Why am I a nonperson? Why is United States scared of me? Is it because I’m a one-man Pandora’s Box of Horrors? Is it because I seem to get away without paying federal income tax for twenty years?
And why is that, Senator? Is it because I’m your constituent? Is it because of my drop-dead gorgeous good looks? No, don’t be silly, Senator. It’s because the federal income tax is a color-of-law fraud. Like so much over at that “juris” “diction.”
I remember fondly when I went to law school. I studied in the basement of Stetson University one summer for the price of a library card. There was all these smelly ol’ books that no one had any interest in, the junk that wouldn’t have had any place in the law library upstairs, the unfashionable underpinnings of American jurisprudence that have no place in law today.
And who could blame the librarian, Senator? There was only so much shelf space in the library upstairs, only so much room for the titles in demand by today’s paying law school student, titles such as “How to Drain the System Dry in Three Easy Lawsuits,” “Defiling Your Environment by Opening Your Mouth,” and “Buckling Down the Leather Straps: Criminal Defense and You.”
No, Senator; I had no interest in polluting decent society with my mere existence. I instead wanted to know the law. So I studied those yucky old books that had been printed and bound in the Eighteenth Century, books such as “The Principles of Natural Law in Which the True Syftems of Morality and Civil Government Are Eftablifhed,” written by one Mister Burlamaqui, Counfellor of State and Profeffor of Natural and Civil Law at Geneva, published in 1748. I painstakingly photocopied the entire book and bound it. It sits here in my lap as I address you.
Say, does Idiot Nondiction United States regard such a book as a terrorism manual? Well it should, because it seems that a knowledge of the fundamentals of law, wielded by the astute layman, might threaten to upend the entire fraudulent system. So I certainly hope that the Department of Homeland Security have accorded me the honor of placing me at the top of their terror list. I am a holy terror. So they’ve gotten it right for once.
And I studied the internal revenue code that one summer. If you’ll permit me to rework a tired old construction for my own purposes, I’ll tell you that I truly have forgotten more about the income tax than your tax attorney will ever know. The entire internal revenue code is a color-of-law fraud. It appears that bankers hired lawyers to ply their flim-flammery and pollute the legal system with greasy words of art like “employer,” “employee,” “taxpayer,” and “income,” the meanings of some of which your assiduous study would never reveal! Isn’t it great? The mere breath of a lawyer is like a rust accelerant; merely by speaking do lawyers corrode and corrupt the legal system. They’re like auto mechanics who cause disease and decay in the very machines they are charged with servicing. That’s one peculiar guild of yours, Senator.
Here’s the dirty little secret of the federal income tax: Filing a tax return creates the legal nexus between the otherwise unencumbered natural person and the income tax. That’s right. It’s truly that simple. Most people who would otherwise not be liable for the tax instead elect to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are the above-signed taxpayer and that the figures listed thereupon are correct. But the IRS considers it less important that the figures be correct than that the above-signed natural person concede that he is a taxpayer. See? It’s the ol’ lawyer switcheroo! “Ha! We got you! Ta da! You just became liable for the tax! You created the necessary legal nexus by attesting that you are a taxpayer, the definition of which your assiduous studies would never reveal!”
To be free of the income tax, just don’t file a tax return. (And possess the necessary informational primacy to expose the fraud. Thanks for the stage. I’ll be on to allodial title next.) It’s really that simple. And the bugaboo of Willful Failure to File applies only to those who otherwise would have been obligated to file.
The United States possesses plenary powers of taxation within its territorial jurisdiction. But outside its territorial jurisdiction –that is, within the territorial jurisdictions of the several states– direct taxes must be apportioned, thus disallowing a graduated income tax. Ah, I shall anticipate your protest, Senator: the “United States citizen, wherever resident” clause. But that there is another of your guild’s greasy words of art. What is the meaning of “United States citizen” in that context? It is an easily verifiable fact that there are two classes of United States citizen; one is a United States citizen by virtue of his having first been a citizen of one of the several states, and the other is a United States citizen by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The former possesses natural rights, the latter possesses civil rights. The latter has a character more akin to that of a ward of the state. And since the Fourteenth Amendment did not destroy that other, original class of citizen, that means that we cannot know whether any particular natural person is a state United States citizen or a federal United States citizen. (I, being the greasy little lawyer in training that I am, would fold my arms and extend to the prosecution all the time they may require, up to the projected lifespan of the universe, to demonstrate that which I do not concede: that I am a federal United States citizen.)
(Incidentally, that is why the filthy beasts in the Justice Department are forever promulgating law enforcement bulletins about so-called “sovereign citizens” and state citizens, mischaracterizing them as somehow anti-government. The foreign bankers who hired adequately corrupt attorneys to write that color-of-law fraud of an internal revenue code, the tax proceeds of which go directly to these banking families overseas, continue to instruct their minions in the Justice Department that no one shall ever stand upon his status as a state citizen. That is why we see the harassment of state citizens by the Justice Department. State United States citizens, as opposed to federal United States citizens, are in no way liable for the federal income tax, assuming, of course, that any income does not derive from within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. (I will not even get into a side discussion about the meaning of the word “income” as it is moot, as I’ve adequately demonstrated that state United States citizens are not liable for the tax absent an attesting under penalty of perjury that they are “the above-signed taxpayer.”
The income tax code may be cracked by one with a keen eye for the fields of study of jurisdiction and citizenship.
So is that why I’m a bad man, Senator? Is it because I blew the IRS and their color-of-law fraud out of the water? Is it because I threaten to bring down the entire fraudulent system?
I don’t much care for frauds. I had these friends once who were nice to my face when they weren’t stealing things out of my trailer. By my accounting, they helped themselves to about a thousand dollars of my belongings.
I don’t much care for thieves. It seems there’s always someone looking to steal from me. If it’s not trash families stealing ham radios from my trailer, it’s trash jurisdictions stealing my money. Or it’s other trash jurisdictions stealing my natural rights by tricking me into conceding that I am a “driver” or an “operator,” more greasy words of art. Well, I’m finally on to the con.
But back to the income tax. You know how I enjoy waving around ironclad smoking guns like that detailed in the Capta Brightstick Document? Here’s the one for the income tax: If we were to ask the Commissioner of the IRS where his organization derives its taxing authority for the income tax, he would invariably reply, “from the Sixteenth Amendment.”
And then if we were to thank the good Commissioner for his considered testimony and turn the questioning to our neighborhood judge for his thoughts on the Sixteenth Amendment, he would invariably reply that “the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new taxing authority. It placed the income tax into the class of indirect tax to which it inherently belonged.”
So how could that be, Senator? How could 9-11 have gone down as described by the Washington Post and the New York Times if Flight 175 wasn’t even at the scene of the crime? And how could the IRS derive new taxing authority from an instrument that confers no new taxing authority?
Hm? Is it a conspiracy theory to point out incompatible engine hardware which precludes certain vehicles from the scene of the crime? Is it a conspiracy theory to be able to read law books? I suppose it was just a conspiracy theory when I saw my ham radio’s User’s Manual in my erstwhile friends’ house, erstwhile friends who knew so little of the device that they mistook it for a CB radio and sold it for fifty bucks or an eighth of weed or whatever instead of the $750 it was worth. Upon seeing the manual I said, “I hope you got at least five hundred bucks for that radio you stole.” They didn’t know what to say. If they had been the federal government, they probably would have called me a conspiracy theorist terriss domestic extremiss.
But anyhow, it’s a fruitful field of inquiry, isn’t it? Of how that Typhoid Mary jurisdiction spreads its filth as far and wide as possible, incarcerating and ruining the lives of people who aren’t even liable for the tax in the first place?
If I ever were to deign to enter your singularly disreputable profession, Senator, I would do so for the sole purpose of destroying color-of-law frauds like the income tax and the driver’s license.
So is that why I’m a terriss? Is that why I’m a bad man? A one-man Pandora’s Box of Horrors?