凍結 天然氣 火車

Income Tax Unconstitutional???

16th Amendment not properly ratified???

  Over the past years I have heard over and over again that the US Income Tax is unconstitutional.

I didn't put much faith in it because after all the 16th Amendment was created to allow income tax.

I always figured that the problem was the was the U.S. Income tax was implemented by the IRS.

I was talking to one of my Libertarian friends on this and he told me that the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified and that is the reason Income Tax is unconstitutional.

He pointed me to this web site:

www.TheLawThatNeverWas.com/
and it gives all the nitty gritty details on the subject.

I have read in the past the the 14th Amendment is unconstitutional for the same reason, that it was not properly ratified. In a number of different books.

According to them the Tennessee legislator was forced to ratify the 14th Amendment under gun point of Federal troops who where then occupying the South after the Civil War.

The same sources say that both Oregon and New York ratified the 14th Amendment and then rescinded their ratifications.

Now I have to go do some research and see if I can find some more sources that also say the 16th Amendment, which allows income tax in the USA was also illegally ratified.

The 16th Amendment says:

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
There were fourty-eight states in the American Union in 1913, meaning that affirmative action of thirty-six was necessary for ratification. In February 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that thirty-eight had ratified the Amendment.

According to this website:

In 1984 Bill Benson began a research project, never before performed, to investigate the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment. After traveling to the capitols of the New England states and reviewing the journals of the state legislative bodies, he saw that many states had not ratified. He continued his research at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.; it was here that Bill found his Golden Key.

This damning piece of evidence is a sixteen-page memorandum from the Solicitor of the Department of State, among whose duties is the provision of legal opinions for the Secretary of State. In this memorandum, the Solicitor lists the many errors he found in the ratification process.

These four states are among the thirty-eight from which Philander Knox claimed ratification:

  • California: The legislature never recorded any vote on any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress.
  • Kentucky: The Senate voted on the resolution, but rejected it by a vote of nine in favor and twenty-two opposed.
  • Minnesota: The State sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington.
  • Oklahoma: The Senate amended the language of the 16th Amendment to have a precisely opposite meaning.

When his project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited the capitol of every state from 1913 and knew that not a single one had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution. Thirty-three states engaged in the unauthorized activity of altering the language of an amendment proposed by Congress, a power that the states do not possess.

Since thirty-six states were needed for ratification, the failure of thirteen to ratify was fatal to the Amendment. This occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization and punctuation, we would still have only two states which successfully ratified.

This link explains the nitty gritty details about why the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified.

Bill Benson and Ricky Duncan

When I googled on the 16th Amendment not being properly ratified all the stuff I found was based on stuff Bill Benson said.

My first question is all the stuff correct when only one guy is saying it?

But then I thought of my friend Ricky Duncan here in Arizona who has don't a lot of similar stuff with Arizona laws.

Ricky Duncan has made several outrageous claims about Arizona laws, but being unemployeed with nothing to do and interested in the subject I researched them and fund them all to be true.

So if that is the case, despite Bill Benson being the only one making these claims he might be correct.

Imaginary laws in Phoenix Parks!!!

Many years ago Ricky Duncan say signs in Phoenix Parks banning guns. Ricky looked up the law sited and found the law had nothing to do with guns or fire arms and was just a bogus excuse to allow the city of Phoenix to ban guns in their parks.

I saw a similar sign in Phoenix which banned shopping carts.

I figured it was an outrageous law because it was aimed as homeless folks and I went to the city of Phoenix code and looked up the law.

I was surprised to see that the law didn't ban shopping carts from Phoenix city parks.

The law on the city of Phoenix's books said something to the effect that:

It was illegal to operate skateboards, roller skates and other wheeled devices in a reckless manor in city parks.
I guess some government bureaucrat in the city of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department who hated homeless folks used that law as a lame excuse to put up signs banning shopping carts in city parks.

So yes there are signs in Phoenix parks that say it is illegal to bring a shopping cart into Phoenix parks, but the law is as bogus as a $3 bill.

So if government bureaucrats in the city of Phoenix are willing to make up imaginary laws to ban guns and shopping carts from city parks I guess it is just as possible that government bureaucrats in the Federal government are just as willing to cite non-existent facts to give them the power to collect income taxes.

You have a right to carry concealed weapons in Arizona

Currently Arizona has one of the most liberal laws regulating concealed weapons in the nation. Almost anyone is allowed to carry a concealed weapon without getting a permit of any type.

That law was passed maybe 5 years ago. I doubt if it was passed before 2005.

Prior to that Arizona had a law on the books making concealed weapons illegal.

Again my friend Ricky Duncan discovered that the law outlawing concealed weapons was not constitional http://arizona-concealed-carry.tripod.com/
http://arizona-concealed-carry.tripod.com/jb_case.html
http://arizona-concealed-carry.tripod.com/state_v_moerman.html
http://www.oocities.org/hashish_arizona/conceal.html









http://my-legal.tripod.com/ricky_duncan.html http://arizona-concealed-carry.tripod.com/ib2343erni.html http://www.oocities.org/hashish_arizona/they_refused_to_file.html finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish finish

 

凍結 天然氣 火車

凍結 天然氣 火車 Frozen Gas Train