• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Freeman Movement and England

Status
Not open for further replies.
- Yes it was!
- No, it wasn't!
- Errr... it really was.
- No, it wasn't.
- Seriously? Dude! It really was. Here are the dates, and the texts.
- It wasn't! Show me the texts!
- I did. Here they are again!
- Show me the texts.
- Errr.... what? I already did.
- Haha. BOGUS!

....until THE END OF TIME.
 
volatile said:
- Yes it was!
- No, it wasn't!
- Errr... it really was.
- No, it wasn't.
- Seriously? Dude! It really was. Here are the dates, and the texts.
- It wasn't! Show me the texts!
- I did. Here they are again!
- Show me the texts.
- Errr.... what? I already did.
- Haha. BOGUS!

....until THE END OF TIME.
Click to expand...

The 16th Amendment was never ratified by the US Congress.

Try something honest, and good instead. Here is some inspired music -

J.S. Bach
Orchestral Suite No. 1
Overture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VukeVr46QHY&feature=related

Now, isn't that better ?
 
Especially said:
No, the Constitution is NOT the legislation.

The legislation of a nation is in its lawful processes. Show us the legislation to impose on the USA a federal income tax. We want to see the date, the reference and the text.

Request Number 10

And still waiting
Click to expand...

Revenue act of 1913

"[ . . . ] subject only to such exemptions and deductions as are hereinafter allowed, the net income of a taxable person shall include gains, profits, and income derived from salaries, wages, or compensation for personal service of whatever kind and in whatever form paid, or from professions, vocations, businesses, trade, commerce, or sales, or dealings in property, whether real or personal, growing out of the ownership or use of or interest in real or personal property, also from interest, rent, dividends, securities, or the transaction of any lawful business carried on for gain or profit, or gains or profits and income derived from any source whatever [ . ."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913
 
Lothian said:
Which part of LissaLysikan's post do you not understand.

You really need to address the points being put to you if you want to convince people.
Click to expand...


The 16th Amendment of the US Constitution failed to get the number of votes necessary to make it binding on the USA.

Show us differently. Let's have the details of the vote.
 
Especially said:
The 16th Amendment of the US Constitution failed to get the number of votes necessary to make it binding on the USA.

Show us differently. Let's have the details of the vote.
Click to expand...
Did you read the post? It covers your complaint and shows why it is baseless.

The traditional FOTL arguments hae been proven wrong in court. You need to distinguish your case from the failures of the past.
 
Especially said:
I hate to disappoint you but the 16th Amendment was never approved by the Congress.
Click to expand...

Especially said:
The 16th Amendment was never ratified by the US Congress.
Click to expand...

Are you going for a record on how many times you can repeat a lie in one thread?

Here's a really special link for you from The Tax Protester FAQ:
Q. "The 16th Amendment was not properly ratified."
A. http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#ratification
"Although the Constitution describes how to ratify amendments, it doesn’t say who is supposed to keep track of the ratification process and let us know when the required three-fourths of the states have ratified an amendment. After some confusion about the status of some amendments (including the infamous “Titles of Nobility” amendment that fell at least one state short of ratification, but appeared in numerous copies of the Constitution in the early and middle 1800s), Congress decided that the Secretary of State should certify what amendments have been ratified. Congress proposed the 16th Amendment on July 12, 1909, and, on February 3, 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox certified that it had been ratified. ..."​
 
Pantaz said:
Are you going for a record on how many times you can repeat a lie in one thread?

Here's a really special link for you from The Tax Protester FAQ:
Q. "The 16th Amendment was not properly ratified."
A. http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#ratification
"Although the Constitution describes how to ratify amendments, it doesn’t say who is supposed to keep track of the ratification process and let us know when the required three-fourths of the states have ratified an amendment. After some confusion about the status of some amendments (including the infamous “Titles of Nobility” amendment that fell at least one state short of ratification, but appeared in numerous copies of the Constitution in the early and middle 1800s), Congress decided that the Secretary of State should certify what amendments have been ratified. Congress proposed the 16th Amendment on July 12, 1909, and, on February 3, 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox certified that it had been ratified. ..."​
Click to expand...

OK, just produce the evidence that three fourths of the Congress ratified the 16th Amendment of the US Constitution when, in fact, they never did. Show us the evidence. Surely you can do it ? Who voted for it ? How many ? Let's have the details. And then I'll accept it. We want the evidence. No more lies. Give us the evidence. What does the record show ?

In the meantime -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VukeVr46QHY&feature=related
 
Last edited:
Especially said:
The 'proof' of the ratification has been given ?

When will you stop telling lies ? The 16th Amendment was NOT ratified by the US Congress. So much for your 'proof'. You are a faker, a forger, a spreader of lies.

But if you want to believe fiction, go ahead. The rest of the USA just laugh at you for being such an obvious clone.

Keep paying. And paying, and paying, and paying. Because nobody can fool you, right ? Not a cent of that money goes to the USA.
Click to expand...

Just because people have provided evidence that goes contrary to your beliefs does not mean that you can simply disregard them.

Perhaps if you weren't so closed-minded you would be at least able to acknowledge that people have provided evidence rather then repeat yourself over and over again.
 
Especially said:
OK, just produce the evidence that three fourths of the Congress ratified the 16th Amendment of the US Constitution when, in fact, they never did. Show us the evidence. Surely you can do it ? Who voted for it ? How many ? Let's have the details. And then I'll accept it.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Dude! It really was. Here are the dates:

Alabama, August 10, 1909; Kentucky, February 8, 1910; South Carolina, February 19, 1910; Illinois, March 1, 1910; Mississippi, March 7, 1910; Oklahoma, March 10, 1910; Maryland, April 8, 1910; Georgia, August 3, 1910; Texas, August 16, 1910; Ohio, January 19, 1911; Idaho, January 20, 1911; Oregon, January 23, 1911; Washington, January 26, 1911; Montana, January 30, 1911; Indiana, January 30, 1911; California, January 31, 1911; Nevada, January 31, 1911; South Dakota, February 3, 1911; Nebraska, February 9, 1911; North Carolina, February 11, 1911; Colorado, February 15, 1911; North Dakota, February 17, 1911; Kansas, February 18, 1911; Michigan, February 23, 1911; Iowa, February 24, 1911; Missouri, March 16, 1911; Maine, March 31, 1911; Tennessee, April 7, 1911; Arkansas, April 22, 1911 (after having rejected it earlier); Wisconsin, May 26, 1911; New York, July 12, 1911; Arizona, April 6, 1912; Minnesota, June 11, 1912; Louisiana, June 28, 1912; West Virginia, January 31, 1913; New Mexico, February 3, 1913. The amendment was subsequently ratified by Massachusetts, March 4, 1913; New Hampshire, March 7, 1913 (after having rejected it on March 2, 1911). The amendment was rejected (and not subsequently ratified) by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Utah.

That, as you can see, is considerably more than three quarters.

(Can I have the MDC for predicting the exact script of this conversation?)
 
Last edited:
volatile said:
Seriously? Dude! It really was. Here are the dates:

Alabama, August 10, 1909; Kentucky, February 8, 1910; South Carolina, February 19, 1910; Illinois, March 1, 1910; Mississippi, March 7, 1910; Oklahoma, March 10, 1910; Maryland, April 8, 1910; Georgia, August 3, 1910; Texas, August 16, 1910; Ohio, January 19, 1911; Idaho, January 20, 1911; Oregon, January 23, 1911; Washington, January 26, 1911; Montana, January 30, 1911; Indiana, January 30, 1911; California, January 31, 1911; Nevada, January 31, 1911; South Dakota, February 3, 1911; Nebraska, February 9, 1911; North Carolina, February 11, 1911; Colorado, February 15, 1911; North Dakota, February 17, 1911; Kansas, February 18, 1911; Michigan, February 23, 1911; Iowa, February 24, 1911; Missouri, March 16, 1911; Maine, March 31, 1911; Tennessee, April 7, 1911; Arkansas, April 22, 1911 (after having rejected it earlier); Wisconsin, May 26, 1911; New York, July 12, 1911; Arizona, April 6, 1912; Minnesota, June 11, 1912; Louisiana, June 28, 1912; West Virginia, January 31, 1913; New Mexico, February 3, 1913. The amendment was subsequently ratified by Massachusetts, March 4, 1913; New Hampshire, March 7, 1913 (after having rejected it on March 2, 1911). The amendment was rejected (and not subsequently ratified) by Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Utah.

That, as you can see, is considerably more than three quarters.

(Can I have the MDC for predicting the exact script of this conversation?)
Click to expand...


No, that is not correct. Where are the three quarters of the Congress here ?

How many votes is this ?
 
As we predicted some many pags ago, our friend here refuses to believe that a law applies to him because he refuses to accept the validity of that law. He looks for magic words, for small print, for excuses, such as to make a monster which even normal definitions of confirmation bias would look up to.
 
Especially said:
No, that is not correct. Where are the three quarters of the Congress here ?

How many votes is this ?
Click to expand...

Can you count? 42 of the 48 states then existing ratified the amendment. 42 is more than 3/4 of 48, which is 36.

So... how is "that not correct"?
 
J.S Bach paid his taxes. He also complained about them. In 1748 his cousin sent him a case of wine and he wrote to thank him, but suggested next time he just send cash, because the wine was subject to such high customs charges.

No need to thank me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom