I recently read your piece on income tax law and I would like you to address the real argument relating to the language of the law, supreme court decisions and the government’s unwillingness to discuss it in a rational way.
What is your response to the arguments made in the following documentary which is also refered to in many other publications relating to the history of the Federal Reserve?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&hl=en
I assume you’re referrring to this column (as none of the other income tax-related columns I found would relate well to your question)? If not, you may want to link to the correct column.
Care to give a brief summary of the arguments you’re making? Not everyone wants to sit and wait for an online video to load.
You only have to watch the first minute to see that this is standard conspiracy theory nonsense, utter rubbish that has been exploded by every court in America.
Read through the Tax Protester FAQ to see how every tax protester argument is sheer idiocy.
Nothing new here.
Here is the link to the straight dope article about taxes and my question is can anyone here show me the law?
And why is asking questions about an unconstitutional tax system written by this country’s wealthiest bankers, “utter conspiratorial nonsense”?
Note that even Cecil’s column calls the tax protesters “crackpots,” “stupid,” and “not citizens of earth.”
The 16th amendment is not unconstitutional. Only delusional people think so.
Look, I read your “tax protestor” FAQ and didn’t find the law. But even that isn’t the point. I’m not against paying taxes which I do, I am against Congress abdicating its responsibility to the people by allowing a private conglomerate to print our nations money, then loan it to us at interest, then change the way it is collected so it now favors investment over hard work.
Andrew Jackson fought this his whole life and put “I killed the bank” on his tombstone.
George Washington said that the 2 greatest threats to liberty would be standing armies and the central banks.
Truman’s lamented the signing the Federal Reserve Act on his deathbed saying he ruined his country.
Are they “crackpots” too?
But, you would rather sling names at me than answer my question. OK, thanks for all your time and help, glad I didn’t buy the subscription.
So am I
Really? That’s not what this visitor noted on his website.Andrew Jackson loved his wife with a passion that drove him often to violence in her defense, and when she died, he had the stone laid on her grave chiseled with a very long poem extolling her nobility and virtue, and his love for her.
In contrast, the President’s stone beside Rachel’s simply states his identity. To see the pair of stones so similar and yet so differently adorned is an interesting, off-balance juxtaposition and one that says much about the President himself.
Cite? I remember when Truman died, and I don’t recall any of the newspapers reporting any such thing. As for the rest, are you in favor of loans with no interest? As for favoring investors over workers in the tax code, you can blame Congress and the President for that one. The Fed doesn’t write the tax code. (If that’s what you mean.)
Voyager,
I appologize, it wasn’t Truman who signed the Federal Reserve Act it was Wilson.
“A great industrial Nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men”. - Woodrow Wilson, 28th US President
And I am not in favor for loans with no interest, but I don’t think your currency should be a loan that a private company collects interest on. I just recently got interested in this because of the movie at the begining of this thread and was looking for an honest rebuttal. Why did the framers of the constitution think it was important that if there was a direct tax on the American people it should be apportioned? I’ve read Cecil’s columns before and respect them so someone sent me the link to his take on the legitimacy of the US Tax system. But his argument was solely that the correct number of states ratified the 16th amendment, not about the constitutionality or the filing of a 1040 (a violation of your 5th amendment priveledge).
“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws.” - Mayer Amschel Rothschild
“All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” - John Adams
“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance.” - James Madison, 4th US President
“The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. By adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.” - Abraham Lincoln, 16th US President
“This Act (the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913) establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President (Woodrow Wilson) signs the Bill, the invisible government of the Monetary Power will be legalised… The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill.” - Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr (1859 - 1924) Congressman
“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” - Henry Ford
“If congress has the right under the Constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to use themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.” — US President Andrew Jackson
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation then by deflation, the banks and the corporations will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” -Thomas Jefferson, The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)
“In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one. In this manner, by creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power, and we have no interest to pay, to anyone. You see, a legitimate government can both spend and lend money into circulation, while banks can only lend significant amounts of their promissory bank notes, for they can neither give away nor spend but a tiny fraction of the money the people need. Thus, when your bankers here in England place money in circulation, there is always a debt principal to be returned and usury to be paid. The result is that you have always too little credit in circulation to give the workers full employment. You do not have too many workers, you have too little money in circulation, and that which circulates, all bears the endless burden of unpayable debt and usury.” - *Benjamin Franklin Autobiography
“Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders… The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and… manipulates the credit of the United States.” -Sen. Barry Goldwater (R-AZ)
“Those few who can understand the system (check book money and credit) will either be so interested in its profits, or so dependent on it favors, that there will be little opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear it burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” - The Rothschild Brothers of London
Did you read the Tax Protester FAQ that Exapno Mapcase pointed you to? See specifically Tax Protester FAQ and the next two items following it.
What constitutionality are you discussing? An amendment to the constitution specifically allows for income taxes.
As for the 5th amendment, in what way is the requirement that you file a Form 1040 a violation of the 5th Amendment?
No, it’s a bullshit theory that the Federal Reserve system is illegal, and therefore money "isn’t “really money”, and therefore is untaxable.
The theory behind this one is that having to fill out a 1040 constitutes having to testify against yourself. An infantile argument to begin with, and, given the assaults our present kakistocracy actually is making upon the 5th Amendment, I find it downright offensive.
My response to tax protestors is always the same: It’s just barely conceivable that you might have some sort of valid legal argument. Let’s go so far as to grant, for the sake of argument, that you do have a valid argument. Even so, though, I can guarantee you that the government will not accept your argument, and like it or not, the government is sufficiently powerful to see to it that you do, in fact, pay the amount of taxes they say you ought to pay, and may make matters very unpleasant for you in the process. You should just count yourself lucky that you live in a country where the government does follow consistent rules in how it collects the taxes, and that you have an opportunity to vote for officials who will change those rules to something more to your liking.
While very practical, this is a very poor response to someone making arguments on the basis of, you know, logic. If we all just gave in to what the majority wanted, we’d be a poorer nation for it.
My questions were designed to draw out the person who posted originally. You will note that he got the almost immediate upper hand in the debate by having some people chime in with ad hominem arguments, as well as arguments basically saying, “your arguments are dumb, as we all know.” While it may be annoying to address an issue like this ad nauseum, the better response in that case is to refuse to contribute.
In the end, the original poster will be unable to articulate specific reasons why the tax is unconsitutional, or why the 1040 is truly a violation of the 4th Amendment. When shown this to be true through logical refutation, he can make up his mind, or close it, as he desires. At least he won’t have the ability to say, “you act with closed minds yourselves…”
This would be nice if true. However, the OP did not ask questions, but gave a link to a propaganda video equivalent to those by moon hoaxers or 9/11 cranks. And the OP responded to questions with a long list, prepared by somebody else, of utterly irrelevant quotations. Nor has the OP actually read any of the material given in response. I’ve already expressed to the mods what I think of a poster who posts in this fashion.
If the OP wants to ask questions or argue court cases, then fine, let’s all do that. My expectation is that nothing of the sort will happen.
I’ll admit I am new to this issue so it is hard for me to argue specific court cases, my question was not meant to be specifically about income tax. Already you have labeled me a tax evader and called the video I posted at the begining a propaganda film after watching 1 minute of it. I have paid my taxes without protest my entire life and am not looking for a specific way I can get away without contributing to society. But I do wish I had some say as to where the money I contributed goes. I am a concerned citizen trying to figure out how this country got to where it is.
My question is about the general history of the Federal Reserve and IRS, or more specifically why they appear to be against all the safeguards the founding fathers put into the consitution to protect against our government becoming an enemy of the people. Control of the currency was meant to be a function of the government in response to the needs of the people, but nobody so far can provide me any information that shows me the Federal Reserve is controlled by the government (they are a private bank and haven’t been audited as long as I have been alive) or that the IRS is applying the tax code, which has more words than most Webster’s Dictionarys, fairly. I will gladly pay for the common good, but I don’t think that is what taxes are doing anymore. Can you at least tell me how much of our tax money goes to the common good and how much goes to pay the interest the FED is charging on the national debt? Am I wrong are they not charging us interest on our own currency? Are our dollars anything more than debt notes not backed by anything other than the good faith of the US government? And yes I do think that if the IRS can put you in jail for any wrong info on your 1040 that it is a violation of your 5th Amendment privledge against self incrimination?
I must admit I feel more than a little dehumanized by your forum. I have not made a single negative comment toward anyone here and get talked about in the 3rd person as though I am:
a) someone that doesn’t want to pay their fair share
b) completely ignorant (although I will admit I am when it comes to Supreme Court decisions)
c) crazy
d) immature
e) Moon Landing and 9/11 conspiracy theorist
And yes I do think that if they can put you in jail for any wrong info on your 1040 that it is a violation of your 5th Amendment privledge against self incrimination. Although I do grant you I am much more disgusted by the Military Commissions act gutting of this priviledge (among the many they have decided to take away).
Care to call me a Holocost denier now too, Exapno?
Thanks for those of you that actually took the time to consider my argument and respond in an intelligent way, I do know there are plenty of people that have probably done a more articulate job of it on this forum.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#2
http://www.irs.gov/irs/article/0,,id=149200,00.html
Not sure what you mean by this.
Did you miss this?
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#9
And this?
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#9
What evidence would satisfy you? Are you aware that IRS decision can be appealed through the court system?
No. But see,
http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#6; Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
How so?
Thank you GFactor, it will take me a while to read through all that.