Comment: I believe there is a force that exists

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I have heard this before. (see in situ)

I believe there is a force that exists

which is greater than any gun. I can not explain nor describe it yet I believe it. The patterns of it's effects which have been stamped upon civilization are undeniable.

No just authority can possibly exist without consent. Whether consent is acquired in ignorance is irrelevant as it is nonetheless acquired. I consider it no coincidence the Declaration of Independence made an appeal to a supreme judge of the world. I consider it no coincidence pledges made in fortunes, lives, and sacred honor declared just authority derives from the consent of the governed. I consider it no coincidence the further American people have strayed from all are equally endowed with certain unalienable rights by their creator the nation has declined. I consider it no coincidence as more and more authority is exercised without just consent the nation has declined.

I agree with your points there are many victims of unjust authority. Men of honor and integrity do not care about such risks. They are motivated to do what is right.

Can any government rightly tax air? So instead of a carbon tax why not simply tax air if the power to tax is unlimited? Because like all things legal it is a carefully crafted illusion. No one created the air. Carbon on the other hand ...

Is the carbon you exhale taxed? No. Carbon produced from business activities are proposed to be taxed. The constitutional system is premised on the notion money can not buy happiness and the pursuit of happiness is a natural and fundamental right not subject to any regulation. It is the activities of business and commerce that are considered privileges. It is the activities of business and commerce that are supposed to fund so called constitutional government.

Same with property taxes. Is dirt taxed? No, who created dirt? What is taxed is the border agreement because borders and any bundles of rights for uses within said borders are the creation of man.

The splinter in peoples minds about an unjust income tax they can not identify are the precise reasons it is unjust. Income taxation is nothing more than a payment reporting system. Using conventional constitutional language ... the owners of Disney, the owner of the intellectual property Mickey Mouse have a natural and fundamental right to use their property to pursue happiness in whatever manner they choose and a right to be rewarded from its industrial, business, or commercial uses.

If Mickey Mouse (ie. First Middle Last) receives a paycheck it is reported. Mickey Mouse is intellectual property. It does not have a body it has an owner. Possessing no body it has no basis in any labor performed to earn income.

First Middle Last is also intellectual property. It also does not have a body and it also has an owner (ie. parents who thought up the idea). If you are using someone else's intellectual property, which has been placed under the protection of the United States by an act of birth registration in any member state, to distinguish yourself because reputations have value ... then any payment made to First Middle Last is income for First Middle Last. You have a liability to report and pay taxes upon that income because you are the one choosing to benefit from distinguishing yourself as Mickey Mouse to benefit from the valuable reputation of Mickey Mouse.

The government used to tax specific activities but nowadays it taxes all income from whatever source derived and using a name (ie. intellectual property) that has been registered in any member state of the United States is a federally connected activity especially in light of the 14th Amendment. Nowadays if there is any mention of specific activities it is merely to tax certain activities at a different rate.

The complexity of the matter increases with aliens which is one reason for all this non-sense about so called illegal aliens. You see, legal aliens are using a name that has been registered in the United States which means they are performing a federally privileged activity. What people typically bitch about when they refer to aliens are unregistered ones who do not have a nexus with the federal government and do not pay income taxes, rightly I might add as there is no real element of consent to be governed.

Now, getting back to where I started about a force greater than any gun. Yes, there are political prisoners but with each one the credibility of the IRS has diminished. In the cases you mention there are irregularities. People already suspicious of the legitimacy of the IRS see some irregular antics occur in a court and become even more suspicious. Then there are the special flowers who have been given what I will call prophetic visions that have enabled them to decode all of the patterns and plainly explain them to a point they make so much common sense it is impossible to deny.

Without a change of trajectory, ultimately all of the hypocrisy will lead to system failure and quite frankly if one looks at the latest taxation statistics more people than ever are not filing any returns. The hypocrisy necessary to maintain the illusion of authority by failing to precisely define income or provide any full and honest disclosure of the nature of any tax liability.

What are those in power going to do? Take away free speech so people can't talk about any plain truths of income taxation? Summarily execute people who talk about it? Such things will only increase a force already at work against dishonesty and fraud which is more powerful than any gun.

The truth is that anyone using a name registered in the United States or any member state to distinguish themselves for reputation value, measured in dollar units of federally privileged private credit notes, is deemed a mere economic unit operating in a sea of commerce while engaging in for profit activities 24/7/365 ... and anything that economic unit does can be taxed. One question remains, can it possibly be said one does not consent to be governed if they voluntarily and freely choose to distinguish themselves using intellectual property thought up/owned by someone else which has been registered in the United States or any member state even if it used in ignorance without full knowledge of any terms? Is it a coincidence ignorance of the law is no excuse? Know thyself.