|
|||
In 1984, William J. Benson of
South Holland, Illinois, began an investigation of the process of
ratification of the 16th Amendment, to determine if the amendment had
been lawfully made a part of the constitution. actual records from all
48 state legislatures and discovered it had not been ratified at all.
Not even close, as a matter of fact
|
|||
Now read this.
|
scream-of-consciousness; "If you're trying to change minds and influence people it's probably not a good idea to say that virtually all elected Democrats are liars, but what the hell."
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Time to chamber up boss
"If the number of Islamic terror attacks continues at the current rate, candlelight vigils will soon be the number-one cause of global warming. " |
15 comments:
-
-
I might have to be one of those kooky supporters. Boing-Boing is a popular blog, but are politically about as smeart as Moveon.org.
- 6/23/07, 7:44 PM
-
-
My money is on "we die" Can't have something like this catching on.
MM - 6/23/07, 8:20 PM
-
-
it's put up or shut up time for a lot of people
- 6/23/07, 10:20 PM
-
-
The Lord knows I despise the IRS and all there arrogance. But this cannot be allowed to stand if so there would not even be enough money to support the military and the things we really do need.Now I would not complain if we moved to a different system as has been discussed on many occasions that would do away with the IRS but till then these nuts cannot be allowed to prevail.
- 6/24/07, 5:59 AM
-
-
Aw hell Jack, it's time we watered that tree of liberty with the blood of our masters in Washington. Our tax dollars really ARE the root of all evil. Not only was the amendment process a fraud, so is everything that has grown from it. We're on the verge of the social security house of cards falling to pieces. It's time that all this federa government titsucking came to and end.
Casca - 6/24/07, 5:13 PM
-
-
If the power of the Federal Government to impose taxes came from the 16th amendment this might be an arguement but I doubt it.
If I recall, Mr. Benson has rather a troubled past and was, I believe, at one time was selling his info on the 16th amendment along with "certified documentation" for $3500 a pop. Kinda makes it hard for me to take his word.
Mr. Brown, who made well over a million in the five years since he decided he didn't have to pay taxes, I kinda feel sorry for. Obviously not average joe in terms of income, I thnk his wife is a dentist, he's also as gullible and grredy as those folks than answer letters from Nigeria. Corse I think NH has a tax lien on his property too, nobody mentions that.
To see the actual source of the Fed tax authority look in Article 1, Section 8:" The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, 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;"
And before you say it doesn't mention income taxs, income tax is a form of excise tax.
-embycil - 6/24/07, 7:20 PM
- Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
Apparently congress does not agree with you embycil. In 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that a similar federal income tax act adopted in 1894 was unconstitutional. The 1913 legislation was the response.
The only thing that matters, or ought matter, is the veracity of Benson's research. Can you, or has anybody, challenged those findings? If not, the 16th Amendment is not law. Unless there is a common law legal concept I've never heard of that gives legitimacy to fraudulent acts after a fixed number of years. - 6/24/07, 9:43 PM
-
-
If you mean Pollock v. Farmer's Loan and Trust, 157 US 429, they struck down the then existing law based on an apportionment issue. They didn't say the Feds couldn't impose an income tax. They said that taxing income from real property was the same as taxing the real property. Taxes on real property have to be apportioned, meaning the revenue from the taxes has to go to the region where the taxes were collected, which is why property taxes are collected by the states. Yes, the 16th amendment is a response to that decision, but it doesn't create a right, it's just an attempt to clarify it.
For a discussion of Mr. Benson's research and his book see United States v. Thomas, 788 F2d. 1250 (1986).
Don't get me wrong, I think the Infernal Revenue Service has way to much leeway and there may be due process issues with the way they conduct some of their "collections." Hell, I say charge everybody that makes over subsistance 10% and forget the deductions. I think the government, and the rest of us, would come out ahead that way, especially since they'd be able to get rid of about half of the IRS. I wish Mr. B. was right and I could get a refund for my last 32 tax returns, but he's not.
-embycil - 6/24/07, 11:12 PM
-
-
As much as I hate the IRS embycil is correct. If you take law classes you will attend a bunch of classes and other presentations in regard to this very issue. I believe the system needs to change but this guy is over the edge. He needs to find another reason to forfiet his life. I have fought and served but I am not going to go to bat for this loon. I would rather die fighting the current invasion of our country. Damn Now I feel like I need a shower because I despise the IRS so much.
- 6/25/07, 4:26 AM
- Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
STOP IT. For whatever reason, res ipsa loquitur, congress went through the motion of amending the constitution. One question is salient: was it ratified? Because if it was not,the cloak under which gummint's been seizing wealth is vapor. A new amendment is then called for. Let's begin the debate now. I'll guarantee the IRS will not survive.
- - 6/25/07, 9:06 AM
- Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
P-Freaking-S
If gummint has been acting fraudulently, I want every cent returned with penalties and interest. I'll accept their rates.
- - 6/25/07, 9:09 AM
-
-
I'd actually like to hang a few of them for good measure, legislators & IRS agents. Think of all the people driven to the end of a rope by THEIR doings.
Casca - 6/25/07, 9:47 AM
-
-
Okay, for the record, it was ratified. Secretary of State Knox received 37 written ratifications and one orally. The thing Benson hangs his hat on is that several of the ratifying documents contained typos or slightly changed the wording. For example, one of the states used the word "lay" instead of "levy". The majority of the mistakes are what you might expect when you have a steno taking dictation (some of us remember this) and don't proof read. The law of some states would provide an argument that the ratification was innefiective. Federal law (Supreme Court case law which going back to 1892) says that the slight deviations are immiterial, you are ratifying the enrolled bill and not the document which you use to communicate your ratiification.
-embycil - 6/25/07, 1:08 PM
- Rodger the Real King of France said...
-
Are we reading the same thing?
" the Kentucky House proposed a resolution to adopt the amendment and then sent that resolution to the Senate in early February, 1910. On February 8, 1910, the Kentucky Senate voted upon that resolution, but rejected it by a vote of 9 in favor and 22 opposed. The Kentucky Senate never did ratify that amendment, but federal officials, being in possession of documents showing this rejection, fraudulently claimed otherwise." - 6/25/07, 5:21 PM
-
-
I don't know the source of that quote so I can't respond directly. However, assuming for the sake of the discussion that Kentucky did not ratify that still leaves 41 other states ratifying the amendment. Although Kentucy is listed as one of the required 36 it could have easily have been Wyoming or Deleware which had both ratified by the 3d but were not listed in the first thirty six to do so. NJ, Vermont, Mass and NH had all also ratified by early March.
The larger constitutional issue however is the federal governments power to levy income tax, and that was never seriously questioned. The only issues actually addressed by the 16th amendment are the nature of income (i.e derived from real property or labor) and how the feds could spend the money.
-embycil - 6/25/07, 6:36 PM