-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Robert Hettinga wrote:

Of course, all the pseudoconstitutionalist claptrap about the 16th being unconstitutional is, of course, that. The constitution's what the Supreme Court says it is, unfortunately.

I don't agree with you on this one, Bob. The fact is that the 16th was never properly ratified. It slid through the cracks, contrary to the procedure for ratifying amendments as outlined in the Constitution. The reason there was no public outcry was because the initial tax was 1% on anyone earning more than $4,000 a year (roughly $80,000 in today's money). Besides, I seriously doubt many people rushed down to the Treasury to cough up their 1% either. This deceptive non-ratification is clearly documented by Bill Benson in his book "The Law That Never Was" <http://www.trustclarks.com/theman.html>. Although his book has been in print for several years, I have yet to hear of anyone who has refuted his claims. The "pseudoconstitutionalist claptrap" that should be pointed out is your claim that "the constitution's what the Supreme Court says it is." Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the Supreme Court judicial power "...to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution..." The words "under this Constitution" imply that the Supreme Court must work by the letter of the law as outlined in the Constitution. How can the Supreme Court pass a decision involving the 16th when the amendment was never ratified as outlined in Section V? These are the kind of shenanigans one would expect from a banana republic tribunal, not the Supreme Court.

Doesn't mean the damn thing shouldn't be repealed, though there's fat chance of that.

Why bother to repeal what never existed? When enough people learn what really happened, and when they couple it with the fact that most of their tax money is wasted and could be better "redistributed" according to their own individual judgement, the house of cards will collapse.

Oh well. Fortunately, we can fight back with digital bearer settlement. Someday. Soon, I hope.

I hope so, too. But I don't advocate waiting until that day to fight back. We can start now by learning the facts and then passing on that knowledge. Consider it to be the creation of a ready and willing market for digital bearer certificates. Nerthus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNHowuBa1d3zm4nqOEQKtwwCg6gUxAKS4LcDpSG1h6g6Bfm9JmVcAn0Cn +lvOs1E10vZ5oXWl/GcHqKaW =wg93 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----