Re: 16th Amendment . . . Ratified !
Captain America II
googlegroups.com shrub...@excite.com
>
> READER: Dear Friends:
> I recently sent out information regarding Attorney Jeffrey Dickstein's
> efforts on Bill Benson's behalf regarding the 16th Amendment
> litigation in the 7th Circuit
> was not ratified/fraudulently ratified. Bill answered the government's
> complaint by putting into the court record not only the jd...@wi.rr.com
non-ratification/ fraudulent ratification of> the amendment but Mr.
Dickstein's
> With Jeff's help, Bill has turned lemons into lemonade by using the
> been trying to avoid for 25 years. Jeff recently accepted an apology
from a person who accused him of not sacrificing enough for the
cause
> of freedom. This person subsequently received an "education" regarding
> Jeff's sacrifices and decided an apology was in order.
Jeff's response to the apology is presented below. I wanted to
provide
it to you and emphasize Jeff's idea regarding a $5.00 donation from
> was instrumental in proving to me that people like Bill were telling
truth out to the American people. Jeff has endured extreme financial
> hardship over the years as a result of this battle as well.
> Please help these two men who have sacrificed a great deal more than
> any of us, certainly much more than I have had to sacrifice. Please
> put $5.00 in an envelope and send it to Jeffrey Dickstein, Attorney at
> Law, 500 W. Bradley Rd., C-108, Fox Point, WI 53227 to keep this
> litigation effort moving forward. If $5.00 is less than you can
> afford, send a little more. If $5.00 is more than you can afford, then
send $1.00, but, please, everyone consider making a contribution.
Please also pray for the success of the 16th Amendment tax scam!
>
>
> Thank you very much for the apology, which is fully accepted.
>
> My concern is that those who might want to contribute to the case and
> who read your e-mail would change their minds. I don't know what
I feel your frustration regarding Farnsworth and others. They are
the
> martyrs sent to the slaughter. Not pretty, but necessary to keep the
> Funding for Bill's litigation is absolutely necessary. If everyone on
the lists sent in only $5.00 each, the work would be funded in full.
> But alas, even those who care don't rise to the occasion. I am deeply
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jeffrey A. Dickstein
>
jd...@wi.rr.com
Jeff, what "law" school did you attend? the "16th Amendment"
internet tax scam is likely to get you disbarred! (the $5 ain't gonna
help you!)
www.evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html
www.quatloos.com internet tax scams
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
www.fraudsandscams.com
www.quatlosers.com
Tax Fraud reporting -
IRS Form 3949-A (available online)
"The ratified 16th Amendment essentially means that when imposing an
income tax, the Congress may impose the tax on income from any source
without having to apportion the total dollar amount of tax collected
from each state according to each state's population in relation to
the total national population. "This has been adjudicated at the U.S.
Supreme Court level, and they're the ones that in fact decide whether
the laws are constitutional, and they've decided that in fact the 16th
Amendment is constitutional," said Michael York, the state's
librarian.
Stephen Black, a professor at Franklin Pierce Law Center and an expert
in tax law, said the Browns' arguments aren't valid.
"The fact is, we live together as a country," Black said. "There are
costs that we the people have agreed to via our representatives, and
we have to pay those somehow."
Nobody likes paying taxes, "but if we're going to have an army to
protect us, if we're going to have freeways to go in between states,
if we're going to have Homeland Security, if we're going to have the
Food and Drug Administration, which makes sure the milk I drink is
pasteurized, then each of us has to come up with our fair share,
whatever that fair share has to be," Black said.
The Browns and their supporters maintain the 16th Amendment is false.
They say not enough states ratified it, those that did ratified
different versions, and Ohio wasn't technically a state when it voted.
"They didn't have Xerox machines. They had to copy things by hand,"
Black said, explaining the minor differences among versions adopted.
Anti-tax activists cite Ohio as one of its reasons to blast the 16th
Amendment. Ohio wasn't technically a state until 1953 although it was
accepted into the union 150 years earlier. But York notes that even
without Ohio, the amendment still had enough states' support.
"When I counted them up, there were 42. They needed 36," he said.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2007/06/24/browns_say_no_to_taxes_historians_say_yes/
ratified 16th Amendment