|
|
This site best viewed with W3C® compliant web browsers.
|
|
|
What can a FREE STATE do about the INCOME TAX and the IRS?
By M. Randolph Hamilton
Updated January 27, 2007
It takes little convincing for most of us who are involved in the
expansion of freedom to be convinced that our federal government may do something
to deceive we the people from time to time, or even frequently.
So when we hear that the federal government deceived us into believing that we
are supposed to pay a tax on our incomes, we actually take a closer look.
Upon closer investigation we learn that there are actually two
different types of US citizens in this country; those who are Citizens of a State
and the United States of America as united under the US Constitution and those
who are citizens of the US federal government and it's territories.
You see, those people who sign IRS forms are volunteering
to be citizens of the US federal government and are waiving their rights as protected
by the US Consitution. After having been in the rat race for so long, it is
difficult for the individual to free himself from it when his employer is working
against him.
There is currently a movement that can blow the lid off of this
deception and return us from the enslavement to which we have been committed.
A Free State Project is
a effort to get 20,000 like minded, freedom oriented people to move to one state. They have selected New Hampshiteas that state. The idea is to get these people to move to a state with a low enough population to have a significant impact on effecting change back to the free society the US was originally modeled after.
So what does all of this have to do with income tax or the IRS?
Those who have investigated the IRS and income tax have discovered that
those of us who are sovereign Citizens of our State are actually non-resident aliens
of the US federal government. Most of us have for many years signed IRS documents
testifying "under penalty of perjury" that we are in fact US citizens not realizing
that we were voluntarily giving up citizenship of the State and moving to the
jurisdiction of the US Federal goverment, which is the only reason that IRS laws
are considered "constitutional" under the 16th amendment.
The IRS is actually a Puerto Rican Corporation and is not
listed under USC Title 5 where all federal agencies are made legal.
It can only operate in the fifty states with the sanction
of the state. Therefore a state that focuses on protecting the rights of the
individual and NOT the collective would more than likely rescind the consent
given to an illegal federal agency. It would also stop the employers in the
state from withholding since the withholding is being done under fraudulant
pretenses. You then would not have to go through the process yourself risking
termination. Please see HOW TO STOP EMPLOYERS FROM WITHHOLDING INCOME TAXES. You may also
want to read
The Reliance Defense.
The state would also protect State Citizens from the abuse of
not only the IRS, but also any other, even legal, federal agency. Imagine living
in a state that would have federal agents acting unconstitutionally arrested for
such acts. That sounds like my kind of state.
Defend Freedom™
|
Action Alert
|
This is the most important movie you will ever watch in your life. From producer Aaron Russo, producer of Trading Places and The Rose, comes America; From Freedom to Fascism, 1 hr. 51 min.
|
Florida Residents Act Now
The Florida Ballot Initiative PAC has two petitions to get taxes under control in the State of Florida. Do not delay. Take back control of your property and eliminate property tax in the State of Florida.
|
|
Maine voted almost unaimously to reject the Real ID Act. Contact your local state representatives to follow suit.
|
|
Democrats are threatening to defund the fence along our southern border with Mexico.
|
News
Senators skeptical of Real ID Act rules
By Anne Broache
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: March 26, 2007, 3:01 PM PDT
Last modified: March 26, 2007, 4:01 PM PDT
Leaders of a U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs panel joined a chorus of outsiders, including many state government officials, who have questioned the costs and privacy implications of the congressionally mandated shift to identification cards that must adhere to a bevy of national standards.
|
|
|
|