Tom Cryer Tax Case - TRANSCRIPTS UP!

2»

Comments

  • gue_barium wrote:
    I appreciate you sharing all of this, Driftin'. I wouldn't have even known about it if you hadn't brought it to light here. We need to do some research and have a thread dedicated to all of those Americans making a patriotic stand.

    No one would have, I doubt.
    And there is a reason for that.

    Just like Aaron Russo's UNREPORTED DEATH ... Tom Cryer beats the IRS in jury trial, and NOT ONE SINGULAR REPORT IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ... outside of the hometown newspaper ... sheesh!

    Just the fact that the story has been 100% burried should give you folks a clue that it is no bullshit.

    If something is a sham they would do their damned-est to smear it all over the news ... my guess is cryer may have found the winning argument in court and these fuckers are scared shitless ...

    also, the above letter to congress from Taft is unreal ... it may explain why IRS agents are so eager to bust you ... either they don't know the truth, or worse ... they do know, and they are livid that ONLY FEDERAL EMPLOYEES FALL UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE INCOME TAX!

    How is that for a motivator to fuck the common man?

    :D
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • LesbelgesLesbelges Posts: 434
    JamMastaE wrote:
    yeah,lay down and take it up the ass.you're a true patriot.


    I wouldn't call myself a patriot as I am not even American...

    I would call myself someone who doesn't live in LaLa land and can face the reality of how the world works.

    Taxes are what funds the government and their activities, whether you like it or not. Now lets say income taxes were made illegal, then one of two things will happen.
    1) The government gives up and gives up the revenue from taxation, and there goes the money for public schools, police, army etc.

    or
    2) The government finds a different way to get that revenue. Like I said, they could just have an insane sales tax to make it all up. They could also have really high tax rates for all corporations in America, which in the end would trickle down to the consumers as higher prices.

    Now I'm no expert, but taxation is a reality and it's not going away whether you like it or not (and trust me i don't). Whatever happens, the government will get that money one way or another.
    Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
    Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
    Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet! 
    Nijmegen '07
    Werchter '07
    April Fools ~ LA1
  • Lesbelges wrote:
    I wouldn't call myself a patriot as I am not even American...

    I would call myself someone who doesn't live in LaLa land and can face the reality of how the world works.

    The reality is that the US Government is WAY WAY WAY out of it's constitutional bounds ... maybe chopping off it's wallet book would force it back in those clearly drawn boundaries ...

    and again, you miss the point.
    Just because it is convenient to the government's pockets, doesn't make violating the constitution acceptable.

    You sound like my father, and unfortunately he IS a citizen of this country, which is scary.

    "Nicholas, you sound crazy. If we got rid of the income tax, how do you propose the government would pay for itself?"

    Yeah, like Jammasta said, lay down and take it up the ass, dad. I don't know about you but it is NEVER ok for you to violate my GOD GIVEN INHERENT RIGHTS ... they aren't even constitutional rights ... the constitution explicitly states that these are your NATURAL BORN GOD GIVEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ... and that piece of paper is merely protection of said rights ...

    fuck your wallet, give me my birthright back and figure out some other way to fuel your bullshit wars and wealth redistribution scam of a federal reserve (ie. communist central bank) system. And please don't ever mention the federal government in connection with education ... you won't win much support from me on that ... you may as well have criminals giving us lectures on ethics if you think that is appropriate.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • LesbelgesLesbelges Posts: 434
    Well being from Europe, I can tell you that a lot of our taxed income (and we get taxed a lot more than you do) goes to helping people in need with global health care, welfare and free public education, college too.


    And no I am not missing the point. I am just telling you that the US could not exist without taxes of one kind or another.

    Besides the army which protects you (I am very much against the Iraq war) there are many other things which taxes fund and you would notice right away once they were gone.

    For example, the FDA which makes sure the drugs you ingest and the food you eat is safe. No taxes = no FDA = companies will be able to put whatever they want on the market.

    The SEC wouldnt be there, so there would be no one making sure that there is no insider trading and stuff like ENRON going on. So if all this begins to happen, a few people make a ton of money, but the rest of us lose money (think an indirect taxation).

    There are many examples, these are just 2. I do not agree in all the ways the US uses its tax revenues, I am just arguing that taxation is a necessity to having a central government.

    I'd love to be able to do whatever I wanted without anyone regulating me or taxing me. The reason I don't want that to happen is because of all the non-honest people out there who would take advantage, that is why you need a central government.
    Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
    Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
    Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet! 
    Nijmegen '07
    Werchter '07
    April Fools ~ LA1
  • Lesbelges wrote:
    For example, the FDA which makes sure the drugs you ingest and the food you eat is safe. No taxes = no FDA = companies will be able to put whatever they want on the market.

    Jesus.
    Keep naming agencies we could do with out.
    ;)

    Does The FDA Violate The Constitution? ... hint hint ... YES ...

    Ron Paul Wants to Tell the FDA to STFU

    and anyhow,
    the FDA FY2008 budget is 1.8billion ... i'm guessing the SEC comes in somewhere around there as well ...

    I believe personal income tax alone now totals over ONE TRILLION in "revenues" to the government ...

    Thanks for giving me a civics lesson on federal budgets.
    My stance still remains on fundamental grounds.
    Something which is an inherent violation of the constitution is just that ...

    ... find a "better" way to get your funds or "better yet" ... trim down your nasty budgets, ASSERT YOUR CONSTITUTIONALY GIVEN AUTHORITY TO PRINT YOUR OWN GODDAMN MONEY, and quit handing over interest to private bankers for no reason ...

    almost half of our debt is self imposed by giving the "federal" reserve the authority to "coin" our money ...

    har har...
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • LesbelgesLesbelges Posts: 434
    Now I'm not arguing that the current level of taxation is correct or that the taxed money is used properly. I am just arguing that taxation is a necessity.

    And you keep mentioning that it's a violation of your constitutional rights. Sure I agree that it violates what's stated in the constitution, but that doesn't make the constitution right. Has the constitution ever been amended?
    Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
    Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
    Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet! 
    Nijmegen '07
    Werchter '07
    April Fools ~ LA1
  • Lesbelges wrote:
    Sure I agree that it violates what's stated in the constitution, but that doesn't make the constitution right

    Uh?

    huh huh.

    uh?

    This is a joke, right?

    This is where i respectfully ask that you go back to belgium, where hopefully you have a better understanding of the fundamental and ultimate law of the land.

    Of COURSE it is right.
    it is the fucking constitution.

    sweet lord.
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • LesbelgesLesbelges Posts: 434
    Uh?

    huh huh.

    uh?

    This is a joke, right?

    This is where i respectfully ask that you go back to belgium, where hopefully you have a better understanding of the fundamental and ultimate law of the land.

    Of COURSE it is right.
    it is the fucking constitution.

    sweet lord.


    Now I will say that I am no expert in the US government nor the constitution. But my understanding is that there are 27 amendments to the constitution, is that incorrect? If it's incorrect, then ok you're right. But if there are indeed 27 amendments to the constitution, your argument of "it is the fucking constitution" is not valid as having 27 amendements means that 27 times there were oversights in the constitution.

    By the way the go back to Belgium comment was very mature, never gets old.
    Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
    Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
    Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet! 
    Nijmegen '07
    Werchter '07
    April Fools ~ LA1
  • Lesbelges wrote:
    Now I will say that I am no expert in the US government nor the constitution. But my understanding is that there are 27 amendments to the constitution, is that incorrect? If it's incorrect, then ok you're right. But if there are indeed 27 amendments to the constitution, your argument of "it is the fucking constitution" is not valid as having 27 amendements means that 27 times there were oversights in the constitution.

    By the way the go back to Belgium comment was very mature, never gets old.

    Look,
    no disrespect but that is a poor argument.
    the constitution itself provides the ability for ammendments to be made to it. the ammendments are additions and not "fixes" as you seem to think (save for the one that repeals the ban on alcohol which WAS unconstitutional to begin with) ...

    i don't think you will find much support anywhere around here for the idea that the constitution is somehow "not necessarily right" ... even us CT loonies won't say that.

    This is what your arguments are reminding me of:
    Poor Irwin Schiff, Trying to "Debate' With Hannity & Colmes ...

    have the poor guy on the show long enough to "make a fool" of him and slander him by calling him unpatriotic, COMPLETELY IGNORE THE REAL ISSUE (likely because those thickskulls cant even understand it), cut him off, disregard intelligent remarks, and then say good bye.

    Dont succumb to that mentality.

    Why don't you go read or view ANY of what i have previously posted and then get back to me.

    Otherwise you are no better than Jlew when it comes to your debate style ... namely, it isn't a debate, because you aren't formulating opinions based on my responses... you are just formulating NEW responses based on your own whim ...
    If I was to smile and I held out my hand
    If I opened it now would you not understand?
  • barakabaraka Posts: 1,268
    Joe.

    THERE IS NO LAW MAKING YOU LIABLE TO PAY INCOME TAX.


    Very interesting case indeed, DriftingByTheStorm! I'm surprised I overlooked this thread before. You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so I have a question for you. Perhaps you interpret it differently than me. It seems to me that the constitution of the United States clearly allows taxation. Article I, Section 8, states:

    "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States."

    And the 16th Amendment 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."


    Perhaps you can shed some light on this.
    The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
    but the illusion of knowledge.
    ~Daniel Boorstin

    Only a life lived for others is worth living.
    ~Albert Einstein
  • LesbelgesLesbelges Posts: 434
    baraka wrote:
    Very interesting case indeed, DriftingByTheStorm! I'm surprised I overlooked this thread before. You seem to be knowledgeable on the subject, so I have a question for you. Perhaps you interpret it differently than me. It seems to me that the constitution of the United States clearly allows taxation. Article I, Section 8, states:

    "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States."

    And the 16th Amendment 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."


    Perhaps you can shed some light on this.


    Just bumping cause id like to see Drifting By the Storm's response.
    Cincinnati '03 Flooded venue!
    Bridge School '06 Night 1 & 2
    Venice '07 pummeled by the sleet! 
    Nijmegen '07
    Werchter '07
    April Fools ~ LA1
Sign In or Register to comment.