WAKE UP SHEEPLE.....
this is another huge realization that everyone should know about.
1. The Internal Revenue Service is not a U.S. Government agency. I
> have numerous exhibits which I use against the IRS such as an Idaho U.S.
> District Court case # 93-405-E-EJL (1993) in which the U.S. litigating
> attorneys denied that the IRS was a U.S. Govt. agency. Congressmen deny
> the IRS as govt. owned. It's a
> corporation held in trust in Puerto Rico and serves the International
> Monetary Fund (IMF), not the United States.
> The Texas Code of Criminal Procedure at Article 2.122, "Special
> investigators," forbids the IRS CID from enforcing federal law in
> Texas. CID agents are not peace officers. They are merely employees of
> a criminal corporation which cannot prove their alleged authority and
> neither can Congress.
>
> 2. The Secretary of the Treasury of the Department of the Treasury is
> the Governor of the IMF and is paid by the Fund not by the United
> States. He's a foreign agent, not a person holding a U.S. Govt.
> position. Title 27 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 250.11
> defines the Secretary of the Treasury as the Secretary of the Treasury
> of Puerto Rico and a Revenue Agent as a Revenue Agent of Puerto Rico.
> This is the only place the definition occurs. The back side of the
> shields of the CID Special Agents have Puerto Rico on them. Do you live
> or work in Puerto Rico?
>
> 3. The Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended is what the IRS is
> enforcing. This code was established by House of Representatives
> Resolution 8300. This is found in Volume 68 of the United States
> Statutes at Large at page 730. Black's Law Dictionary and all others
> define a "resolution" as a municipal opinion only [of the District of
> Columbia] not to be confused with a statute or law. That's what it
> says. The code is not law according to the code as well. See Section
> 7806(b) Construction of title.
>
> 4. Found at Volume 37 U.S. Stat. at Large, page 1785 is the 16th
> Amendment. Here we find that the 16th Amendment was never passed as a
> law involving the Union states. It is "private law" as stated in the
> "act." The 16th Amendment doesn't even have an "enabling clause" which
> all actual laws must have giving them teeth to enforce them.
>
> 5. The UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT which enforce the Internal
> Revenue Code is not a "court of the United States," never having been
> established by an "act of Congress" as required by the Constitution for
> the United States. This court acts as an Article 4 territorial court
> without authority. Each of these judges have the IRS ax hanging over
> their heads and issues biased opinions. These judges also understand
> that the corporate United States (established by the District of
> Columbia Act in 1871) acts only in commerce, not as an actual government
> but as a corporation. That's why the Uniform Commercial Code was
> established. In fact, the 1966 Federal Tax Lien Act was legislated to
> place the Internal Revenue Code under the Uniform Commercial Code where
> tax liens were concerned. These tax liens (commercial in nature) must
> be certified under penalty of perjury as the U.C.C. required that for
> filing purposes the liens must follow state law when filed in the county
> recorder's office or with the state's Secretary of State's office. This
> never happens. Instead of a certified tax lien, the IRS files a "Notice
> of Federal Tax Lien." They file a "notice" in place of an actual lien.
> In Texas this is a felony. The county recorder (county clerk) cannot
> lawfully accept this "Notice." That is also a felony. By accepting
> this bogus instrument, the clerk has turned the Notice into a negotiable
> instrument which is then sold to the corporate United States. This is
> fraud. This also a libel against the name of the party against whom the
> "Notice" is filed. There is no "Affidavit of Claim" which lawfully
> states the nature of the claim against the aggrieved party. This is
> blatant violation of Texas law.
>
> 6. If you are going to complain about taxes, do it for the right
> reasons. Title 26 CFR at Section 1.861-8(f)(1)
> states that the filing requirements pertain to generally nonresident
> aliens who earn compensation within the U.S., foreign corporations doing
> business here, and U.S. citizens who have commercial contracts with the
> United States which are known as "effectively connected income."
>
> My clients do not file or pay an income tax because they do not fit
> the legal mold of the "person" required to file and can prove it in
> court so the IRS never files against them. It's knowledge, not emotion,
> that's powerful. If you have any further comments or questions, please
> either call (713) 661-9144 or e-mail me at rltaylor@dcnet2000.com.
>
now, why wouldnt quotes like these get into the local newspapers and also presented as evidence?
it seems there are enough documents floating around
to stop their lying once and for all?
SURPRISE!
THE INCOME TAX IS VOLUNTARY!
"Our system of taxation is based upon
voluntary assessment and payment, not upon distraint."
-The Supreme CourtFlora v. United States, 362 U.S. 145, pg. 176
In 1986, 99.5 million Americans were tricked into filing and paying federal income taxes when legally; they didn't have to do either. If this statement shocks you, it is only because you and the rest of the nation have been thoroughly deceived by the federal government (with federal courts playing the key role), and an army of accountants, lawyers, and other tax preparers. All of these have a vested interest in keeping you ignorant concerning the real nature of federal income taxes.
That an entire nation of supposedly intelligent human beings could be so thoroughly hood winked, must rank as the greatest and most spectacular hoax of all time, with the phenomenon of millions of Americans scurrying to IRS offices each April 15th comparable to lemmings marching into the sea.
The fact is no provision of the Internal Revenue Code requires anyone to file or pay income taxes. This tax, unlike other internal revenue taxes, is strictly voluntary. This is because a compulsory income tax would violate the Constitution's three taxing clauses, the Bill of Rights and the 16th Amendment-all of which impose restrictions on the government's power and ability to tax income in ways few Americans understand. So, in order for the income tax not to be unconstitutional it had to be written on a noncompulsory basis. However, in order to deceive Americans of this, as well as provide federal courts and the IRS with deceptive passages on which to hang illegal prosecutions and illegal seizures, the Internal Revenue Code was written to make paying income taxes appear mandatory. The government succeeded in doing this by tricking the public into believing that those enforcement provisions of the Code, that apply to other, non-voluntary taxes (such as alcohol and tobacco taxes), also apply to income taxes when in fact, they do not. However, despite such trickery, the IRS still admits that our "income tax laws"' are purely VOLUNTARY!
Indeed, every official IRS pronouncement on this issue admits to the voluntary nature of the income tax, as the following quotations and government documents prove.
"The IRS' primary task is to collect taxes under a voluntary compliance system." (emphasis added)- Jerome Kurtz
Internal Revenue Annual Report, 1980
"Our tax system is based on individual self-assessment and voluntary compliance." (emphasis added) - Mortimer Caplin
Internal Revenue Audit Manual, 1975
"Each year American taxpayers voluntarily file their tax returns and make a special effort to pay the taxes they owe." (emphasis added)
-Johnnie M. Walters
Internal Revenue 1040 Booklet, 1971
"Because the American tax system is based on voluntary compliance and self-assessment, each year taxpayers make their own determination of their tax liability' and file returns reporting the correct tax. (emphasis added)
- WELCOME to the United States of America
Form 1-357, Re. 7-19-80, the United States
Department of Justice, Immigration
and Naturalization Service
Additional proof of the voluntary nature of income taxes can be found in the IRS' own regulations. For example, under Section 601.601, which deals with "Objectives and Standards for Publication" we find the following:
The purpose of publishing revenue rulings and revenue procedures in the Internal Revenue Bulletin is to promote correct and uniform applications of the tax laws by the Internal Revenue Service employees and to assist taxpayers in attaining maximum voluntary compliance. (emphasis added)
On July 8, 1981 the Controller General of the United States issued a report entitled Illegal Tax Protesters Threaten Tax System (GGD-81-83)3, which, on its cover, warned that illegal tax protesters threatened our tax system because they represent a threat to our nation's voluntary tax system. (emphasis added)
Figure 1-1 contains the entire introductory statement of Commissioner Jerome Kurtz that appeared in the 1979 IRS Annual Report in which Kurtz mentions the voluntary nature of income taxes no less than six times, and comments that in 1978 "individuals voluntarily [emphasis added] reported nearly $1.1 trillion in income...." Don't you think that Kurtz knows the difference between "voluntary" and "mandatory," and if he thought that people were required to file he certainly wouldn't claim they did so "voluntarily"? How many of those who Kurtz claimed filed "voluntarily," actually believed they did so "voluntarily," as opposed to believing that they were required to do so?
Figure 1-2 is an excerpt from the Federal Register, Vol. 39, No. 62, dated March 29,1974 which explains that the IRS' "mission...is to encourage ... voluntary compliance."
Figures 1-3 are reproductions from the IRS' latest issue of Understanding Taxes, a slick teaching syllabus sent to our public schools so that the brainwashing of the American public can start at an early age. The syllabus seeks to dupe students into believing that they are required to pay income taxes by using such deceptive language as [note F]: "taxpayers are responsible for paying income taxes as income is earned through withholding." Why doesn't it say that taxpayers are required? The syllabus reluctantly admits the voluntary nature of the income tax no less than three times (at A, E and H) but, referring to the statements at A and B:
(a) How can students "understand the [meaning of] "voluntary compliance" if there are "consequences" for "non-compliance"? (Note how the government specifically avoids saying that "penalties" apply!)
(b) How can there be legal "consequences" if "taxpayers voluntarily report income to the government..."
Even the Supreme Court in Flora V. United States, (as previously noted) recognized and commented on the voluntary nature of the income tax.
You can check with as many dictionaries as you like, and you will find that the word "voluntary" means something done of one's own free will, and without legal obligation. So if compliance with "income tax laws" is required, why would commissioner after commissioner claim that filing is voluntary if it were not? Do you really believe that "voluntary compliance" can mean the same thing as "compulsory compliance"? And if compliance with "income tax laws" is required, i.e. compulsory, why would all of these government documents claim otherwise?
THE MEANING OF VOLUNTARY
COMPLIANCE AND SELF-ASSESSMENT
While the reader might need to have the meaning of "self assessment" explained, the meaning of "voluntary compliance" should be perfectly clear. "Voluntary compliance", can only mean that compliance with "income tax laws" is voluntary and that you can comply or not comply as you choose. Actually the term "voluntary compliance" makes no sense. If something is "voluntary," then the word "compliance" is superfluous. If, on the other hand, "compliance" is compulsory, then any use of the word "voluntary" is nonsensical. It should be perfectly evident why the government contrived this self-contradictory expression. Have you ever heard of it in connection with anything else? The government feared that if it correctly used the solitary word "voluntary" to describe federal income taxes, the nature of the tax would become immediately apparent. So it added the word "compliance," seeking, in this way, to fool the public by the mandatory meaning that word conveys. The government relied on an ingenuous public not to notice that the preceding word, "voluntary," rendered the latter word, "compliance," meaningless. And the American public, in overwhelming measure, didn't let the government down!
Actually, the government is very careful not to officially misrepresent, the voluntary nature of the tax nor to officially tell the public that anything about it is "required." Instead, the government relies on a myriad of misleading techniques that enable it to accomplish the same thing.
One such example is shown in Figure 1-3. Note how the government, even when telling school children that the income tax is voluntary, simultaneously seeks to persuade them that it is not. It does this by discussing the tax in terms that make it sound compulsory, but really do not make it so. With practice, you will be able to spot these deceptions in all government documents. For now, I will help you-though little help should be necessary on this point.
Note that instead of telling readers that Americans are required to file and pay income taxes (if this were really the case), the government seeks to mislead them on this issue by appearing to warn them (at B) about the "consequences for citizens and society of noncompliance"; and that (at C) the "Students will define noncompliance with federal income tax laws as illegal and list the results of noncompliance." Notice it will be the "students" who will define "noncompliance ... as illegal,"- not the government! The government, of course, knows that "noncompliance" is not illegal so it cannot "define" it in this manner. But the government is nevertheless able to convey this by its use of some verbal sleight of hand that neither, the teacher or students will ever notice. The government has truly raised the level of deception to a veritable art form.
At D, the government seeks to mislead students by using such mumbo-jumbo as citizens having an "obligation ... to comply with tax policy decisions." Try figuring out what that means, while you also try figuring out what an inferred legal "obligation to comply" means-when "compliance" is admittedly voluntary.
Continuing with its deception, the government states (at I) that "Students will determine, given sufficient information, whether an individual is required to file a return." So this is how the government deceitfully infers that filing is "required" knowing full well that it is not, and provides another example of the technique referred to earlier. The government, of course, knows full well that it cannot legally tell the students who, "is required to file" (unless it says, "nobody"). So it relies on the students misleading each other-under the influence of their own trusted teacher, who is also totally convinced that filing is mandatory and therefore files regularly. Since the teacher will not be dissuaded from this belief, regardless of how many times the syllabus says that such filing is voluntary, he or she' will be instrumental in fooling her pupils.
Using the public to fool the public is an important aspect of the government's program of deception. In addition, it would never dawn on those school children (who undoubtedly infuse Washington politicians with the same honesty that they associate with George Washington and the cherry tree) that their own government would deliberately seek to deceive them in the manner the syllabus is intended to do. As the government relies on the nation's school teachers to mislead children right in their own classrooms, so too does the government rely on and utilize the nation's media-converting it into a virtual monolithic government propaganda agency. This vast media network is harnessed to work the American public into a virtual filing frenzy around April 15th, little realizing that it has been actually duped into duping the public in like manner.
Interestingly enough (at G), the syllabus correctly states that employees (though the syllabus uses the tricky legal term "taxpayers") "use form W-4 to tell their employers how much to withhold from their pay for taxes." This is an accurate acknowledgement by the IRS that under the "law," it is the employee who supposedly "tells" the employer how much to deduct, and not the other way around. In practice, however, the IRS totally disregards this principle and sends unsigned, computerized letters (see Figure 2-2 in Chapter 2) to employers telling them to disregard what their employees "tell" them to deduct, and to deduct instead, what nameless and faceless IRS employees instruct them to deduct. This is a clear-cut example of how a correct IRS policy statement is illegally disregarded by the Service in practice.
"STRENGTHENING VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE"
In a 200 page study entitled Internal Revenue Service Strategic Plan (Document 69415-85) the IRS provided the nation with a sterling example of "double think," since the document outlined new and "strategic initiatives for strengthening voluntary compliance." Now ask yourself precisely how does a government go about "strengthening" something that is "voluntary"? Roscoe Egger, the IRS Commissioner responsible for the "Strategic Plan," explained that one of the principle reasons for the "Plan" was the problems caused by so called "tax protesters." However, throughout that document Mr. Egger consistently refers and admits to the voluntary nature of the income tax. For example:
================
119293!! |
