Restore The Constitution

The National sales tax is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

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. The Congress does not have the power to lay an Un-apportioned tax, period. A sales tax is un-apportioned and a tax on consumption, which is a reverse income tax. Is the Income tax legal? Only in the United States. What is the jurisdiction of the United States? In the USC code, the jurisdiction of the United States are: the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, U.S. Virigin Islands. It is not the several states known as the State ‘Republics’. A person in the USC code; IRC Chapter 75 26 U.S.C. 7343 which contain all the criminal penalties in the code.
[A]n officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who, as such officer, employee or member, is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
An individual who is not in such a capacity is not defined as a “person” subject to criminal penalties. Unpriviledged natural persons, who do not impose the income (excise) tax upon themselves by volunteering to file returns and be liable, are not subject by law to the tax and they are not “persons” who can lawfully be subjected to criminal charges for not filing a return or not paying income tax.

A flat tax of say $500 per person is Constitutional, a direct tax on consumption is not. The money is taken out of your hands after you purchase your basic goods for survival. This is another version of the communistic graduated income tax. Do you really want the federal government to regulate every one of your personal transactions? You will need a federal ID to buy or sell. Sounds like the Real ID Act; starting three years from now, if you live or work in the United States, you’ll need a federally approved ID card to travel on an airplane, open a bank account, collect Social Security payments, or take advantage of nearly any government service. Practically speaking, your driver’s license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards. Remember the book of Revelations. The second beast of Revelation 13 will cause “all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name” (verses 16-17).

I rather keep the voluntary tax of the IRS, than the mandatory tax of a national sales tax. Atleast, I have a choice not to pay the IRS. Will the government issue me an exemption, for not being under their jurisdiction? Even if they do, I will then have to fight with every merchant to get it honored. In order to sell on the internet, I will need a national merchant ID, if I do not collect every single itty-bitty scrap of tax for the vamps;they will be breaking down my door and locking my ass up. Currently the iRS cannot do this they have to actually have to use the court system,… sometimes. A flat tax no way baby. Without ever admitting the fraud of the IrS? I like Huckabee’s idea to Terraform Mars, before a flat tax.

This is the fundamental question in regards to the law. Do you believe that you are free and that the purpose of the state is to protect your property and liberty! Or do you believe that you are a taxpayer and a subject citizen of the state and that you should sacrifice yourself to some vague greater good known only as the public interest? Are you the Master or the Slave? The engine or the genius behind the design? How you decide on this question will determine whether you support the idea of a Republican form of government; that is a limited government based on the rule of law or one that is based on protecting the interests of the people as a whole. The rule of law is a set of unchanging principals, such as the Ten commandments which are the root of the Common law, which is the basis of what is known as Constitutional law.
Constitutional Law is actually a misnomer; the laws of the land are not the Constitution but the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is a separate and distinct document from the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the limits of the government; it has nothing to do with the Law. The Bill of rights is derived from Thomas Paine concept of Natural law as expressed in his book Commonsense. The whole meaning of the American Common Law can be extrapolated from the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
All men are created equal, that the power is endowed not granted; God is a part of Man indivisible. Unalienable Rights- Unable to take away, unable to lien. The state is unable to tax the human being, nor restrict one’s liberties, nor limit one’s ability to procure happiness. Which can be interpreted as declaring a certain moral code or limit the choice of an occupation.
The key is found in the definition of a “person”; 4 U.S.C. Section 110(a) defines the person by pointing to a nonexistent 26 U.S.C. Section 3797. 26 U.S.C. 7701(a) (a) defines “person” as follows:
Sec. 7701(a)(1) Person. The term “person” shall be constructed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership,association,company or corporation.

An Inhabitant as defined in the Articles of Confederation, is a natural born person who is sovereign and is not subject to the UCC, but rather the Common Law. There is a big difference between the legal rights of a natural person and that of an artificial person. The artificial person is subject to the UCC and does not have rights as defined in the Bill of rights, but privileges granted solely by the government within the laws written and enforced by that government.

In 1775, a mysterious figure known only by the nickname the professor appeared to the flag committee headed by Benjamin Franklin. This man of European descent, recommended the flag of the British-East India company as the banner of the American colonies. The Union Jack, a horizontal striped-flag with the Union Jack logo,was the flag flown during the American Revolution, not the Betsy Ross as seen in the Patriot.
The founding of the American Republic is intertwined with a mysterious figure only known as the “Professor”. The Professor became the advisor, to Benjamin Franklin and the flag committee and recommended the “Grand Union flag” as the banner for the American colonies warring against England. The Grand Union flag a horizontal striped red and white flag with a British Jack in the upper left corner was also the flag of the British East-India Company. The British East-India Company was at the time of the American Revolution controlled by the Jesuits and the afore-mentioned enigimatic figure was none other than Jesuit General Lorenzo Ricci. Two years earlier the Jesuit order was suppressed by Pope Clement XIV and General Ricci alleged died six months after the Pope was poisoned.

The Vatican Treasurer all through the time of this intrique was General Ricci’s best friend and former classmate, Cardinal Braschi. Braschi controlled the Vatican Treasury during the American Revolution; as General Ricci re-appeared in America under a new identity. The Jesuits heavily influenced by the Art of War; which was translated by Ricci, himself into Latin most likely posed as an agent of the British East India company, offering help to the American Revolutionairies. The founding fathers all protestant were voraciously anti-Catholic having seen the harsh suppression by the Popes in Europe never would have accepted the help of a Catholic and certainly not the Jesuit General himself!
It appears the Jesuits via the Vatican Treasury may have funded the American Revolution. The Grand Union Jack was then simply the banner of the Corporation that sponsored the American Revolution. It would also explain the seat of the New American government being set up in a Roman Catholic territory and the institution of Roman-Civil law, as the law of the United States! This week we saw the removal of the dreaded Jesuit General, Father Kolvenbach.
The resignation of Father Kolvenbach and the election of Father Nicolas was just the beginning of the General Congregation’s work; as of Jan. 19, the Jesuits had not announced an end date for the meeting, but it was expected to last at least another month and focus on questions of Jesuit identity and governance, vocations, mission and collaboration with the laity.
The New Man Father Nicolas is it a good thing or a bad thing? Who knows with the Jesuits, where-ever a Jesuit goes Revolution seems to break out, maybe that would be a good thing for America at this juncture. Thomas Jefferson said you need a Revolution every 50 years just to keep things honest.

Adam Graham
April 26, 2005

The atmosphere in Washington grows more poisonous as a showdown looms on filibustering judicial nominees. It would serve us well to realize the source of the problem. Its not that judges are liberals or congress is made up of conservatives. Rather, the battle in Washington is about a federal government that’s grown too large and intrusive.

If we do this, something remarkable will happen. Slowly, but surely Washington’s poisonous atmosphere will begin to clear as true power is returned to the people of the States and the federal government focuses on powers expressly granted to it by the Constitution.