Archive for June, 2013


Get ready, this might be the big one. You know, the start of the one world currency bankster monopoly. I’m sure it’ll still be a money from nothing scam, more pieces of paper that in reality are worthless.

Listen to Ms. Hudes closely, what she is stating is outrageous and damming. With a big BUT, listen to what she says toward the end. Is she being allowed to say all this to promote a one world currency? I don’t know but, the powers that be have been perpetrating this money junkie scam for decades. What you think you have and what you really have are two different things. I’m sure your all well aware if you don’t pay your taxes to the strong arm of the fed (irs) they will come and take everything you paid to much for as a banker slave.

The cost for farming, manufacturing and services should have declined due to technology which saves time and money but, have increased enormously since 1913. The value of the USD has declined due to manipulation of the system. The dollar was once worth a dollar in precious metal, today its worth about 2 cents in the same metals, thanks to the federal reserve act. Where has all this wealth vanished too? Wait a sec, I’ll bet Leahy got some, he certainly knows the game by now.

At 1:45 she states who she gave this information to. Does the name Leahy ring a bell?

 

 

2 Cents on NSA

confidencial head

2 Cents on NSA

I’m sure everyone has read and heard the news regarding NSA spying on its citizen’s. This is certainly nothing new, only on a grander scale. Lincoln, the not so honest did it during the War Between the States. Abe shut down almost 400 newspapers and imprisoned 1000’s of his dissenters. He accomplished those feats all through spying. All the while creating an atmosphere of war, pitting his fellow citizens against each other.

The USA Corporation has had the power to control communications from the time of Roosevelt. Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency due to United States bankruptcy. In fact, there are now in effect four Presidentially-proclaimed states of national emergency, the corporation is still bankrupt. More so now than in 1933. When Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. (The US is allowed to exist “as is” for other reasons but, that’s another story)

Get the War and Emergency Powers Acts and the 1973 Senate Report 93-549 of the 93rd Congress, 1st Session and read it carefully. In emergency…the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and the list goes on. (22 U.S.C.A. 286d.1977; See: Executive Order 12919 signed by President Bill Clinton)

The individual States due to being sub-corporations of the DC Corporation have the same ability to spy on its citizen’s. Much of all this has happened because we are all subjects of British rule and their money monopoly. Rothschild is their royal financier operating out of the city state of London and Israel (Goddess Isis = IS, the sun God Ra = RA and Elohim = EL, this is also another story).

In December, 1781, it was moved in the British House of Commons that a resolution should be adopted declaring “That all farther attempts to reduce the Americans to obedience by force would be ineffectual, and injurious to the true interests of Great Britain.” The true interests of the King were wealth and power. With the cooperation of his loyal “Esquires” (British Nobility), namely Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and John Jay, the King negotiated and signed the terms of the Paris Treaty of 1783 from which his future heirs would benefit. The Founding Fathers and King George worked hand- in-hand to install a Central Government over the American colonists and to bind them to a permanent debt that could never be paid. We’re more aware of this un-payable debt now than ever before in history.

Windsor castle

In the first paragraph of the Treaty of 1783, King George III is recognized as “King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland” and “arch- treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire and of the United States of America.” In the first article of the same Treaty, the King makes a claim to continue receiving gold, silver and copper (real money) as gain for his business venture. In article 4, the United States agrees to pay all bona fide debts to the British King. In Article 6, the King sets his terms for his continued collection of debts and damages. In Article 12, the King dictates the terms of where and with whom the United States can trade. In Article 18, the United States agrees to a wide variety of material that would be subject to confiscation if Britain found said material shipped to its enemy’s ports.

So many people think this country is a beacon of freedom, think again.

During a state of emergency the Constitution is, as Bush said, only a piece of paper. Honestly, do you need a piece of paper to tell you what your freedoms should be?

It amazes me that the people have been so bumbed down that they think anything the all powerful government and it’s 100’s of agencies do is good for the nation. IF they decided to reduce the population of north America by 30% would that be fine?

DHS Admits Boston Training Drill Involving Backpack Explosives  Planned Months Before Marathon

According to the DHS documents acquired by the Boston Globe, the agents were planning on conducting training exercises centered around a fictitious terrorist group called ‘Free America Citizens’, a group that would plant backpacks full of explosives around Boston that the detectives would be forced to track down. Ultimately, of course, this ended up happening at the Boston Marathon itself with precise accuracy. The Globe report reads that “the city was hit with a real terrorist attack executed in a frighteningly similar fashion.”

Read more: http://www.storyleak.com/dhs-boston-training-drill-backpack-explosives/#ixzz2WJCYuuon

The disturbing fact here is that all attacks of this nature have taken place around training drills involving DHS and related agency’s. It would appear that there planned with a outcome for future restraints on liberties and one step closer to martial law.

What we have under the big dome is a bunch of liars, if their not lying then they cover for the liars. Will this NSA scandal be the straw that broke the camels back. Trying to get any information, even in a congressional hearing is like trying to find a needle in a hay stack. But, we don’t know that Ed Snowden was put up the blowing of the whistle.  In this event to start another scandal to hide one that could be 10 times worst. That would be the IRS and the 16th amendment, the strong arm control for the federal reserve.

IF the Prism system is so high tech how come they haven’t arrested all the criminals in D.C.? The reason is because they have a free ride and a lot of practice when it comes to corruption and not telling the truth.

 

Untruths from an earlier time

Wizards of Was

Wizards of Was

Bill Cooper predicts Sept. 11. 2001 & Gun Control

Cooper did this long before “The best alternative media money can buy”. Alex Jones, tried to take credit for it on his broadcast talk radio. Of course this was proven in a heartbeat that Mr. Jones was plagiarizing Mr. Cooper

More here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAgTFWglHrc

With the entire amount of BS going on within the halls of the Whitehouse and within the government body whole:  You have to wonder about the cognitive input; Where is all this going? Is all this crap intentional to keep our minds reeling in confusion?  I don’t know but, sometimes I think the twisted plan is having some sort of bizarre impact on the right side of my brain.

Benghazi Scandal,

I-R-S Gate

Prism tap

Syria

Israel

New World Order

National Debt

UFO’s

War Crimes

Gun Control,

Drones (US)

Zionist world control

Georgia Guide Stones

Global (I’m freezing) Warming

Gov. ammo purchases (billions)

Militarization of Police

Hidden Planets

Banking

Secret Weapons

Trade Center (WTC) insider Collapse

Relocation F-E-M-a camps

MK-Ultra

GMO foods

Iran

GEO engineering chem-trails

Cults

Imperial Wars

Mass burial plastic coffins

Harrp weather project

Illegal Wars

Government gun & drug trafficking

Corrupted and bought politicians

Police state

Religious sex scandals

Fake moon landings

Media control

Derivatives

Fiat thin air currency

Libya gold (gone)

Gun control, and last I can think of right now

Conspiracy Theory.

The list above is now escaping the box while gaining reason from thinking people. Recently becoming known as Conspiracy Truth, not conspiracy. If I may; the new term should be “Conspiracy Prophesy”.  Giving promulgation as the above listed is now becoming known to be progressively underway as “agency projects” evolving the present and future consciousness of the ‘Powers That Be”. These people are afraid of the “whole people” and hoping not to be the “powers that where” The great and powerful wizards of Was……………… The courageous men and women that have brought this and yet to be published information to the alternative media, making us all aware to new insights and understanding, should be rewarded with our deep felt thanks and gratitude for the wake-up call.

By no means is the list above close to complete considering all the world events that are affecting us today and well into the future. 2025: will the voice be load and expressing “What is Freedom” or will it be a duct tape society functioning as told, trained in the public schools to believe what your taught. Washed with mind control, entertainment, prescription drugs and a destination all planned out for you and your children?

Dammed will be the Wizards of Was

vtfree2

Nukes used in Syria???

nuke is

 

If, and I mean if this has any validity (using nukes) there’s a whole new game of war starting. Start small and escalate to the major weapons of destruction. The conflict in the middle east is out of control and I think that many leading officials around the world are waking up to this fact. Are we on a path of destruction that will finally come home to roost here on US soil. It certainly is starting to look that way. We can not keep the charade of being the protector going much longer. The US seems to be putting the noose around it’s own neck, time is short, hold on to your hats ladies and gentlemen, this isn’t good.

Start below at about 15 min in:

 

Striking evidence of the use of American EPW (Earth Penetrating Weapons) nuclear weapons in Syria has come to light. Experts say the proof is irrefutable.

Dramatic video footage from Syria has revealed startling evidence that counters Israel’s claims of “surgical strikes” on weapons headed to Lebanon.

What were said to be air strikes is now proven to have actually been artillery, something easily discernible to even an untrained observer.

What happens next is shocking. While artillery shells rain down on Syrian army positions, mobile Israeli artillery in direct support and even accompanying rebel forces inside Syria, a huge explosion occurs.

After analysis, it had become clear, Syria had come under attack by Israel using, not just nuclear weapons, but an American nuclear bunker buster bomb, one of several supplied to Israel to use against Iran, one of the last acts of the Bush/Cheney administration.

Submitted for analysis, the footage was compared with tests of the 37,000-pound MOB (Massive Ordnance Penetrator), designed by Boeing to be used against Iran’s underground facilities. There was no similarity whatsoever noted between the Syrian “event” and a conventional “bunker buster”

More here: http://beforeitsnews.com/eu/2013/05/details-of-israels-nuclear-weapon-used-on-syria-emerge-2520436.html

 

Q & A about the I-R-S

 

Given the scandals surrounding the IRS, which is nothing new I decided to drag this out of my archives. Originally this was a list of 31 questions; I’ve shortened the list to less pages due to length, this was lengthily and sort of still is.  Some of the answers have been shortened also. Many people are unaware the history and the illegality of this strong arm of the federal reserve.  

 

IRS under the looking glass

IRS under the looking glass

 

 

Questions and Answers about

the Internal Revenue Service

 

certified by Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.

 

Common Law Copyright

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

 1.               Is the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) an organization within the U.S. Department of the Treasury?

Answer:  No.  The IRS is not an organization within the United States Department of the Treasury.  The U.S. Department of the Treasury was organized by statutes now codified in Title 31 of the United States Code, abbreviated “31 U.S.C.”  The only mention of the IRS anywhere in 31 U.S.C. §§ 301‑310 is an authorization for the President to appoint an Assistant General Counsel in the U.S. Department of the Treasury to be the Chief Counsel for the IRS.  See 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2).

At footnote 23 in the case of Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, 441 U.S. 281 (1979), the U.S. Supreme Court admitted that no organic Act for the IRS could be found, after they searched for such an Act all the way back to the Civil War, which ended in the year 1865 A.D.  The Guarantee Clause in the U.S. Constitution guarantees the Rule of Law to all Americans (we are to be governed by Law and not by arbitrary bureaucrats).  See Article IV, Section 4.  Since there was no organic Act creating it, IRS is not a lawful organization.

2.               If not an organization within the U.S. Department of the Treasury, then what exactly is the IRS?

Answer:  The IRS appears to be a collection agency working for foreign banks and operating out of Puerto Rico under color of the Federal Alcohol Administration (“FAA”).  But the FAA was promptly declared unconstitutional inside the 50 States by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of U.S. v. Constantine, 296 U.S. 287 (1935), because Prohibition had already been repealed.

In 1998, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit identified a second “Secretary of the Treasury” as a man by the name of Manual Díaz-Saldaña.  See the definitions of “Secretary” and “Secretary or his delegate” at 27 CFR 26.11 (formerly 27 CFR 250.11), and the published decision in Used Tire International, Inc. v. Manual Díaz-Saldaña, court docket number 97‑2348, September 11, 1998.  Both definitions mention Puerto Rico.

When all the evidence is examined objectively, IRS appears to be a money laundry, extortion racket, and conspiracy to engage in a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1951 and 1961 et seq. (“RICO”).  Think of Puerto RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act);  in other words, it is an organized crime syndicate operating under false and fraudulent pretenses.  See also the Sherman Act and the Lanham Act.

3.               By what legal authority, if any, has the IRS established offices inside the 50 States of the Union?

Answer:  After much diligent research, several investigators have concluded that there is no known Act of Congress, nor any Executive Order, giving IRS lawful jurisdiction to operate within any of the 50 States of the Union.

Their presence within the 50 States appears to stem from certain Agreements on Coordination of Tax Administration (“ACTA”), which officials in those States have consummated with the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.  A template for ACTA agreements can be found at the IRS Internet website and in the Supreme Law Library on the Internet.

However, those ACTA agreements are demonstrably fraudulent, for example, by expressly defining “IRS” as a lawful bureau within the U.S. Department of the Treasury.  (See Answer to Question 1 above.)  Moreover, those ACTA agreements also appear to violate State laws requiring competitive bidding before such a service contract can be awarded by a State government to any subcontractor.  There is no evidence to indicate that ACTA agreements were reached after competitive bidding processes;  on the contrary, the IRS is adamant about maintaining a monopoly syndicate.

4.               Can IRS legally show “Department of the Treasury” on their outgoing mail?

Answer:  No.  It is obvious that such deceptive nomenclature is intended to convey the false impression that IRS is a lawful bureau or department within the U.S. Department of the Treasury.  Federal laws prohibit the use of United States Mail for fraudulent purposes.  Every piece of U.S. Mail sent from IRS with “Department of the Treasury” in the return address, is one count of mail fraud.  See also 31 U.S.C. 333.

5.               Does the U.S. Department of Justice have power of attorney to represent the IRS in federal court?

Answer:  No.  Although the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) does have power of attorney to represent federal agencies before federal courts, the IRS is not an “agency” as that term is legally defined in the Freedom of Information Act or in the Administrative Procedures Act.  The governments of all federal Territories are expressly excluded from the definition of federal “agency” by Act of Congress.  See 5 U.S.C. 551(1)(C).

Since IRS is domiciled in Puerto Rico (RICO?), it is thereby excluded from the definition of federal agencies which can be represented by the DOJ.  The IRS Chief Counsel, appointed by the President under authority of 31 U.S.C. 301(f)(2), can appear, or appoint a delegate to appear in federal court on behalf of IRS and IRS employees.  Again, see the Answer to Question 1 above.  As far as powers of attorney are concerned, the chain of command begins with Congress, flows to the President, and then to the IRS Chief Counsel, and NOT to the U.S. Department of Justice.

You pay We play

You pay We play

6.               Were the so-called 14th and 16th amendments properly ratified?

Answer:  No.  Neither was properly ratified.  In the case of People v. Boxer (December 1992), docket number #S-030016, U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer fell totally silent in the face of an Application to the California Supreme Court by the People of California, for an ORDER compelling Senator Boxer to witness the material evidence against the so-called 16th amendment.

That so‑called “amendment” allegedly authorized federal income taxation, even though it contains no provision expressly repealing two Constitutional Clauses mandating that direct taxes must be apportioned.  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court have both ruled that repeals by implication are not favored.  See Crawford Fitting Co. et al. v. J.T. Gibbons, Inc., 482 U.S. 437, 442 (1987).

The material evidence in question was summarized in AFFIDAVIT’s that were properly executed and filed in that case.  Boxer fell totally silent, thus rendering those affidavits the “truth of the case.”  The so‑called 16th amendment has now been correctly identified as a major fraud upon the American People and the United States.  Major fraud against the United States is a serious federal offense.  See 18 U.S.C. 1031.

Similarly, the so-called 14th amendment was never properly ratified either.  In the case of Dyett v. Turner, 439 P.2d  266, 270 (1968), the Utah Supreme Court recited numerous historical facts proving, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the so‑called 14th amendment was likewise a major fraud upon the American People.

Those facts, in many cases, were Acts of the several State Legislatures voting for or against that proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution.  The Supreme Law Library has a collection of references detailing this major fraud.

The U.S. Constitution requires that constitutional amendments be ratified by three-fourths of the several States.  As such, their Acts are governed by the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the U.S. Constitution.  See Article IV, Section 1.

Judging by the sheer amount of litigation its various sections have generated, particularly Section 1, the so‑called 14th amendment is one of the worst pieces of legislation ever written in American history.  The phrase “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” is properly understood to mean “subject to the municipal jurisdiction of Congress.”  (See Answer to Question 19 below.)

For this one reason alone, the Congressional Resolution proposing the so-called 14th amendment is provably vague and therefore unconstitutional.  See 14 Stat. 358-359, Joint Resolution No. 48, June 16, 1866.

7.               Where are the statutes that create a specific liability for federal income taxes?

Answer:  Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) contains no provisions creating a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A.  Aside from the statutes which apply only to federal government employees, pursuant to the Public Salary Tax Act, the only other statutes that create a specific liability for federal income taxes are those itemized in the definition of “Withholding agent” at IRC section 7701(a)(16).  For example, see IRC section 1461.  A separate liability statute for “employment” taxes imposed by subtitle C is found at IRC section 3403.

After a worker authorizes a payroll officer to withhold taxes, typically by completing Form W‑4, the payroll officer then becomes a withholding agent who is legally and specifically liable for payment of all taxes withheld from that worker’s paycheck.  Until such time as those taxes are paid in full into the Treasury of the United States, the withholding agent is the only party who is legally liable for those taxes, not the worker.  See IRC section 7809 (“Treasury of the United   States”).

If the worker opts instead to complete a Withholding Exemption Certificate, consistent with IRC section 3402(n), the payroll officer is not thereby authorized to withhold any federal income taxes.  In this latter situation, there is absolutely no liability for the worker or for the payroll officer;  in other words, there is no liability PERIOD, specifically because there is no withholding agent.

8.               Can a federal regulation create a specific liability, when no specific liability is created by the corresponding statute?

Answer:  No.  The U.S. Constitution vests all legislative power in the Congress of the United States.  See Article I, Section 1.  The Executive Branch of the federal government has no legislative power whatsoever.  This means that agencies of the Executive Branch, and also the federal Courts in the Judicial Branch, are prohibited from making law.

If an Act of Congress fails to create a specific liability for any tax imposed by that Act, then there is no liability for that tax.  Executive agencies have no authority to cure any such omission by using regulations to create a liability.

“[A]n administrative agency may not create a criminal offense or any liability not sanctioned by the lawmaking authority, especially a liability for a tax or inspection fee.”  See Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Acker, 361 U.S. 87, 4 L.Ed.2d 127, 80 S.Ct. 144 (1959), and Independent Petroleum Corp. v. Fly, 141 F.2d 189 (5th Cir. 1944) as cited at 2 Am Jur 2d, p. 129, footnote 2 (1962 edition) [bold emphasis added].  However, this cite from American Jurisprudence has been removed from the 1994 edition of that legal encyclopedia.

9.               The federal regulations create an income tax liability for what specific classes of people?

Answer:  The regulations at 26 CFR 1.1-1 attempted to create a specific liability for all “citizens of the United States” and all “residents of the United   States”.  However, those regulations correspond to IRC section 1, which does not create a specific liability for taxes imposed by subtitle A.

Therefore, these regulations are an overly broad extension of the underlying statutory authority; as such, they are unconstitutional, null and void ab initio (from the beginning, in Latin).  The Acker case cited above held that federal regulations can not exceed the underlying statutory authority.  (See Answer to Question 8 above.)

10.           How many classes of citizens are there, and how did this number come to be?

Answer:  There are two (2) classes of citizens:  State Citizens and federal citizens.  The first class originates in the Qualifications Clauses in the U.S. Constitution, where the term “Citizen of the United   States” is used.  (See 1:2:2, 1:3:3 and 2:1:5.)  Notice the UPPER-CASE “C” in “Citizen”.

The pertinent court cases have defined the term “United States” in these Clauses to mean “States United”, and the full term means “Citizen of ONE OF the States United”.  See People v. De La Guerra, 40 Cal. 311, 337 (1870);  Judge Pablo De La Guerra signed the California Constitution of 1849, when California first joined the Union.  Similar terms are found in the Diversity Clause at Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, and in the Privileges and Immunities Clause at Article IV, Section 2, Clause 1.  Prior to the Civil War, there was only one (1) class of Citizens under American Law.  See the holding in Pannill v. Roanoke, 252 F. 910, 914‑915 (1918), for definitive authority on this key point.

The second class originates in the 1866 Civil Rights Act, where the term “citizen of the United States” is used.  This Act was later codified at 42 U.S.C. 1983.  Notice the lower-case “c” in “citizen”.  The pertinent court cases have held that Congress thereby created a municipal franchise primarily for members of the Negro race, who were freed by President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation (a war measure), and later by the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery and involuntary servitude.  Compelling payment of a “tax” for which there is no liability statute is tantamount to involuntary servitude, and extortion.

13.           What is a “Withholding agent”?

Answer:  (See Answer to Question 7 first.)  The term “Withholding agent” is legally defined at IRC section 7701(a)(16).  It is further defined by the statutes itemized in that section, e.g. IRC 1461 where liability for funds withheld is clearly assigned.  In plain English, a “withholding agent” is a person who is responsible for withholding taxes from a worker’s paycheck, and then paying those taxes into the Treasury of the United States, typically on a quarterly basis.  See IRC section 7809.

One cannot become a withholding agent unless workers first authorize taxes to be withheld from their paychecks.  This authorization is typically done when workers opt to execute a valid W‑4 “Employee’s Withholding Allowance Certificate.”  In plain English, by signing a W‑4 workers designate themselves as “employees” and certify they are allowing withholding to occur.

If workers do not execute a valid W‑4 form, a company’s payroll officer is not authorized to withhold any federal income taxes from their paychecks.  In other words, the payroll officer does not have “permission” or “power of attorney” to withhold taxes, until and unless workers authorize or “allow” that withholding ‑‑ by signing Form W‑4 knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily.

Pay particular attention to the term “Employee” in the title of this form.  A properly executed Form W‑4 creates the presumption that the workers wish to be treated as if they were “employees” of the federal government.  Obviously, for people who do not work for the federal government, such a presumption is a legal fiction, at best.

15.           What is “tax evasion” and who might be guilty of this crime?

Answer:  “Tax evasion” is the crime of evading a lawful tax.  In the context of federal income taxes, this crime can only be committed by persons who have a legal liability to pay, i.e. the withholding agent.  If one is not employed by the federal government, one is not subject to the Public Salary Tax Act unless one chooses to be treated “as if” one is a federal government “employee.”  This is typically done by executing a valid Form W‑4.

However, as discussed above, Form W‑4 is not mandatory for workers who are not “employed” by the federal government.  Corporations chartered by the 50 States of the Union are technically “foreign” corporations with respect to the IRC;  they are decidedly not the federal government, and should not be regarded “as if” they are the federal government, particularly when they were never created by any Act of Congress.

16.           Why does IRS Form 1040 not require a Notary Public to notarize a taxpayer’s signature?

Answer:  This question is one of the fastest ways to unravel the fraudulent nature of federal income taxes.  At 28 U.S.C. section 1746, Congress authorized written verifications to be executed under penalty of perjury without the need for a Notary Public, i.e. to witness one’s signature.

This statute identifies two different formats for such written verifications:  (1) those executed outside the “United States” and (2) those executed inside the “United States”.  These two formats correspond to sections 1746(1) and 1746(2), respectively.

What is extremely revealing in this statute is the format for verifications executed “outside the United States”.  In this latter format, the statute adds the qualifying phrase “under the laws of the United States of America”.

Clearly, the terms “United States” and “United States of   America” are both used in this same statute.  They are not one and the same.  The former refers to the federal government — in the U.S. Constitution and throughout most federal statutes.  The latter refers to the 50 States that are united by, and under, the U.S. Constitution.  28 U.S.C. 1746 is the only federal statute in all of Title 28 of the United States Code that utilizes the term “United States of America”, as such.

17.           Does the term “United States” have multiple legal meanings and, if so, what are they?

Answer:  Yes.  The term has several meanings.  The term “United States” may be used in any one of several senses.  [1] It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations.  [2] It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty of the United States extends, or [3] it may be the collective name of the States which are united by and under the Constitution.  See Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) [bold emphasis, brackets and numbers added for clarity].

18.           Is the term “income” defined in the IRC and, if not, where is it defined?

Answer:  The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has already ruled that the term “income” is not defined anywhere in the IRC:  “The general term ‘income’ is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code.”  U.S. v. Ballard, 535 F.2d 400, 404 (8th Circuit, 1976).

Moreover, in Mark Eisner v. Myrtle H. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920), the high Court told Congress it could not legislate any definition of “income” because that term was believed to be in the U.S. Constitution.  The Eisner case was predicated on the ratification of the 16th amendment, which would have introduced the term “income” into the U.S. Constitution for the very first time (but only if that amendment had been properly ratified).

20.           What does it mean if my State is not mentioned in any of the federal income tax statutes?

The general rule is that federal government powers must be expressed and enumerated.  For example, the U.S. Constitution is a grant of enumerated powers.  If a power is not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution, then Congress does not have any authority to exercise that power.  This rule is tersely expressed in the Ninth Amendment, in the Bill of Rights.

If California is not mentioned in any of the federal income tax statutes, then those statutes have no force or effect within that State.  This is also true of all 50 States.

21.           In what other ways is the IRC deliberately vague, and what are the real implications for the average American?

There are numerous other ways in which the IRC is deliberately vague.  The absence of any legal definition for the term “income” is a classic deception.  The IRS enforces the Code as a tax on everything that “comes in,” but nothing could be further from the truth.  “Income” is decidedly NOT everything that “comes in.”

More importantly, the fact that this vagueness is deliberate is sufficient grounds for concluding that the entire Code is null, void and unconstitutional, for violating our fundamental Right to know the nature and cause of any accusation, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights.

Whether the vagueness is deliberate or not, any statute is unconstitutionally void if it is vague.  If a statute is void for vagueness, the situation is the same as if it had never been enacted at all, and for this reason it can be ignored entirely.

22.           Has Title 26 of the United States Code (“U.S.C.”) ever been enacted into positive law, and what are the legal implications if Title 26 has not been enacted into positive law?

Answer:  No.  Another, less obvious case of deliberate deception is the statute at IRC section 7851(a)(6)(A), where it states that the provisions of subtitle F shall take effect on the day after the date of enactment of “this title”.  Because the term “this title” is not defined anywhere in the IRC, least of all in the section dedicated to definitions, one is forced to look elsewhere for its meaning, or to derive its meaning from context.

Throughout Title 28 of the United States Code — the laws which govern all the federal courts — the term “this title” clearly refers to Title 28.  This fact would tend to support a conclusion that “this title”, as that term is used in the IRC, refers to Title 26 of the United States Code.  However, Title 26 has never been enacted into positive law, as such.

Even though all federal judges may know the secret meaning of “this title”, they are men and women of UNcommon intelligence.  The U.S. Supreme Court’s test for vagueness is violated whenever men and women of common intelligence must necessarily guess at the meaning and differ as to the application of a vague statute.  See Connally et al. v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391 (1926).  Thus, federal judges are applying the wrong test for vagueness.

Accordingly, the provisions of subtitle F have never taken effect.  (“F” is for enForcement!)  This subtitle contains all of the enforcement statutes of the IRC, e.g. filing requirements, penalties for failure to file and tax evasion, grants of court jurisdiction over liens, levies and seizures, summons enforcement and so on.

In other words, the IRC is a big pile of Code without any teeth; as such, it can impose no legal obligations upon anyone, not even people with dentures!

28.           Can the IRS levy bank accounts without a valid court order?

Answer:  No.  The Fifth Amendment prohibits all deprivations of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.  Due Process of Law is another honored and well developed feature of American constitutional practice.  Put simply, it requires Notice and Hearing before any property can be seized by any federal government employees, agents, departments or agencies.

A levy against a bank account is a forced seizure of property, i.e. the funds on deposit in that account.  No such seizure can occur unless due process of law has first run its course.  This means notice, hearing, and deliberate adjudication of all the pertinent issues of law and fact.

Only after this process has run its proper or “due” course, can a valid court order be issued.  The holding in U.S. v. O’Dell, 160 F.2d 304 (6th Cir. 1947), makes it very clear that the IRS can only levy a bank account after first obtaining a Warrant of Distraint, or court ORDER.  And, of course, no court ORDER could ever be obtained unless all affected Parties had first enjoyed their “day in court.”

29.           Do federal income tax revenues pay for any government services and, if so, which government services are funded by federal income taxes?

Answer:  No.  The money trail is very difficult to follow, in this instance, because the IRS is technically a trust with a domicile in Puerto Rico.  See 31 U.S.C. 1321(a)(62).  As such, their records are protected by laws which guarantee the privacy of trust records within that territorial jurisdiction, provided that the trust is not also violating the Sherman Antitrust Act.

 

 

 

For Whom the Bell Tolled

Assassinations:

president

When you look at a list of the people that committed assassinations you have to wonder where the notion came from, where they set up as patsy’s. More or less put up to their despicable deeds done dirt cheap, by an inside/outside source.  Not committed on their own accord. Will we ever know, No, their dead. At the same time we have to ask our self’s what about the witnesses of certain modern day events. Have they been suicided or disappeared due to the official story? Again, we will never know, dead men don’t speak.

A very solid segment of the below listed culprits have been proven to of had an in/outside influence. Such as governmental cabinet members and cia /fbi agents or unknown agencies involved with the banking cartels and members of the secret second government (black ops).  Some even said to be part of the MK-Ultra (mind control 1960/80’s) project to carry out a specific mission. How do we know? We don’t.

What follows is what I think is an interesting list of assassination or attempted assassination history. This is a primer to do your own investigation into the unknown history we didn’t learn in the controlled public dumb us down schools.

20th Century:

Giuseppe Zangara (F. Roosevelt, 1933) was born Sept. 7, 1900, in Italy, immigrated at age 23. Even by assassins’ standards he was short, just 5” Don’t forget the “New Deal” was a really a “RAW DEAL”.  It changed our free country as  much as the tyrant Lincoln did. Did Zangara know this and was used for the event.

Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola (Truman, 1950), born 1915 and 1927 respectively, were both Puerto Rican. Collazo was the youngest of 14. Both came to the U.S. , Collazo after his father’s death, to work; Torresola, at 18, to work for the Nationalists. Both were short by U.S. standards, but typical of smaller statured Puerto Ricans, Collazo 5’6” and Torresola 5’5”. Both had daughters from 1st marriages. Both knew extreme poverty. Did they lose family during the war?

Lee Harvey Oswald (J.F. Kennedy, 1963) was born Oct. 18, 1939, in New Orleans, of medium height, slight build. The 3rd child of 3, born to two fathers. His father died before he was born. His mother, who married, separated, reconciled, then divorced while Lee was young, found the children too much for her, sent them to orphanages, boarding schools, and finally the military. Oswald, was killed by Jack Ruby (Rubenstein) a Zionist mafia night club owner  before standing trial. The Warren Commission was called to investigate Kennedy’s death and found that Oswald had acted alone to kill Kennedy, we now know different. JFK made a lot of enemies by trying to do better for the union of states, particularly with the central banking system and Israel nuclear weapons program, which they have at least 400 now and have not signed any treaties.

James Earl Ray ( M.L.King, Jr., 1968), born Mar. 10, 1928, on the Illinois/Missouri border, of the American “poor white” parents; his father was an escaped prisoner; thus, they moved around a lot. Ray was very small; once squeezed through blades of fan to rob a bar. He had a few casual relationships, but the only close friends were his brothers; a loner, the 1st of 9 children. It has now come to light the cia was heavily involved. King was murdered because the trouble he was causing with the vote manipulation. Believe it or no,t the US did not want black votes counting in an election.

Sirhan Sirhan (R. Kennedy, 1968), was born Mar. 19, 1944, in Jerusalem to Palestinian Christians. His father was a successful civil servant, until Jerusalem was taken by Israel. The family had to flee, becoming refugees for 9 years before coming to U.S., when Sirhan was 14 the 5th of 7 children. Their father abandoned them and returned to Palestine. Again, we find inside maneuvering by governmental agencies. Bobby had plans to continue in his brothers footsteps.

Sara Jane Moore (Ford, 1975), born Feb. 13, 1930, Charleston, WV, American (half-Jewish) family, 2nd of 5 children. She was a short,slim, attractive young woman, dumpy as she grew older. She married 5 times, had 3 children (left with her parents),

John Hinckley (Reagan, 1981), born May 29, 1955, in Ardmore, OK, 3rd of 3 children; “short,” from 160 lbs to overweight; no real friendships or relationships apart from his obsession with actress Jody Foster. Reagan was shot because he wanted to know where the gold of Fort Knox was and what the hell was going on in area 51. He never mentioned either again, he was in his place.

Frank Corder (Clinton, 1994), born May 26, 1956, 2nd of 2 children. Recently divorced. Father died of cancer year before attempt. The Clintons have left a lot of bodies behind in their aftermath to the top. I’m surprised they have lived this long, with all those enemies.

Arthur Bremer (Wallace, 1972), born Aug. 21, 1950, in Milwaukee, short, pudgy, and a social outcast, no social skills and no successful relationships. He was 4th of 5 children of an alcoholic father and a mother, a “foundling,” ever emotionally distant. TPTB wanted him gone because he knew what was happening in the WH.

Leon Czolgosz  (William McKinley)  was shot two times by anarchist Czolgosz while the president was visiting the Pan-American Exhibit in Buffalo, New York on September 6, 1901. He died on September 14, 1901. Czolgosz stated that he shot McKinley because he was an enemy of working people. He was convicted of the murder and electrocuted on October 29, 1901.

19th century

Charles Guiteau, (James Garfield) In the spring of 1881, Guiteau, who had been a Republican Party supporter, became embittered after being refused a government job. He decided to assassinate President Garfield, and began tracking his movements. On July 2, 1881, Garfield was at a railroad station in Washington, D.C., planning to board a train to travel to a speaking engagement. Guiteau, armed with a large caliber revolver, came up behind Garfield and shot him twice, once in the arm and once in the back. I guess he couldn’t hold onto that large cal. Revolver.

John Wilkes Booth (Abraham Lincoln) On April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated while attending a play at Ford’s Theater in Washington, D.C. Actor John Wilkes Booth shot him in the back of the head before jumping onto the stage and escaping to Maryland. Lincoln died on April 15th. April 26th, Booth was found hiding in a barn which was set on fire. He was then shot and killed. Eight conspirators were punished for their roles. Read “Lincoln , Unmasked” and you will know why.

Richard Lawrence, (Andrew Jackson) On January 30, 1835, Jackson was attending a funeral for Congressman Warren Davis. Lawrence, attempted to shoot him with two different derringers, each of which misfired. He was tried for the attempted assassination but was found not guilty by reason of insanity. He spent the rest of his life in an insane asylum. This sounds just like what happens today when the fbi foils a bombing plot, they set it up to look like the good guys.

History is a great subject as soon as you learn how to read between the lines.