[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

You Know What Happens Next Cash Jordan: Half-Built Tower Abandoned… as ICE Deports Entire ‘Migrant Workforce’ Heavy rainfall causes flash flooding Tuesday night, some cars stuck in high water on Chicago's West Biden Doctor PLEADS THE FIFTH, Refuses To Testify To Congress, Biden Pardons ARE VOID Joe Rogan says FBI director Kash Patel played him for a fool and maga for fools with the Jeff Epstein files Elon's AI System "Grok" Went Rogue And Has Been SHUT DOWN in an Emergency! Earthquake Swarms at One of the MOST DANGEROUS Volcanoes in the USA Ben Shapiro Declares Epstein Case CLOSED: ‘Facts on the Ground Have Changed’ Iran receives 40 Chinese J10-C Fighter Jets China’s Railgun Is Now Battle-Ready, Thanks to Nuclear Power Chinese Hypersonic Advancements! Deadly new missile could decimate entire US fleet in 20 minutes Iran Confirms Massive Chinese HQ 9 B Missile Deal Why Is Europe Hitting 114°F And Still Rising? The INCREDIBLE Impacts of Methylene Blue The LARGEST Eruptions since the Merapi Disaster in 2010 at Lewotobi Laki Laki in Indonesia Feds ARREST 11 Leftists For AMBUSH On ICE, 2 Cops Shot, Organized Terror Cell Targeted ICE In Texas What is quantum computing? 12 Important Questions We Should Be Asking About The Cover Up The Truth About Jeffrey Epstein TSA quietly scraps security check that every passenger dreads Iran Receives Emergency Airlift of Chinese Air Defence Systems as Israel Considers New Attacks Russia reportedly used its new, inexpensive Chernika kamikaze drone in the Ukraine Iran's President Says the US Pledged Israel Wouldn't Attack During Previous Nuclear Negotiations Will Japan's Rice Price Shock Lead To Government Collapse And Spark A Global Bond Crisis Beware The 'Omniwar': Catherine Austin Fitts Fears 'Weaponization Of Everything' Roger Stone: AG Pam Bondi Must Answer For 14 Terabytes Claim Of Child Torture Videos! 'Hit Us, Please' - America's Left Issues A 'Broken Arrow' Signal To Europe Cash Jordan Trump Deports ‘Thousands of Migrants’ to Africa… on Purpose Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats Texas Flood Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas

Business/Finance
See other Business/Finance Articles

Title: Westminster man told to stop running tax scheme
Source: Baltimore Sun
URL Source: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/lo ... story?coll=bal-local-headlines
Published: Dec 4, 2006
Author: AP
Post Date: 2006-12-04 18:32:27 by Starwind
Ping List: *unUsual Suspects*     Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*
Keywords: Kotmair, Save-A-Patriot Fellowship
Views: 3238
Comments: 200

A Westminster man has been barred by a federal judge from running a scheme in which he promised to help members avoid paying federal taxes, the U.S. Department of Justice announced today.

The "Save-A-Patriot Fellowship" run by John Baptist Kotmair Jr. falsely advised that clients didn't have to pay taxes and could legally withdraw from the Social Security system, U.S. District Judge William Nickerson said in his ruling. Despite legal action by the U.S. Justice Department, Kotmair's organization continued to file frivolous protest letters with the Internal Revenue Service on behalf of more than 800 clients and showed "no inclination ... to cease their activities," Nickerson noted.

Nickerson's order, issued last week, permanently bars Kotmair and his organization from representing or assisting anyone in corresponding with the IRS, or preparing court filings relating to income taxes. Kotmair and his organization must also notify all individuals involved in the scheme of the injunction and provide the Justice Department with the names of the customers, their e-mail addresses and telephone and Social Security numbers.

The injunction also must be posted prominently on the organization's Web sites for a year, and fraudulent promotional materials must be removed from the sites.

Poster Comment:

Kotmair's defense and taxation arguments were inane to put it charitably. His website (where he's to post the injunction) is at http://save-a-patriot.org/

Stupid tax-protestors and their schemes just muddy the water for legitimate tax-protest arguments. Kotmair, Schiff, Schultz, Rose all will become boilerplate examples of tax schemes which will be used unfairly to broad-brush and defeat otherwise legitimate arguments, rasing the cost and complexity to properly take on the IRS.

I cite Joe Banister as an example of how to do it right, intelligently, and the above tax schemes just make it difficult if not impossible for people like Banister to prevail honestly on the merits. Subscribe to *unUsual Suspects*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 199.

#3. To: Starwind (#0)

Can one legally bail out of the Social Security program?

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2006-12-04   18:57:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Can one legally bail out of the Social Security program?

1st ... can one be expected to subject their children to a lifetime of feudal serfdom in an allegedly free country ? I say no, but that's exactly what we do when we sign them up at the hospital. The IRS readily admits that they cannot collect the income tax from people without SSN's ... and one must ask why ? It's because you haven't accepted the "promised" benefits of SSN (retirement/medical) nor have you volunteered into their "INSURANCE" program.

You asked if one could "bail out" of SS. I have, and I have a SS-521 form that is Stamped by the SS Administration, Dated, and signed by the SS Administrator that states I have no record with the SS Administration even though I had received a SSN as a child.

I formally expatriated from the Federal Government, and made numerous Constructive Notices to all federal agancies concerned with my withdrawal from SS. I rescinded, canceled, terminated and removed all signatures on all documentation that bound me contractually with any legal fiction such as government entities, banks, and other corporations. These entities were all properly noticed as well. I placed Notices in Newspapers for the appropriate amount of time required for legal notice, on top of the written Constructive Notices sent to all State and Federal Agencies. I made it very certain and obvious that I wouldn't associate with murdering scum for the conveniences provided by them. I also forfeited the many years of funds that I had "contributed". [They use this term (Contributions) so you know it's voluntary.

I do no business other than that which is private.

And even though I have this documentation I don't trust the government. I loathe the U.S. government, and have done just fine without them for almost 20 years now. I did it for Biblical reasons, not the money. And even though I'm not a holy roller, there isn't anything more prohibited by scripture in my opinion than worshipping the State through its MARK.

Many people find it too difficult to cut the umbilical cord and for good reasons too. I just got to the point where I couldn't take anymore of their fraud, and made every attempt to state my position openly.

I think I have been protected by the true authority of this universe because I have operated in good faith for the right reasons. If it's just about the money ... you'll have a hard time sticking with it.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-04   20:33:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Good rant, noone. How did you get the 521 form?

Neil McIver  posted on  2006-12-04   23:40:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

How did you get the 521 form?

I printed it out off of the internet and filled it out. (I had already filed voluminous Notices etc., years before, but I wanted to be certain that I was out).

The form I filled out asked for my reasons to terminate SS. My reasons were (1) Deceptive Trade Practices, (2). Commercial Fraud, and (3). Mark of the Beast.

I submitted it to SS to be filed in my record ... but I didn't have a record anymore.

I did the Phil Marsh program and then some. Marsh was later attacked and they confiscated all of his computers etc., and I got a call from the U.S. Atty asking me to snitch Marsh off. The U.S. Atty told me how bad I'd been fucked by Marsh and that he'd get me some of my money back if I'd turn State's witness against Marsh.

I told that scumbag that even if Marsh was wrong, he was right as far as I was concerned, and it sounded to me like he was fishing. I hung up and never heard from him again.

Marsh ended up being convicted on one of 47 counts against him ... mail fraud. Nothing to do with taxes.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-04   23:56:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

[noone222 #42]

I did the Phil Marsh program and then some. Marsh was later attacked and they confiscated all of his computers etc., and I got a call from the U.S. Atty asking me to snitch Marsh off. The U.S. Atty told me how bad I'd been fucked by Marsh and that he'd get me some of my money back if I'd turn State's witness against Marsh.

I told that scumbag that even if Marsh was wrong, he was right as far as I was concerned, and it sounded to me like he was fishing. I hung up and never heard from him again.

Marsh ended up being convicted on one of 47 counts against him ... mail fraud. Nothing to do with taxes.

http://laws.findlaw.com/9th/9610287.html

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
USA v MARSH
9610287

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
No. 96-10287
Plaintiff-Appellee,
D.C. No.
v.
CR-93-00592-VRW
PHILLIP MARSH,
Defendant-Appellant.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
No. 96-10288
Plaintiff-Appellee,
D.C. No.
v.
CR-93-00592-VRW
MARLENE MARSH,
Defendant-Appellant.

* * *

On Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

Vaughn R. Walker, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted

March 9, 1998--San Francisco, California

Filed May 27, 1998
Before: John T. Noonan and Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit
Judges, and Dean D. Pregerson*, District Judge.

Opinion by Judge Noonan

* * *

OPINION

NOONAN, Circuit Judge:

Phillip Marsh and his five co-defendants appeal their con-
victions of conspiring to defraud the United States by imped-
ing the collection of federal income taxes and their
convictions of related crimes. They also appeal their sen-
tences, which, as to Phillip Marsh total a term of imprison-
ment of 17 1/2 years, as to his wife Marlene a term of 14
years, and as to the other defendants lesser but still substantial
periods of prison.

* * *

The second trial was two months shorter than the first. On
December 13, 1995 the jury found all six defendants guilty of
violating 18 U.S.C. S 371 by conspiring to defraud the United
States in the collection of income taxes. Phillip and Marlene
Marsh and Jill Spencer were convicted of two counts of viola-
tion of 26 U.S.C. S 7212(a) by corruptly endeavoring to
obstruct the administration of the income tax laws by filing
the liens. Both the Marshes and both the Spencers were con-
victed of violating 26 U.S.C. S 7201 by tax evasion and vio-
lating 26 U.S.C. S 7203 by failing to file tax returns. Both
Marshes were acquitted of ten counts of mail fraud and con-
victed of ten counts of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C.
S 1341. Both Spencers were similarly acquitted, Darrell of
five, Jill of nine counts, and similarly convicted of nine mail
fraud counts; and Coltrane was convicted of six mail fraud
counts. The court denied Rule 29 motions, including motions
by the Marshes and Jill Spencer to dismiss the obstruction
charges on the ground of lack of venue.

On June 26, 1996 the court pronounced sentence. Phillip
Marsh was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for conspiracy
to defraud the United States; 5 years imprisonment for each
of his ten mail fraud convictions; 5 years imprisonment on
each of two convictions of tax evasion; 3 years imprisonment
for each his two endeavors to impede the administration of the
tax laws; and 1 year imprisonment for each conviction of will-
ful failure to file tax returns. The sentences for conspiracy, tax
evasion and 9 of the 10 mail fraud counts were to be served
concurrently with each other. The 3 year sentences for the
endeavor to impede were to be were to be served consecu-
tively to the other counts and to each other. The 1 year sen-
tences for the two failures to file counts served consecutively
to each other and the other counts. The sentence on the two
tax evasion counts and two failure to file counts totals 7 years.
The 5 year sentence for the tenth mail fraud charge was to be
served consecutively to the extent necessary to produce a total
sentence of 17 1/2 years.

Marlene Marsh was sentenced to 5 years imprisonment for
conspiracy to defraud the United States; 5 years each for the
10 mail fraud counts, 5 years each for the two tax evasion
counts, 3 years on each of the 2 counts of endeavor to impede,
1 year on each of the 2 convictions of willful failure to file.
The 3 year sentences for endeavor to impede were to be
served concurrently with each other and consecutively to the
other sentences, the 1 year sentences for failure to file were
to be served consecutively to each other and to the other sen-
tences, and the 5 years for the two tax evasion counts and 10
mail counts were to be served concurrently to each other and
consecutively to the other sentences to the extent necessary to
produce a total sentence of 14 years. The sentence on the two
tax evasion counts and two failure to file counts totals 7 years.

* * *

The defendants appeal.

ANALYSIS

* * *

[14] Waivers. Two issues now raised by the defendants
were waived at trial. On the face of the indictments the venue
of the tax counts was wrong: the Marshes and Spencers had
been residents of the Eastern District of California, but they
were being tried in the Northern District. The defendants said
not a word about the venue until they were convicted. They
now contend that the government might have proved some act
in the Northern District that would have related to the tax
courts and justified the venue; they could not know till the
trial was over. The defendants waited too long. They cannot
sandbag the government after the verdict is in. United States
v. Powell, 498 F.2d 890, 891-92 (9th Cir. 1974).

Phillip Marsh earnestly urges that the exclusion of the evi-
dence of his psychological state was error in the light of our
en banc decision in United States v. Morales, 108 F.3d 1031
(9th Cir. 1997), which he characterizes as establishing a new
constitutional rule that should be applied retroactively.
Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314 (1987). Morales did not
announce new constitutional doctrine but applied the Federal
Rules of Evidence. Marsh cannot benefit from the case retro-
actively. He waived his right to introduce the psychiatrist's
testimony by not seeking to introduce it in the second trial.

We find no plain error.

Other issues raised by the defendants need not be consid-
ered in view of our ruling on the principal counts.

* * *

nolu_chan  posted on  2006-12-22   19:23:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

As for the implications of that, congratulations, you have correctly identified what it does. Of course it leaves a much worsened condition than existed under King George.

Your gleeful acceptance of tyranny saddens me.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-22   20:01:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Your gleeful acceptance of tyranny saddens me.

Your denying reality changes nothing.

nolu_chan  posted on  2006-12-22   22:35:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Your denying reality changes nothing.

Our realities are different ... you will tolerate fraud, I won't.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-22   23:33:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Our realities are different ... you will tolerate fraud, I won't.

Making believe reality does not exist changes nothing.

Blathering about the income tax being unlawful does not make it so.

nolu_chan  posted on  2006-12-23   0:21:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

(1). Making believe reality does not exist changes nothing.

(2). Blathering about the income tax being unlawful does not make it so.

(1). Pretending that a system fraught with corruption, confusion and confiscation that has refused to address simple straight forward requests from those it intends to "tax", such as what makes one liable for or subject to the so-called income tax, a system that has veered drastically from its original intent and intended targets, has brought us to where we are today. A runaway federal bureaucracy, legislated by pious perverts and social deviants, supported by a criminal judiciary, all padding their own pockets and that of their associates at the expense of common decency but more pertinently to the destruction of common liberty, while demanding the debt not be questioned by those expected to finance it. This may satisfy your expectation of reality but leaves me wanting.

(2). A tax on income (property) could be lawful if apportioned. [I know this debate rages relative to the 16th Amendment, but the 16th Amendment was ruled as not conferring any new power of taxation ... blah blah], or should the tax be imposed upon the event that produces the income (and we determine the specific definition of the word income without combining it with compound words such as net income, taxable income, or gross income, because we need to know first what income itself is defined as, not whether it was net, taxable or gross because all money that "comes in" isn't necessarily "income"), and if the tax is imposed upon an event we need to define what events are taxable, because every event is not taxable. Should an event (source) be taxable then the amount of revenue produced by that taxable event should be used to measure the amount of tax obligation due, and assess it "uniformly" throughout the system.

The design of the tax system as originally constructed was ingenious because it left freemen free to "choose" whether they would be taxed either by choosing to partake in taxable events or purchase taxable items [and be taxed indirectly but uniformly] or pay a poll tax of some sort [that was direct but apportioned].

What you refer to as blathering I would call discussion. Like it or not we must endure it in the best interests of the people of this country, otherwise those you are supporting, those that are violating the public's trust, are going to completely bankrupt America.

Our recent ancestors screwed the pooch through naivete and blind trust. We have awakened to find ourselves swamped in legalese that protects an unjust system that is counter productive to a free society. There are many factors that could be argued independently but the fundamental problem has its roots in the Central Banking authority held in private hands being abused horribly to the benefit of bankers and government.

We know there exists a private side (non-taxable) and a public side (taxable) to our lives. We have a natural "right" to conduct private lives and private business without entering the public side. When we enter the public spectrum we are subject to public policy, but until then we are not. That's why the currency states on its face that it's legal tender (not money per se) for (substitute) all debt public and private.

Maybe you're perfectly correct in your approach to realism as you see it. I grew up in a rough neighborhood full of bullies that would beat others up for their lunch money on a daily basis if not physically prevented from doing so. Our government and their agents have become the bully, only they're a little more sophisticated, and they use the lunch money they steal to hire goons, purchase guns, deal drugs, build weapons of mass homicide, start wars and kill people at will. [This is how I perceive reality, and I choose not to be robbed for the purposes aforementioned.] I guess you might call me a conscientious objector.

My personal beliefs go beyond the simplicity of going along to get along, not making waves, or rocking the boat. However, these are personal beliefs and unnecessary to the conversation at hand. But in the end we only spend a short amount of time on this beautiful planet and I'm convinced we can improve our stewardship of it by regaining our moral compass, eliminating political rhetoric by reviving statesmanship that truly serves the betterment of our fellow man, and by dealing in honesty regarding all things. This may be unrealistic, but this is my life, the only one I get and I will be true to myself, otherwise life has very little meaning and all of the hocum about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (property) is pablum fed to infants purposed to brainwash rather than instill conviction of principles that appear unnecesary to your reality and have become a thing of the past. I'm not able to enjoy a reality free from principle and long held maxims that can be sacrificed for the sake of convenience or expediency simply because corruption seems to rule the day.

"If I'm free just leave me alone, if I'm not free lock me up, either way quit lying to me"

noone222  posted on  2006-12-23   7:57:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

[noone222 #195] A tax on income (property) could be lawful if apportioned.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
-- U.S. Const, Amd 16

[noone222 #195] I know this debate rages relative to the 16th Amendment, but the 16th Amendment was ruled as not conferring any new power of taxation ...

The courts have both implicitly and explicitly recognized that the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes a non-apportioned direct income tax on United States citizens and that the federal tax laws as applied are valid. In United States v. Collins, 920 F.2d 619, 629 (10th Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 920 (1991), the court cited Brushaber v. Union Pac. R.R., 240 U.S. 1, 12-19 (1916), and noted the United States Supreme Court has recognized that the "sixteenth amendment authorizes a direct nonapportioned tax upon United States citizens throughout the nation, not just in federal enclaves."

In re Becraft, 885 F.2d 547 (9th Cir. 1989) - the court affirmed a failure to file conviction, rejecting the taxpayer’s frivolous position that the Sixteenth Amendment does not authorize a direct non-apportioned income tax. United States v. Collins, 920 F.2d 619, 629 (10th Cir. 1990) - the court found defendant’s argument that the Sixteenth Amendment does not authorize a direct, non-apportioned tax on United States citizens similarly to be “devoid of any arguable basis in law.”

Lovell v. United States, 755 F.2d 517, 518 (7th Cir. 1984) - the court rejected the argument that the Constitution prohibits imposition of a direct tax without apportionment, and upheld the district court’s frivolous return penalty assessment and the award of attorneys’ fees to the government “because [the taxpayers’] legal position was patently frivolous.” The appeals court imposed additional sanctions for pursuing “frivolous arguments in bad faith.”

Broughton v. United States, 632 F.2d 706 (8th Cir. 1980) - the court rejected a refund suit, stating that the Sixteenth Amendment authorizes imposition of an income tax without apportionment among the states. Stearman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-39, 89 T.C.M. (CCH) 823 (2005), aff’d, 436 F.3d 533 (5th Cir. 2006) - the court imposed sanctions totaling $25,000 against the taxpayer for advancing arguments characteristic of tax-protester rhetoric that has been universally rejected by the courts, including arguments regarding the Sixteenth Amendment. In affirming the Tax Court’s holding, the Fifth Circuit granted the government’s request for further sanctions of $6,000 against the taxpayer for maintaining frivolous arguments on appeal, and the Fifth Circuit imposed an additional $6,000 sanctions on its own, for total additional sanctions of $12,000.

[noone222 #195] What you refer to as blathering I would call discussion. Like it or not we must endure it in the best interests of the people of this country, otherwise those you are supporting, those that are violating the public's trust, are going to completely bankrupt America.

Prior to prohibition, the sale of booze was lawful. During prohibition it was unlawful. Now it is lawful again. Recognizing that neither supports prohibition nor the sale of booze.

[noone222 #195] I guess you might call me a conscientious objector.

nolu_chan  posted on  2006-12-24   2:52:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Prior to prohibition, the sale of booze was lawful. During prohibition it was unlawful. Now it is lawful again. Recognizing that neither supports prohibition nor the sale of booze.

[noone222 #195] I guess you might call me a conscientious objector.

I guess you might call me a retired veteran. USN (Ret).

Odd isn't it, that the 21st Amendment "repeals" the 18th ... and no such language is used in the 16th as it would affect the 1st at section 8 clause 1 or section 9 clause 4.

Recognizing that neither supports prohibition nor the sale of booze.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here, the 21st did prohibit the sale of alcohol. However it didn't outlaw the manufacture for private use of alcohol, because that is beyond the purview of the CON-gress.

I did my time, 4 years as a matter of fact, one of those being a year in Vietnam. [Headline: Young, impressionable kids join military to serve what they thought was their country, but they were terribly mistaken.]

I have absolutely no ties to the U.S. Govt., "none" !

After WW II a show trial was held at Nuremburg. A number of Nazis were hung for following "the law" and orders directed to them according tolaw. This was a show trial, and a few putz's were hung and a number of them went to prison for their deeds, but declassified documents and a number of books demonstrate that most of the nazi scum were placed in the U.S. and Britain, given new identities and used in any number of government projects.

Many of those imprisoned at Nuremburg had their sentences commuted by J.J. McCloy, (an American Nazi like the Bush family) who was the European Commissioner over the Nuremburg trial. J.J. McCloy also met at Clint Murchison's house the night before the nazis killed Kennedy here in America, and later sat on the Warren Commission that swept the assassination under the rug. I loathe the U.S. Govt., and everything it stands for, I am shamed by the greed and lust for power that drives the scumbags, murders and deviants controlling the country, and I am embarrased at the American people's ignorance that allows these miscreants to remain in authority because I don't think they would continue to prop up a fascistic executive dictatorship if they were cognizant of it.

It seems to me that it's usually someone receiving a government check that maintains blind and unyielding support for the bullies in D.C. (District of Child molesters). And I know that many of them are unaware of the massive fraud, murder, genocide and general mayhem operated by what they perceive as a good government ... but those days are coming to an end. People are waking up thanks to 9-11, an inside government op perpetrated by the nazi deviants currently in power to instill fear and pass draconian legislation that strikes at the heart of the very liberty many of us ignorantly thought we defended.

I am very hopeful that the cabal of criminal collusion in D.C. [District of Cock-Roaches] will be brought up on charges, convicted and publicly hung for their subversion against the people of America.

In closing, I have not taken a light hearted approach to my position. I have spent thousands of hours researching the law, history, and the Scriptures. Unlike many of my fellow men/women I am unable to turn my head and ignore my conscience, wave a plastic flag and praise the satanist bastard you call your President. There is a semi-silent spiritual war in progress that has been on going for thousands of years. We all have the opportunity to determine our own fate, and enlist in the service of the Almighty Creator of the Universe or the legion of satan. The Creator makes no bones about the fact that there may be some persecution attached to service in his outfit, while satan offers some temporary conveniences that seemingly persuades otherwise good people to support his agenda. It's hard to blame Americans personally for their allegiance since it's drilled into their head from birth, and would appear to be a most natural condition if the government were benevolent and hadn't become vile.

I can't see inside your mind, nor do I understand your life experiences to determine why you take the position you have chosen, all I can know is what's inside of my mind and the path I've chosen.

noone222  posted on  2006-12-24   5:25:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

        There are no replies to Comment # 199.

End Trace Mode for Comment # 199.

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]