If Ed Brown dies then so do I.

[Brock]

EEEK!  Brown people and scary headlines!  Run for your lives!

[LordBaltimore]

NO ONE thinks the Browns should be killed or incarcerated over this. They are being used as an example, during an election cycle. They did the same thing when Buchanan ran, and will use it to discredit anyone who is against the IRS, etc. by linking them with 'kooks'. It is predictable and it is purposeful and intended to get people off message. To wit, the Browns have been doing this for YEARS, so how come the feds have just decided to go after them NOW? Think about it!

I think that's a bit far fetched.  The DOJ chooses about two hundred tax protesters to prosecute every year.  Nothing different in election years.  Schiff, for example was prosecuted after being out of prison and openly selling detax packages for 14 years as well.  The IRS and DOJ are just painfully (ridiculously) slow.

In fact, the Browns were originally scheduled for trial a year ago (July 6, 2006), and the trial was only delayed to this year because Ed and Elaine requested multiple extensions of time to prepare.

[CNHT]

2006 was also an election year for NH. Not farfetched at all. You just said he did this before a couple  years ago...but I cannot find the post which made its way to my email. Maybe you are still editing it.

This is not the first time for this...it's happened before.

I don't ascribe any motives to Ed, I just think they don't want to pay their taxes, like the rest of us.

[CNHT]

I've been watching the Brown case like a hawk since January.  For the most part, it's the same kind of fascination you get from watching a train wreck.  What I've found most interesting is the threats of violence not only from Ed, but from several supporters on this and other forums.  

Sometimes it can bring out the worst, as it did in past years...which supports my theory that somehow the issue comes up conveniently when there is something bigger going on, like a presidential election!

And while I think its a shame that people like Dada and the free staters are willing to set themselves back considerably by embracing the kook factor with open arms, it's been with sheer horror that I've been watching Ron Paul's name and reputation get dragged into this train wreck.  

I agree. Ron is for doing something about the IRS but so are many others in the mainstream like Huckabee who finally had the courage to mention it in the second debate thanks to Ron and people like Steve Forbes who made it the centerpiece of his presidential campaign platform. But in order to discredit Ron, they will try to link  him with tax evaders. It may not resonate with us, who realise what the government is doing, which is namely the fact that one of the biggest link with tax evaders is our own president BUSH, who would allow milions to have tax amnesty while not stopping what is going on with the Browns. (Sorry if Brock and others who are mired in petty political correctness can't see through this or the bigger question as to why this is being allowed to happen.)

[Braddogg]

EEEK!  Brown people and scary headlines!  Run for your lives!

[CNHT]

RP's name was only suggested by one person---even he would commit political suicide to side with the Browns.

Well all it takes is ONE for them to pick up on it. Granite Grok just interviewed the Grannies and made no mention of the 'other' stuff that was painted on their RV, yet he disses them on the website for just that.

[JohninRI]

You do more homework. The law as it's written and as you quote applies only to "United States persons," not to Americans, and you MUST learn the law's own definitions for terms like "U.S. Citizen," and "U.S. person," i.e., residents of the District of Columbia or one of their federal territories or those who claim to be citizens of the federal government through use of their products like the ss number. The Feds have for the past 200 years tried to inch their jurisdiction onto us. For the federal income tax their enforcing their own laws incorrectly. There is a federal income tax, but it doesn't apply to Americans, only to U.S. persons. You can't discuss legal matters without using the language as it's defined in the law, which is way different than common usage. Also the term "income" and "wages" are way way different than what they are commonly understood to mean. Here's a good place to start - takes about 20 minutes http://www.originalintent.org/edu/fedincometax.php

Thank you for your concern Henry.  I must have missed something.  What I think it means is that residents, nonresident aliens, corporations, estates and trusts must pay the tax but no matter where in the world a NONRESIDENT performs work for wages or sells any of his or her personal property it is to be considered having taken place outside of IRS jurisdiction.  Doesn't that seem to be saying somewhat the same thing that you are saying but in their own tax code? 

John

[Henry]

You do more homework. The law as it's written and as you quote applies only to "United States persons," not to Americans, and you MUST learn the law's own definitions for terms like "U.S. Citizen," and "U.S. person," i.e., residents of the District of Columbia or one of their federal territories or those who claim to be citizens of the federal government through use of their products like the ss number. The Feds have for the past 200 years tried to inch their jurisdiction onto us. For the federal income tax their enforcing their own laws incorrectly. There is a federal income tax, but it doesn't apply to Americans, only to U.S. persons. You can't discuss legal matters without using the language as it's defined in the law, which is way different than common usage. Also the term "income" and "wages" are way way different than what they are commonly understood to mean. Here's a good place to start - takes about 20 minutes http://www.originalintent.org/edu/fedincometax.php

Thank you for your concern Henry.  I must have missed something.  What I think it means is that residents, nonresident aliens, corporations, estates and trusts must pay the tax but no matter where in the world a NONRESIDENT performs work for wages or sells any of his or her personal property it is to be considered having taken place outside of IRS jurisdiction.  Doesn't that seem to be saying somewhat the same thing that you are saying but in their own tax code? 

John

I think most of us would fall into the nonresident alien category. Here, check this out as an example of how their shenanigans work. Here's part of the code where they define the word "state."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sec_26_00007701----000-.html

The term "State" shall be construed to include the District of Columbia, where such construction is necessary to carry out provisions of this title.


Seems like "state" would mean to include all 50 plus D.C., right? No, the word "include" in a legal sense restricts the definition of "state" to only mean D.C.

Here's the definition of "include" from Black's Law Dictionary 4th ed.- To confine within, hold as in an inclosure, take in, attain, shut up, contain, inclose, comprise, comprehend, embrace, involve. inclose. To surround; to encompass; to bound; fence; or hem in, on all sides.

Their definition of "state" means only the District of Columbia. Just randomly look through the code and know that the word "state" = D.C. It changes lots of things. I ain't no lawyer or nothin', but it seems obvious that the deceit and evil is hard coded into the actual language itself. It's just all illegitimate, no matter what grade of marble their buildings are made out of or how many guns they have.

[JohninRI]

Henry,

You can be a nonresident alien if you wish but me, I'm a plain old NONRESIDENT.

John

[JohninRI]

    The original "Internal Revenue Act" categorized  People and corporations into four categories; residents;  resident aliens;  nonresident aliens;  and nonresidents.The term "resident," (Not before but ever since the 14th Amendment was enacted.),  as you learned in Part 1. of this work,  is a naturalized 14th Amendment "citizen of the United States" and that person was  made such through birth or naturalization.  The term "resident alien" means a citizen from another country which has not yet been naturalized by the United States Federal Government, but is a "resident"  in somepart of the country.   A "nonresident alien" is a citizen from another Country who has made no intentions of naturalizing into this Country,  but none the less,  is doing some sort of business within the United States of America or one of its territorial possessions.  Each of these three classes of People are taxed within the original Code of 1913 in Sections 1 and 2.

1913 Tax Code


    "TITLE I. –  INCOME TAX.

     Part I. – On Individuals.

             Sec. 1. (a) That there shall be levied, assessed, collected, and paid annually upon the entire net income received in the preceeding calendar year from all sources by every individual, a citizen or resident of the United States, a tax of two per centum upon such income; and a like tax shall be levied, assessed,  collected, and paid annually upon the entire net income received in the preceeding calendar year from all sources within the United States by every individual, a nonresident alien, ...
             (b)  In addition to the income tax imposed by subsection (a) of this section (herein referred to as the normal tax) there shall be levied, assessed, collected, and paid upon the total net income of every individual, or, in the case of a nonresident alien, the totel net income received from all sources within the United States, an additional income tax (herein referred to as the additional tax) of one per cent per annum upon the amount by which such total net income exceeds $20,000 ..."

    The first section imposes a tax on every citizen or resident of the United States and a like tax on nonresident aliens who derive income from within the United States.  The second section imposes an "additional income tax" on "every individual" who was subject to the tax in the first section and has an income derived from within the United States in excess of $20,000.

    So what about the "nonresident," does this term exist  in the Code, and is this tax imposed on him in these two sections?  The term does exist and the only time it appears to me that the nonresident is taxed within the Code is after the death of the nonresident, when his property becomes an "estate" and this is true to this very day.  The current Section 2100,  Subchapter B,  of the Internal Revenue Code is entitled, "Estates of Nonresidents Not Citizens." It states;

        " A tax is hereby imposed upon the estate of every decedent nonresident not a citizen of  the United States."    Section 2100, (a)

    This is the only place in the current Code where the "nonresident" class is taxed!

    When a natural born State Citizen, who is not already a 14th Amendment "citizen of the United States" dies, he loses his natural status and becomes an entity created by the United States  Federal Government; an "estate."  Any taxable portion of this estate after this Nonresident's death is legally taxed in accordance with the Code.

[CNHT]

Too confusing for me.

I am just not wanting to merge our Constitutional Republic, which we hope to restore, with a socialist government that has no such constitution and wants to tax us 'evenly'.

Allowing some people to NOT pay yet trying to incarcerate others for not paying is just indicative of what their intentions are -- Marxism, worldwide.

Take from those who produce to even the score with those who don't.

[JohninRI]

Too confusing for me.

I am just not wanting to merge our Constitutional Republic, which we hope to restore, with a socialist government that has no such constitution and wants to tax us 'evenly'.

Allowing some people to NOT pay yet trying to incarcerate others for not paying is just indicative of what their intentions are -- Marxism, worldwide.

Take from those who produce to even the score with those who don't.

I didn't set up the system.  I just studied it.  The 16th Amendment didn't change the apportionment requirement and any other direct tax on Natural State Citizens will still be unconstitutional without the 14th Amendment changing the People's status from NONRESIDENT to RESIDENT.  Even if that tax is more just than the present system.

The only tax I will ever accept without apportionment is an excise tax..

http://templecon.org/TTW/ttw.html

John

[CNHT]

This woman has an interesting take on the IRS>


http://www.devvy.com/notax.html

[Henry]

CNHT - I'm slow...I just realized what your acronym is and found the site. Still reading...

JohninRI - That's interesting about losing state citizenship or natural status after death. Death and taxes... Its endlessly nuanced and complex for a reason.

[JohninRI]

JohninRI - That's interesting about losing state citizenship or natural status after death. Death and taxes... Its endlessly nuanced and complex for a reason.

Henry,  that's only one way of losing the status.  The most common way is to make yourself eligible for Federal benefits by applying for a SS#.

If you have a SS# you no longer can access your State or Federal Bills of Rights.  Al you have are regulated privileges under the 14th Amendment. 

John