Taxes and condensed data as appears to be

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Meador was seriously wrong.

For one thing, 27 CFR 250.11 doesn't exist and hasn't existed for about ten years. The entire part 250 was deleted and rewritten elsewhere in 27 CFR.

The text that used to be 27 CFR 250.11 is now at 27 CFR 26.11 (Meaning of terms), which defines about 30 words and expressions, including "Secretary. The Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico". But this section begins, "When used in this part [= part 26 of Title 27] and in forms prescribed under this part, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatable with the intent thereof, terms shall have the meaning ascribed in this section." In other words, this definition of Secretary only applies to the text of 27 CFR part 26.

The document in the Meador reference was written in the early to mid 1990's. So at that time it was a correct reference.

Please post 27 CFR 250.11 so that we can all see that the intent was identical. (ie. that the old 250.11 also began with the same phrase as 26.11).

[Sharing Lights]

Originally Posted by Big Al

From where ever you cut and paste your post, I cut and paste this from your post

[indent]"[/INDEOn June 6, 1972, Acting Secretary of the Treasury Charles E.
Walker signed Treasury Order Number 120-01 which established the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. He did this with the
stroke of his pen, citing "by virtue of the authority vested in
me as Secretary of the Treasury, including the authority in
Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950." He ordered the ...NT]

1) Do you understand yourself what you are arguing about, particularly
after I quoted accurately from all the sides?

2) Are you aware that you spend time not on helping readers to counteract injustice,
as we do discuss the issue of injustice imposed on the People of this country by
fraud artists and criminals,
but you spend your time on defending your ego?

3) Guess what is more important to me, personally:

to share such knowledge as possible and may all self-empower, themselves,
to be Sovereign and discern for themselves the truth, facts, and opinions or
keep feeding your ego?

4) On top of that, you, still, fail comprehending that, instead of
politely asking what was not clear to you and/or contradictory to your,
personal knowledge, you, proudly "attacked" the data in the post
submitted by me correctly, as if it gave you more worth, while,
the above has been proved already.

5) When I am not sure, I ask, and respectfully, instead of the way you used,
as if that could work with me or most readers.

6) Before point fingers at someone, examine your, own conduct first.

7) This is not about you or me; this is about not avoiding the core
of the issue in discussion, about reading the records first before assuming,
and learning how to interact with people not from an angle of ego
but by substance (with any people in general,
as none of us are better.)

[Sharing Lights]

Originally Posted by FreeFromContract

The document in the Meador reference was written in the early to mid 1990's. So at that time it was a correct reference.

Please post 27 CFR 250.11 so that we can all see that the intent was identical. (ie. that the old 250.11 also began with the same phrase as 26.11).

Light and Virtues to any, true Sovereign!

I always, maintain that for every individual in any numbers from 1 to millions, there are those of you, who
even outnumbered by such millions, outshine them all
by spirit and substance.

As truth is on your side, by a simple, Higher Law:

since you search that truth and you embrace it first.
then, it embraces you back until all become one.

I maintain confidence that the Sovereigns would
discern for themselves whether the criminals in the FR or those who expose them contribute to Sovereignty and who contributes to the enslavement.

For those like you, dear, FreeFromContract, I am willing
to dedicate my time and efforts with others to reinstate our rights from those who have abducted it.

The more all of you are active, the more we all would benefit each other and others.

As for those, who dwell on not helping us to awaken but who try to discredit the facts of the FR stealing our monies and labor, as well, designing the system of some taxes, "confiscated" from us, they would only make us better and brighter.

I say those who dwell on trivial things are, still, needed and are welcomed.

No way, they can divert us from our goals or smother the focus.

Let them deny reality, as we fear it not.

Amen

[Sharing Lights]

Originally Posted by Big Al

From where ever you cut and paste your post, I cut and paste this from your post

[indent]"[/INDEOn June 6, 1972, Acting Secretary of the Treasury Charles E.
Walker signed Treasury Order Number 120-01 which established the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. He did this with the
stroke of his pen, citing "by virtue of the authority vested in
me as Secretary of the Treasury, including the authority in
Reorganization Plan No. 26 of 1950." He ordered the ...NT]

Just to share with all a typical tactic of deceit.

1)An individual would copy a part of your post.

2) Yet, he/she would "conveniently" not copy the other part, so you believe it doesn't even exist.

3) As truth is not on their side, they can only state half-truth,
while all, reasonable people know

truth is whole and only.

Once again, below its the other, conveniently omitted by Big Al part of my post,
as all can witness the original themselves - Post # 14.

4) From the Website of the Agency, itself:

Quote:
Effective January 24, 2003, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) was transferred under the Homeland Security bill to the Department of Justice. The law enforcement functions of ATF under the Department of the Treasury were transferred to the Department of Justice. The tax and trade functions of ATF will remain in the Treasury Department with the new Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.

In addition, the agency's name was changed to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to reflect it new mission in the Department of Justice.

History of ATF from Oxford University Press, Inc.
1789 - 1998 U.S.



The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) is a tax-collecting, enforcement and regulatory arm of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

In common with all other members of the executive branch, ATF's responsibility is established by congressional action. ATF cannot enact a law, nor can it amend the law. Charged as it is with fiscal oversight of some of the most controversial topics in Western civilization, ATF strives to maintain professional neutrality while giving a 35-to-1 return on every dollar it spends. ATF has the best cost-to-collection ratio in the federal family.

Quote:
ATF is the youngest tax-collecting Treasury agency, separated from the Internal Revenue Service by Treasury Department Order No. 120-1 (former No. 221), effective 1 July 1972.

Notwithstanding, ATF
Quote:
traces its roots

across two hundred years of American history.


If any doubts - http://www.atf.gov/about/atfhistory.htm

I can assure anyone who is in love with deceit, such can not work with me.

If in doubt, keep trying.

Good luck.

[Sharing Lights]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Meador was seriously wrong.

For one thing, 27 CFR 250.11 doesn't exist and hasn't existed for about ten years. The entire part 250 was deleted and rewritten elsewhere in 27 CFR.

The text that used to be 27 CFR 250.11 is now at 27 CFR 26.11 (Meaning of terms), which defines about 30 words and expressions, including "Secretary. The Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico". But this section begins, "When used in this part [= part 26 of Title 27] and in forms prescribed under this part, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatable with the intent thereof, terms shall have the meaning ascribed in this section." In other words, this definition of Secretary only applies to the text of 27 CFR part 26.

And what is part 26? Its caption is "Part 26. Liquors and Articles from Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands." The entire part 26 deals only with shipping stuff, mostly booze, from distilleries and vintners in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. As Puerto Rico has its own peculiar tax and tariff system, such shipments involve some peculiar paperwork. The rest of part 26 describes how transactions are made: Money is deposited in the Treasury of Puerto Rico and the Secretary [of the P.R. Treasury] signs off on some permits to ship the merchandise.

So the use of Secretary in 27 CFR part 26 doesn't apply elsewhere. Outside of 27 CFR part 26, the Puerto Rican Treasury Secretary is clearly referenced by using his full title. For example, in 26 CFR sec. 7.936-1, there is a mention of "exemption from Puerto Rican income tax under regulations issued by the Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico..."

And, by the way, Saldana stopped being the Secretary of PR Treasury some years ago; last word I have is that he is the Comptroller of PR. The current Secretary of the Treasury of PR is Juan Carlos Mendez Torres.

As for the claim that:


It's true that the income tax was nearly non-existent, most of the federal govt's revenue came from tariffs before the 16th Amendment was adopted. But there had been a national debt, and in 1916 it was considerably less than it had been in 1901. The government wasn't running a surplus when the 16th Amendment was adopted, else it would have lowered the tariffs without taxing incomes. But the 16th Amendment enabled the govt to collect from all Americans in proportion to their individual levels of prosperity, and this enabled the govt to drop the high tariffs that had crippled us in international business.

Look how much time and efforts you spent?

On what?

Then compare that with the title of the Thread.

What is your point, that the income tax and the FR - corporation posing as benefiting
the People are operating under the Constitutional laws?

No, they are not!

They benefit people?

No, they are not - they benefit the biggest and richest bankers in the world, who are so rich that cannot even spend all, their, monies and it is still not enough for them.

That is the truth and only the Truth!

They leave some crumbs for the People, enough not to provoke a revolt.


"The Federal Reserve and National Banks exercise an exclusive monopoly and privilege of creating credit and issuing their notes at the expense of the public, which does not receive a fair equivalent. This scheme is obliquely designed for the benefit of an idle monopoly to rob, blackmail and oppress the producers of wealth. . . It has defied the lawfully Constituted Government . . .

Slavery and all its incidents, including Peonage, thralldom and debt created by fraud is universally prohibited in the United States. This case represents but another form of Slavery by the Bankers. Their position is not supported by the Constitution."


Courts are under their control.

Private laws operate more often than the Constitutional ones.

The courts do operate under the provision of Admiralty for a fact.
There is no due process.

FR gets the income tax through different schemes and the Treasure is only its buffer.

Whatever Congress needs it gets not from Treasury
as it is emptied quite fast but from the FR.


You, pathetically, indeed, argue on such triviality as names of secretaries.
Who cares?

It is amazing with what consistency you try to divert, literally, divert the attention of the People from the real issue.

Most income tax is going through various schemes to the FR who defraud this country every day.
FR offers notes -not real monies in return and collects tax on imposed debt.

It took me days to find the links which David already had.

I, highly, suggest all to listen to an audio he found at:

http://www.livingdebtfree.info/creature.ram

Dear Shoonra,
as I run this Thread, I would be honest with you,
as I have been before:


I have certain responsibilities before the readers.
I have to share the vast knowledge available so that they can discern the Truth for themselves and become immune to the fraud in law and that of the, so called - "agencies."

I, truly, wish all to be able to defend their God/Nature given rights.

If I would be arguing with you on all those things you try to take me on and others away from the real knowledge,
those of us who seek that knowledge would be stuck on your moves of diversion.

That is self-evident.

I am responsible to sticking to the matter and not "flowers" of yours, which most of us can, already, inhale any way.

When time, permits, I would answer your allegations.
The priorities are set for me, nevertheless.


You demonstrate to some of us a typical approach of lawyers in Court when they desperately try to have Pro Se argue on trivial things away from the real subject.

The law schools drill these "smart" lawyers for that.

Yet, Sovereign minds as many of us are here, are out of such "jurisdiction."

We would continue with the thread - the reality of it - not names of secretaries....
Oh, Lord....


PS.

FR is much wiser than you may think.
It, also, operates via buffer zones where the US Constitution may not be enforced,
while you stick to meaningless "letters" and not the "spirit" of their, clever moves.

These bankers are brilliant indeed.

Yet, what a waste of abilities, as if their soul can take the paper notes
with them or shield them from the Destiny and Providence!

Who cares whether they believe in that or not.

All would face the reality one day!

It is only what you do in life and the sum of all of your actions and intentions
which comprise the moment of facing the Higher Justice!

Few words why Commonwealth attracts corporations, which try to operate from there.

Puerto Rico, as a country of Commonwealth utilized as as smart move to use the land where the US Constitution may not apply by the definition the Insular Areas/Commonwealth.


In 1950, the U.S. Congress afforded Puerto Ricans the right to organize a constitutional convention, contingent on the results of a referendum, where the electorate would determine if they wished to organize their own government pursuant to a constitution of their own choosing. Puerto Ricans expressed their support for this measure in a 1951 referendum, which gave voters a yes-or-no choice for the commonwealth status, defined as a ‘permanent association with a federal union’. A second referendum was held to approve the constitution, which was adopted in 1952. Prior to approving the new constitution, the Constitutional Convention specified the name by which the body politic would be known. The convention on February 4 of 1952 approved resolution 22 which chose in English the word “Commonwealth”, meaning a “politically organized community” or “State”, which is simultaneously connected by a compact or treaty to another political system. Unable to translate the word into Spanish, the convention adopted a translation inspired by the Irish Free State called “Estado Libre Asociado” (ELA) to represent the compact between the people of Puerto Rico and the United States, which is literally translated into English as “Associated Free State”.

Under the 1952 constitution, Puerto Rico is a Commonwealth (use some benefits of the U.S.) and is permitted a degree of autonomy similar to that of a state of the Union, such an arrangement is known as federacy. Puerto Rico does not have voting representation in the U.S. Congress; neither does it have any electors in the U.S. Electoral College...

In time, we would venture further.
I do not post things in vain.

[Sharing Lights]

Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve system have never been audited. It operates outside the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States. - Barry Goldwater, R-AZ

1) If we are wrong, why and how come when all are audited or can be audited, the FR has never been audited?

2) Who do you believe controls auditng?

3) How does FR manage to operate outside the control of Congress?

[Shoonra]

Federal law requires that the Federal Reserve be audited annually.
Congress does have some supervision of the Federal Reserve, however this was deliberately limited to protect the Federal Reserve System from transitory political pressures.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Federal law requires that the Federal Reserve be audited annually.
Congress does have some supervision of the Federal Reserve, however this was deliberately limited to protect the Federal Reserve System from transitory political pressures.

Emphasis added.

Which part of the U.S. Constitution authorized this arrangement?

[Sharing Lights]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Federal law requires that the Federal Reserve be audited annually.
Congress does have some supervision of the Federal Reserve, however this was deliberately limited to protect the Federal Reserve System from transitory political pressures.

Thank you for responding.

Could you, please, also share with us the
findings of one, such audit?

I assure you that I ask questions sincerely
even when we disagree, as I adhere to
the rules of debates.

As for

"however this was deliberately limited to protect the Federal Reserve System from transitory political pressures"

are you kidding?

I think you, truly, believe what wrote.
Hmmmm.

I would not comment on what may drive you to such conclusions;
yet I would comment on the following:

The Federal Reserve, being the richest and most powerful Cartel in the world,
picks and places many candidates in all the branches of the US Government,
as well as directly influences and "buys" the Third World
Governments.

The FR influences the lawmaking to protect itself.., and it has plenty of monies
to accomplish such by whatever it takes.

The FR sets forth the rules for those candidates, who
are mere pawns in their hands and would do what
they are supposed to do (told.)

Whoever pays for music, makes such requests
for songs to be played!

You may argue that voters decide.

"Are you kidding" would reiterate I, "most voters have no clue and
believe nonsense they hear and loud promises.

The Public after becoming tired of the BS on all sides, picks the one,
who is the loudest and most determined,
as well as, who made most promises.


Who pays for campaigns, largely, and exerts all the influence can master
through buffer zones?

Of course, we would never see, "paid for by the Federal Reserve."

Yet....

How many cases do you know of "when all promises made" which have been kept?
Why do you think that the Public calls Politicians - "whores."

Maybe both: Politicians and whores sell something and use it to their gain?

When "opportunities" are wide spread in the case of each -
the same result follows.
both receive what have expected.

Just a thought in my, semi-poetic style, reflecting the reality of life
with, maybe, a chance to make it into a Maxim one day.




I appreciate your efforts sincerely; yet, I, equally,
sincerely would like you to face the reality
and not what the FR put forth in its propaganda.


When I read you,
at times, I feel as "you read them."

Yet, once again the freedom of choice is cherished.

[Shoonra]

For info about the audit of the Federal Reserve:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/genera...q/faqfrs.htm#9

I imagine a copy of the audit report can be found at the Federal Reserve Bank in your district.