn't effect significant change.

Some time before Cooper wrote his article, I read the 1992 New York v. United States decision. In the decision, the Supreme Court used the term "Cooperative Federalism".

My response was, "What the hell is Cooperative Federalism?"

The next time I saw published use of the term was in the title of an article in the 1992 edition of The Book of the States. In the meantime, I ran across the "Federalism" executive order Ronald Reagan put in place. The Reagan order, which technically preserves constitutional integrity, is the one Bill Clinton keeps trying to overhaul, but he is getting considerable resistance. This particular executive order is an executive policy statement, it doesn't meet standards of 3 U.S.C. Section 301 and the Federal Register Act. It is simply the prevailing policy statement that informally shapes relations between State and Federal governments.

Now we have two essential identifying terms: On the Federal side, "Federalism", and on the State side, "Cooperative Federalism".

Let's address the scheme of things through two constitutional questions: Have Article I  8, clauses 5 & 6 and Article I  10, paragraph one of the Constitution been repealed or amended? Has the Constitution been amended to effect prohibition against opium, cocaine, and other such substances?

We'll follow those questions with two more: Do we have gold and silver coin as our national currency? Do we have national prohibition against drugs?

In light of the first two questions, we can conclude that Congress has defaulted responsibility for providing a national currency of gold and silver coin, and our States of the Union are accommodating the fraud without a constitutional amendment; and in light of the second question, we can conclude that Federal government is exercising a power which is not enumerated in the Constitution, and our respective state governments are accommodating the usurpation of power.

Obviously, the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was patently unconstitutional. At least it was if it applied to Union. But it might not be if it applied to United States Government itself, and territories and insular possessions of the United States. Likewise, the Federal drug laws would be legitimate if they applied to the District of Columbia and insular possessions of the United States. It is here that Congress has plenary or near-absolute power. And we can lengthen the list. The Federal Alcohol Administration Act is legitimate in Puerto Rico, but not Oklahoma. Likewise, the Social Security Act of 1935 is legitimate in Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, etc., but not in Kansas. Where the latter is concerned, we see proper geographical application in definitions of "State", "United States" and "citizen" at 26 CFR §31.3121(e)-6.

At the January 1937 general conference of the Council of State Governments, delegates from a majority of our state legislatures endorsed the Declaration of Intergovernmental Dependence. This formalized what was already a working arrangement. States of the Union formally went on the Federal dole system, and by setting up the infrastructure, provided a forum for general agreement among state governing bodies as to what Federal encroachment they would accommodate.

Here are more relevant questions: Does the executive branch have legislative authority? Can the President unilaterally repeal law once it has been formally enacted by Congress?

Via Reorganization Plan 3 of 1940, Roosevelt reassigned duties of the Federal Alcohol Administration to BIR, thereby abandoning the agency Congress established, then via Reorganization Plan 26 of 1950, Truman effectively terminated the offices of assessor and collector Congress established in 1862, In other words, after the Supreme Court determined that Federal enforcement agencies had no authority to enforce state alcohol law in the several States, administration of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act was moved under authority of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico for administration in insular possessions of the United States. By law, BIR, Puerto Rico could not be exercised in the Union, but since State governments were willing to accommodate Federal encroachment in return for whatever financial incentives Federal government provided, the fraud was and has generally been accommodated. The scheme worked well enough that in 1950, Truman followed the Roosevelt lead by authorizing BIR, i.e., IRS administration of Federal income tax law. But the geographical application remains the same, limited to the District of Columbia and insular possessions of the United States.

Through their gross income "source" research, Tupper Sausie, Thurston Bell, Larken Rose and various others have documented that the American people in general are liable for Federal income tax, but are liable only on income from foreign sources and insular possessions of the United States. These conclusions reinforce and are consistent with my research and research by Bentson and Cooper. With enactment of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, via Truman executive orders, the offices of assessor and collector of internal revenue were terminated, and administration of the Internal Revenue Code, by appearance, was turned over to the Internal Revenue Service, an agency of the Department of the Treasury, Puerto Rico.

We need to address one more entity, the "United States of America".

What is the United States of America? As it turns out, there are two entities called the "United States of America". The first and original, mentioned in the Preamble and Article II of the Constitution of the United States, was formally created in the Articles of Confederation. But some time after the Civil War, probably early in the twentieth century, a second "United States of America" came into being. The second is a political alliance or compact of the insular possessions of the United States.

Here I'm going to introduce evidence secured by John M. Ohman, an Idaho Falls, Idaho attorney. In the case styled Diversified Metal Products, Inc. v. T-Bow Company Trust, Internal Revenue Service, and Steve Morgan, case CV93-4117, filed in the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District of the State of Idaho, the Booneville County Magistrates Court, Ohman filed an impleader petition.

Diversified Metal was served a notice of levy for money owed to the T-Bow Trust. In order to determine rightful ownership, Ohman filed the interpleader action on behalf of Diversified Metal. In his complaint, he stipulated facts. His fact #4 is as follows: "Defendant Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is an agency of the United States government(tm)"

In her January 24, 2000 response, U.S. Attorney Betty H. Richardson made the following correction to Ohman's averment: "Denies that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency of the United States Government but admits that the United States of America would be a proper party to this action."

This is something I've tried to impress on people for most of two years, but few grasp the implications: The Constitution of the United States creates and vests authority in a governmental entity known as the "United States" or "United States Government." While it is "for" the United States of America, the Constitution vests absolutely no authority in the United States of America. Any time the United States prosecutes as case, whether civil or criminal, it must be in the name and by authority of the United States, not the United States of America. The only place the "United States of America" has any standing is in territorial courts in insular possessions of the United States, then the styling must be, "United States of America, ss, President of the United States". See title 48 of the United States Code for particulars relating to Puerto Rican and Virgin Islands courts.

If we read notes following the current 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, we find that the "United States of America" is currently defined as an agency of the United States. In the context of the Downes v. Bidwell decision, we find that these insular possessions, which are not incorporated in the constitutional scheme, are "foreign" to the United States, i.e., to the Union of States. Therefore, this political alliance or compact known as the United States of America, which first appeared in 1918 legislation, is a government foreign to the United States and the several States even though the member insular possessions belong to the United States.

The Richardson correction above verifies that the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of United States Government, but the United States of America, clearly a distinct and different entity, would be a party of interest. It would be difficult to be any clearer on the subject, and the Rechardson correction tells us that people such as U.S. Attorneys, attorneys in the Department of Justice, and Federal judges are fully aware of the difference.

Michael Bufkin, a Dundee, Illinois attorney, undertook a delightful project. On December 18, 1998, he sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of the Treasury asking for documentation of authority for the Department of Justice to defend Internal Revenue Service personnel in civil or criminal cases. In an August 2, 1999 response, Leslie Howard in the national IRS office responded with the following: "A search was performed with the Office of Tax Crimes (Criminal Investigation) and with the Assistant Chief Counsel (Disclosure Litigation) and we have no documents responsible to your request. However, you may forward a copy of your request to the U.S. Attorney General's Office within the Department of Justice."

Bufkin did just that. In response to his September 21, 1999 FOIA to the Attorney General, Thomas J. McIntrye informed Bufkin that, "We have conducted a search of the appropriate indices to Criminal Division records and did not locate any records responsive to your request."

We don't know who has lawful authority to defend IRS personnel, but the Department of Justice and U.S. Attorneys don't. Possibly the foreign "United States of America" that is principal of interest and benefits from IRS initiatives has a raft of attorneys ready to defend these foreign agents.

As chance would have it, one of the people in our group recently received certification of documents on IRS Austin Region stationary that is headed, "United States of America, Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service". The certification letters are dated November 16, 1999.

What we are dealing with amounts to invasion of a foreign government accommodated by our respective State governments. However, thanks to the diligence of people approaching IRS tyranny from several directions, we about have the whole nut documented and broken down.

With the context of what I've written, the Cooper article that follows will have more signficance.

Dan Meador Ponca City, Oklahoma

"The Congress shall have Power to Lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excise, to Pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;" The Constitution for the United States of America, Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 1.

" No Capitation or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration hereinbefore directed to be taken." The Constitution for the United States of America, Article 1, Section 9, paragraph 4.

 

CAJI Investigation

Investigation of the alleged Internal Revenue Service and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has disclosed a broad, premeditated conspiracy to defraud the Citizens (freemen) of the united States of America. Examination of the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, The Statutes at Large, Congressional record, The Federal Register, and Internal Revenue manuals, too numerous to list, reveals a crime of such magnitude, that words cannot adequately describe the betrayal of the American people. What we have uncovered has clearly been designed to circumvent the limitations of the Constitution for the united States and implement the COMMUNIST MANIFESTO within the 50 States. Marx and Engles claimed that in the effort to create a classless society, a "GRADUATED INCOME TAX" could be used as a weapon to destroy the middle class.

 

THE ART OF ILLUSION

Magic is the art of illusion. Those who practice magic are called "Magi". They have created a web of obfuscation and confusion in the Law. When the courts have ruled them unconstitutional or unlawful they merely stepped outside JURISDICTION AND VENUE. By fooling the people they continued the Crime. These Magicians have convinced Americans that we have a status we do not. We are led to believe we must do things that are not required. Through the clever use of language the government promotes FRAUD.

 

NOT CREATED BY CONGRESS

The Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the alleged Internal Revenue Service were not created by Congress. These are not organizations or agencies of the Department of the Treasury or of the federal government They appear to be operated through pure trusts administered by the Secretary of the Treasury ( the Trustee ). The Settler of the trusts and the Beneficiary or Beneficiaries are Unknown. According to the law governing Trusts, the Information does not have to be revealed. (?)

 

NOT FOUND IN 31 USC

The organization of the Department of the Treasury can be found in 31 United States Code, Chapter 3, beginning on page 7. You will not find the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the Internal Revenue Service, The Secret Service or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and firearms listed.

We learned that the Bureau of Internal Revenue, internal revenue, Internal Revenue service, internal revenue service, Official Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Alcohol Administration, Director Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms Division, and the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms are one organization. We found this obfuscated.

 

CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD

The investigation found, that except for the very few who are engaged in specific activities, the Citizens of the 50 States of the united States of America have never been required to file or to pay "income taxes". The Federal government is engaging in constructive fraud on a massive scale. Americans who have been frightened into filing and paying "income taxes "have been robbed of their money. Millions of lives have been ruined. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people have been imprisoned on the pretense they violated laws that do not exist. Some have been driven to suicide. Marriages have been destroyed. Property has been confiscated to pay taxes that were never owed.

 

LINCOLN'S WAR TAX

During the Civil war, Abraham Lincoln imposed a war tax upon the citizens. The war tax lawfully applied only to those citizens who resided WITHIN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND FEDERALLY OWNED TERRITORIES, DOCKYARDS, NAVAL BASES, OR FORTS, and (?) those who were considered to be in rebellion against the Union. Many Citizens of the several States volunteered to pay. After the war the tax was repealed. THIS LEFT THE IMPRESSION THAT THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS COULD LEVY AN UNAPPORTIONED DIRECT TAX UPON THE CITIZENS OF THE SEVERAL STATES; WHEN IN FACT NO SUCH TAX HAD EVER BEEN IMPOSED. The tax was hot fraud as nothing was done to deceive the people. THOSE WHO WERE DECEIVED, IN FACT, DECEIVED THEMSELVES.!!

 

PHILIPPINE TRUST # 1

In the last century the United States acquired by CONQUEST the territory of the Philippine Islands, Guam, and Puerto Rico. The Philippine Customs Administrative Act was passed by the Philippine Commission during the period from Sept. 1, 1900 to August 31, 1902, to regulate trade with foreign countries and to create revenue in the form of duties, imposts, and excises. The act CREATED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S FIRST TRUST FUND called Trust fund #1, the Philippine special fund (customs and duties), 31 USC, Section 1321. The Act was administered under the general Supervision and control of the Secretary of Finance and Justice.

 

PHILLIPINE TRUST # 2
BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE

The Philippine Commission passed another act known as The Internal Revenue Law of Nineteen Hundred and Four. This Act created the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the federal government's second trust fund (internal revenue), 31 USC, Section 1321. In the Act, Article 1, Section 2, we find, "There shall be established a Bureau of Internal Revenue, the chief officer of which Bureau shall be known as the Collector of Internal Revenue. He shall be appointed by the Civil Governor, with the advise and consent of the Philippine Commission, and shall receive a salary at the rate of eight thousand PESOS per annum. The Bureau of Internal Revenue shall belong to the Department of Finance and Justice." And in Section 3, we find, " The Collector of Internal Revenue, under the direction of the Secretary of Finance and Justice, shall have general superintendence of the assessment and collection of all taxed and excises imposed by this Act or by any Act amendatory thereof, and shall perform such other duties as may be required by law.

 

CUSTOMS AND B.I.R. MERGED

It was clear that the Customs Administrative Act was to fall within the JURISDICTION of the Bureau of the Internal Revenue which bureau was to be responsible for "all taxes and excises imposed by this Act," which clearly include import and export excise taxes. This effectively MERGED Customs and Internal Revenue in the Philippines."

 

DEMON ALCOHOL

When Prohibition was ratified in 1919 with the 18th Amendment, the government created federal bureaucracies to enforce he outlaw of alcohol. As protest and resistance to prohibition increased, so did new federal laws and the number of bureaucrats hired to enforce them. After much bloodshed and public anger, prohibition was repealed with the 21st Amendment which was ratified in 1933.

 

FEDERAL ALCOHOL ACT

In 1933 President Roosevelt declared a "Banking Emergency". The Congress gave the President dictatorial powers under the "War Powers Act of 1917". Congress used the economic EMERGENCY as the excuse as the excuse to give blanket approval to any and all Presidential EXECUTIVE ORDERS. Roosevelt, with a little help from his socialist friends was prolific in his production of new legislation and executive orders. In 1935 the Public Administration Clearinghouse wrote, and Roosevelt introduced, The Federal Alcohol Act. Congress passed it into law. The Act established The Federal Alcohol Administration. That same year the Supreme Court in a monumental ruling struck down the act among many others on a long list of draconian and New Deal laws. The Federal Alcohol Administration did knot go away; it became involved in other affairs, placed in a sort of standby status.

 

INTERNAL REVENUE (PUERTO RICO)

At some unknown date prior to 1940 another Bureau of Internal Revenue was established in Puerto Rico. The 62nd Trust Fund was created and named Trust Fund #62 Puerto Rico special fund (Internal Revenue). Note that the Puerto Rico special fund has Internal Revenue , capital "I" & "R". The Philippine special fund (internal revenue) is in lower case letters.

Between 1904 and 1938 the China Trade Act was passed to deal with Opium, Cocaine and Citric wines shipped out of China. It appears to have been administered in the Philippines by the Bureau of Internal Revenue.

 

CHINA TRADE ACT

We studied a copy of The Code of Federal Registrations of the United States of America in force June 1, 1938, Title 26 - Internal Revenue, Chapter 1 - ( Parts 1-137). On page 65 it makes reference to the China Trade Act, where the first use of such terms as: income, credits, withholding, Assessment and Collection Deficiencies, extension of time for payment, and failure to file return. The entire substance of Title 26 deals with foreign individuals, foreign corporations, foreign insurance corporations, foreign ships, income from sources within possessions of the United States, Citizens of the United States and domestic corporations deriving income from sources within a possession of the United States, and China trade Act Corporations.

 

NARCOTICS, ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS

All of the taxes covered by these laws concerned the imposts, excise taxes, and duties to be collected by the Bureau of Internal Revenue for such items as narcotics, alcohol, tobacco, and firearms. The alleged Internal Revenue Service likes to make a big "to do" about the fact that Al Capone was jailed for tax evasion. The I.R.S. will not tell you that the tax Capone evaded was not "income tax" as we know it, but the tax due on the income from the alcohol which he had imported from Canada. If he had paid the tax he would not have been convicted. The Internal Revenue Act of 1939 was clearly concerned with all taxes, imposts, excises and duties collected on trade between the POSSESSIONS AND TERRITORIES of the United States and foreign individuals, foreign corporations, or foreign governments. The income tax laws have always applied only to the Philippines, Puerto Rico, District of Columbia, Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, territories and insular Possessions.

 

F.A.A. becomes B.I.R.

Under the Reorganization Plan Number 3 of 1940 which appears at 5 United States Code Service 903, the Federal Alcohol Administration and offices of members and Administrators thereof were abolished and their functions directed to be administered under direction and supervision of Secretary of Treasury through Bureau of Internal Revenue. We found this history in all of the older editions of 27 USCS, Section 201. It has been removed from current editions. Only two Bureaus of Internal Revenue have ever existed. One in the Philippines and another in Puerto Rico. Events that have transpired tell us that the Federal Alcohol Administration was absorbed by the Puerto Rico Trust # 62 (Internal Revenue).

 

VICTORY TAX ACT

World War II was the golden opportunity. Americans were willing to sacrifice almost anything if they thought that sacrifice would win the war. In that atmosphere Congress passed the Victory Tax Act. It mandated an Income Tax for the years 1943 and 1944 to be filed in the years 1944 and 1945. The Victory Tax Act automatically expired at the end of 1944. The Federal Government with the clever use of language, created the myth that the tax was Applicable to ALL Americans. Because of their desire to win the war, Americans filed and paid he tax. Because of IGNORANCE OF THE LAW, Americans filed and paid the tax. The Government promoted the FRAUD AND THREATENED THOSE WHO OBJECTED. Americans "forgot" that the law expired in 2 years. When the date had come and gone, they continued to keep "records"; they continued to file; and they continued to pay the tax. The Federal Government continued to print returns and COLLECT THE TAX. NEVER MIND THE FACT THAT NO CITIZEN OF ANY OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE UNION WAS EVER LIABLE TO PAY THE TAX IN THE FIRST PLACE.

 

FEDERAL POWERS LIMITED

The FICTION "that because it was an excise tax, it was legal" (lawful) IS NOT TRUE. The power of the Federal Government is limited to its own property as stated in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 17, and to "regulate Commerce with FOREIGN NATIONS, and among the "several" States, and with the Indian tribes;" as stated in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 3, 18 USC, Section 921, Definitions, states," The term 'interstate or foreign commerce' INCLUDES commerce between any place in a State and any place outside of that State, or within any POSSESSION of the United States ( not INCLUDING the Canal Zone) or the District of Columbia, but such term DOES NOT INCLUDE commerce between places within the same State, but through any place outside of that State. The term 'State' INCLUDES the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the possessions of the United States (not INCLUDING the Canal Zone)." Only EMPLOYEES of the federal government, RESIDENTS of the District of Columbia, RESIDENTS of naval bases RESIDENTS of forts, U.S. Citizens of the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Territories, and insular possessions were lawfully required to file and pay the Victory Tax.

 

B.I.R. becomes I.R.S.

In 1953 the United States relinquished control over the Philippines Why do the Philippine pure Trusts #1 (customs duties) and #2 (internal revenue) continue to be administered today? Who are the Settlers of the Trusts? What is done with the funds in the Trusts? What businesses, if any, do these Trusts operate? Who are the Beneficiaries? Coincidentally on July 9, 1953, the Secretary of the Treasury, G.M. Humphery, by "virtue of the authority vested in me", changed the name of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, B.I.R. to Internal Revenue Service when he signed what is now Treasury Order 150-06. This was an obvious attempt to legitimize the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Without the Approval of Congress or the President, Humphrey, without any legal and LAWFUL authority, tried to turn a pure trust into an agency of the Department of the Treasury. His actions were illegal and unlawful but went unchallenged. Did he change the name of the B.I.R. in Puerto Rico or the B.I.R. in the Philippines? WE CANNOT FIND THE ANSWER.

 

MUTUAL SECURITY ACT

In 1954, the United States and Guam became partners under the Mutual Security Act. The Act and other documents make reference to the definition of Guam and the United States as being INTERCHANGEABLE. In the same year the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 was passed. The Code provides for the United States and Guam to coordinate the "Individual Income Tax". Pertinent information on the tax issue may be found in 26 CFR 301.7654-1 : Constitution of U.S. and Guam Individual income taxes. 26 CFR 7654 - 1 (e): Military personnel in Guam, 48 USC Section 1421(i) : "Income tax laws" defined. The Constitution forbids unapportioned direct taxes upon the Citizens of the several States of the 50 States of the Union: Therefore the federal government must trick (defraud) people into volunteering to pay taxes as "U.S. citizens" of EITHER Guam, the Virgin Islands, or Puerto Rico. IT SOUNDS INSANE BUT IT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE. [ AN I.R.S. HUMBUG ]

 

B.A.T.F. from I.R.S.

On June 6, 1972 Acting Secretary of the Treasury, Charles E. Walker signed Treasury Order Number 120-01 which establishes the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. He did this with the stroke of his PEN citing, "by virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of the Treasury, including the authority in Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950." He ordered the, "transfer, as specified herein, the functions, powers and duties of the Internal Revenue Service arising under laws relating to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives (including the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms division of the Internal Revenue Service) to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (hereinafter referred to as the Bureau) which is HEREBY established. The Bureau shall be headed by the Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (hereinafter referred to as the Director). The Director shall perform his duties under the general direction of the Secretary of the Treasury (hereinafter referred to as the Secretary) and under the supervision of the Assistant Secretary (Enforcement, Tariff and Trade Affairs, and Operations) ( hereinafter referred to as the Assistant Secretary)."

 

B.A.T.F = I.R.S.

Treasury Order 120-01 assigned to the new B.A.T.F. CHAPTERS 51, 52, 53 OF THE Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and sections 7652 and 7653 of such code, chapters 61 through 80 inclusive of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, the Federal Alcohol Administration Act (27 USC Chapter 8)[which, in 1935 the SUPREME COURT HAD DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL WITHIN THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE UNION,] 18 USC Chapter 44, Title VII Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (18 USC Appendix, sections 1201 - 1203, 18 USC 1262 - 1265, 1952 and 3615. etc. Mr Walker then makes a statement within TO 120-01 that is very revealing, "The terms 'Director, Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms Division' and 'Commissioner of Internal Revenue' wherever used in regulations, rules, and instructions, and forms, issued or adopted for the administration and enforcement of the laws specified in paragraph 2 hereof, which are in effect or in use on the effective date of this Order, shall be held to mean 'the Director'". Walker seemed to branch the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), creating the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF), and then with that statement joined them back together into one. In the Federal Register, Volume 41, Number 180, of Wednesday, September 15, 1976 we find, "The term Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division ' has been replaced by the term ' Internal Revenue Service."

We found this pattern of deception and obfuscation everywhere we looked during our investigation. For further evidence of the fact that the I.R.S. and the B.A.T.F. are one in the same organization, check 27 USCA Section 201.

 

The Gift of the Magi

This is how the Magi perform magic. Secretary Humphrey with NO AUTHORITY, creates an AGENCY of the Department of the Treasury called "Internal Revenue Service", out of AIR, from AN OFFSHORE PURE TRUST, called "Bureau of Internal Revenue". The "SETTLER" and "BENEFICIARIES" of the trust are UNKNOWN. The "TRUSTEE" is the "SECRETARY of THE TREASURY". Acting Secretary Walker further LAUNDERS the trust by CREATING from the alleged "Internal Revenue Service", the "BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO AND FIREARMS".

 

PERSON BECOMES THING

Unlike Humphrey, however, Walker ASSUAGES himself of any guilt, when he NULLIFIED the order by PROCLAIMING, "The terms 'Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division' and 'Commissioner of Internal Revenue' wherever used in regulations, rules, and instructions, and forms, issued or adopted FOR THE ADMINISTRATION and ENFORCEMENT of the LAWS specified in paragraph 2 hereof, which are in effect or in use on the effective date of this Order, shall be held to mean the Director'".

Walker created the [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms] from the [Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division] of Humphrey's [Internal Revenue Service]. He then says, that, what was transferred, is the same ENTITY as the [Commissioner of Internal Revenue]. He KNEW he could not create something from nothing without the AUTHORITY OF CONGRESS and/or the President, so he made it look like he did something that he had, in fact, not done. TO COMPOUND THE FRAUD, the FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLISHED the unbelievable assertion that a PERSON HAD BEEN REPLACED WITH A THING; " the term Director Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division has been replaced with the term Internal Revenue Service."

 

STROKE OF GENIUS

The FEDERAL Alcohol Administration, which ADMINISTERS the Federal Alcohol Act, and offices of members and Administrator thereof, were ABOLISHED, and their functions were DIRECTED to be ADMINISTERED under direction and supervision of Secretary of Treasury through Bureau of Internal Revenue, now Internal Revenue Service. THE FEDERAL ALCOHOL ACT WAS RULED "UNCONSTITUTIONAL" WITHIN THE 50 STATES; so was transferred to the B.I.R., which is an OFFSHORE TRUST, which became the I.R.S.; which gave BIRTH to the B.A.T.F.; AND SOMEHOW, the term [Director, Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division], which is a PERSON within the B.A.T.F., spawned the alleged Internal Revenue Service via another flick of the pen on September 15, 1976. In a brilliant flash of LOGIC, Wayne C. Bentson DETERMINED that he could CHECK THESE FACTS, by filing a Freedom of Information Act request, asking the B.A.T.F. to:- "name the person who administers the Federal Alcohol Act." If we were wrong a reply stating that no record exists as to any name of any person who administers the Act. The request was submitted to the B.A.T.F. THE REPLY came on July 14, 1944, from the Secret Service, an unexpected source, which discloses a connection we had not suspected. THE REPLY STATES THAT JOHN MAGAW , OF THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS, of the [Department of the Treasury], administers THE FEDERAL ALCOHOL ACT. You may remember from the Waco hearings that JOHN MAGAW IS THE [DIRECTOR ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS]. All of our research was confirmed by that ADMISSION.

 

SMOKE AND MIRRORS

Despite all the pen flicking and the smoke and mirrors, there is no such organization of the Department of he Treasury known as "Internal Revenue Service" or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms." 31 USC IS 'Money and Finance' and therein is published the laws pertaining to the Department of the Treasury (D.O.T.). 31 USC, Chapter 3 is a statutory list of the organizations of the D.O.T.--- Internal Revenue Service and/or Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms ARE NOT LISTED WITHIN "31 USC" AS AGENCIES OR ORGANIZATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY. --- THEY ARE REFERENCED, HOWEVER, AS, "TO BE AUDITED" BY THE CONTROLLER GENERAL IN 31 USC SECTION 713.

 

BATF - PUERTO RICO

We have already demonstrated that both of these organizations are in reality the same organization. Where we find one we will surely find the other. In 27 CFR, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 250.11, DEFINITIONS, we find, "United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms office. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms office in Puerto Rico ... " and "Secretary - The Secretary of Puerto Rico", and "Revenue Agent - Any duly authorized Commonwealth Internal Revenue Agent of the Department of the Treasury of Puerto Rico." Remember that 'Internal Revenue' is the name of the Puerto Rico Trust #62. It is perfectly logical and reasonable that a Revenue Agent works as an employee for the Department of the treasury of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

 

Where is I.R.S.

Where is the alleged "Internal Revenue Service?" The Internal Revenue Code of 1939, a.k.a. Internal Revenue Code of 1954, etc., etc.,; 27 CFR Refers to Title 26 as relevant to Title 27, ----- as per 27 CFR, Chapter 1, Section 250.30, ----- which states that 26 USC 5001 (a) (1) is governing a 27 USC law. ----- In fact 26 USC Chapters 51, 52, and 53 are the alcohol, tobacco and firearms taxes, administered by the Internal Revenue Service; alias Bureau of Internal Revenue; alias Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue; alias Director, Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division; alias Internal Revenue Service.

 

MUST BE NOTICED

According to 26 CFR Section 1.6001 - 1 (d), Records, [no one is required to keep records or file returns, unless specifically notified, by the district director, by notice served upon him, to make such returns, render such statements, or keep such specific records, as will enable the district director to determine, whether or not, such person is liable for tax under subtitle A of the Code.

26 CFR states that this rule includes State individual income taxes. --- Don't get yourself all lathered up because "State" means ... the District of Columbia, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, territories, and insular possessions.

 

NO IMPLEMENTATION OF LAW

44 USC says that every regulation or rule must be published in the Federal Register. It also states that every regulation or rule must be approved by the Secretary of the Treasury. If there is no regulation there is no implementation of Law. There is no regulation governing "failure to file a return". There is no computer code for "failure to file". The only thing we could find was a requirement stating "where to file" an income tax return. It can be found in 26 CFR, Sect. 1.6091-3, which states that, "Income tax returns required to be filed with the Director of International Operations". Who is the Director of International Operations?

 

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

NO ONE IN GOVERNMENT IS ALLOWED TO DO ANYTHING UNLESS THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN SPECIFIC WRITTEN AUTHORITY, OR SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN GIVEN AUTHORITY IN THE LAW, GIVES THAT PERSON A DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY ORDER SPELLING OUT EXACTLY WHAT THEY CAN AND CANNOT DO UNDER THAT SPECIFIC ORDER. We combed the Department of the Treasury's Handbook of Delegation Orders and we found that no one in the I.R.S. or B.A.T.F. has any authority to do most of the things they have been doing for years.

 

NO AUTHORITY TO AUDIT

Delegation Order Number 115 (Rev. 5) of May 12, 1986, is the only delegation of authority to conduct Audit. It states that the I.R.S. and B.A.T.F. can only audit themselves, and only for amount of $750.00 or less. Any amount above that amount, must be audited by the Controller General according to Title 31 USC. No other authority to audit exists. No I.R.S. or B.A.T.F. agent, or representative can furnish us with any law, rule, or regulation, which gives them the authority to audit anyone other than themselves. Order Number 191 states that they can levy on Property, but only if that Property is in the hands of third parties.

 

Authority to Investigate

The manual states on page 1100-40.2 of April 21, 1989, Criminal Investigation Division, that:- "the Criminal Investigation Division enforces the criminal statutes applicable to income, estate, gift, employment, and excise tax laws ... involving United States citizens, residing in foreign countries, and non resident aliens, subject to Federal income tax filing requirements, by developing information concerning alleged criminal violations thereof, evaluating allegations and indications of such violations, to determine investigations to be undertaken, investigating suspected criminal violations of such laws, recommending prosecution when warranted, and measuring effectiveness of the investigating process ... "

 

AUTHORITY TO COLLECT

On page 1100 - 40.1 it states in 1132.7 of April 21, 1989, Director, Office of Taxpayer Service and Compliance, "Responsible for operation of a comprehensive enforcement and assistance program for all taxpayers under the immediate jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner (International) ... Directs the full range of collection activity on delinquent accounts and delinquent returns for taxpayers overseas, in Puerto Rico, and in United States possessions and territories.

 

50 STATES NOT INCLUDED

1132.72 of April 21, 1989, Collection Division, says "Executes the full range of collection activities on delinquent accounts, which includes securing delinquent returns involving taxpayers outside the United States and those in United States territories, possessions and in Puerto Rico."

 

U.S. ATTORNEY'S MANUAL

The United States Attorney's Manual, Title 6 Tax Division, Chapter 4, page 16, October 1, 1988, 6-4.270, Criminal Division Responsibility, states, "The Criminal Division has limited responsibility for the Prosecution of offenses investigated by the I.R.S. Those offenses are:- excise violations involving liquor tax, narcotics, stamp tax, firearms, wagering, and coin-operated gambling and amusement machines; MALFEASANCE OFFENSES COMMITTED BY I.R.S. PERSONNEL: forcible rescue of seized property; corrupt or forcible interference with an officer or employee, acting under INTERNAL REVENUE LAWS; and unauthorized mutilation, removal or misuse of stamps. See 28 CFR S 0.70.

 

"ACTS OF CONGRESS"

We found this revelation in 28 USC Rule 54c, Application of Terms, "As used in these rules the following terms have the designated meanings. 'Act of Congress' includes any act of Congress locally applicable and in force in the District of Columbia, in Puerto Rico, in a territory or in an insular possession".

 

IT IS THE LAW

28 USC is the "Rules of the Courts" and was written and approved by the Justices of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in writing 28 USC has already ruled upon this issue It is the Law.(l.o. How can the Supreme Court write law?)

 

WHERE IS THE MONEY?

Where does the MONEY go that is paid into the I.R.S.? It spends at least a year in what is called a "quad zero" account under and Individual Master File, after which time the Director of the I.R.S. Center can apparently do whatever he wants with the money. It is sometimes dispersed under Treasury Order 91 (Rev, 1 ), May 12, 1986 which is a service agreement between the I.R.S. and the Agency for International Development, A.I.D.

 

WE FINANCED SOVIET WEAPONS

When William Casey, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency during the Iran-Contra, was the head of A.I.D. he funnelled hundreds of millions of dollars to the Soviet Union, which money was spent building the Kama River Truck Factory, the largest military production facility for tanks, trucks, armored personnel carriers, and other wheeled vehicles in he world. The Kama River factory has a production capability larger than all of the combined automobile and truck manufacturing plants in the United States. (l.o. New World order for the collapse and take over of the automotive industry).

 

I.R.S. / AID SERVICE AGREEMENT

The Agreement states "Authority is hereby delegated to the Assistant Commissioner International to develop and enter into the service agreement between the Treasury Department and the Agency for International Development. The Secretary of the Treasury is always appointed Governor of the International Monetary Fund (treason?) in accordance with the international agreement that CREATED the I.M.F. The Secretary of the Treasury is paid by the I.M.F. while acting as Governor (treason, emoluments?)

 

Agent Of Foreign Powers

Lloyd Bentsen held the following positions at the same time he was Secretary of the Treasury:

 

1. U.S. Governor of the International Monetary Fund,
2. U.S. Governor of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
3. U.S. Governor of the African Development Bank,
4. U.S. Governor of the Asian Development Bank,
5. U.S. Governor of the African Development Fund
6. U.S. Governor of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Mr. Bentson received a salary from each of these organizations which literally made him an unregistered agent for several foreign powers (treason, emoluments?)

 

Citizen vs citizen

By birth we are each a Citizen of the State of New Jersey, or a Citizen of the State of California, or a Citizen of the State Florida, or a Citizen of the State of whatever State you wherein we were born, and at the same time, we are all Citizens of the united States of America, AND ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ACTS OF CONGRESS, OTHER THAN THE 18 GRANTS OF POWERS SPECIFICALLY CITED IN THE Constitution for the united States of America. People who are born or who reside within the federal District of Columbia, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, any territory, on any naval base or dockyard, within forts, or within insular possessions are called U.S. citizens AND are subject to Acts of Congress. Within the Law, words have meanings, that not the same meanings, that are accepted in common usage. our Constitution is the Constitution for the united States of America. The U.S. Constitution is the Constitution of Puerto Rico.

 

VOLUNTEER "TAXPAYERS"

We are subject to the laws of the JURISDICTION which we volunteer to accept. In the Law governing Income tax, income is defined as foreign earned income, offshore oil well, or windfall profits, and war profits. A return is prepared by a TAXPAYER to submit to the federal government taxes that he or she has collected. A TAXPAYER IS ONE WHO COLLECTS TAXES AND SUBMITS THE TAXES AS A RETURN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AN EMPLOYEE IS ONE WHO IS EMPLOYED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AN EMPLOYER IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AN INDIVIDUAL IS A citizen OF GUAM OR THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS. A BUSINESS IS DEFINED AS A GOVERNMENT, A BANK, OR AN INSURANCE COMPANY. A RESIDENT IS AN ALIEN CITIZEN OF GUAM, THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS, OR PUERTO RICO, WHO RESIDES WITHIN ONE OF THE 50 STATES OF THE united STATES OF AMERICA or one of the other island possessions.

 

1040 for "ALIENS"

A form 1040 is the income tax return for a nonresident alien citizen of the U.S. Virgin Islands residing within one of the 50 States (geographically) of the several States of the united States of America. If you volunteer that you are a U.S. citizen, you have become a U.S. citizen. IF YOU WRITE OR PRINT YOUR NAME ON A LINE LABELED " taxpayer", you have become a taxpayer. Since these form are affidavits, which you submit under penalty of perjury, you commit a crime every time you fill one out and sign stating that you are that which you are not. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS DELIGHTED by your ignorance, AND WILL GLADLY ACCEPT YOUR RETURNS AND YOUR MONEY. As proof refer to The Virgin Islands Tax Guide which states, "All references to the District Director or to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should be interpreted to mean the Director of the Virgin Islands Bureau of Internal Revenue. All references to the Internal Revenue Service, The Federal Depository and similar references should be interpreted as the B.I.R., and so forth. Any question interpreting Federal forms for use in the Virgin Islands should be referred to the B.I.R.."

 

CODES TELL THE TALE

In Internal Revenue Service publications 6209, Computer Codes for I.R.S. "TC 150" is listed as the Virgin Islands Returns" and the codes 300 through 398 are listed as "U.S. and UK Tax Treaty claims involving taxes on narcotics which were financed in the Cayman Islands and imported into the Virgin islands".

 

NARCOTICS DEALER?

When Freedom of Information Act requests have been filed for Individual Master File (IMF) for people who are experiencing tax problems with the I.R.S., every return ha been found to contain the above codes except for some which are coded as "Guam" returns. Every return shows that the unsuspecting Citizen is being taxed on income derived from importing narcotics, alcohol, tobacco, or firearms into the United States or one of its territories or possessions, from a foreign country or from Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands or into the Virgin Islands form the Cayman Islands.

 

WHO IS REQUIRED TO FILE?

26 CFR, 601.103 (a) is the only place which tells us who is required to file a return, provided that person has been properly noticed by the District Director to KEEP RECORDS AND THEN NOTICED THAT HE/SHE IS REQUIRED TO FILE. It states, "In general, each taxpayer (or person required to collect and pay over the taxes) is required to file a prescribed form of return ..." Are you a Taxpayer? (l.o.- you must first be a tax collector)

 

WHO ARE THESE THUGS?

The scam manifests itself in many different ways. In order to maintain the semblance of legality, hats are changed from moment to moment. When you are told to submit records for examination YOU ARE DEALING WITH CUSTOMS. When you submit an offer in compromise, YOU ARE DEALING WITH THE COAST GUARD. When you are confronted by a Special Agent of the I.R.S. you are really DEALING WITH A DEPUTIZED UNITED STATES MARSHALL. When you are being investigated by the alleged Internal Revenue Service, YOU ARE REALLY DEALING WITH AN AGENT, CONTRACTED BY THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, TO INVESTIGATE NARCOTICS VIOLATIONS. When the alleged Internal Revenue Service charges you with a crime, YOU ARE DEALING WITH THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO AND FIREARMS. Only a small part of 26 USC is administered by the Internal Revenue Service. Most of the Code is administered by THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL AND FIREARMS, including Chapter 61 through 80, which is ENFORCEMENT. ---- In addition, 27 CFR IS B.A.T.F. and states in Subpart B - DEFINITIONS, 250.11, MEANING OF TERMS, "United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms office - Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms office in Puerto Rico". Every Person we find, who is being prosecuted by the alleged Internal Revenue Service has a Code on their I.M.F. putting them in "tax class 6" which designates that they have violated a law relating to alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, Puerto Rico.

 

NO JURISDICTION

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, has no venue or jurisdiction within the borders of any of the 50 States of the united States of America, except in pursuit of an importer of contraband alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, who failed to pay the TAX on those items. As proof, refer to the July 30, 1993 ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 1 F.3d 1511; 1993 U.S. App. Lexis 19747, where the court ruled in United States v. D.J. Vollmer & Co. that "the B.A.T.F. has jurisdiction over the first sale of a firearm imported to the country, but they don't have jurisdiction over subsequent sales."

 

FEDS LIE

Attorneys, including your defense attorney, the U.S. Attorney, Federal Judges, and alleged Internal Revenue Service and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms personnel, routinely lie in depositions and on the witness stand to perpetuate the FRAUD. THIS THEY DO WILLINGLY AND WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY ARE COMMITTING PERJURY. EVERY JUDGE INTENTIONALLY LIES, EVERY TIME HE/SHE GIVES INSTRUCTIONS TO A JURY IN A CRIMINAL, OR TAX CASE, BROUGHT BY THE I.R.S. OR THE B.A.T.F. They all know it, and do it willingly, and with malice aforethought.

 

WHERE DO THEY GET THESE GUYS?

How does the government hire people, who will intentionally work to defraud their fellow Americans? Most of those who work on the lower levels for the I.R.S., B.A.T.F, and other Agencies simply do not know the truth. They do as they are told to earn a living until retirement. Executives, U.S. Attorneys, Federal Judges, and others, do KNOW, AND ARE, with full KNOWLEDGE and MALICE aforethought, participating in the crime of the century. MANY OF THESE PEOPLE ARE PAID LOTS OF MONEY. (l.o.-EVERY SOUL HAS ITS PRICE).

 

MONETARY AWARDS
(for DECEPTION, CRIMINALITY AND FRAUD)

The Internal Revenue Manual; Handbook of Delegation Orders, January 17, 1983, PAGE 1229-91; outlines the alleged Internal Revenue Services's system of monetary awards, "of up to and including $5000.00, for any one individual employee or group of employees, in his/her immediate office, including field employees, engaged in National Office projects; and contributions of employees of other Government agencies and armed forces members"; WITH THE APPROVAL OF the Deputy Commissioner; " of $5,001.00 to $10,000.00, for any one individual or group", with the approval of the Deputy Commissioner; "of $10,001.00 to $25,000 for any one individual or group", with the Commissioner's concurrence, "an additional monetary reward of $10,000.00 (total $35,000.00) TO THE PRESIDENT THROUGH TREASURY AND OPM" with the Commissioner's concurrence. (IMPEACHABLE, TREASONABLE).

 

LEGAL (l.o.-BUT NOT LAWFUL) BRIBERY

These awards include cash awards. They are not limited as to number, that may be awarded, to any one person or group. There is no limitation placed upon any award. Any person or group of persons can be awarded this money, including:- U.S. Attorneys, Federal Judges, your Certified Public Accountant, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, YOUR MOTHER, H&R BLOCK, etc. The awards may be given to the same person or group, each minute, each hour, every day, every week, every month, every year, or not at all. In other words, the U.S. Government and the alleged Internal Revenue Service, a.k.a, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms have a perfectly legal (l.o. not lawful) system of bribery. The bribery works against the Citizens of the several States of the united States of America.

 

WARNING!

Our investigation uncovered a lot. We have printed only a little. Successful use of this material requires a lot of study and an excellent understanding of the legal system. Please do not compound errors by attempting to extract some imaginary magic bullet against alleged Internal Revenue Service, or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO DISCOVER THIS INFORMATION. YOU MUST KNOW IT INSIDE OUT, BACKWARDS AND FORWARDS; LIKE A KNEEJERK RESPONSE.

 

TRUST BETRAYED

We have been betrayed by those we trusted. We have been robbed of our money and property. It happened because we trusted imperfect men to rule imperfect men; and we failed in our duty as watchdog, and SOVEREIGNS OVER OUR SERVANTS. IT HAPPENED BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN IGNORANT, APATHETIC AND EVEN STUPID.

 

BY CHOICE AND CONSENT

"A nation or world of people, who will not use their intelligence, are no better than animals that have no intelligence; such people are beasts of burden and steaks upon the table by choice and consent." "Behold a Pale Horse" by William Cooper, Light Technology Publishing, Sedona. A significant portion of the research, that led to the writing of this article was contributed by Mr. Wayne Bentson.

 

---

MEET THE IRS: AMERICA'S ENEMY WITHIN
[Especially after you've just paid'em]

By D.J. Logan

The IRS is not who you think they are. IRS agents are neither

trained nor paid by the United Stated Government.

Pursuant to Treasury Delegation Order No. 92, the IRS is trained under the

direction of the Division of Human Resources (U.N.) and the Commissioner

(INTERNATIONAL), by the office of Personnel Management. In the 1979

edition 22 USCA 278, "The United nations," you will find Executive Order 10422.

The Office of Personnel Management is under the direction of the Secretary of

the United Nations.  Pursuant to Treasury Delegation Order No. 91, the IRS

entered into a "Service Agreement" with the US Treasury Department (See Public Law  94-564,

Legislative History, pg. 5967, Reorganization (BANKRUPTCY!!!) Plan No. 26)

and the Agency for International Development. This agency is an

international paramilitary operation and, according to the Department of

the  Army Field manual (1969) 41-10, pgs 1-4, Sec. 1-7 (b) & 1-6. Sec. 1-10 (7)

(c) (1), and 22 USCA 284, includes such activities as, "Assumption of full

or partial executive, legislative, and judicial authority over a country or

area."     The IRS is also an agency/member of a 169 nation pact called the

International Criminal Police Organization, or INTERPOL, found at 22 USCA

263a. The memorandum of Understanding, (MOU), between the Secretary of

Treasury, AKA the corporate governor of "The Fund" and "The Bank"

(International Monetary Fund, and the International Bank for

reconstruction and Development), indicated that the Attorney General and her

associates are soliciting and collecting information for foreign principals; the

international organizations, corporations, and associations, exemplified

by  22 USCA 286f. According to the 1994 US Government Manual, at page 390,

the Attorney General is the permanent representative to INTERPOL, and the

Secretary of Treasury is the alternate member.

Under Article 30 of the INTERPOL constitution, these individuals must

expatriate their citizenship. They serve no allegiance to the United

States of America. The IRS is paid by "The Fund" and "The Bank." Thus it

appears from the documentary evidence that the Internal Revenue Sevice

agents are "Agents of a Foreign Principle" within the meaning and intent of the

"Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938" for private, not public, gain.

The IRS is directed and controlled by the corporate Governor of "The Fund"

and "The Bank." The Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS collection agency are

both privately owned and operated under private statutes. The IRS operates

under public policy, not Constitutional Law, and in the interest of our nations

foreign creditors.

The Constitution only permits Congress to lay and collect taxes. It does

not authorize Congress to delegate the tax collection power to a private

corporation, which collects our taxes for a private bank, the Federal

Reserve, who then deposits it into the Treasury of the IMF. The IRS is not

allowed to state that they collect taxes for the United States Treasury. They only

refer to "The Treasury." PC magazine reported that the Clinton

Administration lawyers are preparing executive orders to connect ALL private

bank accounts and banking cards directly to the IRS, Treasury and Federal

Reserve Computers. "A society of sheep must, in time, beget a government of

wolves." -- Bertrand de Juvenal.

***********

Additional Reading on FRB/IRS:

Griffin, G. E. (1994/1995). The creature from Jekyll Island: A second

look at the Federal Reserve. (Westlake Village, CA: American Media) and

Icke, David. The Biggest Secret, Bridge of Love Publications check his

web site also    www.davidicke.com    highly recommended

Currently, there are many groups attempting to expose the privately owned

Federal Reserve Bank and its Internal Revenue Service collection agency,

for who it really is, and how it affects/has affected the entire world

economy. We will be hearing within the year 2001 whether or not those on the

cutting edge have been successful.

Additional reading on secret societies, such as the "Illumianti" and certain

religious/political groups:

Baigent, M., Leigh, R., & Lincoln, H. (1983). Holy blood, holy grail.

New York: Bantam/Doubleday/Dell.

Baigent, M., Leigh, R., & Lincoln, H. (1983). The messianic legacy. New

York: Dell.

Additional reading on how "powers that be" use mind control to enslave the

masses:  O'Brien, C., & Phillips, M. (1995). Trance formation of America: The

true life story  of a CIA mind control slave. Las Vegas: Reality Marketing.

(Website  available; many are attempting to discredit her experiences, which is

often thecase).

The owners of the Federal Reserve has probably been one of the best kept

secrets since its formation in 1912. According to R. E. McMaster,

publisher of a newsletter called "The Reaper" and author of "Cycles of War," the

one reason for this is that the Federal Reserve finances both sides of a given

war. This explains why all the US Presidential administrations since

Woodrow Wilson were actually run by the Illuminati's Council on Foreign

Relations  (CFR) and have been financing communist countries, whether

through monetary support, food and arm shipments or through technological,

industrial aid and so forth. McMasters and Eustace Mullins in "The Secrets of the

Federal Reserve: The London Connection," published by Bankers Research

Institute, P.O. Box 1105, Staunton, VA 24401, write there are approximately 13

MAJOR FAMILIES and THEIR RELATIVES AND OFFSPRINGS WHO OWN

THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM AND ARE BEHIND THE "NEW WORLD

ORDER":

1. Rothschilds of London and Berlin.

2. Lazares Brothers of Paris

3. Israel Moses Seaf of Italy

4. Kuhn, (5) Loeb & Co. of Germany and New York

6. Warburg & Co. of Hamburg, Germany

7. Lehman Brothers of New York

8. Goldman, (9) Sachs of New York

10. Rockefeller Brothers of New York

11. J. P. Morgan of New York

12. Jacob Schiff (Al Gore's daughter, Karina's grandfather-in-law)

13. J. Henry Schroder

Most, if not all, are Jewish (this is purely for appearance sake for

future repercussions) families--one of the main reasons for the

large support of funds to Israel. Not really..Israel needed to be

established to set up a confrontational situation in the Middle East to

generate the wars that reptiles feed on and to control the portal there into

the fourth dimension as well as the oil and etc.. Prescott Bush, the

grandfather of George W. Bush, an international bank with the late Averill

Harriman's bank was Adolf Hitler's personal banker. Hitler had a desire

for a New World Order. It is a very complicated situation. There is web site you

can go to and read an unauthorized biography of the Bush family and their

ancestry. Many of these groups are also using evironmental issues to

accomplish their agenda. Just as any company, and the U.S. is a corporation,

there are certain people at the top who control the affairs...we as a country or

world are no different. The masses need to be aware of what is really going

on...and through mass consciousness changes will be made. We will see as

things progress what the Divine Plan is for our country/planet--the Macrocosm,

with us as human beings, the microcosm. We must trust and have faith that all

will work out for the best and highest good for all.

These families, their relatives and siblings own the Federal Reserve

Bank, and there are also others who are individuals in charge of secret

societies as well as certain bureaucratic governmental agencies. Printing

the names of those who own the Federal Reserve Bank, the people in charge

of the Council of Foreign Relations and the Bildenbergers can help cause them

some concern because they do not have any way of knowing how many masses

are aware of who they are and therefore, they may wish to seek some kind of

way out or to create some action that shows they are not part of thet scheme

to enslave the masses.

By printing these names and forwarding them throughout the internet, it

will have a slight effect of intimidating to some degree, particularly if many of

the masses awaken before it is too late. Once that action is triggered, if

enough people are awakened, they may have a chance of awakening those who

would have otherwise been skeptical. Many in the military, milita and police force

are not in favor of the New World Order; and of course, there are many who do

not even know what is going on and will simply follow orders. This is why readers

must pass pertinent information far and wide.

More sites for information

the premier trust: Pure Constitutional Trust.

http://no1040s.com/notax/ 

*******************

Here is the other site: David,

in FLA. Excellent gentleman. Hasn't filed a 1040 in several years.

David Dietz

(954)963-7182

http://www.protectyourstuff.com

Estate Planning, Asset Protection Planning, Business Planning

**********************

http://www.ischiff.com/  Irwin Schiff's tax site. He's in Las Vegas

*****************

http://www.givemeliberty.org/ 

*********************

Debunking the Federal Reserve Conspiracy Theories

http://members.home.net/flaherty15/conspire.htm

Tax Protestor FAQ

http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html

Subject: Text of recent USA Today Ad re Income Tax Withholding

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/we_the_people.asp
Dear We The People
Q. WHAT DO THESE MEN HAVE IN COMMON?
David Bosset
Bosset Marketing Partners, Inc. (Florida)
Nick Jesson
No Time Delay Electronics, Inc. (California)
Dick Simkanin
Arrow Custom Plastics, Inc. (Texas)
Al Thompson
Cencal Aviation Products, Inc. (California)
Leonard Roberto
Batavia Enclosures, Inc. (New York)
A. THEY ARE ALL EMPLOYERS WHO HAVE STOPPED WITHHOLDING
TAXES FROM THEIR WORKERS' PAYCHECKS
They are part of a growing number of employers and
workers who believe that:
THERE IS NO LAW THAT REQUIRES WORKERS, AS U.S.
CITIZENS EARNING THEIR MONEY FROM DOMESTIC COMPANIES,
TO PAY INCOME OR EMPLOYMENT TAXES; NOR TO HAVE THOSE
TAXES WITHHELD;
THE 16TH AMENDMENT (THE "INCOME TAX AMENDMENT") WAS
FRAUDULENTLY DECLARED TO BE RATIFIED BY THE SECRETARY
OF STATE IN 1913.*
Each of the employers has come to these conclusions
with the aid of Certified Public Accountants,
attorneys and/or tax researchers. In 1999, upon
consultation with tax researcher Thurston Bell, David
Bosset, a former tax consultant himself, submitted a
nine page legal memorandum to the IRS, arguing that he
had erred in 1996 and 1997 in filing 528 W-2s and
1099s, which reported that workers had earned taxable
income. Attached were 528 W-2s and 1099s, corrected to
"0."
The local IRS office passed the matter up to the
Conflict Resolution Branch, which determined that Mr.
Bosset was correct. The IRS returned the money that
Mr. Bosset had withheld from the paychecks of his
employees. Soon after, other employers around the
country stopped withholding, including those
identified above.
Each employer has respectfully presented these
arguments to the IRS (and to their representatives in
Congress), asking the government to review the results
of their research and to show them if they are
mistaken. The IRS DID NOT RESPOND, nor did the others.

IRS SUDDENLY THREATENS "CRACKDOWN"
The IRS on February 10th made public announcements
that it would soon conduct a crackdown on dozens of
employers who have stopped withholding taxes from the
money they pay their workers. The announcement
apparently was spurred on by articles in the New York
Times in November that called the employers "tax
cheats" and warned that the trend could spread and
cause the tax system to collapse.
The Times quoted IRS Deputy Commissioner Dale Hart as
saying that the employers' legal rationale is
frivolous, has no legal authority, and has been
thoroughly rejected by the courts. The employers, of
course, do not see their arguments as frivolous, and
are unaware of any court case that has addressed or
rejected them. Hart did not offer any code section
that would apply
The employers all followed IRS administrative
procedures and cite chapter and verse of the laws and
regulations that allow them to stop withholding. The
IRS, after due consideration, refunded money the
employers had withheld from the paychecks of their
employees. This was not the result of a low-level
clerical error, but was based on numerous exchanges
through the IRS's Problem Resolution program.
At least one of the employers named in the Times
article has written a letter to the IRS Commissioner
requesting a meeting to discuss the matter. Excerpts
from that letter are printed below.
Nick Jesson's (NTD Electronics') demand for dialogue
was UNANSWERED by the IRS, so he is now going public.
The IRS's failure to respond follows a series of
attempts to get government officials, including the
IRS, Congress and the White House, to participate in
conferences to publicly explain findings and refute
allegations by numerous tax researchers and former IRS
agents such as the allegations made at the top of this
message.
Tax researchers recognize that the actions of the
employers are supported by provisions in the Tax Code.
For example: A withholding agent is only required to
withhold from foreigners (Code Sections 7701, 1461,
1441-3). Tax researchers have noted for years that a
statement of citizenship given to an
employer/withholding agent precludes the withholding
of tax, as there is no authority in the Code to
withhold money from a citizen or resident of the U.S.
unless that person authorizes it. If the worker
submits a statement of citizenship, the employer, as a
withholding agent, is relieved of duty to withhold
income taxes, since those apply to nonresident aliens.
See our web site.
Tax researchers have asserted there is no law that a
U.S. citizen must have a social security number (SSN)
or that an employer must have an employer
identification number (EIN), or that either of them
must participate in the social security program (
i.e., employment or FICA taxes under Subtitle C). An
employer who does participate in the social security
program is required to give a W-4 form to a worker,
but is not required to get it back, and the worker is
not required to fill it out and return it, unless that
worker wants to participate in the social security
program. Absent a W-4 signed by the worker, an
employer is not authorized by law to withhold and
submit to the IRS money from the worker for employment
taxes. Further, a person without a SSN number would
have no taxable income. All this has been
well-documented and verified by numerous letters from
any number of Social Security Administration
officials. You can check these out on our web site
(see below).
Section 1441(a) and (b) state that interest,
dividends, rent, salaries, wages, profits, etc., are
"income" when received on behalf of, or paid to, a
nonresident alien or other foreign entity. And courts
have ruled that profits of corporations are "income."
But there is no provision in the Code stating that
receipts of citizens or residents of the country are
"income." Thus, a citizen's own receipts are not
"gross income" and are not, therefore, "taxable
income" under the Code. Income refers to property
derived from activity involving the exercise of a
government-granted privilege.
Section 61 of the Code has the definition of gross
income as "all income from whatever source derived,"
and then a list of 15 "items." Tax researchers have
recognized that the "items" listed are not the same as
"sources" of income that are taxable. The sources are
actually to be found in a more remote part of the Code
at Section 861 (or section 1.861-8(f)(1) of the
regulations). They consist of five "foreign" sources.
In previous versions of the Code, the relationship and
distinction between the "items" and the "sources" was
not disguised or separated by distance in the Code.
This part of the Code is an important aspect of the
position taken by the employers who have stopped
withholding. For more details, see "Connecting the
Dots" on our web site, and especially go to
www.Taxableincome.net for a free download of Larken
Rose's excellent book and/or refer to appropriate
chapters of Chris Hansen's opus magnus at
http://familyguardian.tzo.com/Publications/GreatIRSHoax.htm,
also a free download.
DEAR IRS : WHY DON'T YOU ANSWER? AN EMPLOYER'S LETTER.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner
Internal Revenue Service
1111 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20224
Dear Commissioner Rossotti:
I am writing to you because I have reason to believe
that certain offices within the Internal Revenue
Service are seeking unwarranted criminal charges both
against Nick Jesson of No Time Delay Electronics for
tax evasion and against myself as Founder and
Executive Researcher of the National Institute for
Taxation Education (NITE) for conspiracy to evade
taxes.
Both Mr. Jesson and I were given this impression by an
article that appeared in the February 10 edition of
the New York Times ("I.R.S. Going After Businesses on
Withholding Tax"), in which reporter David Cay
Johnston refers to Mr. Jesson twice, in the context of
quotes by IRS officials such as CID Chief Mark E.
Matthews and Deputy Commissioner Dale Hart. Each of
these officials stated that efforts are being made
within the IRS to tighten enforcement, and Chief
Matthews told the Times that "some of the business
owners, as well as the promoters who advise them, will
be prosecuted for tax evasion and other crimes."
I wish for you to know the facts of this issue so that
you can understand that in my work with Mr. Jesson, we
have sought complete compliance with all of the
Internal Revenue laws as stated in the U.S. Code, the
Treasury Regulations, and the Internal Revenue Manual.
Furthermore, it has always been our intent to correct
any mistakes of law or fact that we have made and
distributed to any interested parties, as we have
engaged in the IRS' administrative process in order to
exhaust all administrative remedy and avail ourselves
of any subsequent judicial hearing of our legal
arguments if necessary.
However, to date the IRS has given us no reason to
believe through Mr. Jesson's correspondences with the
agency that Mr. Jesson or I have misunderstood,
misrepresented, or failed to comply with the law in
any way. We have made every effort to comply with the
law and the IRS procedures that we must exhaust before
seeking adjudication of claims. Since the IRS has
effectively accepted as correct and truthful NITE's
arguments as applied by Mr. Jesson, any attempt to
prosecute either myself or Mr. Jesson would not only
be outside of the scope of the law but also a clear
abuse of government power.
NITE is an educational organization operating under
the protection of the First Amendment guaranty of
freedom of speech and freedom of association… Since
1997 NITE has been distributing information regarding
the Internal Revenue laws and assisting its members in
complying with the letter of the law and discovering
the long-obfuscated IRS administrative procedures,
which are binding upon the IRS as well as the
Citizens.
In the case of Mr. Jesson NITE provided to him
information regarding the U.S. Source Rules as set
forth in the Internal Revenue laws and the process of
correcting prior claims made to the IRS regarding
"gross income" paid and reported to the IRS. These are
the pertinent facts of Mr. Jesson's case:
On May 10, 2000, following information researched and
published by NITE, Mr. Jesson amended the 1997 returns
for No Time Delay Electronics, Inc. by filing Forms
941C, W-2C and W-3C reflecting gross income of "0",
based on the "source" rules as defined by the Treasury
Regulations. These returns were submitted pursuant to
26 C.F.R. §301.6402-2, complying with the only
administrative process available to an employer
seeking a Refund of overpayment of taxes. Had he
failed to take this specific action he would be unable
to seek any other remedy in the courts before
exhausting this administrative remedy.
On June 1, 2000 Mr. Jesson received a response letter
from the IRS stating that the agency needed more time
to review his case before making a decision on his
Claim for Refund. The letter stated that no further
information would be required of him at that time
while the review was under way.
On July 11, 2000 the IRS completed review of Mr.
Jesson's case and issued four Refund checks in the
amounts of $68,244.94, $61,262.01, $37,373.74, and
$48,573.87. These checks were refunds for employment
taxes that were withheld for each quarter of 1997.
Since receiving the refund checks, Mr. Jesson has
received no further correspondences from the IRS of
any kind, especially none stating that the refund was
issued mistakenly.
On November 19, 2000 the New York Times printed an
article authored by David Cay Johnston, which referred
to Mr. Jesson (not by name but as owner of NTD
Electronics) in the context of tax cheats who are
evading the taxes owed.
Prior to the publication of the article I had a brief
conversation with Mr. Johnston, during which I
attempted to correct his misconception of the
substance of my work. Though there was some reference
made to my work through mention of NTD Electronics,
there was no specific mention of myself or of NITE
(www.nite.org) being the source of this effort by
employers to apply the U.S. Source Rules to their
determinations of wages and gross income reported to
the IRS.
[Editor's note]…The letter goes on to note
inaccuracies in the Times stories by David Cay
Johnston and his failure to take telephone calls from
Mr. Jesson or to return them. The letter notes the
article of February 10 juxtaposed statements about Mr.
Jesson with statements by IRS officials who said that
business owners are "scamming their employees" and
will be prosecuted for evasion. The article stated
that those who promote tax strategies for businesses
will also be prosecuted. The letter continues…

I understand that the IRS should not be held
responsible for the words that Mr. Johnston chooses to
write and the New York Times chooses to publish. I
recognize the possibility that the IRS may have given
Mr. Johnston wholly accurate information and that the
blame for the accusatory language lies wholly upon Mr.
Johnston and the New York Times. And it is with this
good faith that I reach out to the IRS to bring the
IRS, NITE and Mr. Jesson into an exclusive and
legitimate face-to-face conversation regarding any
misunderstandings or errors of law that NITE or Mr.
Jesson are holding and availing to the public.
We propose that the IRS, represented by you and/or
your delegates, engage NITE in a public forum and
discuss the legality and legitimacy of the positions
that NITE proffers. At this meeting, we expect that
the IRS will either provide pertinent case law from a
court of competent jurisdiction that does not ignore
the fact that the U.S. Source Rules apply to U.S.
Citizens, or failing that will admit publicly that
NITE's specific argument of law is correct and
therefore no criminal or civil actions will be brought
against any individual Citizen who proffers NITE's
specific argument. At this meeting you and your
delegates would have the opportunity to refute our
argument and we would have an opportunity to engage in
a dialogue with our government regarding our
application of the whole of the Internal Revenue laws
and most specifically our application of the U.S.
Source Rules to U.S. Citizens.
[Editor's note]…The letter says that Mr. Bell and Mr.
Jesson are prepared to meet for the discussion at any
time and place that will allow for an audience of
members of the media and other concerned citizens, and
that it would be desirable to have representatives of
the Justice Department there to save the need for any
follow-up meetings with them. Mr. Bell states that the
position used by Mr. Jesson has never been argued or
decided in federal court, and that so far, no
government official has attempted to refute the
specific arguments on which it is based. He continues…


This letter is being sent to you directly since your
delegates have made the naked threats of prosecution
as contained in the David Cay Johnston article.
If the intent of your subordinates' comments to David
Cay Johnston was to intimidate and threaten
law-abiding citizens and employers, then the
Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 has indeed failed
to protect taxpayers in the manner that Congress
intended. Nevertheless, we are not intimidated by the
lawless threats of your deputies, as any attempt by
the IRS to follow through with these threats will be
reviewed by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration as well as our elected officials in
Congress.
Presently the record shows that the IRS has not only
failed to refute our position but has even
affirmatively offered evidence that our arguments are
correct by refunding over $215,000 to No Time Delay
Electronics. Therefore, until such time as we are
shown to our reasonable satisfaction to be holding
mistaken positions, Mr. Jesson, NITE and I will
continue to operate as law-abiding Citizens within the
letter of the law as we have applied.
We expect a response from you within fifteen (15)
business days.
Respectfully,
Thurston P. Bell
Executive Researcher and Founder
National Institute for Taxation Education
SUMMARY OF THE LETTER

The employers' position is careful to follow the laws
and regulations.
The applications went through IRS's procedures and
were approved.
The NY Times articles were both inaccurate and biased.
Employer Jesson and Thurston Bell requested a meeting
with the IRS to discuss the issues and the IRS did not
respond at all.
The IRS has not responded to Mr. Bell's letter. They
refused to deny or respond to former CID investigator
Joe Banister's report that concluded the findings by
numerous tax researchers were correct. They have
declined to reply to invitations to five conferences
conducted by We The People Foundation to discuss
questions and issues. (For further details of these
attempts, go to our web site.) We have posed the
crucial question: "At what point must continued
evasion be regarded as an admission that the tax
researchers are correct, and that there is no law that
requires most citizens to pay income tax?"
___________________________BOX______________________________
* In 1913, Americans got the federal income tax and a
central bank (the Federal Reserve System). There is
evidence in support of the hypothesis that the income
tax was imposed on the American people so that the
owners of the (private) central bank could control not
only our money but our government as well.
___________________________BOX______________________________-

SHODDY JOURNALISM: David Cay Johnston and The NY Times
become an issue.
Our previous message two weeks ago noted that the NY
Times has assumed the role of cheerleader for the IRS,
obviously hoping to sic 'em onto the employers who
have stopped withholding, even though in accordance
with the rules.
In another Times article on February 23, David Cay
Johnston reported that the recent sentencing of a
couple for crimes involving tax evasion followed a
trial at which defendants' case was based on Code
section 861. Larken Rose, a tax researcher who has
studied and written authoritatively about the 861
position, asked Mr. Johnston about it, and he
acknowledged that the 861 position was not mentioned
at the trial and was not an issue adjudicated. This
represents irresponsible and misleading journalism.
Check Larken Rose's website at www.Taxableincome.net
for more information (email:
larken@taxableincome.net).
We also have a copy of a very biased, hostile and
condescending letter Mr. Johnston sent to Mr. Jesson
two weeks ago in response to Jesson's challenge that
Johnston show him the law that makes him liable, and
noting that the California tax board, whose tax rules
are the same as the federal, had recently approved his
position. We'll not print that letter at this time,
but it has become evident that Mr. Johnston has set
out upon a one-man crusade, using the NY Times as his
vehicle, against any and all who don't agree with his
views on the income tax, even though he acknowledges
in the letter that he hasn't done research on it.
His letter asserts that the issues Jesson has raised
have been judged in tax courts, district courts, and
appeals courts and been rejected as without merit. In
fact, Thurston Bell's letter above states that these
issues have never been addressed or adjudicated in any
court case. Johnston's desire to discredit the
employers has caused him to resort to inaccurate,
false and unethical reporting.
As further evidence of his unprofessional bias, Mr.
Johnston "pulled the plug" on an interview when the
guest interviewee, Virginia Cropsey, J.D., an expert
on the 4th Amendment and IRS liens, began to speak
about warrant requirements for federal seizures of
property for income taxes and that IRS seizures had
decreased by 98% because they can't get a warrant,
since it would require them to lie under oath that a
tax was owed. She said she had never spoken with a
more insolent, biased reporter, who didn't want to
hear any explanations about the tax laws that he
couldn't refute. She said she had lost a lot of
respect for the Times. Check her website at
www.getawarrant.com.
It appears to us that there is serious reason to
question whether the readers of the NY Times are well
served by David Cay Johnston's brand of reporting,
since it is biased and incompletely researched. If you
would like to express your opinion about the NY Times
articles by David Cay Johnston, you can do so by
calling his superior, Glenn Kramon, Business Editor,
at (212) 556-1471.
_______________________________-BOX
____________________________
LATE NEWS: The Texas Incident
Subsequent to the NY Times articles, the IRS contacted
Clubb Spa and Pool, a company in Keller, Texas, just
northwest of Dallas, that had stopped withholding in
accordance with the provisions of the law. The IRS
wanted to send a couple of auditors to review their
books and records. On the appointed day, last Friday,
February 23, five people showed up, three of them
conspicuously carrying guns. When asked by company
owner, Teri Clubb, who the armed men were, they
refused to disclose their identities. The company
called 911, police officers arrived who told the
agents they'd have to identify themselves or leave.
The IRS group left, still (except for one auditor)
refusing to give identities. As of this writing, the
police have not provided the owner with a written
incident report.
If revenue officers are authorized by law (Code
section 7608) to conduct only civil enforcement of
alcohol, tobacco, and firearms regulations, and the
Criminal Investigation Division only authorized to
investigate income tax matters involving U.S. citizens
residing in foreign countries and nonresident aliens
with U.S. income (Internal Revenue Manual chapter
1100), one wonders just what was going on, and under
what authority.
Employers have noted that in Texas, as in most states,
garnishment of wages (which is what withholding is, if
done without the employees permission) requires a
court order. In Texas, it is even written into the
state constitution, as well.
This whole incident seems to resemble the old Brown
Shirt intimidation tactics of Nazi Germany. But the
owner of one company said, in effect: "This is
America. Don't show us your guns; show us your
authority."
______________________________FOOTER__________________________________

This message is part of PROJECT TOTO, a plan to
educate millions of citizens (along with accountants,
tax attorneys, legislators, judges, IRS employees, and
prospective jurors) about the true limited application
of the income tax laws, to expose any operations of
the IRS that are unauthorized by law, and to put an
end to any illegal collection of taxes from people who
do not owe them. We want to publish several additional
full-page ads in this newspaper, each of which costs
tens of thousands of dollars. Your help is urgently
needed. Please send a donation .In addition, please
order 500 copies of this ad from WTP for $50.
Jefferson said it best, "When the government fears the
people, you have liberty. When the people fear the
government, you have tyranny." Sponsored by We The
People Foundation For Constitutional Education, Inc.,
2458 Ridge Rd., Queensbury, NY 12804,
http://www.givemeliberty.org/
mailto:mailto:acta@capital.net (518) 656-3578 Fax
(518)656-9724
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested in Constitutional Issues? Checkout The Freedom Page radio show
audio tapes.  Just click: http://freedompage.home.mindspring.com/store.html

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Daniel Lannoye"
Subject: IRS IN Perspective
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 03:11:33 -0500

This is an article from NewaMax.com. I consider this a scam alert. Dan.

Subject: Federal Reserve Bank "Fraud"
What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we have it?

Greg Hobbs

November 1, 1999

The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed to implement a
country's fiscal policies. They monitor commercial banks to ensure
that they maintain sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain
solvent and stable. Central banks also do business, such as currency
exchanges and gold transactions, with other central banks.

In theory, a central bank should be good for a country, and they
might be if it wasn't for the fact that they are not owned or
controlled by the government of the country they are serving. Private
central banks, including our FED, operate not in the interest of the
public good but for profit.

There have been three central banks in our nation's history. The
first two, while deceptive and fraudulent, pale in comparison to the
scope and size of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED.
What they all have in common is an insidious practice known
as "fractional banking."

Fractional banking or fractional lending is the ability to create
money from nothing, lend it to the government or someone else and
charge interest to boot. The practice evolved before banks existed.
Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to individuals and
merchants for storage of their gold or silver. The goldsmiths gave
these "depositors" a certificate that showed the amount of gold
stored. These certificates were then used to conduct business.

In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their vaults was
rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move in and out but the large
majority never moved. Sensing a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths
issued double receipts for the gold, in effect creating money
(certificates) from nothing and then lending those certificates
(creating debt) to depositors and charging them interest as well.

Since the certificates represented more gold than actually existed,
the certificates were "fractionally" backed by gold. Eventually some
of these vault operations were transformed into banks and the
practice of fractional banking continued.

Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we examine our first
central bank, the First Bank of the United States (BUS). It was
created, after bitter dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered
for 20 years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used its
control of the currency to defraud the public and establish a legal
form of usury.

This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate, ten dollars of
loans for each dollar they had on deposit. This misuse and abuse of
their public charter continued for the entire 20 years of their
existence. Public outrage over these abuses was such that the charter
was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist in 1811.

The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos, seen by bankers
as another opportunity for easy profits. They influenced Congress to
charter the second central bank, the Second Bank of the United States
(SBUS), in 1816.

The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS sold franchises
and literally doubled the number of banks in a short period of time.
The country began to boom and move westward, which required money.
Using fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank and their
franchisees created the debt/money for the expansion.

Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to shut off the
debt/money, citing the need to control inflation. This action on the
part of the SBUS caused bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then
took control of the assets that were used as security against the
loans.

Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of prosperity and
depression. The central bank caused inflation by creating debt/money
for loans and credit and making these funds readily available. The
economy boomed. Then they used the inflation which they created as an
excuse to shut off the loans/credit/money.

The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to falter or slow
dramatically and large numbers of business and personal bankruptcies
resulted. The central bank then seized the assets used as security
for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers during the boom
was then transferred to the central bank during the bust. And you
always wondered how the big guys ended up with all the marbles.

Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the ups and downs in
our economy over the last 85 years? Think about the depression of the
late '20s and all through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of
debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy and get the
country back on track, but did they? No; in fact, they restricted the
money supply quite severely. We all know the results that occurred
from that action, don't we?

Why would the FED do this? During that period asset values and stocks
were at rock bottom prices. Who do you think was buying everything at
10 cents on the dollar? I believe that it is referred to as
consolidating the wealth. How many times have they already done this
in the last 85 years?

Do you think they will do it again?
Just as an aside at this point, look at today's economy. Things are
booming. Why? Because the FED has been very liberal with its
debt/credit/money. The market is hyper inflated. Who creates
inflation? The FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They
restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they do that? The
market collapses.

Several months back, after certain central banks said they would be
selling large quantities of gold, the price of gold fell to a 25-year
low of about $260 per ounce. The central banks then bought gold.
After buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks announced
that they would be restricting the amount of gold released into the
market for the next five years. The price of gold went up $75.00 per
ounce in just a few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars
did the central banks make with those two press releases?

Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against more severe
economic conditions. Do you think that the private banking families
that own the FED are buying or selling equities at this time?
(Remember: buy low, sell high.) How much more money do you think
these FED owners will make when they restrict the money supply at the
top of this current cycle?

Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions that he thinks
the market is overvalued, or words to that effect. Just a hint that
he will raise interest rates (restrict the money supply), and equity
markets have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians do not
rule central banks, central banks rule governments and politicians.
President Andrew Jackson won the presidency in 1828 with the promise
to end the national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his second
term President Jackson withdrew all government funds from the bank
and on January 8, 1835, paid off the national debt. He is the only
president in history to have this distinction. The charter of the
SBUS expired in 1836.

Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of money, the United
States experienced unprecedented growth for 60 or 70 years, and the
resulting wealth was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get
back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson Aldrich, then Chairman
of the National Monetary Commission, in collusion with
representatives of the European central banks, devised a plan to
pressure and deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would
covertly establish a private central bank.

This bank would assume control over the American economy by
controlling the issuance of its money. After a huge public relations
campaign, engineered by the foreign central banks, the Federal
Reserve Act of 1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas
recess, with many members of the Congress absent. President Woodrow
Wilson, pressured by his political and financial backers, signed it
on December 23, 1913.

The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name carefully selected
and designed to deceive. "Federal" would lead one to believe that
this is a government organization. "Reserve" would lead one to
believe that the currency is being backed by gold and
silver. "System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that one
would not conclude that a new central bank had been created.
In reality, the act created a private, for profit, central banking
corporation owned by a cartel of private banks. Who owns the FED? The
Rothschilds of London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel
Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of Germany; and the
Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and the Rockefeller families of New
York.

Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit corporation in
America that is exempt from both federal and state taxes? The FED
takes in about one trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking
families listed above get all that money.

Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in taxes goes to the
US Treasury to pay for the expenses of the government. Do you want to
know where your tax dollars really go? If you look at the back of any
check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has been endorsed
as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen. Depository for Credit U.S. Treas.
This is in Payment of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you
pay in income taxes is given to those private banking families,
commonly known as the FED, tax free.

Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the concept of creating
money from nothing. You may have heard the term "monetizing the
debt," which is kind of the same thing. As an example, if the US
Government wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does borrow
every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to borrow the money. The
FED calls the Treasury and says print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes
(FRN) in units of one hundred dollars.

The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note, for a total of
$230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then lends the $1 million to the
government at face value plus interest.
To add insult to injury, the government has to create a bond for $1
million as security for the loan. And the rich get richer. The above
was just an example, because in reality the FED does not even print
the money; it's just a computer entry in their accounting system.
To put this on a more personal level, let's use another example.

Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve Banking System. This
membership makes it legal for them to create money from nothing and
lend it to you. Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize
that only a small fraction of the money deposited in their banks is
ever actually withdrawn in the form of cash. Only about 4 percent of
all the money that exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it
is simply a computer entry.

Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some home
improvements. You know that the bank didn't actually take $10,000
from its pile of cash and put it into your pile? They simply went to
their computer and input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They
created, from thin air, a debt which you have to secure with an asset
and repay with interest. The bank is allowed to create and lend as
much debt as they want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio
imposed by the FED.

It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your friendly bank,
doesn't it? How about those loan committees that scrutinize you with
a microscope before approving the loan they created from thin air.
What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They don't want you
to understand what they are doing. People fear what they do not
understand. You are easier to delude and control when you are
ignorant and afraid.

Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the income tax
created? If you guessed 1913, the same year that the FED was created,
you get a gold star. Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going
to use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that debt? The
income tax was created to complete the illusion that real money had
been lent and therefore real money had to be repaid. And you thought
Houdini was good.

So, what can be done? My father taught me that you should always
stand up for what is right, even if you have to stand up alone.
If "We the People" don't take some action now, there may come a time
when "We the People" are no more. You should write a letter or send
an email to each of your elected representatives. Many of our elected
representatives do not understand the FED. Once informed they will
not be able to plead ignorance and remain silent.

Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution specifically says that
Congress is the only body that can "coin money and regulate the value
thereof." The US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone
other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.

Ask your representative, in light of that information, how it is
possible for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, and the Federal Reserve
Bank that it created, to be constitutional. Ask them why this private
banking cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in profits
without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.

Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private
banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation
and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up
around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until
their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered."

Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question is, "Can you now
see what is in store for us if we allow the FED to continue
controlling our country?"

home