America: Freedom to Fascism

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
9/11 was perpetrated by US government officials and made to look as if it was conducted solely by arab terrorists to justify the war on terrorism and shredding of the U.S. Constitution. That's the way I see it anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt ask you to repeat your conjecture, I asked for evidence. Care to try again?

[/ QUOTE ]Building 7 for one. Only an idiot would think fires would cause a highrise to come fall straight down just like a controlled demolition.

Also, this book has enlightened me as to just how shoddy and shallow the 9/11 Commission's investigation was, which leads me to believe these guys didn't want to reveal the truth of what happened that day.

Here's plenty more evidence if you care to look for yourself: http://911research.com/ . Excuse me if I don't get into another long, drawn out argument over this on the internets, but I've done it so often and have finally learned my lesson not to cast pearls before swine.

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This movie is a joke, right?

I only got through the part where assert that there's no law requiring the filing of tax returns. (hint: I.R.C. sec. 6011 gives the Dept. of the Treasury the power to issue regulations saying who needs to file returns. Treas. Reg. 1.6012 says that anyone who has more than $750 of gross income in a year must file.) The internet is really dangerous for people who aren't very smart, I guess.

[/ QUOTE ]

The argument that comes later is that income is legally defined as capital gains or profits, not wages.

While I'm sure there are tons of loopholes one could use to argue either way, anything that makes people hates taxation is good, no matter how stupid it is [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I did quit before that part, but that sounds pretty laughably wrong too, as gross income is also statutorily defined, and it explicitly includes "Compensation for services." I.R.C. sec. 61.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Sec. 61. Gross income defined

(a) General definition
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means
all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited
to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions,
fringe benefits, and similar items;

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't see wages and salaries in that list.

[Insp. Clue!So?]

And "they" blew up building 7 why exactly? They had some extra explosives lying around? WTC 1 and 2 weren't enough to piss off everybody?

And those idiots you mention seem to include all the top people who blow up buildings for a living.

And they waited 7 hours, letting hundreds of firemen and officials to run around the building unfettered, people who would be freely snooping around looking for every conceivalbe danger and would certainly notice something slightly out of the ordinary like, oh say, explosives set for demolition?


Not to mention the fact that you'd need vast tons of explosives to wire a building like that, not just a couple of packs of semtex--all unnoticed, of course (let's not even get into these same issues for wtc 1 and 2).

You have to be just as stupid to believe this stuff as you do to believe that Hussein had WMD or was behind 9/11...the whole thing is simply idiotic.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
9/11 was perpetrated by US government officials and made to look as if it was conducted solely by arab terrorists to justify the war on terrorism and shredding of the U.S. Constitution. That's the way I see it anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt ask you to repeat your conjecture, I asked for evidence. Care to try again?

[/ QUOTE ]Building 7 for one. Only an idiot would think fires would cause a highrise to come fall straight down just like a controlled demolition.

Also, this book has enlightened me as to just how shoddy and shallow the 9/11 Commission's investigation was, which leads me to believe these guys didn't want to reveal the truth of what happened that day.

Here's plenty more evidence if you care to look for yourself: http://911research.com/ . Excuse me if I don't get into another long, drawn out argument over this on the internets, but I've done it so often and have finally learned my lesson not to cast pearls before swine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for admitting that you have nothing to bolster your position. Ive been to the url you recommended before and I remain quite unconvinced.

[canis582]

Operation Northwoods is all the evidence i need.

Of course the government is fighting a war against its own people...every government seeks to repress its own people for corporate gain. (if the people are dumb and let it happen, like americans)

[nicky g]

[ QUOTE ]
Operation Northwoods is all the evidence i need.


[/ QUOTE ]

Something that the government considered (but didn't do) in the 1960s is all the evidence you need for it having done something similar in 2001?

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't see wages and salaries in that list.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wages and salaries are compensation for services. I don't see how anyone could dispute that. You perform a service, and then your employer compensates you. "Compensation" for "services."

In other news, I watched another 15 or so minutes of that garbage. Basically, all they do is cherrypick good-sounding quotes and string them together to imply that income taxes are unconstitutional or not legally required. If you look at any one of the sources they cite, you'll find that the source as a whole says something completely different than what Russo says. For example, he quotes a Treasury reg. which uses the word "voluntary compliance," and then behaves as if that phrase applies to the entire system of income taxes. In fact, the reg he quotes (and you can actually see part of it in the film) says that revenue rulings and other guidance will be published by the IRS to help people voluntarily comply with their income tax obligations. The whole thing's a poorly-constructed sham for people who are too dumb to look at sources.

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
9/11 was perpetrated by US government officials and made to look as if it was conducted solely by arab terrorists to justify the war on terrorism and shredding of the U.S. Constitution. That's the way I see it anyway.


[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt ask you to repeat your conjecture, I asked for evidence. Care to try again?

[/ QUOTE ]Building 7 for one. Only an idiot would think fires would cause a highrise to come fall straight down just like a controlled demolition.

Also, this book has enlightened me as to just how shoddy and shallow the 9/11 Commission's investigation was, which leads me to believe these guys didn't want to reveal the truth of what happened that day.

Here's plenty more evidence if you care to look for yourself: http://911research.com/ . Excuse me if I don't get into another long, drawn out argument over this on the internets, but I've done it so often and have finally learned my lesson not to cast pearls before swine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for admitting that you have nothing to bolster your position. Ive been to the url you recommended before and I remain quite unconvinced.

[/ QUOTE ]
So you think fires on two floors can make a steel structure fall straight down just like a controlled demolition?
Here's another clue for you all. Concrete doesn't turn to fine dust unless it is forcibly exploded. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
And "they" blew up building 7 why exactly?

[/ QUOTE ]Why don't you educate yourself on what government offices were in that building? Are you familiar with the concept of destroying evidence?

[illeagle]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, all they do is cherrypick good-sounding quotes and string them together to imply that income taxes are unconstitutional or not legally required.

[/ QUOTE ] You mean like Supreme Court rulings?