PROOF OF CONSPIRACY

[Guest guest]

- J & K Novak

[Changing Planet] PROOF OF CONSPIRACY

 

FEDERAL INCOME TAXPROOF OF CONSPIRACYBy: Alan Stanghttp://www.etherzone.com/2003/stang081503.shtmlFor many weeks, we have been looking at what we realistically might do tosave our country from the totalitarian dictatorship that is rapidlysuppressing it. We have seen that to have any hope of doing so we mustrecognize the cause: the conspiracy for world government. Presently, we aredemonstrating why that recognition is so important, and we chose an issuefor the purpose: the sodomite explosion.We chose that issue because it is so much in the news. We could just as wellhave chosen the federal income tax. A few days ago, the income tax was inthe news again, or, rather, it should have been. It should have been bannerheadlines across the country - but it wasn't. Because you are reading theseprofundities at Etherzone.com, you probably already know what I am talkingabout, but my guess is that few other Americans do, because it goes withoutsaying that the Communist News Network, the Communist Broadcasting System,all the news that's print to fit and so on, have not given it the coverageit deserves.I refer of course to the fact that, in Memphis, the federal government trieda lady named Vernice Kuglin on charges of tax evasion - filing false W-4forms - and lost. Miss Kuglin is a pilot for Federal Express. Some yearsago, she began wondering what law required her to pay income tax. She couldn't find it in the Internal Revenue Code, so, in 1995, she wrote IRS andasked them to tell her.The Internal Revenue Service refused. They did not respond. The more shestudied, the more she became convinced that the reason they failed torespond was that the law did not require her to pay. So, she put 99allowances on her W-4, and took home (almost) all her wages.Our friends at IRS said she had lied, and charged her with six felony countsof tax evasion on $920,000 of income, enough to put Miss Kuglin away for aslong as 30 years. She is 58 now, so in effect she faced a life sentence, andcould have had to pay $1.5 million in fines. It is important to note thatour friends at IRS prepare these cases very carefully. They don't take oneinto court unless they know they will win. In a case like this, involvingserious money, they do everything they can to incite the jurors' envy. Theyconstantly refer to the defendant's "fair share."On August 8, 2003, in Memphis, despite all this, the jury acquitted MissKuglin of all charges. They said IRS had not proved the lady was required topay the tax. After the verdict, frustrated prosecutor Joe Murphy asked thejudge to order Miss Kuglin to pay it. The judge replied, "Sir, I don't workfor IRS." By then Murphy may have been too mentally taxed to remember that,after the verdict, there was no legal basis for the judge to issue such anorder, even if he does work for IRS.Notice that there are many taxes in the Internal Revenue Code. Our friendsat IRS have no trouble citing the Code section - the law - that requires a"taxpayer" to pay each one. Except the income tax. With regard to the incometax alone, they are tongue-tied. Why? Wouldn't they quash the controversyand kamikaze pilots like Miss Kuglin, simply by stating the Code sectionthat applies?Yes, they would; they don't 'cause there ain't. There is no such section.That doesn't mean the income tax is illegal or unconstitutional. It doesn'tmean there is no such tax. There is, and the people it applies to need topay it, but it applies to very few people, like most of the taxes in theInternal Revenue Code.What the law requires you to do every year - and our friends at IRS say sothemselves - is determine whether you are one of those people. You aloneknow that, because you alone know what you did last year. Did you make andsell liquor last year? Then you must pay the liquor tax. If you made andsold no liquor, forget it. You don't owe the tax.To conceal that fact, litigious prevaricators (lawyers) with advanceddegrees in obfuscation have deliberately written the income tax into theCode in as confusing a manner as possible, to make it incomprehensible tothe normal mind; and our dear friends at IRS use the uncertainty thatconfusion engenders to intimidate and literally to threaten Americans intovoluntarily paying a tax the law does not require them to pay.What does the law say? There are two kinds of federal taxes, only two:direct and indirect. There is no third kind of federal tax. The law - theConstitution - says that all federal taxes must be one or the other. InBrushaber v. Union Pacific (240 US 1), in 1915, the US Supreme Court ruledthat the income tax is legal (constitutional), but that it is an indirecttax.Indeed, in Stanton v. Baltic Mining (240 US 103), just a year later, thesame judges said the same thing and added that their previous ruling, inBrushaber, created "no new power of taxation." In other words, Brushaberlimited the federal government's power to tax rather than expand it; limitedit by forcefully explaining where that power could not reach. Nothing hadchanged since the Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional in 1894, inPollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust (158 US 601).The trouble with the tax today is that our friends at IRS are administeringit illegally as a direct tax, which the Supreme Court forbade. That is thesecret they don't want you to know. Because I am trying to inform, notobfuscate, I am happy to add that this explanation is necessarily quitesimplified, maybe even oversimplified, because of space - but it is true.For more information, one of many things you could look at is my book,TaxScam: How IRS Swindles You and What You Can Do About It, which yourIntrepid Correspondent wrote as a guest of the federal government, allexpenses paid, without the help of Matthew Lesko. Go to www.stangbooks.comand click on non-fiction.Patriotic Americans hearing about all this for the first time, often worry.Without the income tax, would the government collapse? The answer is to askyourself when the government began. Let's say 1784. When did the income taxbegin? Nineteen thirteen. Between 1784 and 1913, there were 129 years. Formany of those years, there were no internal taxes at all! Yet, just beforethe illegal income tax of 1894, the big problem in Congress was the "SurplusMonster." Tax money was pouring in and Congress didn't know what to do withit. See the cartoon from Puck, the comic weekly, in TaxScam.Indeed, when income tax withholding took effect "temporarily" in 1942, thefederal government was still collecting more in alcohol and tobacco taxesthan it was in individual income taxes. Can you name a year between 1784 and1942 when the government collapsed? I'm willing to compromise. Name a coupleof months. No income tax was needed, because during most of those years thegovernment was restricted to the few activities the Constitution allows.Because of verdicts like Kuglin, pressure to abolish the income tax willgrow. Legislators and others will devise schemes like sales taxes,guaranteed to produce the same revenue the income tax yields now. Askyourself why the federal government should continue to receive the enormousswag it gouges from us now.Along these lines, where did the income tax come from? Isn't it the secondstep to Communism listed by Marx in the Communist Manifesto? Marx thoughtthat the only step to Communism more important than the income tax wasgovernment control of "all property in land." Sure enough, we now can seewhy he thought the income tax was so crucial to Communism.Among its purposes is the destruction of the middle class that pays it. Asyou will see in TaxScam from the mouth of the Conspiracy itself, the mainpurpose of the income tax is to reduce the destructive, inflationary effectsof the funny money printed by the Federal Reserve. The income tax does thatby removing purchasing power from the economy, via "temporary" withholding.So now we know that the income tax didn't "just happen." It isn't just ascheme to raise funds. It's a tool of the conspiracy for world government.Did you know all this before? If not, and if you now have a totallydifferent take on the income tax, you now also see why it is supremelyimportant to call it what it is: a conspiracy.We are talking about what we can realistically do to save America. When yourobedient servant went nose to nose with IRS, I was charged only with a fewmisdemeanors, failing to file a particular form; no big deal. Miss Kuglinlaid her life on the line. She faced 30 (thirty) years in prison, plus ahuge fine. Apparently she refused to take a lesser plea.I have not yet had the honor and pleasure of meeting the lady. I am sure sheis as feminine as a lady can be. So I am not talking about her when I saythat to do what she did would take cojones as big as bowling balls, and Idon't know many men that brave. I certainly have nothing against JessicaLynch. That innocent, little lady was used and abused by Iraq and the UnitedStates, which to its everlasting shame is promoting women in combat. Butkamikaze pilot Vernice Kuglin is in fact the heroine the media have beentrying to make poor Jessica. Banzai!********If this email is cut short, changingplanet/messagesYou can help us make a difference. Click here for details:http://changingplanet.supremalex.org/help.htmChanging Planet News - Where Ethics, Science and Spirituality BlendCOLLECTIVE CONSCIOUSNESS PROJECT: If this email sparked emotions in you, positive or negative, please pray, meditate, visualize or concentrate on the best possible outcome for Humanity and Earth for AT LEAST 10 seconds. On the web at http://changingplanet.supremalex.orgNews and service since 1995