Independent American News

By Christopher Hansen,

I was talking to my good friend, Al Popp, today. He told me that the smallest tree in the world was the Princess Pine Evergreen.

And “What they heck has that got to do with the Damm’s Definition of a dollar,” you ask.

Simple. Greg Damm is a Mormon. The Book of Mormon has the most interesting measurement unit ever devised. It is one that any Fascist like Damm would love to abuse because it really is no definition at all. It was just the best measurement the guy building the boat had at that time.

And they (boats) were built after a manner that they were exceedingly tight, even that they would hold water like unto a dish; and the bottom thereof was tight like unto a dish; and the sides thereof were tight like unto a dish; and the ends thereof were peaked; and the top thereof was tight like unto a dish; and the length thereof was the length of a tree; and the door thereof, when it was shut, was tight like unto a dish.

“The boat was the length thereof was the length of a tree?” says I. Aw Ha
I have you now Mr. Greg Damm! I fully understand your understanding of the established value of the U.S. dollar.

dollar value = length of a tree!

Now we all clearly understand what a dollar is. It is just like a tree. AND EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT A TREE IS! Right?!

So the current definition of a dollar is something that could be as tall as a Princess Pine or as short as a Redwood.

Al said to me: “The current definition of a dollar is like the definition of the foot.”

Just like the word dollar the foot once had many meanings. It was, in fact, the length of YOUR foot. Then the King Of England STEPPED in (ha ha I made a funny) and said: This is ludicrous. No one has the same size foot so no one knows how long a foot is. [wise man] So the King said: I am the king so a foot will be equal to the length of MY foot. Why not?

A dollar was the same way. There were and are many “dollars.”

Currently the dollar is the name of the currency in Canada, Zimbabwe, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA and every one is different. The problem here is obvious. We need a king with a dollar so we all know what the king’s dollar is then we know that our dollar can be judged by his dollar which could have the value of a tree. Like in the wooden nickle we all know about. That comes for a tree.

But we don’t have a King. We have Congress and Congress has the power, “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;”

WOW those Founding Fathers thought of EVERYTHING. Who needs a king?

And so the original Congress followed the requirement in the Constitutuion and established the Standard of Weights and Measures and told Americans that a dollar was 371 4/16th grains of pure silver or 416 grains of standard silver. Easy. Now we know that a dollar was not a redwood nor a Princess pine but more like a miniature apple tree and that was a fixed Standard of Weights and Measure so Americans could have, in clear and unequivocal language, exactly what a dollar was.

Today, however, there is a small problem. Al explained it to me like this: “Everyone knows what a foot is because of the King of England and because Congress fixed the Standard of that Measure. But what if Congress simply removed the definition of the foot by simply removing the fixed Standard? What if the measurement of the foot became variable and fluid and was now established by irredeemable Federal Reserve notes that claim to be dollars at an exchange rate on the open market? What if the fixed Standard of Weights and Measures became the length of a tree?”

And I asked: “And what if the governemnt could devalue the standard measurement by simplify putting more foots on to the open market?”

And then the wise ole’ Al said: “And now you know what the value of a U.S. dollar is.”

And I said, “No I don’t.”

And Al said: “Right. And that is just what the government wants because if you knew what a dollar was then they would not be able to use the definition that is most beneficial to them, our money masters, at any given time.”

And I said: “But that is not fair.”

And Al said: “Right.”

So I said: “So a dollar is the length of a tree.”

And Al said: “Yes my young Padawan,” which I didn’t understand cause I am older than him.

So what I learned today is that a dollar can be anything. It can be an irredeemable note or a weight of silver or gold or copper or zinc and copper or a piece of paper to buy Mediterranean Avenue after you Pass Go and collect 200 Dollars. It is as meaningless as a foot without a fixed standard. It is the length of tree. You can fit 1000 angels on a dollar but it is small enough to fit in your pocket.

Thanks Al! Now I understand.

Keeping in mind the well-settled rule that the citizen is exempt from taxation unless the same is imposed by clear and unequivocal language, and that where the construction of a tax law is doubtful, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of those upon whom the tax is sought to be laid… Spreckels Sugar Refining Co. v. McClain, 192 U.S. 397 (1904)

Where there is a reasonable doubt as to the meaning of a taxing act it should be construed most favorably to the taxpayer. Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151

‘Tax laws, like all other laws, are made to be obeyed. They should therefore be intelligible to those who are expected to obey them.’ White v. Aronson, 302 U.S. 16 (1937)

“the terms of a penal statute… must be sufficiently explicit to inform those who are subject to it what conduct on their part will render them liable to its penalties… and a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application violates the first essential of due process of law.”Connally v. General Const. Co by Justice Southerland:

“It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed? PUBLIUS. (Madison) Federalist Papers 62

Congressman Rob Gramms of Minnesota said in Congress that the code consists of over 7,000,000 words, and has been changed 5,400 times since 1986.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 17th, 2009 at 12:36 pm and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.