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

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The death of Yu Menglong: Political scandal in China (Homo Rape & murder of Actor)

The Pacific Plate Is CRACKING: A Massive Geological Disaster Is Unfolding!

Waste Of The Day: Veterans' Hospital Equipment Is Missing

The Earth Has Been Shaken By 466,742 Earthquakes So Far In 2025

LadyX

Half of the US secret service and every gov't three letter agency wants Trump dead. Tomorrow should be a good show

1963 Chrysler Turbine

3I/ATLAS is Beginning to Reveal What it Truly Is

Deep Intel on the Damning New F-35 Report

CONFIRMED “A 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon on 9/11” says Military witnesses on the scene

NEW: Armed man detained at site of Kirk memorial: Report

$200 Silver Is "VERY ATTAINABLE In Coming Rush" Here's Why - Mike Maloney

Trump’s Project 2025 and Big Tech could put 30% of jobs at risk by 2030

Brigitte Macron is going all the way to a U.S. court to prove she’s actually a woman

China's 'Rocket Artillery 360 Mile Range 990 Pound Warhead

FED's $3.5 Billion Gold Margin Call

France Riots: Battle On Streets Of Paris Intensifies After Macron’s New Move Sparks Renewed Violence

Saudi Arabia Pakistan Defence pact agreement explained | Geopolitical Analysis

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops

The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong

Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking

Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison

Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why)

Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them

America Is Reaching A Boiling Point

The Pandemic Of Fake Psychiatric Diagnoses

This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: MEDIA WANTS WACO-STYLE MASSACRE
Source: American Free Press
URL Source: http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/waco-style_massacre.html
Published: Feb 5, 2007
Author: Mark Anderson
Post Date: 2007-02-05 16:16:02 by intotheabyss
Keywords: None
Views: 530
Comments: 41

New Hampshire Patriot Not What Mainstream Wants You to Believe

The circumstances surrounding the Browns, a New Hampshire couple convicted of federal income tax evasion, could turn on a dime.

Recently AFP interviewed Ed Brown, a Plainfield home owner who grew up in the Roxbury slums of Boston. He and Mrs. Brown, who is a dentist, are self-made people who worked hard for their lot in life, only to see it swept away by a government that takes in gargantuan sums of money via taxes on the domestic populace to pay enormous interest on the national debt (which cannot be repaid), much of which is due to America‚s endless military conflicts.

When AFP contacted Brown recently, he was living everyday life as best he can at the house he built on their 110 acres. His wife, who he said is in a state of arrest wearing an electronic ankle bracelet—is staying with a son in a neighboring state.

“The dental business died a week ago Tuesday,” Brown told AFP. “My wife’s a prisoner—like she’s a flight risk!”

The two are supposed to be sentenced April 24, having each been convicted Jan. 18 in federal court in Concord for not paying income taxes since 1996. The government claims the Browns owe some $625,000.

“Everybody should say, ‘show me the law and I’ll pay the tax,’ ” Brown told AFP. That is what he told federal authorities who can’t seem to produce a copy of a law requiring payment of the federal income tax.

Filmmaker Aaron Russo’s America: From Freedom to Fascism documentary interviews a number of former IRS agents and other authoritative people who say that the powers that be, when asked to provide a copy of the law, such as an enabling statute, that requires U.S. workers to pay federal income tax on their wages, come up empty-handed.

Russo concluded that if the federal income tax applies to anyone or anything, it applies to corporate capital gains, not the incomes of individuals, and that the IRS doesn’t even define income.

The proverbial “tax man” came down on the Browns just as they had considered selling their home and acreage so they could live in a warmer climate. Notably, their property is across the road from 500 acres owned by Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer.

But making the best of the winter weather, individuals and families with children have been over to Brown’s place lately for sledding and skating—before and since the tax trouble began. Life still seems more or less normal, though Brown suspects that federal agents may eventually storm the house and arrest him, perhaps after the publicity on his and his wife’s plight calms down.

As of Jan. 25, he said the publicity was still significant, with TV news crews continuing to pay attention. He also told AFP that while he has always paid the 54 other kinds of taxes levied on Americans—with property taxes hitting $14,000 a year on their home and $18,000 a year on their office building for the former dental business—he won’t budge on the federal income tax.

For one thing, as already noted, no one can produce a copy of the law that requires payment of an unapportioned tax on the labor of Americans. Moreover, there are due-process issues whereby U.S. District Court Judge Steven McAuliffe apparently disallowed the Browns from bringing forth any evidence or witnesses they needed for defending themselves in court. Also, the issue of federal jurisdiction, or the lack thereof, comes into play, Brown pointed out.

Addressing some conventional media reports that characterized his home as a virtual fortress, or “compound” with a “lookout tower,” Brown replied, “It’s a deck, for crying out loud—an octagon-shaped compass deck.”

Just below the elevated deck on the large, well-built house—which has solar-power capability and was off the grid from 1990 to 2003—is a reading room.

“We’re very mainstream, middle-class people,” said Brown, who noted that media reports suggesting he’s “holed up” in his house are off base.

Some areas of the house have been boarded up to keep out blowing snow, so he is not “barricading” himself in the house, he explained.

The Union Leader seems also to have played the “antigovernment” card, even though many American patriots make a careful distinction by saying they are anti-corruption of government, not anti-government.

Notably, the Associated Press article in The Union Leader couldn’t resist the highly charged word “compound,” which conceivably could create a bunker mentality in the minds of readers and may quell public outrage if federal agents ever decide to forcibly enter Brown’s home to arrest him. As the article claimed:

“A jury decided that the Browns plotted to hide their income and avoid taxes on Elaine Brown’s income of $1.9 million between 1996 and 2003. Over 10 years, they also used $215,890 of postal money orders broken into increments just below the reporting threshold to pay for their hilltop compound and for Elaine Brown’s dental offices.”

U.S. marshals said on a couple occasions they had no plans to forcibly enter Brown’s property and arrest him, though national media sources quoted marshals as saying that they “have to decide how to seize the Browns’ assets, possibly including their home.”

Citing a new twist in this case, a recent issue of The Boston Globe noted that federal agents “seized more than 30 weapons from the Brown house in May.”

Brown commented by telling AFP, “They stole $15,000 worth of my guns and turned them over to a gun shop.”

Brown was still at home on Jan. 25, preferring only to comment off the record about the situation.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 41.

#33. To: intotheabyss (#0)

“Everybody should say, ‘show me the law and I’ll pay the tax,’ ” Brown told AFP. That is what he told federal authorities who can’t seem to produce a copy of a law requiring payment of the federal income tax.

Ignorantia juris non excusat.

Unfortunately, the thieves in Washington have the upper hand in any legal arguments regarding the obligation to file tax returns or pay taxes.

The requirement to pay taxes is set forth in section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code, which imposes a tax on the taxable income of individuals, estates, and trusts as determined by the tables set forth in that section. (Section 11 imposes a tax on the taxable income of corporations.) Furthermore, the obligation to pay tax is also described in section 6151, which requires taxpayers to submit payment with their tax returns. Failure to pay taxes could subject the noncomplying individual to criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, as well as civil penalties.

In discussing section 6151, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals stated that "when a tax return is required to be filed, the person so required 'shall' pay such taxes to the internal revenue officer with whom the return is filed at the fixed time and place. The sections of the Internal Revenue Code imposed a duty on Drefke to file tax returns and pay the . . . tax, a duty which he chose to ignore." United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8 th Cir. 1983).

The requirement to file an income tax return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in Internal Revenue Code §§ 6011(a), 6012(a), et seq., and 6072(a). See also Treas. Reg. § 1.6011-1(a).

It is not true, as is sometimes claimed, that "income" is not defined in the law. For federal income tax purposes, "gross income" means all income from whatever source derived and includes compensation for services. I.R.C. § 61. Any income, from whatever source, is presumed to be income under section 61, unless the taxpayer can establish that it is specifically exempted or excluded. In Reese v. United States, 24 F.3d 228, 231 (Fed. Cir. 1994), the court stated, "an abiding principle of federal tax law is that, absent an enumerated exception, gross income means all income from whatever source derived.

leveller  posted on  2007-02-09   17:49:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: leveller (#33)

Unfortunately, the thieves in Washington have the upper hand in any legal arguments regarding the obligation to file tax returns or pay taxes.

No they don't...

There are many deceptions that have worked themselves into our modern age that are vistages of a bygone era. These include the following:

The word 'Income' has been redefined. At the time that our tax law was passed, it meant 'profit,' the proceeds of a corporation after deducting expenses. Now that definition has come to include 'wages,' the proceeds of a single individual selling his labor. We know this to be true by reviewing the congressional record of conversations on the floor preceding the vote.

The 16th Amendment was never truly ratified. It was forced fed to an unsuspecting public in an era when morse code was the main means of communications. This is the Amendment our modern day legal system says justifies the income tax. Even accepting the 16th as legal, many court cases have declared that this amendment bestows no new taxing power, which renders the current Income Tax unconstitutional!

Our current lawmakers are vaguely aware that the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional. When pressed, they admit in closed circles that the Income Tax is voluntary, thus it is legal!

And I don't volunteer.

intotheabyss  posted on  2007-02-14   10:56:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: intotheabyss (#37)

These are interesting ideas.

intotheabyss:

The word 'Income' has been redefined. At the time that our tax law was passed, it meant 'profit,' the proceeds of a corporation after deducting expenses. Now that definition has come to include 'wages,' the proceeds of a single individual selling his labor. We know this to be true by reviewing the congressional record of conversations on the floor preceding the vote.

voice of sanity:

Please cite the Congressional record pages to which you refer. In addition, if by "our tax law" you mean the Sixteenth Amendment, the text of that amendment reads: "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." The definition of the term "incomes" is thus of importance. There is, however, no good argument for the proposition that at the time of ratification of that amendment, the term "incomes" did not include wages or salaries or compensation for labor. You will need to cite dictionaries of the time to prove this thesis. The O.E.D. belies this thesis, as does the text of the 1862 income tax law, which levied a tax "upon the annual gains, profits of income of every person residing in the United States, whether derived from any kind of property, rents, interest, dividends, salaries, or from any profession, trade, employment, or vocation carried on in the United States or elsewhere, or from any other source whatever."

intotheabyss:

The 16th Amendment was never truly ratified. It was forced fed to an unsuspecting public in an era when morse code was the main means of communications. This is the Amendment our modern day legal system says justifies the income tax.

voice of reason:

36 states ratified it. Although there is some controversy about Kentucky's ratification, it has never been challenged. Perhaps a lawsuit filed in Kentucky, or a bill intoduced into the Kentucky state legislature, to have the ratfication declared illegal, null, and void, would make us all happy.

intotheabyss:

Even accepting the 16th as legal, many court cases have declared that this amendment bestows no new taxing power, which renders the current Income Tax unconstitutional!

voice of reason:

That argument seems to have arisen from an understandable misconstruction of the poorly written Supreme Court opinion in STANTON v. BALTIC MINING COMPANY., 36 S. Ct. 278, 240 U.S. 103 (1916), where the court ruled that the 16th Amendment "conferred no new power of taxation...." Some argue that, since the income tax law of 1894 was not legal before the 16th Amendment, and since the Supreme Court, in Stanton, later said that the 16th Amendment conferred no new power, ergo income is still not subject to taxation. However, the entire relevant portion of the above quote was as follows: "[T]he provisions of the Sixteenth Amendment conferred no new power of taxation but simply prohibited the previous complete and plenary power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning from being taken out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged and being placed in the category of direct taxation subject to apportionment by a consideration of the sources from which the income was derived, that is by testing the tax not by what it was -- a tax on income, but by a mistaken theory deduced from the origin or source of the income taxed." Stanton, supra, 240 U.S. 112, 113. The Stanton court held, in other words, that congress has always possessed broad powers to tax income and the 16th Amendment simply corrected the court's error of classifying taxes on income derived from property as "direct taxes" subject to apportionment.

intotheabyss:

Our current lawmakers are vaguely aware that the 16th Amendment is unconstitutional. When pressed, they admit in closed circles that the Income Tax is voluntary, thus it is legal!

voice of sanity:

By "voluntary," the IRS seems to mean "self-assessed." The obligation to file and pay taxes is not, however, in any sense, voluntary. It is mandatory.

leveller  posted on  2007-02-14   13:18:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: leveller (#39)

Just curious, do you think the Federal Reserve is a private bank?

intotheabyss  posted on  2007-02-14   13:26:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: intotheabyss (#40)

the Federal Reserve is a private bank

The twelve federal reserve banks are owned by member banks, all commercial institutions.

leveller  posted on  2007-02-14   14:23:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 41.

        There are no replies to Comment # 41.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 41.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


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