It is now illegal to pay your taxes in the USA and UK because of anti-terrorism laws

in life •  3 years ago  (edited)

Did you know that it is illegal for you to pay tax if you live in the USA or the UK? Sounds crazy, right? Well, I'll explain why:

Multiple anti-terrorism laws make it illegal to fund terrorism in the UK and the US. The only problem is: These countries' governments are terrorist organizations.

What? My government is a terrorist?

Terrorism is defined as: "The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes." Anyone notice a problem here yet?

The problem is this: The dictionary definition of terrorism precisely describes the behaviour of American and British governments, therefore making it a criminal act to pay tax to fund those governments

In other words, the US and UK governments' own laws makes it illegal for you to pay tax to them because they fund terrorism, participate in terrorism, and supply the global arms trade. Together these two Western governments, in just the last two decades, have killed as many as eight million people in state-sponsored acts of terrorism.

You mean paying tax is a war crime?

Paying tax to your government may mean you are liable for prosecution as a war criminal. This may sound extreme, but remember that just following orders from your government is not considered an acceptable justification for supporting a terrorist state that murders millions of people.

The concept of Superior Orders, also known as the Nuremberg defense, is one where a person claims they are not responsible for their actions because they are just doing what they are told by a superior. In our case, the US or UK government.

During the trials for war crimes after World War II, several Nazis used the defence of "lawful orders" or, to use the German phrase Befehl ist Befehl, which translates to, "an order is an order" meaning they were" only following orders".

However, this is not always accepted as a defence. Individuals are held responsible for their participation in a state-level war crime. Therefore, if you choose to pay your taxes to terrorist organizations like the US or UK governments, you also leave yourself open to criminal prosecution in the future for funding a terrorist state that destabalizes foreign nations for power and profit.

But everyone is paying tax, it must be ok. Right?

Remember that many Germans viewed the Nazis as a legitimate government. It is very hard to see, when you exist within a criminal state system, that the state is criminal. Typically, this is only reflected on after the state collapses. Just because your government has a veneer of legitimacy, and everyone around you is doing the same thing, it doesn't mean that you should also fund terrorism.

Ok, show me the laws that make it illegal to pay tax.

Sure. Let's look closer at the laws that make it illegal for us to fund our terrorist governments:

Executive Order 12947

Issued by President Bill Clinton on January 23, 1995, this law prohibits financial transactions with groups "threatening disruption of the Middle East peace process."

America subsequently invaded Iraq in 2003, under the false claim of dismantling Weapons of Mass Destruction. This appears to have somewhat threatened "disruption of the Middle East peace process," by any definition. Therefore it is illegal to pay tax to the US government because this would clearly be a financial transaction with a group "threatening disruption of the Middle East peace process."

Executive Order 13224

This was issued by U.S. President George W. Bush on September 23, 2001.

The order "provides a means by which to disrupt the financial support network for terrorists and terrorist organizations by authorizing the U.S. Treasury, in consultation with other U.S. government agencies, to designate and block the assets of foreign individuals and entities that commit, or pose a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism."

It was reported that "The Washington DC-based Physicians for Social Responsibility released a study concluding that the death toll from ten years of the “War on Terror” since the 9/11 attacks is at least 1.3 million, and could be as high as 2 million." But, researchers in the region suggest it's closer to 8 million. 1

Oh dear, it seems that the USA have made it illegal to fund the US government because it "commits, and poses a significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism". Again, another law that makes paying your taxes illegal.

Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Act 2010

This UK law allows financial institutions to freeze the assets of terrorists. Again, the problem here is that the UK government is, logically, then required to freeze its own assets since it is one of the biggest terrorist organizations in the world, responsible for millions of deaths through its "use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes."

Currently, the British Government focuses its terrorist campaigns on the Middle East. But, historically, state terrorism in the UK has included the holocaust it committed in India, and the concentration camps and torture it enacted globally. In addition, there are many war crimes which the UK Government has subsequently destroyed evidence of:

What happens if I stop paying tax?

Well, if enough of us do it, then we can fight terrorism in the most effective way possible: By making it impossible for the world's two biggest terrorist organizations to fund their ongoing acts of terror.

In addition, we can do so knowing that we comply with the law. And that paying our taxes would, in fact, be illegal.


Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

A must resteem!!!

Thanks @mallorcaman

Haha. This is a neat stuff. As funny as it sounds I things all Americans can bring this motion to the court to legally withdrawing their duty to pay tax to the largest terrorist organization in the world.

We all know how the Americans love to settle disputes in the court. This one would be the biggest one to pursue by all means :)

My vote, follow & resteem for u

The courts in this tax farm are not there to protect the farm animals however. We have countless double standards, special protections, and our own ruling class of puppets who are above the law.

Almost all of our laws are there to control us too, not to protect our individual liberties or to punish those who use unjustified violence against us. They are not there to protect our property even. Instead, they are mostly there to make sure we have a very difficult time keeping and accumulating it.

I'm not sure what the solution is to this issue, but so far I believe bleeding the beast to death by a thousand cuts and publicly speaking out about it are two good strategies. They can ignore us as long as they want, but the economics of the situation are beginning to have an effect. The system is crumbling.

My concern though is that the world will be brought to war before a collapse happens, and of course they will conveniently have a replacement system prepared in advance for afterwards.

Thanks, @abuzarkalam –– Yes, it would be fun to take it to court. However, the law already seems quite clear to me: It's illegal to fund terrorism.

true that brother

Thanks, @hauntedbrain.

This is the sort of deceptive stuff that makes everyone ignorantly implicate in criminal accessory.

The Deep State intends to trick us into complicity, thereby making us all responsible for the evil we've ignorantly signed up for.

A terrible deception...

Thanks for reading and for your thoughts. @shayne

What are taxes?

Well, the obvious answer is: Taxes are theft! ;-)

Good question. I'll meditate on it and maybe write another piece.

What do you feel they are?

lol. It was kind of a throwaway joke comment to imply I don't pay taxes. But really I guess thinking about it there is a deeper answer.

I shall postulate.

I try not to and I take back every penny I can get of my stolen property without risking being put in a rape cage too much.

Great article, and so true. This reminded me of a man who was in court because he didn't pay his TV license. He used the above in front of the judge. His reasoning: The BBC broadcasting the 9/11 attack in New York 20 minutes before it happened. He said that since that wouldn't be possible, the BBC was a terrorist organisation and therefore it would be illegal for him to pay the TV license as it would contribute to funding terrorist activities. He won the case!

Thanks for the great info, @misslasvegas.

Sounds like the revolution has already begun.

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

Well said, the biggest terrorists in the world cloak their activities in 'humanitarian intervention' / 'no fly zones' / 'democracy' and 'freedom'.

Let's drop love bombs on these people so that they stop killing each other.

Resteemed :)

Thanks @v4vapid.

Yes, the present-day holocaust underway in the Middle East is disguised in language and propaganda.

Exactly as it was in Nazi Germany.

As Goebbels said, "Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated
are confident they are acting on their own free will."


"It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise."

And so we get: The War on Terror.

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

Most US citizens just don't give a damn because it isn't their homes being bombed or their children being blown to pieces. It's disgraceful and depressing how ignorant most people here are. Even when you show them solid evidence of what is happening, they simply ignore it. They ignore it! I don't even want to bother trying with such people anymore. They are mindless zombies. :(

Thanks for reading @finnian.

I was a zombie too until I woke up four years ago.

I'm now trying to work out how to communicate these realisations to the other sleepwalkers. I guess it means writing more articles like this.

It's a pleasure to meet another friend in the fight. Yes, one of my primary objectives in life is to further liberty and truth. This site is a great place to do it too!

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

It really is insulting, right? "I'm fighting for your freedom!" Yeah, right. No, you are not. You're fighting to steal gold and secure other resources to stall the coming economic collapse and empire transition.

It's even more insulting when the zombies argue in favor of the supposed "heroism" against the actual military veterans they're heroizing.

Average American:"Thanks for your service. You're a hero!"
Me: "Sooo, being a naive youth, duped into committing acts of terror against innocent civilians of foreign nations in the name of power and plunder is what passes for heriosm these days?"
Average American: "We prefer to only be held accountable for our intentions, not our actions. You meant well so great job!!!!"

You'll notice nobody rebutted me in the comments of this post. Because some people would rather "support the troops" than support reality--even when an ex-troop lays it out for them.

lol excellent blog... you may have just got yourself a new follower lol?

Thanks, @shaf1991.

Lol well played. What is unfortunate is that the government is sufficiently armed and instructed against the people that our chances of being able to advance otherwise than with an elite/people system become more and more slender. I will follow you because you are a smart person and I like your way of seeing things.

Thanks, @izbing

You didn't see that coming eh @izbing? :P

So good and important information in here, thanks

Thanks, @hamzaoui

U are welcome, please visit my blog and Support @matrjoschka

This comment has received a 0.13 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @hamzaoui.

This comment has received a 0.11 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @hamzaoui.

Hello - upvote:) Nice post:) Also, fun fact for today: an arrow frog has enough poison to kill over 2,200 people, lol:D

Thanks, @ergoproxy

Frogs are powerful.

I just laughed out loud in a restaurant and everyone is staring at me now. Ergo proxy is one of my favorite animes - the visuals are astounding.

I just checked out your profile and you have a beautiful voice. Thanks for posting and thanks for the laugh.

well said, we all stop paying taxes haha!

Thanks for reading, @brothermic

There are ways to do it without breaking their laws. Take back every penny you can in every way possible.

Two sentences in, I already knew I'm gonna love this post. As a proud UK citizen, all I can say is fuck the government. The US and UK governments are literally the biggest terrorist organisations on te planet which we are forced to fund by having money stolen from us. Dropped you a follow and resteemed because i love your ideas on this!

Thanks, @looking4llamas

Yes, the first step in ending terrorism is de-funding the UK and US governments.

No worries man, you're absolutely right!

How can we defund something that creates its own "money" out of thin air? As long as they can use war to steal and secure economic resources, I do not see how we can change the situation.

I think it would be a three-step approach, initially:

• Stop funding state terrorism by not paying the government's ongoing bill for illegal war (taxes).

• Stop using the 'money' these two terrorist states print; to progressively invalidate their money as a container of value.

• Use a decentralised alternative technology for value transmission: Bitcoin or similar.

What do you feel?

We cannot depend on the majority to fight for their liberty or ours. They won't do it. This is the question of my life time really. How do we coexist with a majority of people who demand rulers when we reject them?

I do the second as much as I can. My bank accounts are kept extremely low and are only used to pay revolving bills. Otherwise, all of my stored labor is withdrawn from the system and converted into other stores of wealth. The more people do that, the better.

Actually, this brings up a good point I forgot to mention earlier. One of the primary ways individuals can fight the system and shut it down is to stay out of debt. Do not use debt, and do not allow others to profit from your debts. Any time we take out a loan, be it a mortgage, car, or credit card, we are feeding the system.

Only buy what you can afford. Mortgages are a tough one though, so I'd say they are an exception. Even there though, I would still say to only buy what you can easily afford. Make sure the mortgage is a very low rate too. That way the loan is probably lower than the inflation rate, so you're not really hurting yourself by having it.

Yes, crypto currencies are a wonderful way to fight the existing system. The more money put into it, the smaller the current system is and the less power it has. We are switching from a centralized system not under our control that directly profits from us being forced to use it to a decentralized system under our control without profit being siphoned from it.

Thanks for some inspiring advice, @finnian

This was very a interesting thought. But what are your views on a states monopoly on violence? which legitimizes violence from lets say U.S military, but criminalizes violence from ISIS. From the view of realism, a states use of violence to sustain hegomony on the international arena is expected since states are rational actors.

My view is that talented psychologists, not militarists, should be in charge of a nation's foreign policy.

Most acts of violence are inner-conflicts projected outwards. The solution is to understand the true roots of violence: Often childhood trauma or socio-economic pressures.

Most humans are rational actors. I feel that we label them irrational only when we fail to understand or take interest in their motivations.

For example, the fairly recent murder of as many as eight million people in the Middle East by wars undertaken by the UK and USA seems like it might be a powerful motivator for groups like ISIS to feel their voice is unheard.

Thanks for a thought-provoking question :)

Reminds me of the philosopher king solution :)

I'd humbly suggest taking a step back and learning what ISIS really is though. It has been trained, armed, and funded by the West.

Violence should only be used, by individuals or groups of individuals, in defense and only when all else fails. It certainly should not be used to steal economic resources, empire building, or for ethnic cleansing.

Thanks, @finnian.

I don't know enough on the specific topic of ISIS, but I'm aware that America and the UK manufacture many of the world's weapons and that many so-called 'terrorist' groups are often the previous generation of 'freedom fighters', armed and financed by a previous terrorist government in the US or elsewhere.

It's basically a mercenary army to wage war by proxy. Russia knows this and is playing the game wisely. Unfortunately though, most people in the West have no clue, or they ignore the truth as usual.

Great post, well researched, now following! This tax revolt would have to be well organized, just a few thousand people would get squashed under the tread of government, it would literally take a nation wide movement and there are too many people dependent on tax income to let this happen.

Thanks @makecents.

Yes, I think the process might have to include setting up communities specifically designed to support US and UK citizens who want to stop funding terrorism.

Perhaps as cryptocurrencies take off there will be more open-minded, well-funded individuals who can help build community spaces and accommodation for those who want to stop funding their terrorist government but need help breaking free.

The Brexit and other votes come to mind in this regard. Look at how some of the places voted, and you'll realize they voted to keep pensions and other state funded benefits. They voted to maintain the taxation is theft system in other words. Sadly, most people are easily controlled through free bread and circuses.

Although this is true, if any of us sheep try to do this, well have our doors blow out tomorrow morning...

This is fun stuff, although important to remember that you can't avoid paying taxes with an argument like this. You'd have to either declare war against the US government (good luck), or just accept that you'll have to pay taxes to them even if you disagree with the foreign policies to an extreme degree.

Thanks, @heymattsokol

I see the point you're making, but I personally can't participate in a war crime, even if the perpetrators of that crime threaten me unless I fund their holocaust.

It's clearly illegal (based on current law) to pay tax because it funds terrorism. Anti-terrorism law is extensive in making this clear.

But I acknowledge that the law is merely words, and any sufficiently aggressive terrorist state will just do as it likes with me.

American citizens stopped paying taxes once before and it seemed to change things. Why not again? :)

I'd like to think I've got some ballz but that sound a terrifying.... fun idea though

If we all stop paying taxes, that will be one of the happiest days of my life.
Considering that taxes are my main financial burden, and I hate paying taxes to corrupt governments.
But I guess we all can dream of that day right? LOL
Comment signature.gif

Thanks for reading, @lulita.

Yes, every social movement begins as a dream.

I'm "All in" for that...

This was entertaining to read. I don't share all of your views, but I agree that many of the actions these governments have taken are supremely unnecessary and certainly mirror the terror laws you quoted.

I do believe that a government needs to exist with a legal monopoly on coercion - in self-defense. So in that regards, I'm with you - we need to deconstruct the statist mentalities that exist, and limit the government to its proper functions - the police, the military, and the courts - all three of which serve one primary purpose: protecting the nation's citizens. None of those require the initiation of force.

Your argument strikes me as something I would see on Joe Rogan's "The Joe Rogan Experience." You should send him an email, as he tends to take very unusual views and give them a platform to speak!

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

Why do governments need monopolies on force? There are nation states without military forces. Do you know the origin of the Second Amendment for example? The Virginia Declaration of Rights was written way before the US Constitution. Here's a part of it, and it should sound a bit familiar. The Supreme Court cannot twist its meaning so easily as 2A too:

Section 13. That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

In other words, standing armies are dangerous, and they threaten individual liberty. There's no need for them in times of peace. An army should be raised by militia forces too. The Swiss still do this today. Many other countries rely on militia forces as well.

We the People, as in regular people who live in a particular area together, are the best defense force. There's absolutely no good reason to have a centralized outside force that is not under our control.

I'm a private investigator and student of security in general also. You might not know it, but police forces controlled by governments is a relatively new concept. Even in early United States of America history, all police functions were private. Towns would elect sheriffs as we do today, but there were no corporate "agencies" controlled by groups that are not accountable to the people.

Worst of all, those "proper functions" of government as you suggest have a long and constant history of abuse. It never works in other words. Given enough time, such entities always end up consolidating power and abusing it. Oligarchs cannot control decentralized groups of people either. They can easily control the opposite however.

The key is a legal monopoly on the use of force in retaliation. Not to initiate it. The police force is the legal monopoly on retaliatory force, aside from the right of private citizens to use force in self-defense where it is required.

You state that the government shouldn't have that power? So who should? The people? So you want random citizens to have the legal right to use force as they see fit?

I'm against all monopolies. The police do initiate violence all the time. Hell, they murder people. Is this a joke?

All people should have equal protection and rights under the law. There should be no double standards or special protections.

Who is supposed to enforce the law? Without an answer to that, you have no basis for any society.

The fact that SOME policemen initiate force when it isn't called for doesn't mean that the police force is inherently evil. It means our court system needs to be better so that we can effectively prosecute them and ensure they can't break the law again.

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

The courts and the law are on their side, not ours, so that will never work.

Who is supposed to enforce the law? Is that what they do, ehh? They are mostly revenue collectors, investigators, and warrant servers. There should be no revenue collection, and private companies and individuals provide the other services as they have in the past. Hell, I'm a private investigator, and I own a security business.

There is no good reason to have a police force like we have today. All of its functions would be better served by the private market. Communities would have courts, court appointed judges, etc. Again, as it has been done in the past.

The police force enjoys special protections and huge double standards compared to those who are not police. That is inherently bad for liberty and for those who are not police. We all want to go home safely at the end of the night too.

I've had a badge before too briefly as a county deputy, I have a brother who is a cop, and my wife's best friend's father is a special victims investigator. In other words I'm not writing this as some raging cop hater.

The current system is broken though, and it does not need to be replaced. It needs to be dismantled. Look around you. Almost all humans are peaceful and interact voluntarily. The few that do not would pay a heavy price for it by the communities they victimize too. All of it would be done without a monopoly on force by government police too.

This is not even getting into how police victimize communities, their high rates of spousal abuse, and how sexual predators and other predators gravitate towards the jobs on purpose.

Thanks for the great thoughts and suggestions, @justinchase.

I'll consider emailing Joe Rogan.

While I love your reasoning, and the fact that you have shown the laws which back your thesis, I doubt that this would stand in a court of law. Though I would love to see the Judge's face as you read the laws and definitions!

Yeah, the courts are not there to protect us. "Justice is an illusion only the middle class believes in because the rich and poor know better." It is possible to get justice in a court, but it usually depends on how much you're willing to spend. That's part of the problem of course...

Thanks, @queenpine, glad you enjoyed it.

Yes, it would be difficult to find a judge who wasn't an employee of the terrorist state. But I hope there are a few judges who remember the lessons of history.

There are also international courts that specialise in war crimes.

Very interesting observation, a classic to be included in the long list of paradox.
But I will bet that no court neither in US or UK will agree with this!

I met an american lady in thailand. She works in Singapore and pays tax there AND she has to pay american tax as well. Crazy.

I agree with your post 100%, it's complete bullshit that these governments pick sides and fund the ongoing violence.

Thanks for reading, @deimus

Yes, it's amazing that a terrorist organization can attempt to force people to fund its war crimes through taxation. But history is full of such extortion.

As awareness spreads, I hope citizens will stop funding their local terrorist groups, such as the UK and US governments.

Yes, isn't the USA one of only two tax farms that taxes its farm animals even when they are living in another farm? ;-)

haha u're right xD

Thanks for reading, @illithas :)

Lovely Post/research!!

Thanks, @andersokohler !

Solid legal argument, but you will not get anywhere with this in court. It's like the sovereign citizens, at least in that one regard.

Thanks, @lexiconical,

Yes, I think it would be a tough confrontation since the courts are financed by the terrorist state. And another poster made me aware that it's already been tried in UK court to some extent:

That's very interesting. I can take a guess at what a US court would say about your argument, and they sort of have a point.

Terrorism is defined by the government of each nation. Let us ignore the morals of that, it simply is, by statute and definition.

They keep the watch lists, add or remove people, etc. The correct reading of the legislation/executive orders that prevent "making payments to terrorists" would most properly be read as "making payements to terrorists (as defined by the entity also making the legislation or EO, ie the USG)". After all, it is their rule you are citing, so it is only fair and logical to use their definition of the words when they wrote the rule. Given they are the ones responsible for meting out the punishment, (and, therefore, bearing the cost of that, taxpayer-theft aside,) I'd say that makes it even more fair defer to their terms.

After establishing all that, they'd point out the USG (Britain, or whoever) is not on the terrorist watch list, and therefore is by definition, not a terrorist as defined in the laws of the US. Therefore this law does not apply.

Case dismissed. Appeal denied.

PS - I don't like the result, but I can't come up with a way to win that argument in court.

PPS - If you could establish in a US court that the US was guilty of war crimes, perhaps for Iraq, you may have the beginnings of a case. International court would probably be no use, however, so this is an unlikely avenue.

That’s good to know thanks a lot for sharing and keep on posting ;)

Thanks, @othmanesl :)

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

So those buying US government bonds are funding terrorism too.

Hi @johnnie, I don't know enough about bonds, but if they provide immediate financing to the present terrorist governments in the UK and the USA, then yes.

Most bond purchases are done by the government itself these days. The Federal Reserve is the "buyer of last resort," and the banks are the real government behind the scenes. The government is literally buying its own debt.

Even worse, central banks around the world are buying the stock markets of other nations. Look up how the Swiss National Bank for example owns a TON of USA stocks. They are playing a very dangerous game that will hopefully come to an end soon.

lol this is some crazy stuff

Thanks, @blazing

Very good observation. Resteemed.

Thanks, @funkit :)

Brilliant. It is so true. Never thought of it that way.

Thanks, @sauna :)

Thanks @matrjoschka for articulating the way I've felt for years, and now the NSA has evidence against me.

The one saving grace is that if they lock up all the milk cows, there won't be any cows left to milk.

In theory, the safest way to "starve the beast" is to understand tax law well enough so each of us, like General Electric, can get away, not only without paying any taxes, but actually get tax rebates.

However, the US Guverment spends way more than it brings in with tax revenues so its only a matter of time before the whole fraudulent system collapses under the weight of it's own lies.

Make sure you know where your lifeboat station is.

Thanks for reading, @theblindsquirl.

How long do you think the current system can last?

I don't have a clue, the saying that describes it best is "Things will continue to run OK, until they don't."

It could be tomorrow it could be 10-15 years but the only thing keeping the US on top right now is the reserve currency status of the U$D. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king and there isn't really a viable alternative, yet. The U$D sucks the least right now but China & Russia have been buying gold like nobody's business.

The blockchain may very well be thing that throws everything into change..

Haha excellent! However if you used this argument they would use violence to force you to pay or go to jail. And Executive orders are not law because the president doesn't make law, congress does. I know, I know executive orders are followed like they are, just pointing out another conundrum.

Thanks, @aboutyourbiz

Yes, the state uses terrorism to silence us when we claim it is a terrorist.

You really can't make this stuff up :)

No joke, it's a crazy world we live in

if this law become legit
i will be coming to USA
by the way nice and interesting post

Thanks, @hauntedbrain

This is crazy

Thanks, @classydapper

Upvoted and rEsteemed!


Thanks, @frankbacon

Taxes have always been highly illegal if compulsory (they are supposed to be voluntary.) Now they are doubly illegal! Notice how the foundation of English law is the contradictory nature that destroys and meaning or function it was originally supposed to have.

Thanks for commenting @d-pend.

Now I'm curious about learning more about taxes and what could replace them.

Yup go into their courts to fight what crimes they are doing to the world, their building, their judge,their lawyers and you become the missing thereafter as they bury you. There is so much wrong in this world by all the governments that as a people all we can achieve is to unfund them when and where we can..Resteemit to others, following.

Thanks, @weetreebonsai.

Yes, I think the trick is not to fight this in court. The American and British courts are the instruments of these terrorist states and have no legitimacy.

It's more effective to build new systems outside these regions as they inevitably collapse.

We can achieve more when we starve the beast...

or.... kill it by a thousand cuts. Make it bleed financially, and do it all "legally."

Steemit is like that of course. Don't fight the current system(s). Build a replacement, move to it, and ignore the old. Make the old system(s) obsolete.

When it comes to governments though, I don't want to build a new system. We need to walk away from the current systems and not replace them.

Where do we go though?

Where ever we can dream it to be...

I'd be happy with a place where I'm left alone as long as I do no harm to anyone or their property. If I ignore it, will it go away?

We all wish for that place...

@finnian, I agree!

I guess we go wherever is most free and try and help the people there get more free.

That's what I've done.

Did you actually relocate? If you did, are you willing to say where in general? It is a topic I am actively studying.

Yes, I relocated to everywhere :)
I keep moving around the place to try and avoid this concept of 'nations'.
A lot of my time is spent in the eastern parts of Europe.

Great read! You already know what the courts will say, though. Something like, "Well it's different when WE do it. Besides, we investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong!"

Thanks, @atlancap,
Yes, that is the typical response from patriarchal authority figures to any criticism :)

This message is endorsed by @portroyalpress.

Except for one little problem.

Our taxes do not go to fund The US govern-cement.
Our taxes go to the FED where they are thrown into a furnace.

In nature, something cannot exist without energy.
And since the FED is making something out of nothing, it has to pull the energy from somewhere. And that somewhere is our labour. If this cycle stops The US dollar stops existing. If the river stops flowing the current(cy) ceases to exist.

After our money goes to the FED and is destroyed,
then the FED creates all new money to give to the govern-cement.

And, remember, what the govern-cement does, is legal.
By definition. Yes, it is morally reprehensible and should be stopped.
But no police officer broke any laws gathering up jews in Germany.

Exceptional point! Hats off to you for pointing it out!

It sounds crazy. But it makes sense.
Economically speaking, it is not clear (for me), what impact it would have on the country.
But if everything were so simple, I would even agree that exactly the same measure was applied to the government of my country.
Here the government makes us finance terrorism and war, AGAINST OURSELVES.
Excellent post!
Greetings from Venezuela

Suggest a crypto crowd funded class action.

This is hilarious, mostly because I really can't argue....

Thanks, @whatamidoing :)

Amusing, but I'm pretty sure it only counts as terrorism when perpetrated by someone who opposes the Empire. When the Empire does it, it's called "bringing democracy to the oppressed peoples of the world." /S
First we bomb all of their infrastructure, and then when they need to rebuild the IMF offers them a loan, and the unsustainable debt based economy chugs along for a few more years as a result. And when we run out of new people to bomb - green toilet paper for all!

  ·  3 years ago (edited)

It is Legal , however, UNLAWFUL

  1. Taxes are unlawful, particularly when levied on income
  2. Powers that should not be using he usurped moneys to fund illegal actions

WHAT may be legal to the State may be Unlawful before God. For example, if a state legalizes Pedophilia, as certain political factions and non governmental persons, organizations and individual trying to do in the US, is a push to legalize unlawfulness. FIGHT with all you are.

Thanks for reading. 😎

ch @globocop

[Upvote] [Comment] [Resteem] [Follow]


To pay taxis lately pretty wrong because they use most of are money for some military bullsh... that nobody needs

Wicked post - and much info to percolate. I dig the vibe of this! Bom Shiva! (((OM)))

Thank God, I got here "just under the wire" in time to up vote at 100% and re-steem your absolutely awesome article! Brilliantly done! I plan to add this to the next revision of my Steemit Library as well.

Thank you, friend @matrjoschka, for seeing clearly enough to turn the Beast's own rhetoric against it!!! Well Done!



“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell

Thanks, @preparedwombat.

An enduring quote!