This is the Man on the street segment I did September 1st for www.truthattack.org THERE IS NO LAW!
troy.zamushowcase.com (310) 980 0960 Amazon Herb Co. CEO, John Easterling explains the importance of a living Rain Forest as opposed to a dead one. MLM PROS Possible Reasons that MLM Could Be a Great Business For You! 1. Usually start-up costs are low. 2. Many of the highest-quality products are manufactured by MLM companies. 3. You can work it part time if you choose, which allows you to work a job fulltime and work your MLM business in your spare time. 4. You can work from your home. 5. Your business expenses will be deductible from your income tax. 6. You will be your own boss. 7. You choose which hours you want to work. 8. You may develop a small extra income or possibly even a very large income, allowing you to quit your job, or have a great retirement. 9. Your income will be a residual income, which will come to you month-after-month, year-after-year. 10. You will have time freedom. 11. You will meet many like-minded people. get started today sharing ZAMU rain forest blend amazontroy.amazonherb.net
Video Rating: 4 / 5
sickasso72
March 19, 2011 at 2:59 am
Humans= DUMB! Common sense like Hitler killing the Jews , what a dumb bitch these people are the finished product of “our accredited educational institutions” give an effin break !
sickasso72
March 19, 2011 at 3:23 am
Humans= DUMB!
zentner18
March 19, 2011 at 4:22 am
Here is ’he law: Title 26
Section 1, imposes the tax
Section 61 defines Gross income
Section 63 defines Taxable income.
Section 6012 requires you to file a tax return if you have income of more than the exemption amount, and
Section 6151 requires you to pay the tax at the time and place fixed for the filing of your return
PeaceIsRad
March 19, 2011 at 4:39 am
On June 4, 1963, JFK signed Executive Order No. 11110. With this Order JFK was on his way to putting the Federal Reserve Bank of NY out of business. 11110 gave the Treasury the power to issue silver certificates. If enough silver certificates circulated they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve notes. Perhaps JFK’s assassination was a warning to future presidents who try to eliminate the U.S. debt by eliminating the Fed’s control over the creation of money. copy and repost 3X
prof5string
March 19, 2011 at 5:21 am
@SendARope The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the income tax in 1881, decades before the 16th. If you’re going to try and debate this, you need to learn some legal history. The Court has consistently held that Congress has always had the power to tax incomes under its taxing authority in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.
SendARope
March 19, 2011 at 5:57 am
@prof5string well that is the point. The constitution is about “enumerated powers” and the govt didn’t have the authority to tax income before the 16th. IF the 16th was illegally ratified then they still don’t. Never stopped them before though.
prof5string
March 19, 2011 at 6:10 am
@polevaultrockstr Garbage. There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting an income tax. Such a tax was legal both before and after the 16th Amendment.
Irwin Schiff is a three-time-loser of a con artist whose theories are 100% crap and have been consistently rejected by the courts. And for God’s sake, learn to spell.
asicit2b
March 19, 2011 at 6:17 am
@prof5string 61 (a)(1) “Normal” taxes and Surtaxes-Computation of “TAXABLE”
“income” Definations blaw,blaw And YOU posted makes YOUR “wages” included
in “gross income.” Do the intrinsic decomposition of the code. What is “NORMAL”
taxes ? do you know ?
asicit2b
March 19, 2011 at 7:04 am
The U.S Supreme Court has ruled that the taxing limitation in Art.1, sec.2, clause 3; and Art. 1, Sec. 9
Clause 4 of the constitution prohibiting the Fed. Gov. from imposing ANY tax directly ON the people, are still in effect. And that the 16th Amend. did NOT nullify those limitations nor authorize any direct tax ON the people.
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 7:32 am
@prof5string what you fail to realize is that the law is read in the light of the constituiton, and the constitution did not allow for a tax on the income of the people of this counrty. This link clearly shows taht the word is to be used in its constitutional sence, not its everyday use. 3w(dot)takelifeback(dot)com(slash)irwin(slash)incomedef(slash)1939(-)1954B(dot)gif
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 7:41 am
@prof5string consider “firearms” are included in the list. Please tell me why a handgun, shotgun, many differnt types of SMG’s and rifels are not considered “firearms” under the law. It is rediculous to think that the law is dictated by the definitions used in everyday life, especially when they define the words for us RIGHT IN THE CODE.
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 8:27 am
@prof5string why don’t you read section 5841 that requires the Secretary of the Treasury to keep a record of ALL firearms in the united states. Now accoding to you, the Secretary of the Treasury is breaking the law, as there is no such registry. And why would they even bother to define “firearms,” conisidereing well all know what a gun is right? Well thats because not all things that the dictionary considers a fire are is considered one in the law, infact many thinsg you and I would never
prof5string
March 19, 2011 at 9:10 am
@polevaultrockstr The Supreme Court has never ruled that hourly wages aren’t income. NEVER. If you think it has, post a citation.
Section 61(a)(1) of the Code makes your wages included in gross income. Your “foreign commerce” argument is a rehash of the bogus “Section 861” argument that has been consistently rejected by the courts and that hasn’t a shred of legal support. It’s so worthless that its chief proponent didn’t even reiase it at his own tax evasion trial.
prof5string
March 19, 2011 at 9:48 am
@polevaultrockstr Read Section 7701(c) of the Code, which says that when “includes” is used in a definition, you don’t exclude other things that are otherwise included in the defined term. In the case of “employee”, the inclusion of corp officers & govt officials doesn’t mean it excludes people otherwise included in the normal meaning of “employee”. Courts have consistently rejected the argument that “includes” as used in 3402 is restrictive; in fact, one court called the argument “inane”.
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 10:16 am
@prof5string read it.
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 10:47 am
@prof5string YES IT DOES!!!!! Why have a law that clearly states who is taxable, but just throw everyone else in becasue you think they should be? You cannot read tax law and assume that you understand the vocabulary as it is specific to the statues they define. When a law list the applicable situations, it is to be assumed that all other situations are not liable under THAT specific law. So if you can point me to the section that does discuss all of us other employed persons I would love to
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 10:49 am
@averageworkinggal taxable. Your citation of “personal services” only apply to “non-resident aliens and citizens entitled to the benefits of section 262. If you look at section 262 it applies to those who receive most of their income from federal possessions, not the average citizen.
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 11:26 am
@averageworkinggal if you read the regulations as they pertain to section 61 you would see that it is of any source derived, unless excluded by law. This also means unless excluded by the constitution, as EVERY law is to be read in light of it. IF you look though section 61 where these sources are named and you get a list. The regulations on 1.861-8 that pertain to section 61state “…a class of income may included excluded income.” In simpler terms not everything on the list is always
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 11:52 am
@llamabait worth money and making me a “profit.” If you go and look at the “sources” in the law book it names only things that deal with foreign commerce and non resident aliens. The law clearly defines everything that is taxable, even stating that some of those thing state might NOT be taxable under the constitution, but it leaves out any kind of reference to the income of legal residents of the US that do not partake in foreign commerce. It is because we are not taxable!!!!
polevaultrockstr
March 19, 2011 at 12:10 pm
@llamabait the law states taxabe INCOME. The word income is defined as an annual tax levied by the Federal government, most states, and some local governments, on an individual’s or corporation’s net profit. When working an 8 hour day you have NO net profit as you just made a fair trade of your time for money. The Supreme Court has numerous times ruled that your hourly wage is NOT income and is NOT tax able by law. Show me the part of the code that makes my energy in my body a good that is
1PHILLWHITE
March 19, 2011 at 12:43 pm
@stainlessTT You make a solid point there.
prof5string
March 19, 2011 at 1:07 pm
@SendARope Section 3402 doesn’t say that. It says an officer of a corp or a government official is included in the definition, but in accordance with Section 7701(c), that doesn’t mean that all other employed persons aren’t included as well.
asicit2b
March 19, 2011 at 1:45 pm
It is title 26 that keeps the CORPORATION in check.There is no law that requires the average american worker in the private sector to pay a direct unapportioned tax on their labor.
asicit2b
March 19, 2011 at 1:57 pm
The “title”of a section is not law,and that the WORDING of the body of the statute ONLY is the law.Onthe “taxable” “income” NOT on the individual.
collapseofthedollar
March 19, 2011 at 2:22 pm
TITLE 26 > Subtitle A > CHAPTER 1 > Subchapter A > PART I > § 1 it’s as clear as day people. I debunked this myth so quick it’s not even funny
Sailingthroughlife
March 19, 2011 at 3:13 pm
great company! great people! great mission & vision!
MrTroyCasey
March 19, 2011 at 3:53 pm
i got one, how do i use it?
warrencon
March 19, 2011 at 4:45 pm
You should get a green screen so you can put the Amazon behind you in your videos.
itrubsthelotion2
March 19, 2011 at 5:31 pm
@protein: 30% of our oxygen? heavens to betsy!!!! pleez. you just want some of this pretty white boy. SIN!
certifiedhealthnut
March 19, 2011 at 6:08 pm
i’m happy to take a smart brother like you anytime…….let’s plan for next year. i think you would enjoy the Ayahuasca experience!
keep up your great consciousness expanding vids we love ’em
proteanview
March 19, 2011 at 6:37 pm
Hey, HealthNut!
20-30% of our oxygen? Incredible.
I’ll have to go see it before it get eaten away.