Kirby

Dear Brethren and Friends,

Due to a cancelled interview on a Swedish radio station today, I felt it necessary to write to the list about my most recent discoveries concerning the Income Tax. I desire to recount its history in light of new understanding. This will cast light on all the disinformation spreading like wildfire throughout the patriot and Bible-believing Christian community, some of which I have believed. As many of you know, I have refused to file a tax return for the last twenty-five years. The reasons are three:

1. There is no Act of law passed by Congress, signed into law by the President and then codified into the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26), which requires an unincorporated, natural person to pay an income tax on his wages received in exchange for labor or intellectual property. (Nearly one trillion Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs or “frauds”) are taken from American laborers every year in “income taxes.” That money is used to pay only the interest on the national debt according to the Grace Commission Report set forth under President Reagan. Head American Knight of Malta J. Peter Grace and JFK co-conspirator/assassin, who chaired that Commission, knew exactly what he was talking about.)

2. According to the rulings of several federal district courts, a “tax return” can be used as evidence against the filer in a criminal prosecution because he has provided all the information on that 1040 "voluntarily." It is for this reason that every IRS commissioner has stated the income tax self-assessment system for individuals is one of "voluntary compliance." We see this term "voluntary compliance" on every IRS 1040 Instruction Pamphlet issued every year. I refuse to voluntarily provide information that may ultimately be used against me in a criminal prosecution.

3. To "voluntarily" provide financial information to the federal government, which information can then be used against the filer in a federal criminal prosecution, is to waive one's Fifth Amendment right. As a Baptist Calvinist, to waive my Fifth Amendment right in any context is to repudiate the work of the Baptist-Calvinists of Virginia, especially Baptist-Calvinist James Madison who penned the Fifth Amendment. The Baptist-Calvinist Fifth Amendment was the means of preventing the Papacy from instituting an American Inquisition via our federal government Rome intended to control from the beginning of our nation’s founding. The First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments are the greatest bulwarks against unbridled reign of the Pope's temporal power over "heretic and liberal" Americans. It is these Amendments that the Order's Patriot Act I has nearly gutted, written from Jesuit Georgetown University in Washington, D.C.---many months before 911! Thus, I refuse to waive my Fifth Amendment right and cannot be compelled to be a witness against myself, especially information provided on a federal income tax return.

To better understand this issue while keeping it simple, I shall recall specific Amendments and Acts of Congress that, when operating together, create the liability for the American laborer to pay an income tax on his wages. This most secretive plan implemented over a period of sixty-five years (1868-1933) is reflective of the diabolical cunning of the Order's greatest Masonic minds working in unison for the destruction of America’s “heretic and liberal” White Anglo Saxon Protestant and Baptist Middle Class, while simultaneously building Rome's Cartel-Corporate-Fascist corporations, most of which do not pay any income tax on their massive profits. Thus, the Order's socialist-communist taxing system (making no distinction between natural and artificial persons---natural persons being living, breathing people and artificial persons being corporations---is returning the world to the Dark Ages. This means we are regressing back to medieval feudalism, when there were: no national sovereignties; no middle class peoples in Europe; no private wealth for the common man; no elective ballot box; corporate monopolies in the hands of blue-blooded, pope-worshipping nobles; no educated and literate populaces; and when the pope was the universal monarch of the world.

1. We shall not address the Income Tax imposed by President Lincoln during the War of Northern Aggression (1861-65). It was repealed in 1864, shortly before the end of that Radical/Black Republican-led, Jacobin socialist-communist, American/French Revolution.

2. On July 28, 1868 (a day of infamy) the Fourteenth Amendment was "declared" to have been ratified. The imposition of that Amendment was the true purpose for inciting and waging the Pope’s Republican-led War/Crusade against the “heretic and liberal” White Southern people regardless of how many Blacks, freed or slave, had to die. It centralized power in Washington, creating a Jesuit “Holy Roman” Empire on the ruins of the destroyed Presbyterian/Baptist-Calvinist Union of Sovereign States. To create a Jesuit-ruled, Masonically-led, centralized empire, national citizenship had to be imposed. This was the intent of the Fourteenth Amendment according to James G. Blaine, "the continental liar from the state of Maine." (Blaine was also a prominent conspirator in the cruel and torturous assassination of the godly, learned and honest President James Garfield which murder occurred in 1881, as shown in VAIII.) The Amendment "reversed the origin and character of American citizenship," making United States citizenship "paramount and dominant," and state citizenship "subordinate and derivative"---state citizenship now being a mere privilege of this newly created national citizenship for both Whites and Blacks. The foundation was now laid for every national citizen of any race to be in commercial privilege while performing his sacred labor for wages.

3. In 1872-73 the Slaughterhouse Cases were decided. Simply put, the "privileges and immunities" of Section One of the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment citizenship (the amendment having been forcibly imposed in the Southern States via martial law from 1866 to 186 did not include "fundamental" or "common law" rights. The Supreme Court held that “fundamental” or "common law" rights were on a state level, not on a federal or national level. (Remember, the American right to work was a common law right secured by the state, not by the federal government.) The blueprint was now set forth in this key Supreme Court decision for the removal of our common law from the state level to be replaced by the Uniform Commercial Code! Once our common law right to work was converted into a commercial privilege to work, the wages from that commercial privilege to work (the “source”) would then be "income." As long as the common law was not overturned on a state level, wages could never be taxed as "income." The distinction between a natural and an artificial person, later set forth by the Supreme Court in Hale v. Henkel (1909) would remain intact.

4. In 1894 the Income Tax Act was passed by Congress. It was a “direct tax” that was “uniform” and not “apportioned.” It taxed the “occupations” of American workers among other things. The law was disobeyed and therefore challenged in court, ultimately decided in 1895 by the Supreme Court. This important case is known as “the Pollack Case” (Pollack v. Farmer’s Loan and Trust Co., 157 US 429, rehearing 158 US 601 (1895)). The decision by the Court was since this direct tax (reported on “a tax return”) was not apportioned, but rather uniform, it was unconstitutional. (According to the Constitution, direct taxes must be “apportioned;” indirect taxes must be “uniform.”)

Now how would the Society of Jesus overcome this decision? How would it be able to put a direct tax without apportionment upon the individual citizens of the Pope’s “Holy Roman” Fourteenth Amendment American Empire? It would take a constitutional amendment.

5. In February of 1913, at the close of the administration of President William Howard Taft, that Skull and Bonesman, 33rd Degree Freemason and slave of the Archbishop of Baltimore James Cardinal Gibbons (as was Taft’s predecessor, 33rd Degree Freemason Theodore “Rex” Roosevelt), the Sixteenth Amendment was declared to have been ratified by Secretary of State and high-level Freemason, Philander Knox. (It has been proven that the amendment was not properly ratified and was recently so admitted by a federal district judge in 2003, but this is not relevant to the discussion at hand.) Assuming that the amendment was properly ratified, according to Black’s Law Dictionary it permitted

“. . . Congress to tax incomes ‘from whatever source derived,’ thus nullifying the Supreme Court’s decisions in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co., which had declared that an income tax was a direct tax, which would be constitutionally valid only if apportioned among the States according to population.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th edition, p. 1244.

Again for clarification purposes, the Sixteenth Amendment NULLIFIED the Pollack Case (just as the Fourteenth Amendment NULLIFIED the Dred Scott Case of 1857). Therefore, the amendment enabled Congress to tax the “incomes” of individuals evidenced by the phrase “without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Censuses related to numbering individual, natural persons, not corporations. And “no new power” was conferred upon Congress to tax “income” of individuals. The old constitutional power to tax “uniformly” was extended to directly tax the “incomes” of individual people. The people were not taxed; their “incomes” were taxed directly, uniformly and without apportionment.

Now, to the delight of the socialist-communist Jesuit Order, the Congress could tax the incomes of individuals and incomes of corporations in the exact same manner although at different rates. The Sixteenth Amendment was openly intended to tax the “income” of the rich, the millionaires unique to “the Guilded Age.” But the Rockefellers and Morgans were already moving their vast personal fortunes into giant trusts and foundations rendering them immune to the new direct and uniform income tax. Therefore the amendment’s secret but true purpose at the outset was to tax the wages of America’s laborers. For this to finally transpire the Company of Jesus would have to wait another twenty years (1913-1933).

(At this time it is appropriate to expose the many tax experts in the income tax movement. Virtually all of them declare that the Sixteenth Amendment is an excise tax. This is a lie. A direct tax is not an excise tax. They also teach that the Pollack Case, intended to tax the incomes of individual wage-earners, was never NULLIFIED by the Sixteenth Amendment, which is another lie. These notorious liars are men like Irwin Schiff and Aaron Roussu, the late producer of the popular DVD, America: From Freedom to Fascism. It is the position of this author that both men are Jesuit temporal coadjutors intending to incite a tax revolt based on misinformation that will result in a fascist military dictatorship, fully justified in forcefully subduing the coming anarchical revolt.)

6. In October of 1929 three Irish Roman Catholics on the New York Stock Exchange “sold short,” hundreds of margin calls crashing the market. According to Curtis Dahl, FDR’s son-in-law, they were Ben Strong, Tom Bragg and Joseph Kennedy. Hundreds of millions of hard-earned, real dollars had been invested in the market at the behest and encouragement of Dupont multimillionaire, Knight of Malta John J. Raskob. The calculated crash, resulting in the Great Depression, enabled the Jesuits to buy up all bankrupted businesses of interest on Wall Street for pennies on the dollar. The funds came from fascist Mussolini who had given the Vatican nearly 100 million dollars via the Lateran Treaty of March, 1929, as reparations for the loss of the Pope’s Temporal Power from 1870 to 1929. With this backdrop, we can now understand why the Order used its CFR member and 33rd Degree Freemason President Franklin Roosevelt to remove the nation’s gold coins from circulation in 1933 and to institute the Social Security System in 1934 as part of the Black Pope’s socialist “New Deal,” then supported by radio priest, Jew-baiter and Jesuit coadjutor, Charles Coughlin.

Kirby

7. In 1933 House Joint Resolution was passed as a solution to the Order’s Great Depression. HJR-192 made it illegal to use gold coin as payment for debts. It bankrupted the states, violated Article 1 Section 10 of the Constitution (“No state shall make any Thing but gold and silver coin a Tender in Payment of Debts”) and put the entire population in commercial paper. Further, and most importantly for this discussion, it abolished the common law in the States, replacing it with the Uniform Commercial Code. With the loss of the common law in the States, the common law on the federal level also disappeared. In fact, the Supreme Court’s Erie Railroad decision of 1938 (Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, 304 US 64) stated that there was no longer any “federal general common law.” When the removal of gold coin abolished the common law in the States, common law rights were also abolished. One of those common law rights was the common law right to work, to labor. At this moment, the common law right to labor became, by OPERATION OF LAW, the commercial privilege to labor. Americans were now commercial slaves to Washington, D.C., “Rome on the Potomac,” and the Society moved in for mop up operations. Now, with all Fourteenth Amendment citizens in privilege on a state level, the once non-taxable monies received in exchange for our labor, was now “income.”

8. In 1934 the Social Security Act was passed. The beginning of the numbering of the American population began. Each would be assigned a Social Security Number (SSN) with an accompanying bond number to be seen on the reverse of the Social Security Card. All American, laboring, “human resources” would be bonded for the national debt, enslaved to interest payments, which could never be repaid. Like the corporations, all American citizens were now commercial “resources” whose “incomes” were to be taxed and they were to be managed by their 14th Amendment creators in Washington via acts of Congress controlled by Rome through the Archbishop of New York City’s Council on Foreign Relations.

In conclusion, the Fourteenth Amendment, the Sixteenth Amendment and House Joint Resolution 192 working in conjunction with one another, have made the “wages” of the individual American citizen subject to the direct and uniform “income tax.” The Fourteenth Amendment placed the national citizen “in privilege,” no longer enjoying any “fundamental” or “common law” rights—including the Bill of Rights as part of the “privileges and immunities” provision of Fourteenth Amendment citizenship—on a national level. The Sixteenth Amendment imposed an “income tax” on the “incomes” of individual Fourteenth Amendment citizens, but for twenty years (from 1913 to 1933) “income” did not include “wages in exchange for labor” or “personal property.” The Fourteenth Amendment citizen still had the common law right to work on a State level. House Joint Resolution 192 passed in 1933 removed gold coin from circulation on the State level. With the removal of gold from the State level, the common law was removed from the State level. With the common law removed, the COMMON LAW RIGHT TO WORK—by OPERATION OF LAW—became a commercial privilege to work. And therefore, all monies derived from that commercial privilege then became “income.” It is well established that during the 1930s, individual wage earners were filing tax returns and paying the “income tax” on their wages. We read the following statement from federal agent John Roy Carlson’s Under Cover, published in 1943, on page 74:

“The mainspring of Nazi strategy was to keep the masses confused, servile and forever ignorant. That is why my Christian Defender was so successful. My formula was simple. Everything hostile to Nazi aims was called Jewish or Communist and the two made synonymous. I realized how easy it is to become a merchant of hate. Lies. . . .
Although I did my utmost to confine its distribution to those who already were chronic hate mongers, The Christian Defender found its way to Washington. The Sate Department sent me a form to ascertain whether I was an agent of a ‘foreign principal.’ The Treasury Department demanded to know why George Pagnanelli [the alias for John Roy Carlson] hadn’t filed an income tax” [in 1939]. [Emphasis added]

Again we read on pages 182 and 186 we read:

“In the spring of 1941 [before the Order’s planned attack on Pearl Harbor and the Congress’ subsequent declaration of war on Japan in December, 1941, the Victory Tax Act to follow in 1942 falsely claimed by Irwin Schiff to be the beginning of individuals paying an income tax on their wages when it was in fact the beginning of the Rumml Withholding Plan] Hubert [Schmuederrich] insisted that I become acquainted with the prospective members of his underground storm-troopers. . . . Hubert boasted that he never filed an income tax report and was also ‘proud’ of being a draft dodger.”
[Emphasis added]

Clearly, individual wage earners were filing income tax returns in the late Thirties and early Forties before the Victory Tax Act was passed in December, 1942, intended to finance World War II. That Victory Tax was an income tax on wages of the American citizen. It was later repealed in May, 1944, but the withholding of income taxes on wages continued to this day. Therefore, since the Sixteenth Amendment authorized a tax on the “incomes” of individuals without regard to a census, and that wages became “income” via HJR-192, it is no surprise to observe in history that tax returns were being filed by wage earners in the late 1930s before the passage of the Victory Tax Act in 1942. And to instill fear and terror in the populace to “file their returns” in preparation for HJR-192 in 1933, in 1931 Al Capone was tried and convicted of income tax evasion (rather than murder) and sentenced to eleven years in federal prison

By 1934 the Jesuits had finally accomplished their tremendous quest of taxing the wages of the largest and most productive labor market in the world. What a bonanza of monies began to flow into the coffers of the U.S. Treasury, which in turn, paid the Black Pope’s Federal Reserve Bank extending its monopoly credit to the U.S. Congress---with interest!

Further, with regard to wages being “income” within the meaning of the many decisions of the federal courts, we will notice but three. In United States v. Becker, 965 F.2d 383, 389 (7th Cir. 1992) the court found defendant’s contention that wages are not income to be “ridiculous.” In United States v. Connor, 898 F.2d 942, 943-44 (3rd Cir.) cert. denied, 497 U.S. 1029 (1990), the court stated that “[e]very court which has ever considered the issue has unequivocally rejected the argument that wages are not income.” In United States v. White, 769 F.2d 511 (8th Cir. 1985), the court issued a permanent injunction to prevent the promotion of the argument that there is no tax imposed on an exchange of property (labor) in an equal exchange for property (wages). In Clark v. United States, 211 F.2d 100 (8th Cir. 1954), the court held
“Of course, gross income and not gross receipts, is the foundation of income tax liability, for it is only earnings [wages], profits and gains which the statute subjects to tax. (See 4 USC 110C.)”

Please notice the date of these cases, all of which are SUBSEQUENT to the passing of HJR-192 in 1933. This author knows of no cases decided by any federal court in which the definition of “income” was included to be wages UNTIL AFTER 1933!

Indeed, “wages” are “income,” but wages have not been defined by the courts to be “profit or gain from a source,” which definition of “income” has been given by the Supreme Court since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913. As to “wages” not being “profit or gain,” we read in Oliver v. Halstead, 196 Va 992; 86 S.E.2d 858 (1955):

“There is a clear distinction between ‘profit’ and ‘wages’ or compensation for labor. Compensation from labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law. The word ‘profit’ as ordinarily used, means the gain made upon any business or investment---a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor.”

And finally, we read in Laureldale Cemetery Association v. Matthews, 354 Pa. 239; 47A.2d 277, 280; 86 S.E. at 859:

“Reasonable compensation for labor or services rendered is not profit.”

It is absolutely imperative to understand that “wages” or “compensation for labor” is not “profit and gain.” But “wages,” or “earnings” in exchange for labor, as well as “profit and gain” are both “income” and thus subject to the “income tax” imposed by the Sixteenth Amendment—only as of 1933. All “income” of those persons, natural and artificial, receiving “profit and gain” from a “source” in privilege, were subject to income taxation as per the Sixteenth Amendment evidenced by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad., 240 US 1 (1916), and Eisner v. Macomber, 252 US 189 (1920). But in 1933, with the passage of HJR-192, “wages” or “earnings” became—by OPERATION OF LAW—“income,” as every federal court decision has determined since that date. (There has never been a law passed by Congress and codified into Title 26 (the Internal Revenue Code) that requires the individual laborer to pay an “income tax” on his wages.) Thus, the Jesuit Order used HJR-192 to EXTEND THE SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT’S power to tax “income” to include “wages.” The taxation of wages was never the OPEN intent of that amendment! That SECRET extension of power was carried out by Congress and thus carries with it the force of law—as every federal district judge knows.

In conclusion, there are two great defenses against the government attempting to tax the wages of the day laborer. The first defense is that no law has ever been passed by Congress and codified into the Internal Revenue Code that requires an individual worker to pay an income tax on his wages. (There really needs to be no law for the government to tax our wages since HJR-192 secretly and yet legally EXTENDED the power of the Sixteenth Amendment to do so. To this, the government will never admit; so the defense that “there is no law” is proving to be a winner. The 50,000 dollar (Federal Reserve Note) reward still stands for anyone who can find the Act of Congress, codified into the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26), that authorizes an income tax on the wages of the nation’s laborers.

The second defense is the Fifth Amendment provision, that no person can be compelled to be a witness against himself in any criminal proceeding. Since the information provided on a 1040 tax return can be used against the filer in a criminal prosecution, one cannot be compelled to assess himself at an IRS Summons or file a tax return, which argument has also proved to be a winner many times. The IRS/DOJ knows this for which reason the annual giving of personal financial information on a 1040 form is called “voluntary compliance.” If the IRS proceeds civilly against a non-filer for refusing to obey an IRS personal Summons (as the taxpayer or non-taxpayer is not compelled to attend said summons pursuant to the Schulz doctrine (2005)), the case should be dismissed. Why? Because the government has “failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted” if the Defendant in the IRS/DOJ’s attempted civil enforcement procedure pleads these two defenses given above in his “motion to dismiss.”

I trust this has been of benefit. I await your comments.

Eric John Phelps

John Clearwater

Very nice indeed. I would also recommend Irwin Schiff and Joe Banister as a constitutional tax authority. And for some beyond cutting edge esoteric mind bending matrix like perceptions of reality. I would HIGHLY recommend "EricWhoRU".

Eric WhoRU has some very insightful and fascinating facts and information to be gleaned and planted into your fertile fields of thought.

~just google it~

__________________
I came I saw I deleted...

John Clearwater

sooo... any luck with enlightenment yet?

__________________
I came I saw I deleted...