Check this out, this guy couldn't be any more true.

[Panzerfaust]

"The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again. However, take away from them the power to create money, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money."

-Sir Josiah Stamp
Former Director of
The Bank of England

[Panzerfaust]

It gets even scarier:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the NY Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almsot 40 years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.

But now the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world goverment. The supra national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the naitonal auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

-David Rockefeller
Private Banker
Council on Foreign Relations
June 1991



"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and excercise power from behind the scenes."

~Felix Frankfurter
U.S. Supreme Court Justice

[Panzerfaust]

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."

~Henry Ford

[Panzerfaust]

This thing is bigger than silly income taxes. This is about new world order and make no mistake about it people. They are planning it day in and day out. While we remain silent, it only lets them work closer to their goal.

[D-Bo Dre]

I already knew that "Democracy" is a complete farce.

Last time I checked, America was a Republic, not a Democracy which is complete bullshit.

Why should the majority be able to tell me how to live my life? That my friends is not a free society. Far from it.

Why are you still living here then?? If you’re not content w/ this countries Democracy then maybe you should consider moving out to another country that will give you more "freedom".. buy a ticket and leave, simple as that.. better yet, ask someone in Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, South America, etc etc if they would be willing to swap w/ you.. I guarantee that you will have thousands more than willing.. It’s funny, how some Americans are fast to bash this countries government, society, laws, etc. but still conform to them.. I recall that even 2Pac touched on this subject on his song Revolution. It goes something like this.. "Ok, so you want to live this thuglife, rebel life, so stop being a coward and start a revolution,, but you don’t want to do that,, you just want live this character life,, like a cartoon.. but if you Really wanted to do something, start your own country, start a revolution, and see how easy that'll be"..

[Panzerfaust]

Why are you still living here then?? If you’re not content w/ this countries Democracy then maybe you should consider moving out to another country that will give you more "freedom".. buy a ticket and leave, simple as that.. better yet, ask someone in Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, South America, etc etc if they would be willing to swap w/ you.. I guarantee that you will have thousands more than willing.. It’s funny, how some Americans are fast to bash this countries government, society, laws, etc. but still conform to them.. I recall that even 2Pac touched on this subject on his song Revolution. It goes something like this.. "Ok, so you want to live this thuglife, rebel life, so stop being a coward and start a revolution,, but you don’t want to do that,, you just want live this character life,, like a cartoon.. but if you Really wanted to do something, start your own country, start a revolution, and see how easy that'll be"..

Wow, you're a smart one aren't you. You have no clue what this thread is about. Your post proves it.

Typical sheep.

[TexSavant]

I have found more info that the Supreme Court ruled on:

Edwin Vicira Prof. of Constitutional Law was interviewed and he stated that the Supreme Court defined what income was in the Isner vs. McCumber case... and it was gains and profits which meant taxing corporate profits NOT wages or labor!


Got this from another forum so I ddidn't have to type it out.

"The film showed the case: The Government vs. Whitey Harrell who was charged with four counts of not filing income tax. He was found innocent.

Joe Banister ... former IRS criminal investigator arrested and tried ... New York Times reported "Tax Evaders Win a Case Over IRS"

Vernice Kuglin ... Federal Express pilot now with Tax Honesty .... not that I care for Fox news but they report on Wed. 13 Aug. 2003 ... "Woman Beats IRS in Court Over Income Tax Protest."

Franklin Sanders along with 24 others were found inocent of not filing taxes base on the SC decision."


MotoXracer: This isn't me against you. I really want to know why these people have been found INNOCENT if there is such a law that requires us to pay income tax? I have always paid my taxes and just because I am reading into this does not mean I am automatically on board just. I need to read much more and become more familiar with Constitutional law.

Give the film a chance, watch it all the way through and then go off and start researching.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...80303867390173

Whitey Harrel:

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS vs. GAYLON L. HARRELL. It was a State income tax, not federal. It has no bearing on federal law.

Vernice Kuglin : Aquitted on the basis of IGNORANCE (Tax Evasion convictions require WILLFUL, DELIBERATE, EVASION. She still had to pay the taxes despite her aquittal, which merely kept her out of jail.

Kuglin entered a settlement with the government in 2004 in which she agreed to pay over $500,000 in taxes and penalties.[8] On April 30, 2007, the Memphis Daily News reported that Kuglin's Federal tax problems continued with the filing of a notice of Federal tax lien in the amount of $188,025

Kuglin v. Commissioner, United States Tax Court, docket no. 21743-03; 2004 TNT 177-6 (Sept. 13, 2004), as cited

Joe Banister was not charged with Tax Evasion. He was charged with Conspiracy for helping a client file false returns and false ammended returns. The charges were dropped becuase there was insufficient evidence of CONSPIRACY, not Tax Evasion. His client, Walter A. Thompson, went on to be convicted of TAX EVASION.

The part of US law that authorizes the income tax most specifically is Ammendment XVI to the united states constitution. which states:

"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 or enumeration."


Eisner v. Macomber NOT Isner vs. McCumber,---No such case

If you bother to read the case, you'll discover that its ruling is PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE of your assumption.

the court held the following:

"Throughout the argument of the Government, in a variety of forms, runs the fundamental error already mentioned--a failure to appraise correctly the force of the term "income" as used in the Sixteenth Amendment, or at least to give practical effect to it. Thus, the Government contends that the tax "is levied on income derived from corporate earnings," when in truth the stockholder has "derived" nothing except paper certificates which, so far as they have any effect, deny him [or "her" -- in this case, Mrs. Macomber] present participation in such earnings. It [the government] contends that the tax may be laid when earnings "are received by the stockholder," whereas [s]he has received none; that the profits are "distributed by means of a stock dividend," although a stock dividend distributes no profits; that under the Act of 1916 "the tax is on the stockholder's share in corporate earnings," when in truth a stockholder has no such share, and receives none in a stock dividend; that "the profits are segregated from his [her] former capital, and [s]he has a separate certificate representing his [her] invested profits or gains," whereas there has been no segregation of profits, nor has [s]he any separate certificate representing a personal gain, since the certificates, new and old, are alike in what they represent--a capital interest in the entire concerns of the corporation."

Standard Oil (ironically), paid Mrs. Macomber a kind of stock dividend, (they CAPITALIZED a portion of the corporate profit, more or less a function of accounting.) This Capilization of profit was indicated on the new stock certificates sent to Macomber, and the stock was also split. While this increased the theoretical value of the stock, the court held that this is NOT INCOME, hence not taxable under the SIXTEENTH ammendment....UNTIL that increase in value is realized (made real) by selling the stock. Thus they ruled against the governements contention that an increase of stock valuation was "Income". This is why you dont have to pay the government every year that your stocks go up, UNLESS YOU SELL THEM, in that case you pay the Capital Gains Tax.

The Supreme court has repeatedly held that the SIXTEENTH Ammendment DOES IN FACT AUTHORIZE THE TAXATION OF INDIVIDUAL EARNED INCOME. Most recently in 1991 in the Case of Cheek v. United States. I suggest you read the opinions of the court.

There is also the Penn Mutual decison from 1960. In which the Court ruled that the Sixteenth Ammendment is not nececcarry as congress has the power to tax income without it, as per Article I, Sec 8 of the US Constitution.

This is a quote from the 3rd circuit court of appeals decision, which was upheld by the US Supreme Court.

"It did not take a constitutional amendment to entitle the United States to impose an income tax. Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., 157 U. S. 429, 158 U. S. 601 (1895), only held that a tax on the income derived from real or personal property was so close to a tax on that property that it could not be imposed without apportionment. The Sixteenth Amendment removed that barrier. Indeed, the requirement for apportionment is pretty strictly limited to taxes on real and personal property and capitation taxes.

It is not necessary to uphold the validity of the tax imposed by the United States that the tax itself bear an accurate label. Indeed, the tax upon the distillation of spirits, imposed very early by federal authority, now reads and has read in terms of a tax upon the spirits themselves, yet the validity of this imposition has been upheld for a very great many years.

It could well be argued that the tax involved here [an income tax] is an "excise tax" based upon the receipt of money by the taxpayer. It certainly is not a tax on property and it certainly is not a capitation tax; therefore, it need not be apportioned. We do not think it profitable, however, to make the label as precise as that required under the Food and Drug Act. Congress has the power to impose taxes generally, and if the particular imposition does not run afoul of any constitutional restrictions then the tax is lawful, call it what you will."

[TexSavant]

This reflects quite poorly on the credibility of the gentleman in the video and also the people who POST and REPOST UTTTER NONSENSE. Keep that in mind when people talk about the "New World Order".

On another note, globalization is an inevitable process with or without the help of secret organizations. The trend of human progress over the course of human history is to live in steadily larger and more complex societies.

All of the countries of Europe were once fractious collections of principalities, kingdoms, and republics (in the case of Venice, anyway).

Read the book Nonzero by Robert Wright. You may need to read other works first as I have no doubt the more intricate elements of Game Theory presented in the book are going to be quite heavy for you indeed.

If you think you can fight globalization, you're the kind of person that would march out to the fields to battle hoards of Locusts with a BROOM.

~PEACE~

[Igifuno]

wow.

[D-Bo Dre]

Wow, you're a smart one aren't you. You have no clue what this thread is about. Your post proves it.

Typical sheep.

Yeah,, just you uttering non-sense..

Typical internet thug..

[D-Bo Dre]

This reflects quite poorly on the credibility of the gentleman in the video and also the people who POST and REPOST UTTTER NONSENSE. Keep that in mind when people talk about the "New World Order".

On another note, globalization is an inevitable process with or without the help of secret organizations. The trend of human progress over the course of human history is to live in steadily larger and more complex societies.

All of the countries of Europe were once fractious collections of principalities, kingdoms, and republics (in the case of Venice, anyway).

Read the book Nonzero by Robert Wright. You may need to read other works first as I have no doubt the more intricate elements of Game Theory presented in the book are going to be quite heavy for you indeed.

If you think you can fight globalization, you're the kind of person that would march out to the fields to battle hoards of Locusts with a BROOM.

~PEACE~

Couldnt have said it better myself!!!

[Atomini]

This reflects quite poorly on the credibility of the gentleman in the video and also the people who POST and REPOST UTTTER NONSENSE. Keep that in mind when people talk about the "New World Order".

On another note, globalization is an inevitable process with or without the help of secret organizations. The trend of human progress over the course of human history is to live in steadily larger and more complex societies.

All of the countries of Europe were once fractious collections of principalities, kingdoms, and republics (in the case of Venice, anyway).

Read the book Nonzero by Robert Wright. You may need to read other works first as I have no doubt the more intricate elements of Game Theory presented in the book are going to be quite heavy for you indeed.

If you think you can fight globalization, you're the kind of person that would march out to the fields to battle hoards of Locusts with a BROOM.

~PEACE~

But must globalization come with all of our freedoms stripped from us? NO!

[unclemoney]

Watch that link above at the 1hr35min25sec mark.

Prepare to be sick.

As much as I hate things with a religious twist I got some great video's for you that you should give a watch. (they are very lengthy though but extremely interesting and very informative. I'll PM them to you and any1 else who's interested).

[unclemoney]

Actually **** it I'll put it out here for every1 to check out.

exposing the illuminati from within Parts 1 and 2:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...84036772812990
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...01728290963918

the light behind masonry:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...14967389038944

I find this guy very informative and his information is dead on. You guys might laugh at the occult parts, I could vouch for what he says however that's a whole nother story...

[sphincter]

I'm watching this now and I have heard varying degres of the same information before and I beleive it to be true, in one part or another... crazy stuff, to be sure!!!!

[Atomini]

You should all check out the book:

Brotherhood Of Darkness