Lengthy,factual opinion on the problems in the US

[Osborn F Enready]

I am going to show you a list of facts, and then I will show you my theory on what is wrong with our government, and finally I will conclude with what the answer is, in my opinion. PLEASE take the time to read, and drop a note of input on what you thought.(This content should take about twenty minutes to read, plus time for links if you choose to follow-up)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FACT #1: Our Founding Fathers created a constitutional REPUBLIC as our form of government - NOT a democracy. The Constitution gives the federal/national government LIMITED powers. All powers not delegated to the United States are reserved to the States respectively or to the People. The Union was created to be the SERVANT of the People. The United States Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of the land. (Article VI, Clause 2, (abbreviated A6C2).

FACT #2: The Constitution gives the Congress the power to lay and collect taxes to pay the debts of the government, provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, subject to the following rules pertaining only to the TWO classes of taxation permitted:

1. DIRECT TAXES which are subject to the rule of apportionment among the states of the Union; "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states . . . ", Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 (A1S2C3), and, "No capitation or other direct tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken" Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 (A1S9C4), and

2. INDIRECT TAXES - imposts duties and excises, subject to the rule of uniformity. "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." (A1S8C1)

FACT #3: The government is NOT allowed by either one of the two classifications to tax CITIZENS or PERMANENT RESIDENT ALIENS of the United States of America, DIRECTLY. The intent of the Founders was to keep the government the servant and to prevent it from becoming the master. (A1S2C3 above)

FACT #4: The CENSUS is taken every ten (10) years to determine the number of representatives to be allotted to each State and the amount of a direct tax that may be apportioned to each State determined by the percentage its number of representatives bears to the total membership in the House of Representatives. (see A1S2C4 and A1S9C4 above).

FACT #5: It was established in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 that the Supreme Court of the United States would have the power of "judicial review"; i.e. the power to declare laws passed by the U.S. Congress to be null and void if such a law or laws was/were in violation of the Constitution, to be determined from the original intent as found in Madison's Notes recorded during the Convention, the Federalist Papers, and the ratifying conventions found in Elliott's Debates.

Due to the characteristics of the SECOND CLASSIFICATION of taxation, the Supreme Court called it an indirect tax, and it is divided into three distinct taxes: IMPOSTS, DUTIES, and EXCISES. These taxes were intended to provide for the operating expenses of the government of the United States. (see A1S8C1 above).

FACT #7: Duties and imposts are taxes laid by government on things imported into the country from abroad, and are paid at ports of entry.

FACT #8: The Supreme Court says that excises are: ". . . taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations and upon corporate privileges." (emphasis added) (see Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. , 200 US 107 [1911]).

FACT #9: In 1862, Congress passed an Act (law) to create an "Income Duty" to help pay for the war between the States. A duty is an indirect tax which the federal government cannot impose on citizens or residents of a State having sources of income within a State of the Union.

FACT #10: Congress passed an Act in 1894 to impose a tax on the incomes of citizens and resident aliens of the United States. The constitutionality of the Act was challenged in 1895 and the Supreme Court said that the law was UNCONSTITUTIONAL because it was a DIRECT TAX that was not apportioned as the Constitution required. (see Pollock v. Farmer's Loan & Trust Co., 157 US 429 [1895]).

FACT #11: In 1909, Congress passed the 16th Amendment to the Constitution that was allegedly ratified by 3/4 of the States; it is known as "The Income Tax Amendment": "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." (Amendment 16 to the United States Constitution.)

FACT #12: Some officials within the IRS, along with professors, teachers, politicians and some judges, have said and are saying, that the 16th Amendment changed the U.S. Constitution to allow a DIRECT tax without apportionment.

FACT #13: The above persons are NOT empowered to interpret the meaning of the United States Constitution! As stated above (FACT #5), this power is granted by the Constitution to the Supreme Court, but LIMITED to the ORIGINAL INTENT. The Supreme Court has NO power to function as a "social engineer" to amend or alter the Constitution as they have been doing. A change or "amendment" can only be lawfully done according to the provisions of Article 5 of that document.

FACT #14: The U.S. Supreme Court said in 1916 that the 16th Amendment did NOT change the U.S. Constitution because of the FACT that Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, and Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4, were NOT REPEALED OR ALTERED; the U.S. Constitution cannot conflict with itself. The Court also said that the 16th Amendment merely prevented the "income duty" from being taken out of the category of INDIRECT taxation. (see Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 240 US [1916])

FACT #15: After the Supreme Court decision, the office of the commissioner of Internal Revenue issued Treasury Decision [Order] 2313 (dated March 21, 1916; Vol. 18, January-December, 1916, p. 53. ) It states in part: ". . . it is hereby held that income accruing to NON-RESIDENT ALIENS in the form of interest from the bonds and dividends on the stock of domestic corporations is subject to the income tax imposed by the act of October 3, 1913."

FACT #16: In another Supreme Court decision in 1916, the Court, in clear language settled the application of the 16th Amendment; " . . . by the previous ruling [Brushaber] it was settled that the provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred NO NEW POWER OF TAXATION but simply prohibited the complete and plenary [full] power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged . . . " (see Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co. , 240 US 112 [1916]).

FACT #17: The United States Constitution gives the national government the exclusive authority to handle foreign affairs. Congress has the power to pass laws concerning the direct or indirect taxation of foreigners doing business in the U.S. of A. It has possessed this power from the beginning, needing no "amendment" (change) to the U.S. Constitution to authorize the exercise of it.

FACT #18: The DIRECT classification of taxation was intended for use when unforeseen expenses or emergencies arise. Congress, needing funds to meet the emergency, can borrow money on the credit of the United States (A1S8C2). The Founding Fathers intended that the budget of the United States be balanced and that a deficit be paid off quickly and in an orderly fashion. Through a DIRECT tax, the tax bill is given to the States of the Union. The bill is "apportioned" by the number of Representatives of each State in Congress; therefore, each State is billed its apportioned share of the DIRECT tax equal to the number of votes its Representatives could employ to pass the tax. How the States raise the money to pay the bill is not a federal concern. (see A1S2C 3 above).

FACT #19: In the Brushaber and Stanton cases, the Supreme Court said the 16th Amendment did not change income taxes to another classification. So if the INCOME TAX is an indirect EXCISE tax, then how is it applied and collected? According to the Supreme Court: "Excises are taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupations and upon corporate privileges; the requirement to pay such taxes involves the exercise of the privilege and if business is not done in the manner described no tax is payable . . . it is the privilege which is the subject of the tax and not the mere buying, selling or handling of goods." (see Flint v. Stone Tracy Co. , 200 US 107 [1911]).

QUESTION: If all RIGHTS come from GOD (citizens of the States retained all RIGHTS except those surrendered as enumerated in the United States Constitution), and PRIVILEGES are granted by government after application; then what is the PRIVILEGE that the "income tax" is applied against?

ANSWER: As established in the U.S. Constitution, the federal government CANNOT directly tax a citizen living within the States of the Union. Citizens possess RIGHTS; these rights cannot be converted to PRIVILEGES by government. The only individuals who would not have these RIGHTS and would be liable to regulation by government are NONRESIDENT ALIENS doing business and working within the United States or receiving domestic source profits from investments, and United States citizens working in a foreign country and taxable under TREATIES between the two governments.

FACT #20: WITHHOLDING AGENTS withhold income taxes. The only section in the Internal Revenue Code that defines this authority is section 7701(a)(16).

FACT #21: Withholding of money for income tax purposes, according to section 7701(a)(16), is only authorized for sections 1441 - NONRESIDENT ALIENS; 1442 - FOREIGN CORPORATIONS; 1443 - FOREIGN TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS; 1461 - WITHHOLDING AGENT LIABLE FOR WITHHELD TAX.

FACT #22: Internal Revenue Manual Chapter 1100 Organization and Staffing, section 1132. 75 states: "The Criminal Investigation Division enforces the criminal statutes applicable to income, estate, gift, employment, and excise tax laws involving UNITED STATES CITIZENS RESIDING IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES and nonresident aliens subject to Federal income tax filing requirements . . . ".

FACT #23: The implementation of IRS Treasury Regulation 1. 1441-5 is explained in Publication 515 on page 2.: "If an individual gives you [the domestic employer or withholding agent] a written statement, in duplicate, stating that he or she is a citizen or resident of the United States, and you do not know otherwise, you may accept this statement and are relieved from the duty of withholding the tax." NOTE: Call the IRS at 1-800-TAX-FORM for a free copy of Publication 515.

FACT #24: The ONLY way a United States citizen or permanent resident alien, living and working within a State of the Union, can have taxes deducted from his/her pay, is by voluntarily making an application (Form SS-5) to obtain a Social Security Number, and then entering that number on an IRS Form W-4 and signing it to permit withholding of "Employment Taxes"-"Form W-4 Employee's Withholding Allowance Certificate" (underline added). That is why the IRS pressures children to apply for a Social security Number, and for employers to obtain the voluntary execution of Form W-4 immediately from all those being hired. However, no federal law or regulation requires workers to have a Social Security Number or sign a W-4 to qualify for a job.

FACT #25: Karl Marx wrote in his COMMUNIST MANIFESTO, ten planks needed to create a COMMUNIST state. The SECOND PLANK is: A HEAVY OR PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX, second only to the ABOLITION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.

FACT #26: The attorney who successfully challenged the Income Tax Act of 1894, Joseph H. Choate, recognized the communist hand in the shadows. He told the Supreme Court: "The act of Congress which we are impugning [challenging as false] before you is communistic in its purposes and tendencies, and is defended here upon principles as communistic, socialistic-what shall I call them- populistic as ever have been addressed to any political assembly in the world."

FACT #27: The Supreme Court agreed; and Mr. Justice Field wrote the Court's opinion, concluding with these prophetic words: "Here I close my opinion. I could not say less in view of questions of such gravity that go down to the very foundations of government. If the provisions of the Constitution can be set aside by an act of Congress, where is the course of usurpation to end? The present assault upon capital is but the beginning. It will be but the stepping-stone to others, larger and more sweeping, till our political contests will become a war of the poor against the rich; a war growing in intensity and bitterness. "

NEED I SAY MORE? . . .

FACT #28: Internal Revenue Code Section 6654(e)(2)© states: ". . . no tax liability . . . if . . . the individual was a citizen or resident of the United States throughout the preceding taxable year. "

The IRS contends that the success of the SELF-ASSESSMENT system depends upon "VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE".....EVIDENTLY SO!!! This clearly points out the abuse and illegality of income tax as is currently practiced, and assumed.

Conclusion of Facts

1. All RIGHTS come from GOD.

2. The United States Government can exercise only those powers given to it by "We The People" through the U.S. Constitution.

3. The "income tax" is an INDIRECT TAX;

4. There is NO section of law in the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26 USC) making a CITIZEN or a RESIDENT working and living WITHIN A STATE OF THE UNION, LIABLE to pay the INCOME (indirect/excise/duty) TAX.

To have the above be recognized, and still have a tax system like we have today(over 17,000 pages, and over 700 different forms required.) is not only taking advantage of the citizens, it is practically RAPE!
U.S. Tax Code:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/#TITLES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is my theory on the evolution of this problem in government, along with some essential facts that help to lay out the timeline and explain how this could happen.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a supporter 100% of the original Constitution, and it's amendments with exception to the 16th, and the 18th(later repealed). I am not aware of any amendments after Article 26.

My issue with the 16th Amendment is rather simple. The article clearly authorizes the United States to collect income tax from all citizens, from any income. The problem with this amendment is it takes many liberties by not being enumerated or explained the method or system to be used for this income tax, and it implies it will be implemented the same as all other taxes referenced under Article 1, section 8 Powers of Congress, which clearly states "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." And also Article 1, section 9 clearly stating "No money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public monies should be published from time to time."
Those issues under Article 1 impose the responsibility of the U.S. Federal Government to clearly state their need for the tax, requiring the people to recognize the need, and pass it into law. It also imposes the responsibility of the government to keep receipts, and make public all spending of public taxpayer money in concise and clear records of payment, and to whom payment was made. All of this though, is only the perception of the public, as I stated above, income tax in the way it is currently practiced, is illegal and unconstitutional, and the 16th Amendment considered moot. (Is this why the amendment was so vague, and was it not MEANT to be upheld?)

This is a very fatal, and tragic flaw in the system, which I am sure is to blame for the majority of the problem with our past 100 years or more of government corruption. Without a clear and concise system of tax collection, and without regulation or accountability for said system, it allows an avenue for monies to be aquired without knowledge or will of the citizens, and this is not allowed, implied, or acceptable for ANY reason. The whole purpose of this system was checks and balances to keep the system honest, and representative of the people. By allowing monies to be built up without record, it allows the government to be an "influence peddler" with the use of these funds. Any surplus of money is also an overtax of the citizenry, and is the property of the people, and should be returned as such at each new fiscal year upon tax audit.

It (the 16th Amendment) was ratified in 1909, long after the whig party was swallowed by the Republican party(which split from the Republican Democratic party) and the Democratic party, was significantly different on several key issues of the TIME, though the major one difference for the split of the Republican Democratic party was slavery.
The Republican and Democratic parties are to blame for this amendment being allowed to pass I believe, as they were in office when it was introduced, and its shortcomings surely had to be recognized by many who knew of the bill. After noticing the endless line of corruption that starts in this short span of time, and from here out, I feel it is very self evident that this is the time when wrong decisions were being made, to allow the two major parties (recently ONE party) to enact legislation slowly to aid each other in maintaining control of the White House. (Not that both parties agreed 100%, but that they realized the potential for maintaining a lock of EXCLUSIVELY two parties on the power of the executive branch of government for the forseeable future. This would allow them to control future appointments of other postitions in government to facilitate the needed numbers for support of this lock on the White House.)

The significance of the timeline for the ratification of the "Income Tax Amendment" is crucial. Allow me to provide this info before continuing;

1873-1907: Financial Panics Prevail
Although the National Banking Act of 1863 established some measure of currency stability for the growing nation, bank runs and financial panics continued to plague the economy. In 1893 a banking panic triggered the worst depression the United States had ever seen, and the economy stabilized only after the intervention of financial mogul J.P. Morgan. It was clear that the nation’s banking and financial system needed serious attention.


1907: A Very Bad Year
In 1907 a bout of speculation on Wall Street ended in failure, triggering a particularly severe banking panic. J.P. Morgan was again called upon to avert disaster. By this time most Americans were calling for reform of the banking system, but the structure of that reform was cause for deep division among the country’s citizens. Conservatives and powerful "money trusts" in the big Eastern cities were vehemently opposed by "progressives." But there was a growing consensus among all Americans that a central banking authority was needed to ensure a healthy banking system and provide for an elastic currency.


1908-1912: The Stage is Set for Decentralized Central Bank
The Aldrich-Vreeland Act of 1908, passed as an immediate response to the panic of 1907, provided for emergency currency issues during crises. It also established the National Monetary Commission to search for a long-term solution to the nation’s banking and financial problems. Under the leadership of Sen. Nelson Aldrich, the commission developed a banker-controlled plan. William Jennings Bryan and other progressives fiercely attacked the plan; they wanted a central bank under public, not banker, control. The 1912 election of Democrat Woodrow Wilson killed the Republican Aldrich plan, but the stage was set for the emergence of a decentralized central bank.


1912: Woodrow Wilson as Financial Reformer
Though not personally knowledgeable about banking and financial issues, Woodrow Wilson solicited expert advice from Virginia Rep. Carter Glass, soon to become the chairman of the House Committee on Banking and Finance, and from the Committee’s expert adviser, H. Parker Willis, formerly a professor of economics at Washington and Lee University. Throughout most of 1912 Glass and Willis labored over a central bank proposal, and by December 1912 they presented Wilson with what would become, with some modifications, the Federal Reserve Act.


1913: The Federal Reserve System is Born
From December 1912 to December 1913 the Glass-Willis proposal was hotly debated, molded and reshaped. By December 23, 1913, when President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law, it stood as a classic example of compromise-a decentralized central bank that balanced the competing interests of private banks and populist sentiment.


1914: Open for Business
Before the new central bank could begin operations, the Reserve Bank Organizing Committee, comprised of Treasury Secretary William McAdoo, Secretary of Agriculture David Houston, and Comptroller of the Currency John Skelton Williams, had the arduous task of building a working institution around the bare bones of the new law. But by Nov. 16, 1914, the 12 cities chosen as sites for regional Reserve Banks were open for business, just as hostilities in Europe erupted into World War I.


1914-1919: Fed Policy During the War
When World War I broke out in mid-1914, U.S. banks continued to operate normally, thanks to emergency currency issued under the Aldrich-Vreeland Act of 1908. But the greater impact in the United States came from the Reserve Banks’ ability to discount banker’s acceptances. Through this mechanism, the United States aided the flow of trade goods to Europe, indirectly helping to finance the war until 1917, when the United States officially declared war on Germany and financing our own war effort became paramount.


1920s: The Beginning of Open Market Operations
Following World War I, Benjamin Strong, head of the New York Fed from 1914 to his death in 1928, recognized that gold no longer served as the central factor in controlling credit. Strong’s aggressive action to stem a recession in 1923 through a large purchase of government securities gave strong evidence of the power of open market operations to influence the availability of credit in the banking system. During the 1920s the Fed began using open market operations as a monetary policy tool. During his tenure, Strong also elevated the stature of the Fed by promoting relations with other central banks, especially the Bank of England.


1929-1933: The Market Crash and the Great Depression
During the 1920s Virginia Rep. Carter Glass warned that stock market speculation would lead to dire consequences. In October 1929 his predictions seemed to be realized when the stock market crashed, and the nation fell into the worst depression in its history. From 1930 to 1933 nearly 10,000 banks failed, and by March 1933 newly inaugurated President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declared a bank holiday, while government officials grappled with ways to remedy the nation’s economic woes. Many people blamed the Fed for failing to stem speculative lending that led to the crash, and some also argued that inadequate understanding of monetary economics kept the Fed from pursuing policies that could have lessened the depth of the Depression.


1933: The Depression’s Aftermath
In reaction to the Great Depression, Congress passed the Banking Act of 1933, better known as the Glass-Steagall Act, calling for the separation of commercial and investment banking and requiring use of government securities as collateral for Federal Reserve notes. The Act also established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), placed open market operations under the Fed and required bank holding companies to be examined by the Fed, a practice that was to have profound future implications, as holding companies became a prevalent structure for banks over time. Also, as part of the massive reforms taking place, Roosevelt recalled all gold and silver certificates, effectively ending the gold and any other metallic standard.

Sorry if that was long, I had to make sure we were all on the same page here, ok , back to the points I was making.

We adopted the new Income Tax(1909), and the economy started to slip, then came the creation of the Federal Reserve, which was swiftly followed by another economy crunch, then the roaring twenties, which was strictly a result of mismanagement of the Federal Reserve(a PRIVATE BANK), and then the market crash, which allowed some of the most corrupt legislation to be passed into law. This was when the first trend of dressing up bad legislation with noble intents came to the forefront. Many of the the issues in "The New Deal" were very noble in concept, but vague and without limits on implementation, which undermined their true purpose, which was to get the economy restarted after the "questionable method" from which it collapsed. Also notice the influence of J.P. Morgan, and if you do further research you'll also notice DuPont. Those two people have more to do with our current situation than most would believe.


If you will notice also, in the last 154 years we have not had a President not represented by either the Republican or Democratic party. Is this so hard to believe once you understand that those two parties were originally one party, and by presenting two similar, yet slightly different pictures on "popular issues" they could control the White House with their overwhelming combined majority of voters? To me it is easy to suppose that that unaccounted for money I earlier spoke of, could be manipulated more easily, between two parties with the same basic agenda, and a little give and take on each side splitting the royalties the taxpayers unknowingly were providing.


NOW, to me it is plausible, possible and highly likely due to the overwhelming amount of proof sitting in our lap, that this system has long been eroded by a few simple errors, that have led to catastrophic conditions, rendering the original system as intended almost inoperable. The violations committed by both the Republican and Democratic parties have been making news since Lincolns platform, and his tragic assasination. The Republicans and Democrats have BOTH lied to us to get in office, and reversed their stance come decision making time, they have BOTH done massive amounts of damage to the legal system, Constitution, and are BOTH guilty of over-taxing, mis-appropriating funds, not showing all taxpayer monies outlay and expenditures, and on top of THOSE things, they over the last 20 years have enacted several funds to benefit the parties specifically, and the cabinet members. They also have approved their own raises, and their own unique health-care/retirement funds. They have also MONOPOLIZED A BI-PARTISAN LOCK ON THE WHITE HOUSE BY USING TAXPAYER MONEY TO FUND EACH PARTIES CAMPAIGN, EFFECTIVELY LIMITING THE ABILITY OF THIRD, OR ANY SUBSEQUENT PARTY TO CAMPAIGN COMPARITIVELY. Most importantly, neither has done ANYTHING substantial before being accused to repeal unconstitutional laws already in place upon their entering the seat of The White House.

That my friends, is all the proof needed to support an argument of Government Conspiracy. Over the last 20 years, they have shaken the gloves off, and are coming on full swing now. The Patriot Act is the worst violation of civil liberties ever acheived in the History of U.S. Government. We have gone to war on a lie, based on faulty intelligence, though there are MANY accusations of foul play by respected sources of both Bush and Clinton. The proof of Conspiracy and Coercion is there, you just have to look from the right perspective, which is Liberty and Justice for ALL! These Presidents, as all Presidents had to take an oath of office, to protect and uphold the Constitution from all threats, foreign and domestic. All Presidents since Carter have done uprecedented damge to civil liberties, supporting unconstitutional federal laws, and should have been impeached or at least HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their actions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, here is what I suggest be done, and I also know that many others currently running for president endorse much of this, but neither a Republican or a Democrat that I know of does.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now that we have a rather solid idea of how, and when the government started to fall into the void of corruption, let us address those problems with effort to re-balance and stabilize the wonderful concept of a democratic republic.

To me it seems obvious, that to stem the growth and persistence of corruption in government, we need to stem the flow of money it has at its disposal without the approval of the taxpayers. This would entail a complete audit of the entire governments books, and listing of all those transactions in entirety, and then reviewing each individual program and bill of payment for validity/efficiency/purpose. This would in essence mean making available a public vote of which programs, and costs the public would deem essential to their government, and they would vote on what was actually taxed, IN ENTIREITY.

Presidential Elections would also have to be altered, to purify the canidates and parties from using money to influence voters by media/advertising/bribes. There would have to be some way for all parties to run their selected canidates in an equal media forum,(the airwaves were a gift to the people after all from Congress) that is MOST accessible to the masses, in a debate where all canidates are asked questions pertaining to the issues the PEOPLE deem important, as well as what the Government deems important. Only after allowing equal time and equal questioning of the issues and platforms of all parties, can you have a truly democratic republic, which was intended. I would also recommend the IRV voting system along with the other mentioned changes.
IRV info: http://www.fairvote.org/irv/

Term limits need to be set for EVERY government branch position, and no position should exceed two 6 year terms successively. The people would need to be consulted on length of individual term limits, through public vote on positions not already under term limits.

There needs to be an amendment, holding all government officials in all branches of government, accountable for any actions they or their subordinates take that violate any constitutional laws, or infringe on any rights. That amendment should also outline specific punishments maximum and minimum for several example offenses, and enacted immediately.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


So, am I totally off here or what folks?? Should our canidate for president be addressing these issues, along with many others that we are not hearing about? What do you think?

Some additional notes;

Allegations of Pat Act Abuses...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in564189.shtml
http://freetotravel.org/cid.html
http://www.gamersnook.com/blog/archives/000455.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1125-07.htm
http://www.russoforpresident.com/issues.php?id=24
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/10/national/10PROT.html (need to register Free with NY Times to read that one)

LILO Leasing scandal tidbits:
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-26-2003-36287.asp
http://finance.senate.gov/press/Gpre...prg030504a.pdf
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...s/doggett.html
http://www.uhuh.com/taxstuff/bignotax.htm


D.A.R.E. Program Report:
http://civilliberty.about.com/gi/dyn....org/DARE.html

Please Reference this site, for the issue of Prohibition and its conclusions in Hindsight;
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/...es/nc/nc2a.htm

ACTUAL FACTS about the War on Drugs:
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/

VERY GRAPHIC, but sadly true...
CAUTION, these contain VILE, DISGUSTING, HORRIFIC links that tie your government to doing exactly what so many of you Bush fans refuse to admit. CAUTION, I have no authority to say this, but I would rate this film clip ® for content, and (E) for essential knowledge of the real story.
CAUTION!

Here is the link to the Film Clip:
http://www.ericblumrich.com/pl_lo.html

Here is the link to ACTUAL DATA, COMPILED UNDER FEDERAL ORDER.
http://www.web-light.nl/VISIE/DUREPO..._dureport.html

And a couple of BBC LINKS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/1910980.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/...um/default.stm

A few more videos, I think you will find hard not to watch....
http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

http://www.ericblumrich.com/ma.html

http://www.ericblumrich.com/critics2.html

CAUTION, these LINKS ARE GUILTY OF CONTAINING A LOT OF GORE, FACT, HORROR, FACT, AND FOUL LANGUAGE, AND FACT. VIEW AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION.


And for those that are still skeptical, I ask you to question the very Pledge of Allegiance you have recited countless times, and ask these questions;

Do you even know and comprehend what "REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS, INDIVISIBLE, UNDER GOD, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL." means?

NOTICE HOW THEY STATE REPUBLIC, (FOR WHICH IT STANDS). THAT MEANS THE REPUBLIC AS WRITTEN IN (THE) CONSTITUTION, not some specific individuals interpretation of the Constitution.

Without the Constitution standing unmolested, this government is not official, nor does it have authority, nor has it authorized or issued a document stating that it is independent of our Constitution. That my friend means that we are CURRENTLY under attack by political forces to USURP power FROM THE PEOPLE, as PROMISED in the Constitution.

Also, if you'll notice, I partially quoted the "new accepted" until recently, version of the Pledge of Allegiance.

The words "Under God" were added after a campaign by the "Knights of Columbus" (an organization with religious ties), lobbied to have those words added.

The orginal accepted version is;

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation,
indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all"

Please check the fact here, or other official websites.
http://www.history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm

The importance of this upcoming election is beyond description. Our country has never been threatened by an enemy of such force, deception, or ability before in our history, since we fought and won our quest for Independence. Both major parties are playing on Americans fears, and ignorance of the truly important issues that control this country, to further perpetrate their combined agendas.

I PLEA TO ALL AMERICANS, PLEASE TAKE THE TIME THIS YEAR TO TRULY STUDY ALL PARTIES CANIDATES WISELY, AND VOTE WITH THE THOUGHT OF OUR IDEALS AND BELIEFS THAT MADE THIS COUNTRY WHAT IT USED TO ONCE STAND FOR, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

This conspiracy has been solely perpetrated upon the U.S. citizens by the Democratic and Republican parties, and their manipulation of the United States government to benefit their parties specifically and further their own agendas instead of recognizing the will of the people, and the recognition of the Constitution as the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND.

Educate yourselves, your friends, and your children. We can still take this country back.....


____________________________________________________________________________
" A man who would trade a measure of liberty, for a measure of security, DESERVES NEITHER."

(Osborn F. Enready)
Michael G. Wojtaluk
Signing Member Free State Project
http://www.freestateproject.org
http://www.russoforpresident.com

[PatrickHenry]

Osborn, you are right in your irrefutable logic and your facts. Fact is, you only left one thing out. The constitution was suspended in 1933, and has never been restored. You live in a whitewashed dictatorship, and you have since the day you were born.

http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?tit...ional_emergency

You may argue all you want, but the Feds are presently ignoring the constitution and all its' amendments. If you choose to make an issue of it, they will choose to make an example of you and will do whatever is necessary to thwart insurrection against their illegal rule. The constitutional issue must be dealt with first, but I have found that most people don't know of this.

Even those on this heated debate website are preoccupied with issues of left/right, Demo/Repub, Bush/Kerry, capitalist/socialist and cannot be bothered about the suspension of the US Constitution for 71 years. Do you know what Executive Orders are? They are laws, proclaimed by the POTUS and published in the Federal Register, which are not necessarily in line with the original US constitution or its amendments. Many, in fact, are entirely antithetical to the freedom proclaimed in that honored document. The media, even the alternative media are reluctant to touch this story. But look it up for yourself. The US Senate tried in 1973 to resolve the national emergency, but were unable to do so, and the unspoken crisis continues to this day. It's called Senate Report 93-549.

All americans have in fact been declared enemies of our government
http://www.city-net.com/~davekle/warpwrs.html

Try mentioning this to your federal representatives and see if you even get a response. I got nothing but a form letter saying thanks for writing!

You will not get enough americans to defy the government's tax authority without a victory in returning to constitutional rule. Publicize this and achieve something on this front or they will hang you on the fence like a coyote. I'd say you need about, oh, 20 million Americans to get off the couch for it...

I can't join you in a tax revolt no matter how righteous, 'cuz I have too much to lose, and these guys are playin' for keeps

[ConservativeX]

Actually, Executive Orders (along with the President submitting a budget to Congress) are delegations from Congress that may be revoked at any time BY Congress.

Kind of like the FCC; they only have what authority that is delegated to them by Congress.

If the Congress wishes to shut down Executive Orders, all they have to do is pass a law rescinding all delegated powers to other branches of the government.

However, the real concern is not Executive Orders, but Judicial Review; this is an oligarchical power that is SELF-delegated and beyond appeal.

As for form letters, that's why I am politically ACTIVE. I meet with my representatives when they are in town, and I call them as well.

[PatrickHenry]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (ConservativeX,)
I meet with my representatives when they are in town, and I call them as well.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Next time you chat, ask about the national state of emergency. I bet the reps still think they have some power.

[Osborn F Enready]

Pat, thanks for the kind words, and I am well aware of the crime of the War Powers Act. The thing Conservative failed to notice in my post was that I am also accusing Congress, and the Senate, as they are majority held positions of both parties.

This is no longer a simple issue of a "few" corrupt persons. This is an issue of the people being forced to either DEMAND recognition, or be forced to revolt. Consult the Constitution, and those are the only option if the representatives stop representing the will of the people. That's why they want your guns, your personal info(Pat Act), and your cooperation. WAKE UP AMERICA.

Thanks again Pat.

[Osborn F Enready]

Alec, it is state rights to write civil laws to create and establish order of the people. The Fed is in place to take care of National matters, and write laws worthy of noting effect to the entire populace. The state has the right to outlaw things, as you cited, as long as they do not infringe upon the constitution.

You obviously confused my use of the word liberty, for the meaning of reckless abandon and no self responsiblity.

I believe each person is responsible for themselves, and each state has the right to write their own laws regarding the will of the people within that state, as long as they dont infringe on the constitution, or individual rights.

Here are a few examples of current Federal Infringements;

Violations of Federal asset forfeiture laws.
(D.A.R.E., B.A.T.F., F.B.I.)

Illegal collection and application of Income Tax

Mis-Use of Military Power

Purposely mis-leading, and mis-informing the public as to International Affairs, when the government represents the people.

Writing laws by Executive Order, instead of in Congress.

Placement of Unconstitutional inter-governmental agencies.

Purposely allowing the War Powers Act to remain in effect while in no state of emergency.

etc. etc. etc.

I have not even addressed your social security, the way they spend your illegally obtained tax dollars, or the double standard enforcement of drug laws.

I truly prefer to debate facts, and not rhetoric.

[Suburbanite]

Osborn, thank you for the read. I'll have to look into it more independently until I express my own opinions but that has to be one of the best posts tying economy and politics together I have probably ever seen, kudos on that.

[PatrickHenry]

Yeah, Osborn. Go man, go.

[Mike]

Osborn, we frequent a lot of the same boards, and I must say you have the most well thought out, documented, factual posts that should open the curtain wide to the shenanigans that have been going on behind the scenes. If you are ever in the SE TX area, let me know as I'd like to buy you a beer(or your drink of choice), and figure out how we can take it back. I was born F'n ready II.

[Autophage]

I don't think opinions can be described as factual. Based on facts, sure, but an opinion is an opinion and not a fact - an opinion is one's perception of facts.

[Osborn F Enready]

Well truly thank you very much for all the supportive posts. I have only been investigating this seriously since the Perot election.

Autophage, I think you will notice that the title of the thread is "Lengthy, factual opinion on the problems in the U.S. All the facts are clearly marked and referenced, and I am fairly sure all opinion is stated as such. Please pick a specific issue to debate, and I will go out of my way to oblige.

Alec, you are wrong in your perception of the Constitution sir. The Constitution is to be recognized as the Supreme Law of the Land. Its purpose is to take the place of a King, by which all issues that arise, can be held up to the outline of intent and ruled based on those laws. All STATES have the RIGHT to impose laws upon the citizenry in their boundaries, as long as they do not infringe on the Constitution. I challenge you Alec, to tell me of one Unconstitutional law that cannot be addressed through a means friendly and acceptable to the Constitution, which has clearly shown the results of its necessity, and usefulness.

Also, one of the main reasons I became so heavily involved in the Federal Laws and restrictions, is because I live in Ohio, which has imposed a program called the "Drug Free Workplace Program." This program coerces business into supporting federal drug laws, by legally administering tax breaks through kickbacks in workers compensation, in exchange for removing the privacy rights of employees for businesses who adopt the program. This program also encourages, and promotes insurance companies to offer lower rates to businesses who are in the program. The ramifications of this are very far reaching and all based on faulty logic.

For one thing, the program demands all employees be administered a drug test, before acceptance. All employees are subject to random tests, which can be administered for many reasons ranging from suspicion(as outlined per programs guidelines), accident on the job, or random name drawings. The program only recognizes urine testing as the method for testing, which has been proven faulty by numerous independent tests conducted by everyone from the ACLU to the military. Urine testing is based on testing for metabolites in the urine of the testee. This is not an accurate method for determining the level, the amount, or the actual intoxification of the person. The only drug that does not pass through a persons system in matter of two days or less, is marijuana, which in heavier people is detectable for over 30 days.

The program removes the assumption of innocence, until proven guilty. The program violates the privacy rights of employees. The program violates business laws, because it gives complying companies an unfair expense advantage in insurance and operating costs due to workers compensation. The program uses faulty information, to coerce businesses of the validity of the testing and the program. The program allows the business, and the insurance company to refuse to pay for on the job injuries that occur,because all employees are tested prior to treatment.

Regardless of whether or not I disagree with drugs, and the employers right to test those he wishes to consider for employment BEFORE they are hired, the program is unethical, and does not promote or encourage business, or the goals the program puts in place. It is also unconstitutional, and violation of my rights to subject me to forcible testing that is proven faulty, to gain employment. This is just another form of discrimination, legalized.

The war on drugs is the biggest lie, myth and propaganda barrel you can use to support big governments ideals.

[Suburbanite]

It sounds like you agree a lot on the situation, but Alec doesn't seem too indignant about it. Is that the only difference? Alec brings up a good point, and I always wonder this myself, everyone has these views and talks about them and expressed how true they are yet I don’t see them acting on them. For me, personally, education is really my issue, it envelops my mind socially, politically, on all real levels and I am extremely concerned for our Youth, it took a lot of work for me to just get a decent education. So I volunteer my time mentoring. What do you do about this Osborn?

[Catch 22]

osborn that is one looooong post man. I'll repsond to it once I finish it, which will probably be next year. :)

[commonsense]

Suburbanite, you're a great example of the success of the American educational system.
You parrot their views flawlessly.

[commonsense]

Osborne:
Thank you so much, you've supplied us with a very concise and thorough chronology that will be very useful for frustrating me to no end while I attempt to enlighten some of the products of our educational system (and media).
None of it was news to me, but admittedly because I have amassed the same net information since becoming a member of this site, but your chronology/synopsis only makes it slightly more palatable because it tells me those like us are not alone in seeing it.
You do overlook one dynamic element, though, and this should also stifle Suburbanite and his ilk with his question on education.
Teddy Roosevelt in his only term achieved many "happy outcomes" from his abuse of presidential powers, but historically signal the last time such moves would work out to be so.
When he very magnanimously and honorably chose to not run again, (no need for term limits with that kind of sensitivity--or was it guilt---to the potential for overstepping presidential powers, regardless of the successes) we all know he went on a long safari in Africa.
Unfortunately, he couldn't get "being the prez" out of his system and from that moment on, screwed up the nest three elections, but more significantly, purely in an effort to secure the popular vote,
TRAGICALLY mixed well-intentioned and necessary popular and "progressive" independendent, free, public/charitable movements for improving life, INEXTRICABLY with socialist and henceforth GOVERNMENT POWER, purely in his bid for reelection.
Hull House, W.E.B. DuBois, NAACP, and others became the beginning of our goverment (taxpayer) sponsored social-engineering self-destruct campaign, the biggest of which was Dewey's socialist education manifesto, which would never would have gotten ground without Teddy, whether he himself won or not, because this was the beginning of (which scots philosopher said it?) "the public dooming democracy once it realizes it can vote itself money from the publivc treasury"
Not only did the "progressive movement" sow the seeds for a future of socialist indoctrination into every aspect of public education, it also forever corrupted the initial worthy efforts of volunteer social improvement movements into failure and multiplying human suffering and the cultivation of a dependent, ignorant, enslaved social underclass of voters by "education" and "social services" working hand in hand.

[Suburbanite]

Jesus why is everyone on my ass?