  |
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:34 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Thanks Lester : ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rynln53
Newbie
Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 44
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| all of this is going around in circles, state clearly and effectively why the fed is either good or bad, and not just a vague statement that rich people are getting richer and poor poorer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shankarsingam
Forum Elder
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 1139
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Im afraid that Last007 is absolutely correct.
Exton, if we acutally have monies in the treasury, then why can t the american people see an audit of how much money(gold) is actually in the federal bank?
Every year we submit a 1040 that tells the government what we did with our money, in return they are suppose to the same with the american people. They do not.
If a group of governors makes up the Federal Reserve then who are they? Names? Is Scharznegger one of them?
Please look up the word 'income' as defined by the constitution.
The income tax is a fraud perpetrated by privately owned banks charging us interest for handling our money.
70 million americans consistenely do not file income tax, including many former IRS agents. Income tax is illegal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| shankarsingam wrote: |
Exton, if we acutally have monies in the treasury, then why can t the american people see an audit of how much money(gold) is actually in the federal bank?
Every year we submit a 1040 that tells the government what we did with our money, in return they are suppose to the same with the american people. They do not. |
What federal bank are you talking about?
Are you talking about the treasury? Because that's where the federal government puts its actual money, and yes, i believe they keep records on that.
Or are you talking about the federal reserve banks?
As far as i can tell, those banks don't actually hold money in the usual sense. When money goes into the federal reserve, it disappears from the economy. When the fed makes loans, they just make more money.
The federal reserve banks aren't banks in the usual sense; they're used to control the money supply.
And yes, there are records kept on who loans what to who.
| Quote: |
If a group of governors makes up the Federal Reserve then who are they? Names? Is Scharznegger one of them? |
No, it's called "the board of governors" - that's just the name of the board. They aren't actually governors of states. They're called "board members" when people refer to them.
And you know where you can find out their names?
On the federal reserve website!
Link to their names:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/bios/
| Quote: |
Please look up the word 'income' as defined by the constitution. |
It doesn't explicitly define the word "income". There are, however, relevent supreme court rulings on the matter. The most relevent of which is Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.
In the ruling, the court says that income taxes can be levied on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion."
[quote]
The income tax is a fraud perpetrated by privately owned banks charging us interest for handling our money.[quote]
The government takes income tax, not the banks.
| Quote: |
Income tax is illegal. |
The constitution explicitly disagrees on that matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: |
When money goes into the federal reserve, it disappears from the economy. |
Hilarious 
Not at all true.
| exton wrote: |
When the fed makes loans, they just make more money. |
Where the interest on that money goes enlies the problem.
The interest goes back to the fed
however,
since the fed is private it does not disappear from our economy.
It goes back into our economy and causes the inflation you see being monitored in the news all the time.
| exton wrote: |
The federal reserve banks aren't banks in the usual sense; they're used to control the money supply. |
only if that were true.
it is a bank in every sense AND it controls the supply.
Huge problem.
| exton wrote: | | And yes, there are records kept on who loans what to who. |
The question is not who loaned what. the question to ask is, "who ends up with the profits from the loan and how is that profit used?"(Ask yourself, "what does the fed(a private company) do with the profits it gets from lending to banks?")
| exton wrote: |
No, it's called "the board of governors" - that's just the name of the board. They aren't actually governors of states. They're called "board members" when people refer to them.
And you know where you can find out their names?
On the federal reserve website!
Link to their names:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/bios/ |
hilarious!!!
the board of governors just work for the company. they are just appoineted by the company owners.
And the fed is a company. and no, no one knows who all of them are.
SIDE NOTE: All the board of governors candidates to be chosen by our government are pre selected by the private owners.
Some choice!
| exton wrote: |
It doesn't explicitly define the word "income". There are, however, relevent supreme court rulings on the matter. The most relevent of which is Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.
In the ruling, the court says that income taxes can be levied on "accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion." |
income is defined. it is profit from coporate activity. and taxes on wages from labor are illegal. (indirect and direct tax issue)
See the below post for the proof. I re posted it for you  .
| exton wrote: |
(((((The income tax is a fraud perpetrated by privately owned banks charging us interest for handling our money.))))
The government takes income tax, not the banks. |
i think what he means is that we would not have income taxes (or less income taxes) if the government did not have to pay interest on money borrowed from the fed.
| exton wrote: |
(((((Income tax is illegal))))))
The constitution explicitly disagrees on that matter. |
Just the opposite. (See the below post for the explaination re posted.)
Last edited by thelast007 on Tue Apr 03, 2007 2:11 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
........& About the 16th Amendment
Even if the 16th Amendment were properly ratified, according to Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution, it has always been unconstitutional for the U.S. Federal Government to directly tax We the People in their property, wages, salaries, or earnings. The judges of the U.S. Supreme Court rejected any claims that the 16th Amendment changed the constitutional limits on direct taxes in Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 U.S. 1, when they ruled that it "created no new power of taxation" and that it "did not change the constitutional limitations which forbid any direct taxation of individuals".
Besides that...
Alleged defects in the ratification of the Income Tax Amendment
According to the investigations of Bill Benson and others, the following defects were found in the ratification of the Income Tax Amendment by the 48 states then existing, three-fourths or 36 of which were needed to ratify it:
01 - Not ratified by state legislature, and so reported
02 - Not ratified by state legislature, but reported as ratified
03 - Missing or incomplete evidence of ratification, but reported as ratified
04 - Failure of Governor or other official to sign, although required by State Constitution
05 - Other violation of State Constitution in ratification process
06 - Other procedural irregularity making ratification doubtful
07 - Approval, but with change in wording, accepted as ratification of original version
08 - Approval, but with change in spelling, accepted as ratification of original version
09 - Approval, but with change in capitalization, accepted as ratification of original version
10 - Approval, but with change in punctuation, accepted as ratification of original version
Again if I am wrong please educate me. Ready to learn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tell me 007, how do you think the fed works? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
oh no. i am really horrible at explaining myself if you feel i haven't explained that yet. 
however i can be very short and simple with this one.
http://vids.myspace.com/index......2016526063
only 3 mintues.
Last edited by thelast007 on Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:14 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
No, you definitely have not explained that yet. You've certainly not provided a coherent picture of waht you believe is going on in the fed, from start to end.
I've been assuming that we're on the same page here. I don't think that's the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| thelast007 wrote: |
According to the investigations of Bill Benson and others, the following defects were found in the ratification of the Income Tax Amendment by the 48 states then existing, three-fourths or 36 of which were needed to ratify it |
And according to the courts, everything is in order with the ratification. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | No, you definitely have not explained that yet. You've certainly not provided a coherent picture of waht you believe is going on in the fed, from start to end.
I've been assuming that we're on the same page here. I don't think that's the case. |
How did you ever assume we were on the same page??????
obvioulsy not one word i type is english to you.  lol
but you know what?
I still love trying |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thelast007
Veteran
Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 525
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| exton wrote: | | thelast007 wrote: |
According to the investigations of Bill Benson and others, the following defects were found in the ratification of the Income Tax Amendment by the 48 states then existing, three-fourths or 36 of which were needed to ratify it |
And according to the courts, everything is in order with the ratification. |
after private investigation it is not in order.
just because they deny the truth that does not change reality.
I am the authority of me. so i say i am the most clear person everytime i explain anything.
How ever you know the reality on that fact right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shankarsingam
Forum Elder
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 1139
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Exton, the more you try to agree to the validity of a legal income tax on american workers, the more 007 is going to own you(As she is far well versed in this topic more than me). Income tax is simply illegal. Its the biggest fraud on the american people.
Ask your self this.
Why are there dozens of former IRS agents who do not pay income tax and have not filed in years?
Why do these former IRS agents also claim that income tax is unconstituional and illegal?
Are they wackos?
This story just came out today on Drudge.
PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A man who contended that he was not required to pay income tax, and whose case led to an indictment against actor Wesley Snipes, was sentenced Tuesday to 27 months in prison.
Arthur L. Farnsworth, 43, of Sellersville, was also fined $500 and ordered to cooperate with Internal Revenue Service investigators in documenting his finances and beginning to pay his tax debt of almost $83,000, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported on its Web site.
He told the jury that his own research had convinced him that federal tax payments were voluntary. Prosecutors argued that his research was created to cover his political beliefs.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200.....r_snipes_4
Exton, a movement is about to begin, you need to be on the side with the facts. This isn't about being republican or democrat, its about being american.
Thats all I have to say on this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
exton
Forum Elder
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 4218
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 05, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| shankarsingam wrote: | | Exton, the more you try to agree to the validity of a legal income tax on american workers, the more 007 is going to own you(As she is far well versed in this topic more than me). Income tax is simply illegal. Its the biggest fraud on the american people. |
I'm failing to understand this. The constitution says,plainly and clearly, that income tax of any kind is legal. Every objection to its ratification has been defeated in court. Where's the illegality?
| Quote: |
Why are there dozens of former IRS agents who do not pay income tax and have not filed in years? |
Assuming that's true? Because they don't want to. No one likes paying taxes.
| Quote: |
Why do these former IRS agents also claim that income tax is unconstituional and illegal?
Are they wackos?
|
You don't have to be a whacko to be wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
|
|
