The 16th Amendment was not ratified! The Income Tax is therefore illegal

Document                  # 20 of 38         ...The 16th Amendment
was not ratified!  The Income Tax is therefore illegal.
Note:  As goes our nation in the push by the Socialist Council on Foreign
Relations, so goes the rest of the "free" world. The CFR through its
enforcement arm, the Communist United Nations, will eventually eliminate all
freedom in this world.  Only you and I can stop it.  Removing the funding
provided directly by the US Taxpayer (all of our income taxes go out of the
country) will be a huge blow to the Elitists who seek to be the world
dictator thru the UN.

 {Philander Knox, Sec of State, 1909-1913, the Taft Administration,
proclaimed the 16th amendment to be ratified just a few days before he left
office in 1913 {sound familiar?}, to make way for the Wilson administration,
even though he knew it had not been legally ratified.
 Philander Knox had for many years been the primary attorney for the richest
men in America, including Carnegie, Rockefeller, Morgan, the Vanderbilts,
the Mellons, and others. He had created for them the largest cartel in the
world, then was appointed, at their request, as the Attorney General in the
McKinley/Roosevelt administrations, where he refused to enforce the Sherman
anti-trust laws against the cartel he had just created.
 The income tax amendment was pushed through Congress in 1909 by Sen Nelson
Aldrich, father-in-law of John D Rockefeller Jr, and grandfather and
namesake of Nelson A Rockefeller, and would not have been ratified if Knox
had not fraudulently proclaimed it so.
 Example: Kentucky's legislature rejected the amendment, but Knox counted
Kentucky as having approved it.
 Example: Oklahoma's legislature changed the amendment's wording so that it
meant just the opposite of what was submitted to the states by Congress, but
Knox counted Oklahoma as approving the amendment.  Minnesota did not submit
any results or copy of their vote to Knox, yet he counted Minnesota as
approving the amendment.}
 The following is copied directly from the USA Today, 23 March 2001, Friday
Edition. Page 8A and The Washington Times National Weekly Edition, March
26-April 1. It is sponsored by: We The People Foundation For Constitutional
Education, Inc.,, E-mail:;   Ph:
518-656-3578.  Fax: 518-656-9724. This is an ongoing educational process
appearing in this "newspaper" and the Washington Times Weekly National
Edition.  I will use the symbols {   } to indicate notes, etc that I may
insert.  The Symbols (   ) and [    ]   are used in the original articles
and will be shown here.
Q: Do you have to file a federal tax return or pay an income tax?
A: These Experts say "NO"! [There are then the pictures of Bill Benson,
Author: "The Law that Never Was"; Larken Rose, Author: "Taxable Income";
John Kotmair, Founder and Fiduciary, Save-a-Patriot Fellowship and Liberty
Works Radio Network]..
 Read the Facts and Judge the truth for yourself.
 >The original Constitution prohibits the Congress from laying a DIRECT
(income) tax on the People unless it is in PROPORTION to the states (the
last cnesus).
 >Our income tax conflicts with the original constitution: it is a DIRECT
tax (the Supreme Court and numerous federal courts have declared it so) and
it has not been laid in PROPORTION to the states.
 >The IRS {and that liberal biased authority on all things} (and the New
York Times) say our income tax, although DIRECT and UN-APPORTIONED, is
constitutional because the 16th amendment did away with the original
requirement that all DIRECT taxes must be in PROPORTION to the states.
 >However, Bill Benson's research shows, conclusively, that the 16th (income
tax) amendment is a FRAUD.-it was fraudulently ratified.
 >When Mr Benson took his charge of FRAUD to federal court, the court
declared that it was a political question for Congress to decide, (Editor's
note: since when if fraud a political question?)
 >Even if the original constitution, or the constitution as amended by the
16th Amendment, authorized Congress to lay a DIRECT tax on all U. S.
Citizens, without APPORTIONMENT, Congress has not done so-Congress has yet
to pass a law that requires most Americans to file a tax return or to pay
income tax.
 >The Current income tax law does NOT apply to most Americans. (Read More
Detailed Evidence at Our Website):
 Bill Benson's research report, "The Law That never Was" is based on
thousands of court-certified documents from state and federal archives. It
proves conclusively the 16th (income tax) amendment to the Constitution in
1913 was fraudulently ratified.
 His report says, in effect, that every individual in America can legally
ignore requirements of the Internal Revenue Code because it is well settled
in American Jurisprudence that any law which is {in} conflict with the
Constitution is abrogated, i.e., it is VOID and can be IGNORED by the
 Mr Benson, a former Criminal Investigator for the Illinois Department of
Revenue, has NOT filed federal or state tax returns or paid any federal or
state tax on his income since 1986. {I know of two people in Crystal
River-one has not paid for over 5 years with no action by the IRS except for
the first year, where he refused to pay an illegal tax, and theother person
who took the IRS to Civil Court 14 years ago, and after spending $13,000,
representing himself in court, won against the IRS when they could not prove
that he had violated any law, and there was no law that required him to pay
a tax on income}.
 Un-refuted research by Larkin Rose and John Kotmair, say in effect, that
EVEN IF the Constitution authorized and income tax, the current income tax
laws do NOT APPLY AND DO NOT REQUIRE most U. S. Citizens to pay any taxes on
 Mr Rose has not filed federal or state income tax returns or paid income
taxes since 1996. Mr Kotmair has not filed federal or state income tax
returns or paid income taxes since 1973.
 Q: Does the constitution prohibit a non-apportioned direct tax on the
 A: Yes! Here is what the original constitution says: "No capitation, or
other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or
enumeration herein before directed to be taken." See Article I, Section 9,
Clause 4.
 Q: Is the individual income tax a direct tax?  A: Yes. According to the
 The U.S. Supreme Court as declared the tax to be a direct tax: "A proper
regard for its [the 16th Amendment's] genesis, as well as its very clear
language, requires also that this amendment shall not be extended by loose
construction, so as to repeal or modify, except as applied to income, those
provisions of the Constitution that require and apportionment according to
population for direct taxes upon property, real and personal." See

 " Eisnery Macomber, (1920), 252 U.S. 189,206, 40 S.ct.189. Editor's
note: Wages and Salaries are property. See: Sims v U.S. (1959), 359 U.S.
 The Federal Appeals Courts have declared The Income Tax to Be a Direct Tax.
"The sixteenth amendment merely eliminates the requirement that the direct
tax be apportioned among the states...The sixteenth amendment was enacted
for the express purpose of providing for a direct income tax." See Parker v.
Commissioner, 724 F.2d 469, 471 5th Cir. 1984).
 The court held that an argument that the income tax was an excise tax was
frivolous on its face. The court declared: "The power thus long predates the
Sixteenth Amendment, which did no more than remove the apportionment
requirement". See Coleman v. Commission, 791 f.2d 68, 70 (7th Cir. 1986).
 The cases cited by Francisco clearly establish that the income tax is a
direct tax...", See United States v. Francisco, 614 f.2d 617, 619 (8th Cir.
 "The sixteenth amendment remove any need to apportion income taxes among
the states that otherwise have been required by Article I, Section 9, Clause
4."  See United States v. Lawson, 670 F,2d 923, 927 (10th Cir, 1982).
Editor's note: For a full discussion see: "Long after Brushaber vs. U. P.
Railroad and Stanton vs Baltic Mining, the courts have declared the income
tax to be a direct tax." This article can be found on our web site. Special
thanks to constitutional attorney Larry Becraft upon whose research our
article is based.
 Q. Is the individual income tax imposed "in proportion to the census."
 A. NO! It is not "in proportion to the census."
 The individual income tax is not tied to the population, state-by-state.
Notwithstanding the constitutional prohibition found in Article I, Section
9, Clause 4, the income tax it is not apportioned among the states.
Congress does not reqire each state to tax their citizens to collect the
money the federal government says it needs, {that is so that they can keep
buying votes, spending money on bridges we don't need, donating 31 million
to The Washington Post for PR favors, and all the crap they waste money on}
over and above what it collects under the taxing authority granted to it
under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution (indirect taxes, excise,
tariffs, duties and imposts).
 Q. How can there be a direct, un-apportioned individual income tax in
America if the original constitution prohibits it?
 A. The government relies upon the validity of the 16th Amendment to the
Constitution as its authority to impose the current, direct, un-apportioned
individual income tax.
 The 16th Amendment reads: "The congress shall have power to lay and collect
taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among
the several states, and without regard to any census enumeration." The IRS
says it is the 16th Amendment that gives it the authority to impose the
income tax directly on the working people of America. The IRS is on record
as saying; "The sixteenth amendment to the Constitution states that citizens
are required to file tax returns and pay taxes." IRS Publication 1918 (July
96, Cat No 22524B.  No less an authority than the New York Times {Ha, Ha,
Ha, yeah sure} says the 16th Amendment is the government's authority to
impose tax directly on the working people of America.  The New York Times
says: "Congress's right to levy taxes on the income of individuals and
corporations was contested throughout the 19th century, but that authority
was written into the Constitution with the passage of the 16th Amendment in
1913." The New York Times Almanac; 2001, The World's Most Comprehensive and
Authoritative Almanac {snicker, snicker, yawn} page 161.
 While refusing to address the question of its fraudulent adoption, the
federal courts have said the 16th Amendment is the government's authority to
impose the income tax directly on the working people of America. For
instance Judge Paul G Hatfield, (United States District Court For the
District of Montana) wrote: "The income tax laws of the United States of
America are constitutional, having been validly enacted under the authority
of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. "See United
States of America vs Jerome David Pederson, (1985) Case No. CR-84-57-GF. In
the United States v. Lawson the court declared: "The Sixteenth Amendment
removed any need to apportion income taxes among the states that otherwise
would have been required by Article I, Section 9, Clause 4." See United
States vs Lawson, 670 F.2d 923 927 (10th Cir. 1982).
 However, Bill Benson's research report documents that the 16th Amendment
was not ratified by the states and is a fraud. Bill Benson's findings,
published in "The Law That Never Was", make a compelling case that the 16th
Amendment (the income tax amendment) was not legally ratified and that
Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed
fraud when he declared it ratified  in February 1913.  For a discussion of
Philander Knox and his motives for fraudulently declaring the 16th Amendment
ratified, see: "Who was Philander Knox? Is it credible that he could have
committed fraud?"  Which can be found on our web site. {He did commit fraud
because he did it to curry favor with the Morgans, Rothschilds,
Rockefellers, Mellons, {the cartel that he created} who subsequently hired
 In 1909, Congress passed the proposed 16th Amendment. It was sent to the
states for ratification by the state legislatures. There were 48 states.
Three-fourths, or 36, of them were required to give their approval in order
for it to be ratified.
 Knox declared the 16th amendment ratified onFebruary 25, 1913, just a few
days before leaving office. He counted 38 states as having approved it.
 >Kentucky: The Kentucky legislature rejected the amendment 33-9, but Knox
counted it as having passed 22-9.
 >Oklahoma: Oklahoma voted for the amendment but changed the wording to mean
the opposite of the proposed amendment-even though a memo from chief legal
counsel Reuben Clark warned that states were not allowed to change the
proposed amendment.
 >Tennessee: Tennessee violated its own state constitution when they failed
to delay the amendment vote until a new state legislature was elected. The
obvious reason for this state constitutional clause was to ensure that the
People of Tennessee would have direct political input on the federal
constitutional amendment process.  Tennessee also violated their own state
constitution by failing to read the resolution on three different days as
prescribed by Article II, Section 28.
 >Texas and Louisiana: Texas and Louisiana violated provisions in their
states constitutions prohibiting the legislatures from empowering the
federal government with any additional taxing authority.
 Twelve other states violated provisions in their State Constitutions,
bringing the number down to 21. Further evidence in Mr Benson's research
report make the list dwindle down much more, but with the number to 21,
fifteen fewer than required, this is a suitable place to rest for the
purposes of this article. For a more detailed state-by-state account, to:
"How some States Failed to Ratify The Sixteenth Amendment", which is located
on our web site. Special thanks to Bill Benson, upon whose research our
article is based.
 In 1985, Mr Benson asked a federal court to declare the 16th amendment to
be null and void because it was fraudulently ratified.  The court, instead
ruled the question to be a political question for the Congress to decide,
{well we know how our bloodsucking tax and spend congress looks at losing
any tax money to spend on those damned giveaways of our money and mine.
CLMsr} it said: "[Defendant] Stahl's claim that ratification of the 16th
Amendment was fraudulently certified constitutes a political question becaue
we could not undertake independent resolution of this issue without
expressing lack of respect due coordinate branches of Government..."{my
question is how in hell can anyone respect our branches of government and
those leeches we have elected to office if they continue to allow this to go
one? CLMsr.} See U.S. v. Stahl (197\86), 792 F2nd 1438. Mr Benson then
pesonally delivered a copy of his voluminous research report to each and
every member of Congress. In response, the Congressional Research Service
immediately issued a report, which declared that the CRS was not going to
address the factual allegations of Mr Benson's report and that the question
of the fraudulent adoption of the 16th Amendment was a question for the
Courts. (Now we see the ping-pong buck passing exercise the government
agencies are so very adept at. CLMsr.)  For a copy of the CRS report, which
was written by a CRS attorney (Ripy), go to or Web Site.
 Mr Benson has concluded that the 16th Amendment can be ignored, that
Congress's power to lay a DIRECT (income) tax on the People is, limited by
the original Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 4), and that because
the income tax has not been laid in proportion to the states he has a
fundamental right to ignore the income tax laws. He has not filed an income
tax return or paid income tax since 1986.
IN THE UNITED STATES. Some evidence:
 1..Sections 1461 and 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code (the "IRC")
establish that the only person made liable to withhold and pay the income
tax is a withholding agent, who is any person required to withhold under
sections 1441-1443, which pertain only to nonresident aliens and foreign
 2..Look in the IRC index under "income tax" to cross-reference with
"citizen" or "citizenship". There are only two entries: one for citizens
departing the U.S. and the other for citizens living abroad. But if one
cross-references "income tax" with "aliens", there are several PAGES of
entries, most of them under subcategory "nonresident alien" where we find
all the familiar terms, such as "deductions", "exemptions,"  "gross income",
and "withholding". Careless indexing? Ask your tax professional.
 3..Form 1040 has never been authorized by the Office of Management and
Budget ("OMB") to be used under Section 1 of the IRC. The only form ever
approved for use under Section 1 is Form 2555, titled "Foreign Earned
 4..A statement of citizenship, in duplicate, from a worker has always
served to relieve an employer of duty to withhold income taxes from ANY
worker's pay, under Section 1.1441-5, and Publication # 515 (wording was
altered in 1999 to disguise the provision).
 5..The Internal Revenue Manual instructs the employees of the IRS that the
Criminal Investigation Division is under the direction of the International
Branch of the IRS and is only authorized to enforce criminal statutes
applicable to taxes for U. S. Citizens residing in foreign countries and
nonresident aliens required to file federal income tax.
 6..IRS revenue officers are authorized by law to conduct only civil
enforcement under subtitle E (alcohol, tobacco, and firearms), not under
subtitle A (income taxes). Among assertions by former IRS agents is that
virtually everything a revenue officer does is outside the Law.
 7..Code section 6020(b), invoked by the IRS when it assesses income tax on
individuals who have not filed a 1040, does not authorize them to assess
income tax on individuals. Delegation Orders from the Commission to IRS
employees authorizing them to execute returns for persons required to file,
but who didn't, do not include Forms 1040 or 2555 on the list of authorized
 8..Regulations implementing the statutes governing tax liens and levies are
under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
{another damned Gestapo agency. CLMsr.}. and not the IRS.
 9..Social Security officials confirmed that there is no law that requires a
citizen to get a social security number, for an employer to get an employer
identification number, or for either of them to participate in social
security and pay employment taxes under subtitle C, unless they want to
participate in the Social Security program. No law requires an employer to
insist on getting a W-4 from a worker, nor for a worker to fill it out.
Without a social security number, a worker can have no taxable income,
according to the Social Security Administration.  On 2/20/01, in an EEOC
case in the Norfolk area, a worker prevailed in a Title VII Civil Rights
action after being fired for not providing a social security number, when
the employer only needed to notify the IRS that it had requested one. You
can see a copy of the letter from the SSA on our web site.
 10.IRC Section 3402 imposes withholding only upon "wages" as defined
exclusively at Sections 3401(a) and 3401(a)(8)(A), which reveals the
remuneration paid to U.S. Citizens living and working in the U.S. is
excepted from the definition of "wages" that are subject to withholding
under Section 3402. The only way it can be "wages" is under IRC Section 911,
i.e., remuneration in U. S. possessions.
 11.IRC Section 3403 indemnifies and protects employers from liability for
the withheld remuneration only if it is "wages" under Section 3401(a).
 12.Senator {Daniel K} Inoye {of Hawaii}, in a letter responding to an
inquiry to a constituent who was a tax consultant, stated, "Based on
research performed by the Congressional Research Service, {Remember Ms Karen
Thurman, Democrat Rep, 5th Dist, Florida, this is the same CRS that just
this year-2001, told you just the opposite which you relayed to me by
letter?}, there is no provision which specifically and unequivocally
requires an individual to pay income taxes." {Ms Thurman,}You can see a copy
of this letter and comments on our website. {Now this is very interesting,
because when I queried my state representative, a Democrat, Ms Karen
Thurman, she sent back a response that said that the Congressional Research
Services says it is a valid tax and I sure had better pay it. It looks as if
the CRS gives the answer that is expected of them. CLMsr}
 13.The definition of "gross income," found in IRC 61 and 26 CFR1.61-1(a)
defines gross income as "all income from whatever source derived, unless
excluded by law."  IRC 61 defines gross income as "all income from whatever
source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1)
Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and
similar items: (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived
from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7)
Dividends; (8) Alimony;...(15) Income from an interest in an estate or
trust. Tax researchers have discovered that "items" of income in IRC 61 are
not the same as "sources" of income. CFR 1.861-1 says: "Section 861 et
seq...and the regulations thereunder, determine the sources of income for
purposes of the income."  The specific sources listed in CFR 1.861-8(f)(1).
They are: (1) over-all limitation to foreign tax credit; (2) international
and foreign sales corporations; (3) non-resident alien individuals and
foreign corporations engaged in trade or business within the U. S.;
(4)foreign base company income; and (5)a list of fifteen other operative
section-all foreign. All this lead to the conclusion that the term "gross
income" does not apply to the income of most citizens but to the incomes of
nonresident aliens and U.S. citizens earning money abroad, a conclusion no
longer very surprising after considering all the other evidence presented
above. Editor's note: This "861 Sources" argument is a very potent but
complex legal argument. For a FREE detailed discussion of this argument, see
REGULATIONS." Special thanks to Larken Rose and John Kotmair.
 What if individuals were to stop filing and paying the income tax and
employers were to stop withholding the tax from the paychecks fo their
employees and there was not federal tax to take the place of the individual
income tax? Would we be able to "fix the bridges and maintain a strong
national defense?"  Would we be able to avoid "chaos"? Would we be a
stronger nation? Is a mechanism in place that would allow a peaceful and
smooth transition from a society with an individual income tax to a society
without one? {most people don't know that all of the income taxes they pay
goes to the bankers that make up the FED, all members of the Council on
Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. None of it goes to pay for
the "services" we get from the federal govt. CLMsr}
 Here we are in the year 2001, and the federal government is preparing to
adopt the federal budget for the next fiscal year. Let's assume that the
Congress will come to the conclusion that it wants two trillion dollars in
tax revenue next year. Let's also assume that Congress expects one trillion
dollars to come from the taxes already in place and authorized by Article I,
Section 8 of the Constitution (excise taxes, tariffs, duties, and imposts),
and that those tax revenues were sufficient (as is the case today) to
maintain a strong defense and to pay for the other federal programs needed
and authorized by the enumerated powers found in Article I. That leaves one
trillion dollars to come from someplace else to pay for everything else
Congress wants to do. Assuming Congress decides not to increase the Article
I, Section 8 taxes, Congress would have to get the other trillion dollars by
taxing the People under the authority granted by Article I, Section 9 of the
Constitution-i.e., by laying a direct tax on the people, a tax that would
have to be PROPORTIONED AMONG THE STATES. This means Congress would have to
pass a bill and the President would have to sign the bill into law,
requiring the states to come up with the money Congress wanted. To be
constitutional, the bill would have to proportion the one trillion dollars
among the 50 states, based on the population figures of the last census.
This is the mechanism that has been in place since 1787, and which could
very easily work today.
 Of course, with this approach to funding the federal government, there
would be a dramatic shift in power away from the federal
government to the States and to the People. {members of congress are so
entrenched, so self-serving, so dedicated to tax and spend, so destructive
of our Constitution, about the only way we could make this work would be to
eliminate about half of them. That way the other half would get the message
and return this nation to We The People...maybe..CLMsr}.
 It can safely be assumed that if given the choice, the States will use
their power to influence the federal government not to adopt the law
requiring the states to come up with the trillion dollars, deciding,
instead, that they, the states don't need the middle man-i.e., that they
will fund the development of communities of their states, and that they will
fund the education of the children of their states, without also funding the
huge {bloated, conceited, leeches. CLMsr} bureaucracies in DC.
{snip of non-essential comments}.
 Freedom is not a spectator sport. These ads costs tens of thousands of
dollars. If you want to see more of these PLEASE HELP.  If every concerned
citizen could contribute just a few dollars we can reach millions and end
this tyranny. Donations are: Confidential, protected by a bonded CPA firm,
and {ironic isn't it.CLMsr}, are tax deductible {to the extent of the law.
CLMsr}. Address: 2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury, New York, 12804. WEBSITE:  Wire transfers: We The People Account #324220020998,
ABA route # 021300077. Buy reprints of this ad in full size & color at:
$50.00 for 500. Ph: 518-656-3578.
{snip of material related and dated to things that happened on 23 March 2001
deleted now as past tense. CLMsr}
 This message is part of Project TOTO, a plan to educate millions of
citizens (along with accountants, tax attorneys, legislators, judges, IRS
employees, and prospective jurors) about the true nature of the income tax
laws, to expose operations of the IRS that are unauthorized by law, and to
put an end to their illegal collection of taxes from people who do not owe
them. Jefferson said it best: "When the government fears the people, you
will have liberty. When the people fear the government, you will have
tyranny." {Hey People, what do we gave NOW? CLMsr.} Sponsored by We The
People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc., 2458 Ridge Road,
Queensbury, NY. 12804.     E-mail:
Fax: 518-656-9724. EndQuote.
{I certify that the afore quoted dialogue is an exact copy of the articles
that appeared in the newspapers identified at the onset of this discussion,
except that underlining was left out, and notes of mine indicated by { } are

 Constitutional Limitations on Taxing Power.
In order to understand why paying income tax and filing tax forms are
voluntary actions for individuals, it is essential to understand the
limitations on federal taxation embodied in the United States Constitution.
The statesmen who wrote the Constitution were fully aware of the dangers to
liberty in allowing a central government to impose taxes directly upon
individuals or upon property.
 The framers of the Constitution included not one, but two limitations in
the Constitution that forbid the federal government to impose any direct
taxes upon individuals or upon property. All direct taxes are required to be
"apportioned," which means that they must be laid upon the state governments
in proportion to each states population.  Another words, if one person owes
$10, all persons owe $10 not $10,000 or $100,000.
 The limitations forbidding direct taxation of individuals are found first
in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, which states: "Representatives and direct
Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included
within this Union, according to their respective Numbers..." and again in
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4, which states: "No Capitation, or other
direct Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration
here in before directed to be taken." These basic sections of the
Constitution have never been repealed or amended. The Constitution still
forbids direct taxation of individuals and property.
 In the past, America prospered and became the greatest and richest country
in the world when individuals paid no income tax and governments revenues
were raised by constitutionally authorized taxes on certain goods and
services and on corporations. But now, money is taken from the productive
sector of society by the income tax to support the non-productive sector,
foreign aid, give-aways and a bloated, needless bureaucracy. The income tax
paid by citizens sharply reduces their earnings, thus they buy less, causing
business to decline, leading to unemployment and depression which lowers the
standard of living for all Americans. The income tax has created havoc in
America's economy, in addition to the loss of liberty and the harassment of
our people by the IRS's oppressive collection tactics.  The collection of
the income tax enforced by fear and intimidation, it is as un-American as
the origin of the income tax itself.
 A graduated income tax is the second plank of Karl Marx Communist
Manifesto. Deceiving citizens into voluntarily subjecting themselves to a
tax they do not owe is FRAUD. And when individuals who do voluntarily
subject themselves to the income (excise) tax by filing returns, have
assessments of tax laid on them directly by the IRS, it is a blatant
violation of the constitutional limitation forbidding the direct taxation of
individuals. If the IRS then confiscates the individuals wages or property
by levy and seizure to settle the unconstitutionally laid tax claims, the
action is pure theft under color of law.
 The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. It was written to
create a government of limited powers for the primary purpose of securing
citizens rights to life, liberty and property. The Declaration of
Independence states that it is the duty of citizens to oppose and resist
abuses of their rights. These violations of citizens rights can be stopped
if enough people become informed of these facts.
 The Constitution is a precious document of our heritage of freedom. Its
guarantees of liberty are only as effective as the will of the people to
enforce them.
 Your labor is your property. Knowledge will give you the power to protect
and enjoy all the fruits of your labors.
 Make no mistake what the founding fathers would do today if they were
serving in Congress. Impeachment proceedings would begin this very day and
continue night and day. Those not impeached would be hanged for treason.
 Wake Up America!!!!!!!!!!!! Today, the Congress and the President, and the
entire judicial system is a disgrace to our country.
  We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments)
that makes us free.  Right?  Then visit:
Then take a look at these sites:

  {    Only Notes 1 & 2 are duplicates of previous messages text.  All text
preceding these notes is new.    }
NOTE # 1: This is the TWENTIETH doc in a string of about 22 regarding the
Income Tax, How it was illegally forced upon us, the collusion of various
nation banks, including The Bank of England, the Banks of Europe, the Banks
of the USA that make up the Non-Government organization known as the Fed and
the bankers themselves dedicated to making this a Socialist Nation. As David
Rockefeller reportedly said in 1973 when he and others formed the Trilateral
Commission, "We will have this a Socialist Nation by the end of the year
2000."  Well, with the help of our past Communist President, he damned well
nearly did it.  If Comrade Gore had been elected, it would be now! The last
doc in this series is a plan that was presented to President Bush when he
visited Florida recently.  It was put directly into his hands.  He has not
acted upon it. We The People must initiate a campaign of letters, faxes,
e-mails, and phone calls to him and others in our otherwise corrupt
government letting them know of our displeasure.  For God and Country, Chet.

NOTE # 2:  [  Should you wish to be removed from my mailing list, please
send a message with the word remove in the subject line.  If you got this
from a mail list, such as  or something like that,
then it is up to the moderator or owner of the list to remove my access
based upon complaints of my material, abuse, or removal of your access if
you request it. ]         Should you wish a copy of a numbered message
(this is the 20th one)   that you may have missed, please e-mail me off net
for a copy of it and I will be very happy to provide it. Chet.

You may forward this to every member of Congress by using a Mail Blaster
application available on the Internet as follows:
Step 1.  Access your web browser.   Step 2.  Type in the search block:
Step 3.  Click on   Send Batch E-Mail which is on the left end of the
Step 4.  Type in your E-mail Address.   Step 5.  Click on Subject: Type in
the subject of your document.
Step 6.  Click on Message: Now here you can type in your message or you can
paste a previously copied file here.  You can also edit your message after
you finish with the message and before sending it.
Step 7.  Then click on   select a file.  Here you may click on:
 demhouse.txt (Socialist Democrat House Members) or,
 democsen.txt (Socialist Democrats Senate Members) or,
 newsorg.txt (Many of the "anchor" news folks have their email address here
for you to use) or,
 rephouse.txt (Republican House of Representatives Members) or,
 repubsen.txt (Republican Senate Members) or,
 senators.txt (All Senators).
Step 8.  After selecting the group to receive your message then click on
send batch. It will go to everyone listed in the batch.
Remember: Nothing beats a letter AND a phone call.

Chester L McWhorter Sr, c/o 504 N. Brighton Rd, Lecanto, Occupied Florida,
C.S.A. 34461. Ph: 352-344-9073. Fax: Same. E-mail:
 20 of 38....   End.

     "Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the
citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged
sword.  It both emboldens the blood, just it narrows the mind.  And when the
drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and
the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of
the citizenry.  Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by
partiotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.
How do I know?  For this is what I have done.  And I am Caesar."--Julius


Part 21

<Back The Bankruptcy of the United States

American Patriot Friends Network APFN

"...a network of net workers..."

APFN Contents Page:Click Here

Message Board

APFN Home Page

Hit Counter