Giordano Bruno
At the beginning of every year around this "special" time (tax time), the mainstream media takes upon itself the task of falsely informing Americans of the "facts" and the history of the income tax and the IRS. Dozens of articles are written by the AP alone over the span of a few months, produced in an editorial style with little source information to back their claims, yet presented as legitimate journalism. 2010 has been no exception, as a quick glance over this recent article on the Joe Stack incident in Austin, Texas will reveal:
This event (which strangely, seems to have disappeared from media coverage as quickly as it appeared) is never-the-less being exploited by the MSM along with other incidents to open new doors in disinformation. The difference between the article above and those propaganda pieces written in past years is that it shows a new concerted effort to link the Anti-Income Tax Movement with the threat of domestic terrorism.
It is clear what the IRS, the private Federal Reserve, and the media would like you to believe, but what are the facts behind the debate over income taxes? Are all the claims of the MSM and the IRS true? Are tax protesters really "crackpots," "conspiracy nuts," and "scam artists" trying to find a loophole out of their solemn duty as Americans to contribute to the "betterment of the nation"?
In this article, we will examine the arguments presented in the AP disinformation piece linked above, as well as common debate tactics used by the IRS and the Federal Reserve to promote the false validity of the income tax. After reviewing the evidence, I believe it will become apparent to anyone with an honest discernment that Income Tax Protesters are anything but "crazy"...
The History Of The Income Tax
Many Americans do not realize that the income tax is actually relatively new. A distantly similar measure was taken during the Civil War by the Federal Government, levying a 3% tax on incomes above $800 a year (a decent sum in those days). However, the tax was abolished in 1872. For over a century, the U.S. government operated without any permanent tax on citizen income. Most American business was conducted privately with little to no interference from government. Wages remained intact and the average American's yearly income was his business and his alone. The states had their own taxes on goods which allowed them to operate, while the Federal Government used excise taxes and tariffs. Attempts to reissue an income tax in 1894 were ruled Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The Constitution specifically denies the issuance of a flat rate tax that is not proportioned to state population. The US Treasury website (which is otherwise filled with disinformation) even admits this:
http://www.ustreas.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml
However, this protection was lost (at least in the public eye) in the period between 1913 and 1916, with the institution of the Federal Reserve; a central banking system controlled privately by interests outside of our government. As we will show, the existence of the income tax is intimately linked with the existence of the Federal Reserve.
Americans consistently fought against schemes to adapt Central Banks, primarily because of their infamous track record for subverting government and dominating societies. The early builders of this country were well aware of the folly in allowing private banks to control the finances of an entire nation:
"The central bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the Principles and form of our Constitution. I am an Enemy to all banks discounting bills or notes for anything but Coin. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their Property until their Children will wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson
"Mischief springs from the power which the moneyed interest derives from a paper currency which they are able to control, from the multitude of corporations with exclusive privileges... which are employed altogether for their benefit. "
-Andrew Jackson
"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed."
-Abraham Lincoln
"The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency. Creating and issuing money is the supreme prerogative of government and is its greatest creative opportunity. Adopting these principles will save the taxpayers immense sums of interest and money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity."
-Abraham Lincoln
(Lincoln later introduced the "Greenback" which was to be used in place of money international bankers loaned the U.S. at incredible interest to finance the Civil War and subversively control the government. Soon after this move, Lincoln was assassinated, and the Greenback was mysteriously taken out of circulation.)
When President James A. Garfield, an opponent of central banking, was inaugurated in 1881, he said "Whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce". On July 2, 1881 Garfield was shot, he died on September 19.
A consortium of international bankers had tried and failed over and over again to maintain financial dominance of the U.S., but this changed in 1913. As is covered in great depth in G. Edward Griffin's incredible book The Creature From Jekyll Island, the consortium returned, led by men such as JP Morgan, Paul Warburg, Frank Vanderlip, German Bankers Kuhn, Loeb and Co., and the Rothschild Family among others. They and their representatives met in secret, traveling under fake names, to meet at the resort on Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia in 1910.
Under Paul Warburg's direction, they drafted a plan to pass the 16th Amendment which would allow them to flank the Supreme Court in creating an income tax, as well as the Federal Reserve Act, which would form the new Federal Reserve System (the bank was in no way a part of the Federal Government. The name was used to swindle the public into believing the institution was not the same as the Central Banks they despised). The plan was then to be presented to Congress by their confidant Senator Nelson Aldrich as if it was his idea alone. Frank Vanderlip later admitted in an interview with the Saturday Evening Post, February 9, 1935:
"...it would have been fatal to Senator Aldrich's plan to have it known that he was calling on anybody from Wall Street to help him in preparing his bill...I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyll Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System."
The Federal Reserve Act was pushed through Congress on Christmas Eve 1913 while most Congressmen were at home with their families and unable to vote on the matter. German Bank, Kuhn, Loeb and Co., immediately sent a representative to run the newly founded Federal Reserve. Woodrow Wilson, who helped with the passage of the act (and whose campaign was heavily financed by the same international bankers) later lamented with regret:
"A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."
-Woodrow Wilson, Senate Doc. 23, 76th Congress, 1st Session
http://www.archive.org/details/NationalEconomyAndTheBankingSystemOfTheUnitedStates
The income tax was put into practice soon after. In its early years, less than 1% of the American population paid into the tax. The foundation, though, had been set, and WWI gave the Fed the opening it needed to accelerate taxation.
Today, the income tax is treated as if it has always been, and that income taxation is "common sense". Many Americans simply assume that it is a fact of life, or that it is necessary, otherwise, it would not exist. Nothing could be further from the truth...
The Federal Reserve Demands Its Payment
On May 23, 1933, Congressman, Louis T. McFadden, brought formal charges against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system. In his letters, he put forward the evidence shown in this article, as well as much more, in the hopes that the American people would be freed from the financial tyranny of central banking. His petition for Articles of Impeachment was referred to the Judiciary Committee, who neither accepted it, nor denied it, meaning, the petition awaits a decision to this day. While Federal Reserve proponents today argue that only "conspiracy theorists" believe there is anything wrong with Central Banking, in fact, numerous members of government have investigated and come to the same exact conclusions as Anti-Fed and Anti-IRS activists. You can read a full log of McFadden's papers here:
http://www.uhuh.com/worthy/mcfad.htm
What McFadden presented was the full truth of the Federal Reserve. Here are some of the most important and damning facts on the Fed:
The Federal Reserve Is Private: For decades, the Fed had contended that it was part of the government, and was subject to audit. When confronted on many occasions about its unwillingness to divulge its activities to the American people, it then argued that it was actually "quasi-private," meaning, it was part of the government, but at the same time separate. The Fed claims it must keep information from the public in order to "avoid political pressure" which supposedly allows them to run our economy more efficiently. As the so called "Great Recession" has revealed, the Fed was able to ruin the economy with artificially low interest rates and is now in the process of annihilating the dollar, even with its independence from oversight.
There is no such thing as a "quasi-private" government financial institution. Either the Fed answers to the people, as democracy demands government institutions do, or it is private and does not. Only recently have Fed officials admitted that the Central Bank is a private entity that answers to no one, including Congress. In the video below, Alan Greenspan makes such an admission:
Past audits of the Fed have occurred, but followed strict guidelines which the Fed itself wrote. Certain items were off limits to auditors, including access to Fed policy decisions, records of foreign transactions, records of transactions with other central banks, etc. Basically, everything we needed to know about what the Fed was doing was off limits. Strangely, Fed officials will argue for the need of the IRS and intense audits of American citizens, but the Fed itself is not allowed to be fully audited:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/714.html
The Fed's Shareholders Are Unknown: Fed proponents claim that the Central Bank has no private shareholders, while activists claim foreign banks are heavily involved in its operation. While some evidence exists to support the idea of foreign influence, the bottom line is that neither side knows exactly who the shareholders of the Fed are, because, of course, the list is withheld from audit. Also, the Fed is not a publicly traded corporation and is therefore not required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to publish a list of its major shareholders. Sadly, American's have been denied the right to know the names of the people who are directly influencing their economy. Until a full audit of the Fed is enacted, we may never know.
The Fed Creates Money Out Of Thin Air: When it was adopted, the private Federal Reserve took on most of the tasks that were originally allocated to the Treasury Department by the Constitution, including the creation of currency. When the government requires money to finance its operations, it turns to the Treasury, who turns to the Fed, who then creates this money using a process called Fractional Reserve Lending; basically a legalized form of financial fraud by which the Fed (or any other bank) can artificially multiply its reserves. Example: If the Fed reserve ratio was 10 to 1, this would mean banks could create credit in the amount of $10 for every one real dollar they have in their accounts. Skeptics often argue that this is a conspiracy theory, but if they actually did their research, they would find that this process is admitted.
In the 1969 case of First National Bank v. Daly, the president of the First National Bank of Montgomery admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration for the mortgage loan given to the defendant (Daly) was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneaopolis, another private bank, further that he knew of no United States statute or law that gave the Plaintiff (the bank) the authority to do this.
Fed proponents argue that similar cases based on the same grounds have been dismissed, but this is irrelevant. The point is that the banks were forced to openly admit on record that they do indeed create the money that they lend out of thin air.
Even the Federal Reserve's own booklet on money creation, "Modern Money Mechanics," admits to the creation of credit from thin air. They have now stopped publication of the document, largely because of the quote on the last paragraph of page 6, which states:
"What they [banks] do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers' transaction accounts. Loans (assets) and deposits (liabilities) both rise by [the amount of the "loan"]."
This is an open admission by the Federal Reserve itself that the money they lend actually never existed. This would be the equivalent of you lending your friend money that you printed on your computer for free, then expecting your friend to pay you back for the loan that cost you nothing, and with interest!
The Fed Charges Us Interest On The Money It Creates: In Fiscal Year 2009, the Treasury spent $383 Billion in taxpayer money to cover the interest payments to holders of our national debt. And the Federal Reserve System is in an indirect way one of the largest holders of American debt. Skeptics claim that the Fed only holds about 7% of interest in American debt, and that this percentage is "rebated" to the Treasury every year. If this were true, it would mean that the Federal Reserve actually costs taxpayers no money and accrues us no debt. The problem is that it is not true at all...
100% Of Your Income Tax Goes To The Private Federal Reserve: Now we get to the central problem of the Income Tax, as well as the reason why it is so closely linked to the existence of the Federal Reserve. In 1984, as a response to President Ronald Reagan's "Private Sector Survey on Cost Control," an investigation of the income tax and the IRS was organized. It was called "The Grace Commission":
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14566862/Grace-Commisson-Report
After extensive accounting of where taxpayer funds are allocated, the Grace Commission came to a startling conclusion:
"100% of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal Debt ... all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services taxpayers expect from government."
-Grace Commission report submitted to President Ronald Reagan - January 15, 1984
So, if every penny of the income tax goes to interest on Federal Debt, where are the Trillions of dollars required to run the U.S. coming from? All foreign investments combined could not account for the massive sums needed. The answer is quite simple: The Federal Reserve creates and lends the money, continuing the debt cycle, which as we all now know is leading to hyperinflation.
Essentially, not one penny of your income taxes goes to funding the programs and services you expect from Government, including schools, roads, sanitation, etc. Most of these services are actually covered by State taxes and taxes on goods such as gasoline, toll roads, along with many others.
So then this epiphany begs us to ask a very important question: If none of our income taxes go towards the government services we require, and all of it is going towards the debt being needlessly generated by a group of private Central Bankers who answer to no one, why should we pay the income tax?
Common Federal Reserve And IRS Talking Points
Below we will list some of the more prominent arguments used by the IRS and Federal Reserve to manipulate the public into accepting Central Banking and income taxation. I would also like to recommend our article "Disinformation Tactics: The Methods Used To Keep You In The Dark":
http://neithercorp.us/npress/?p=251
This article outlines the many psychological games inherent in arguments like those used by the Fed and the IRS.
You can see these arguments presented in endless circular logic on websites like those linked here:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/articles/tax/basics/6195.asp
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf
http://public.findlaw.com/taxes/tax-basics/tax-myths.html
1) Tax Protesters Are "Crazy," And Their Arguments are "Frivolous"
The only thing frivolous here is this talking point. Calling someone "crazy" is not a rational argument, it is only juvenile ridicule designed to inspire biases in other people so that they will not listen to Tax Activist arguments objectively. Ridicule is a tactic often encouraged by Saul Alinsky, a socialist and moral relativist who believed that winning an argument had nothing to do with the truth, but denigrating the opposition until they surrendered out of frustration.
2) Tax Protesters Are A "Fringe Movement"
Another empty debate tactic. If one examines the growth of the Liberty Movement over the past few years alone, they would find millions of people who are aware and naturally averse to the Federal Reserve and the IRS. The fact that Ron Paul, a presidential candidate who has stated consistently that he wants to shut down the Federal Reserve and the IRS, won the latest CPAC straw poll by a substantial margin shows that the Anti-Income Tax Movement is in no way "fringe":
However, even if the movement was "fringe," that alone would not make their arguments any less valid. Most if not all movements based on a concrete truth usually begin small and out of the mainstream. If we ignored every argument that came from a fringe group, we would still believe the Sun revolves around the Earth.
3) Tax Protesters Are Dangerous
This argument has been more prevalent because of the Joe Stack plane crash, but its undercurrent has always been around. It runs along the same lines as the "crazy" debate point. It is designed to frighten people enough to ignore Tax Activist Arguments, or even to make people see activists as a threat to their safety. The overall Liberty Movement (the movement which comprises Tax Activists, Fed Activists, Anti-globalists, etc.) is a leaderless movement. People act spontaneously in its name without direction because they believe deeply in its cause. Such a concept has many advantages, especially in that its leadership is not vulnerable to subversion, because leadership is unnecessary for the movement to continue. But, this does make it easy to attack in that any member of the movement who takes a decidedly violent action can be used by the government as a false symbol in place of leadership. After reading through Joe Stack's "manifesto," it appears to me that he was not a member of the Liberty Movement, only a man who happened to hate the IRS (at least, that's the way it seems). But this does not stop the MSM from trying to link him to the Anti-Tax Movement and the Liberty Movement as a whole, as if we are all ready to "snap" and fly our prop-planes into buildings.
4) Tax Protesters Just Want To Get Out Of Paying What They Owe, Which Is "Un-American"
The terms "tax evader," "tax cheat," and "tax dodger" were created to instill the sense that Tax Activists are somehow criminals for even presenting the arguments they do. Most Tax Activists are keenly aware that they will likely not get out of paying taxes, at least not in the short term, so the "cheat" argument is mute. They fight the IRS because, as we have shown, the IRS and the Federal Reserve are built upon lies, and lies must be fought on principle in one way or another. Money has little to do with it. To me, nothing is more American than standing for what one believes in regardless of the opposition.
5) Paying Income Tax Is The Law
Actually, there is NO specific law that states that the IRS has the right to tax your income. When Joe Banister, an IRS Agent for many years, overheard the anti-income tax arguments on a radio show, he set out to produce the law which specifically states that he had to pay income tax. Banister found himself stumped. The agent thoroughly checked the IRS code, and could not find the law. When he approached his superiors and asked them if they could show him where the law was written, he was promptly fired. Remember, this man was a dedicated IRS Agent for years:
The question this presents is: If the IRS cannot produce the exact law which allows them to tax income, then why are they allowed to throw people in jail for not doing so?
A list of many other IRS whistleblowers can be seen here:
http://www.irs-armory.com/read/wistleblowers.htm
6) No Tax Activist Has Ever Beaten The IRS In Court
The IRS uses this argument on its own website, but it is entirely false. Attorney Tom Cryer, charged in Shreveport, Louisiana for tax evasion, beat the IRS on a jury vote of 12-0 on the grounds that they could not prove they had a right to tax his labor, nor could they prove there was a law that allowed them to do so:
Vernice Klugman, a FedEx pilot, beat the IRS in 2003 on grounds that the Income Tax was unlawful:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94630,00.html
Tennessee farmer Lloyd Long beat the IRS in 1993 on the grounds that they could not prove he was required by law to pay a tax on his income:
http://fly.hiwaay.net/~becraft/LongLloyd1.htm
These are only a few examples. In many cases, when asked if the IRS could produce the exact law which allowed it to tax income on labor, they refused, or were unable to.
For more information of the IRS' unlawful enforcement of income tax, check out Aaron Russo's film "America: Freedom To Fascism"
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173#
The IRS' only response to this argument so far is that though there is no specific law, the "entire tax code" acts as "one big law," which allows them to tax income. This is utter nonsense. If they can interpret the body of the tax code to mean that they are legally allowed to tax income, then what is to stop others from interpreting it differently? Without specifics, there is no law.
7) The 16th Amendment Allows Income Taxation
There are many arguments over whether or not the 16th Amendment was legally ratified, but let's assume for the moment that it was. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of S. Pacific v. Lowe in 1918:
"The provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation but simply prohibited the complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged."
And in the case of Peck v. Lowe, the Supreme Court contended that:
"The Sixteenth Amendment, although referred to in argument, has no real bearing and may be put out of view. As pointed out in recent decisions, (Brushaber), it does not extend the taxing power to new or excepted subjects, but merely removes all occasion, which otherwise might exist, for an apportionment among the states of taxes laid on income, whether it be derived from one source or another."
What this means is, even if the 16th Amendment was properly ratified, the Supreme Court ruled afterwards that it allowed no new taxes beyond what was provisioned by the Constitution. Indeed, the income tax was still illegal despite the amendment. The Federal Reserve and the IRS have apparently ignored this ruling with the blessing of certain sections of government.
8) Without The Income Tax, We Would Have No Government Services
As we have shown, this is false. Not one penny of your income tax goes towards public services. The existence of the income tax is wholly unnecessary.
9) The Federal Reserve Is Subject To Government Oversight And Audit
Again, we have shown this to be false. I would also point out that if the Fed was actually subject to a FULL audit, then why are they fighting Ron Paul's Fed Audit Bill, HR 1207? Obviously, they have not been subject to a full audit before, otherwise they would not be so hostile towards this bill. The question here is: Do the American people have the right to know who is controlling their economy and what specific financial actions those people have taken in doing so? I believe the answer is a resounding "yes".
10) The Federal Reserve Is Necessary For A Healthy Economy
Anyone who truly believes this after the past two years is living in fantasy land. The U.S. operated for an extensive period without the existence of a permanent Central Bank, and the Treasury is perfectly capable of doing the job of currency creation without the help of private bankers, while at the same time being subject to the democratic process. For more information on why the Fed is dead weight hanging from the neck of American society, see our article "Auditing The Federal Reserve: What Are The Banksters So Afraid Of...?"
http://neithercorp.us/npress/?p=201
Tax Protesting: An Admirable Tradition
Most of us are ready to admit that taxation to a certain degree is required for a country to run smoothly. Taxation is not what we oppose. What we do oppose, though, is the abuse of taxation to invade privacy and dominate culture. Authoritarian governments throughout history have used forced tribute to shackle the common man to a certain state of mind. The psychological effects of overt taxation are very pronounced. It insinuates a sense of fealty, and of submission, usually without an explanation of necessity. The tax, like death, just is. But taxes are not a force of nature, they are a creation of men, and they can be changed or destroyed by men. The income tax is no exception.
It has been driven into the collective American mind, the notion that the IRS, the Federal Reserve, and the income tax, are undeniable and eternal. Many people believe that they are right simply because they ‘are,' like law itself. But like any law, they are subject to higher moral fortitude. Justice lords over law, and if a law is found to be unjust, it must be undone. We believe the evidence shows that establishments like the IRS, and the Federal Reserve, represent unjust and faulty law. It is no more insane to question these establishments than it is to question the establishments of monarchy, or slavery, and the American people have every right to remove these establishments from their culture to produce greater balance in society.
This country began on the actions and beliefs of Tax Protesters. Men who were willing to stand against the mechanisms of their own government, and start anew with ideals designed to prevent unjust law from looming over humanity once again. To rediscover these ideals and to embody them is our greatest hope of overcoming the many dangers, economic and political, that we face today. With determination and strength of will, we can turn the tide back. Decades of lies scattered to the winds, in the span of a single generation.
Thanks to Campaign For Liberty for providing this image.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento