A real patriot
You may not have heard this from your local news channel, but on Thursday we nearly saw a stand-off reminiscent of Waco and Ruby Ridge.
U.S. Marshals and local police brought armored cars, SWAT teams and an explosives disposal unit. Planes flew overhead, heavily armed police officers guarded roadblocks, and phone lines were cut. But despite the heavy police presence, marshals said they did not come to the Plainfield home of tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown yesterday to arrest them.
Instead, U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier said police were in the area to do surveillance on Ed Brown and his supporters while an IRS criminal investigation unit seized a building the couple own 10 miles away.
“We needed to know where he was, and we needed to know where his supporters were,” Monier said to a group of reporters stationed by a blockade about two miles from the Browns’ home on Center of Town Road.
For those of you who don’t know, Edward and Elaine Brown were convicted in January on felonies stemming from their refusal to pay income taxes. They call their trial a sham, and claim they were denied due process. They have been at their home since January, so I call bullshit on the U.S. Marshal’s position that they needed to know where they were. InfoWars.com calls bullshit too.
Astounding testimony from Danny Riley, the man who was arrested by U.S. Marshals after walking Ed Brown’s dog near his property yesterday morning, proves that Thursday’s events in Plainfield New Hampshire represent a planned siege that was only aborted after Riley’s disappearance gave the Browns early warning that militarized police and SWAT teams were descending on their home.
In the video blog, Riley also reveals that U.S. Marshals attempted to kill him as he ran by firing two sniper rounds that whizzed past his head as he attempted to escape, before eventually being Tasered on his shoulder and arrested.
The few talking heads that are talking about the Edward and Elaine Brown situation try to paint them as wacky people on the fringe of society. I want you to know that they are patriots. Our country was built on the foundation of personal liberty and the founders were very explicit when they protected due process, redress of grievances, and even the freedom from certain forms of taxation in our constitution.
At the heart of the Brown situation are two issues. The first is the 16th amendment and whether it actually granted the government the right to tax the fruits of our labor. Tommy Cryer, an accomplished Louisiana attorney, recently filed this very interesting motion to dismiss indictment in a tax evasion case. In it, he posits that income, as defined by the constitution and Supreme Court cases, is not the same as a wage. Truly, there is much more put forth but I’m no legal scholar; it would be best for you to read the motion and come to your own conclusion. The second is whether our court systems are working in the manner prescribed by the constitution; as places where the public has the ability to judge the merits of the law. If you have taken the time to read about the Ruby Ridge and Waco cases, you will know that this second issue was also at the core of them.
I hope that the Browns come through this safely. Edward Brown has said:
“I would say to the marshal, and all of those people responsible for any unlawful action, to be very apprehensive and very nervous about conducting any criminal activity against our land or ourselves,” Brown said. “We are a very reciprocal people. You do us good, we do you good. You do us bad, we’re gonna do you bad. It’s that simple.”
I’ve seen interviews with Mr. Brown and read statements from Mrs. Brown. They seem like reasonable people who are taking a principled stand against an out of control government. I believe them when they say that they won’t initiate force, but will reciprocate if necessary. I hope history is kind to them because I’m sure the government won’t be.
[...] A real patriot You may not have heard this from your local news channel, but on Thursday we nearly saw a stand-off reminiscent of Waco […] [...]
Top Posts « WordPress.com said this on June 9, 2007 at 5:59 pm |
Income tax was passed on one of those bills where it was added on at the end in small print. At a time when people and Congressmen were scattered all over the place. There was no real communications. Only Pony Express.
Other bills, preceding this one, were voted down due to inequity. It is thru that door of inequity, that is can be Contitutionally challenged.
Slavery is Unconstitutional also. However, current economic policy since the mid 70’s, has sold the country into slavery to debt. The actual Value of the dollar, its value in trade, has been liquidated through the extension of easy credit.
This is what happens when we no longer pay attention to what the folk in Congress are doing. Only way to change it is to get involved and stay on the back of our government. However we as a people are so easily distracted by the bull that the media shows us. Paris Hilton for an example.
Interesting post. Thanks.
- Blemmy.com,
the site for New Yorkers
Everybody pays taxes. Everybody.
If a law applies to some of us, it applies to all of us. I don’t know how sociopaths can be lauded as “patriots” just because of their ideological extremism.
If anything, ideological extremism at the expense of social responsibility and level-headedness is the SUREST sign of psychological pathology that I can even think of.
Sacrificing rationality for the sake of your manifesto is the trademark of all lunatics. No, it doesn’t merit respect and if you’re breaking the law, it makes you a menace.
Absolutely correct and the Browns pay taxes on many things. In fact, everything that people scream about as necessities are covered by local taxes. (Police, fire protection, etc.) Their issue is with the personal income tax.
Bend over all you want, and pay for every immoral thing that the U.S. government does in you name. You are obviously the kind of person who would never question the wrong change given or a shitty product bought. Go back to sleep. We’re sorry that we woke you.
Are you talking about the Republican and Democrat parties?
huh?
@ cavenger (just in case you really want to know)
If I have $1, invest it, and turn it into $2, I pay tax on the gain of $1.
If I invest 1 hour of labor, I don’t get the hour back. The $ received for the exchange is not a gain and not rightfully defined as income.
In business, the cost of doing business is backed out and you pay tax on the actual profit. What is your time worth? (Perhaps we can look to some of the obscene lawsuit settlements in recent history for guidance.)
The original income tax proposal called for a deduction for all personal living expenses to arrive at a net in a similar way to arriving at a business net profit.
I have more to say, but I gotta get some more wine.
The original income tax also didn’t apply to anybody but the very well off.
You mean like that stupid f’ing AMT that kills us every year? ;o)
AMT is going to get worse unless it is abolished because it isn’t indexed to inflation. Probably will affect 25 million people next year.
HOWEVER,
from Tax Foundation
In the end it doesn’t really matter whether the language is a little ambiguous, or that Ohio might not be a real signer or a legal state, therefore negating the 13th amendment, or that we don’t really earn any legal money because it isn’t gold or silver coins. Right or wrong, American courts rest on precedent and the legal precedent for nearly 100 years has been the income tax courtesy of the 13th Amendment.
Aside from that, it would take congress about thirty seconds to create a nominally legal tax system to replace the current “illegal” income tax we now have assuming it is abolished as unconstitutional.
The only way that you could end the tax through civil disobedience is for millions of people to refuse to pay the tax. But one or two or a dozen or a hundred tax protesters whose legal theories are on shaky ground to start with are never going to convince the rest of the populace to join up.
Well, I quit my job a year ago, so I don’t pay anything on my own. My share of the mortgage is paid through exchange- I put out and keep house and the doc pays the bills. Hubby would never refuse to file. He likes our lifestyle better outside of prison.
I really like what Cryer put forth in his motion. There was nothing about “the amendment wasn’t ratified” or the “gold standard” but it made really good arguments about the definitions of income and direct/indirect taxes.
Whichever arguments that the Browns are relying on are irrelevant IMO. They weren’t given the opportunity to have the merit of the argument judged by a jury of their peers. When you are unable to get through that barrier, there is a problem bigger than the tax being fought.
Actually, it does matter. Several SCOTUS cases demand that in the case of unclear language, the matter be settled in favor of the American and against the IRS.
Of course, I’m not an attorney or CPA, but I mastered reading before Kindergarten.
Michelle, you funny girl (and you like wine).
I read the linked story and you’re right the arguments were clear and concise. But the courts and the lawyers think they covered that gap with the income tax amendment. What I mean is that it doesn’t matter whether they did or didn’t, they think they did and they have all the best weapons.
In tax protest cases sometimes the arguments are very compelling but the courts consistently don’t care. There are a few exceptions, that FedEx pilot comes to mind. But she was cleared because she believed that she did not have an obligation to file not because she did not have an obligation to file.
The main reason that I say it don’t matter is because as soon as the SCOTUS says income tax is not constitutional Congress will enact legislation making it constitutional or something retroactively equivalent. There is no way the feds are going to let go of a multi-trillion dollar revenue stream.
And you know what? They ain’t serving Cabernet at Terminal Island Federal Penitentiary.
Me? I’d be delighted if they abolished income tax tomorrow. I might be out of a job but I had a job before this one.
I also think that income tax is an important lesson to all about why it is so important to stop even the most innocuous sounding legislation from passing. After all, income tax will never be anything but a tax on the filthy rich.
16th Amendment, got dam it.
Bottom rate of tax in 1913 was $200.00 for those with taxable incomes exceeding $20,000.00. Everybody with a taxable income under 20 grand was exempt.
That’s the equivalent of a 2006 taxable income of $403,000.00
And that is the problem. If the courts do not act in a constitutionally sound way, the matter can’t be addressed. If they do, the cat’s out of the bag and the public might wake up to a new country.
I appreciate that the Browns are putting their necks under the blade because the rest of us are to chicken to.
I support tax resistance, but the narrow quasi-legalistic justifications the Browns use for theirs fall flat, IMO.
Doesn’t really matter though…result count most.
btw you should post this at LFV, and for that matter my site too!
I agree. A private charity has no dictates to take action except by their own minds or hearts.
TWC,
After digging around much deeper, reading several of the Browns’ motions and many of the cited cases, I will have to concede that the tax issue is one that is nearly insurmountable in courts. While I think that Ed & Elaine were right on one or two things, the bigger problem comes from the fact that the courts have ruled time and time again in favor of the gov and the legislative branches have tightened loopholes as they went. With each case, it is easier for the courts to dismiss, on the basis of frivolity, defendants’ very real perception that the current tax system is immoral or unconstitutional.
It seems that the only chance the American taxpayer has is to organize a non-violent movement dedicated to withholding certain taxes; civil disobedience a la Thoreau. The problem with that is there is this recently engrained sense of entitlement within most Americans. This sense of entitlement breeds a sense of dependence. Coupled with the dependence is fear. I see some of it in my own household; my husband fears prison even more than I do, and therefore we would never consider not filing a legally accurate return.
I guess you knew most of that, but I wanted to let you know where I ended after some really heavy reading.
[...] told you last month about the Browns and mentioned Tommy Cryer’s case. As a refresher, there is no law [...]
Last Free Voice » Blog Archive » Tommy Cryer wins said this on August 31, 2007 at 8:48 pm |
[...] van der Galiën Read all about it here: Ed and Elaine Brown were taken into custody last week. I’ve made no secret of my support for the Browns, but I’m starting to worry about offering my opinions in such a public manner. [...]
Libertarians Gone Wild « The Van Der Galiën Gazette said this on October 9, 2007 at 2:30 pm |