[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Activism See other Activism Articles Title: Message from Larken Rose Breaking the Silence Dear Subscriber, Greetings from the federal prison camp in Waymart, PA. Since the verdict in my trial, and throughout my wife's trial, and during my incarceration to date, one of the most frustrating things for me has been remaining silent. Not a day has gone by in which I didn't want to say a thing or two (or ten) to all of you on this list. But being at the mercy of the court, and to a lesser degree our own lawyers, Tessa and I have had to pretty much bite our lips until both of our sentencings had occurred. As of today, we're done being quiet. I am writing this prior to Tessa's sentencing, so I can't comment on how it went. But I have a lot of other things I've been waiting to comment on for a very long time. Now I can, and I will. First, I'm guessing that our prolonged silence was perceived by some as a sign that we had given up, or maybe even decided that we were wrong. Now, at long last, I can rebut such notions with a resounding "Hell, no!" I won't apologize for the ~ silence, as it was necessary to minimize the harm to our family inflicted upon us for crimes we didn't commit. Now that both sentences have been pronounced, we can speak our minds again. And that, as it happens, will be the topic of this, the first in a series of daily messages to be sent to this list. Chilling Effect 101 My wife and I were wrongly convicted of five misdemeanor counts of willful failure to file federal income tax returns (26 USC 7203). At sentencing, Judge Michael Baylson made it abundantly clear that he would impose a harsher sentence if I did not take down my web sites and stop selling my video. So I did. What, you might ask, do those things have to do with not filing returns (what we were convicted of)? The answer: not a damn thing. This was nothing more than a roundabout way of achieving unconstitutional censorship, and circumventing the First Amendment. That's what the feds wanted, and the court gave it to them. Consider why I've been so silent: because everyone accepted it as self-evident that our "punishment" would be worse if we were to speak our minds prior to sentencing. Take a moment to digest the full significance of that. We had to shut up, because if we said bad things about the government or the courts (regardless of whether the comments had anything to do with what we were convicted of), we would most likely be punished for it at sentencing. First Amendment? What's that? Just how blatant does tyranny have to be before Americans will call it what it is? There is also a chance that when my prison term is up (in November), and I go into "supervised release," that Judge Baylson could make "shut up about 861" be a condition of release. If so, I will fight it. But even the possibility should make freedom-loving people sick. In addition, my wife and I have already started filing FALSE returns, incorrectly reporting our income as taxable (when we know it isn't) to avoid retaliation from the court. That's a bit ironic: we will be committing FELONIES< by signing returns we know to be inaccurate (see 26 USC 7206) in order to minimize the punishment we receive for misdemeanors we didn't commit. In fact, we've already done so, filing returns for 1997 and subsequent years. We've paid a lot of money, and will pay a lot more, that we know we don't owe to the government, to avoid further terrorist tactics of the IRS, DOJ and the courts. Judge Baylson at sentencing used the word "rehabilitation," which I found sickeningly Orwellian. But if being "rehabilitated" means to stop telling the truth, stop pointing out tyranny and government fraud, and to stop wanting to see truth and justice win... well then I guess I'm not rehabilitated. Sincerely, Larken "The Convict" Rose From Federal Prison
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: christine (#0)
This gentleman patriot is a true heir of the Founders. There's rage in Heaven among them over the institutionalized robbery called the "income tax," which they made a point to repudiate explicitly.
"Non est hic: surrexit enim, sicut dixit." ("He is not here: for He hath risen as He hath said.") ---Message left by Angel, about why Jesus wasn't in
I like that vision.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||