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

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

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

My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’

Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC

Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines

New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics,

BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk,

Douglas Macgregor - IT'S BEGUN - The People Are Rising Up!

Marine Sniper: They're Lying About Charlie Kirk's Death and They Know It!

Mike Johnson Holds 'Private Meeting' With Jewish Leaders, Pledges to Screen Out Anti-Israel GOP Candidates

Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!]

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Media Noticing WTP’s
Source: WTP Foundation
URL Source: http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/6700temp/Update2007-09-11.htm
Published: Sep 15, 2007
Author: wee peeps
Post Date: 2007-09-15 06:34:54 by HOUNDDAWG
Keywords: None
Views: 110
Comments: 4

Following the Order by the US Court of Appeals in Manhattan blocking enforcement of the most harmful part of the August 9th injunction issued by a federal District Court Judge against WTP, and that ordered oral arguments before a substantive motions panel in Manhattan next Tuesday, both the New York Times and a prestigious, 35-year old First Amendment watchdog and legal defense organization have published stories regarding WTP’s case.

Last Tuesday, the New York Times followed up on its original story regarding the District Court's injunction with a short piece covering the Order by the Court of Appeals. The text appears below:

The New York Times

September 4, 2007

Order on Tax Evasion Site Blocked

A federal appeals court has temporarily blocked an order that the Internal Revenue Service be given the names of people who acquired materials from a Web site on how to defeat the tax laws.

The Web site, http://givemeliberty.org, shut down last week and posted an Aug. 9 order to do so from Thomas J. McAvoy, a senior federal judge for the Northern District of New York.

Judge McAvoy ruled that evidence showed that the Web site was inciting people to violate the tax laws. The judge found that under a 1969 Supreme Court ruling, the Web site had thus lost its First Amendment protections as either commercial or political speech.

Robert L. Schulz of Queensbury, N.Y., who operates the Web site, appealed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on Thursday.

On Friday, Judge Peter W. Hall temporarily blocked the portion of the order requiring Mr. Schulz to turn over to the government the names and identifying details of people who had obtained information at the Web site on how to stop federal tax from being withheld from their paychecks. Judge Hall set Sept. 18 for oral arguments on the issue.

On Friday, September 1, 2007, a First Amendment watchdog and legal defense organization called "The Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press" also covered the developments in the WTP case, specifically referencing USDC Judge McAvoy's finding that WTP's Speech "incites imminent lawless action," and referring to the seminal Supreme Court case Brandenburg v. Ohio which established the legal standard for determining if such Speech can be enjoined.

The Committee provides free legal assistance to news reporters facing litigation for their exercise of the First Amendment. Its September 7th article about WTP can be read here. The Committee's website is http://www.rcfp.org.

Given the importance of the numerous First Amendment issues before the Court and the difficulties the government faces in publicly defending its 6700 related "enforcement" actions against WTP, we anticipate next week's proceedings will be of enormous significance not only for the WTP organization but for the larger future of Free Speech and the First Amendment’s guarantee of the People’s Right to Petition the government for Redress of Grievances. We anticipate posting a brief web update following next week's hearing as well as an audio recording of the oral arguments.

As of today, the Government has yet to respond to WTP's motion to stay the enforcement of Judge McAvoy’s order pending the results of WTP’s appeal from that Order.


Poster Comment:

Every time we ask to see the law they show us yet another decision by a tax consuming judge.

As Michael Rivero said:

"What laws? Show us the law being violated. Show us the law, voted by Congress, signed by the President, and passed by the US Supreme Court which obligates working people to pay a direct non-apportioned tax in their wages or salaries."

"Well, the tax is authorized by the 16th amendment!" govt hacks tell us.

"But, the supreme court said that it isn't!" our people reply.

"You can't show that to the jury because it might confuse them!" The judges tell us.

And so on....

Rivero adds:

More details are HERE. Please save a local copy for future reference.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.

#1. To: HOUNDDAWG (#0) (Edited)

Every time we ask to see the law they show us yet another decision by a tax consuming judge.

OH, it's there alright.

You can find it at Title 26, Section 7203 and Section 7243; and in Title 26, Section 301 - 335. At least this is what most are prosecuted under. GRANTED, there HAVE been a few victories (very few and far between) but those can be attributed to having a jury which was actually COMPETENT enough to make a rational decision, which is nearly impossible to find among the brain-dead sleepwalking shoeple of this country today.

The REASON they don't "show" it to us, is that then EVERYONE would KNOW what ties them to it, and exactly HOW to rid themselves of it...

It is a legitimate "levy" because of the license people get from the State/Gov to allow them the privilege of working for either a corporation (a creation of the State) or the State itself - which a person has no RIGHT of doing under Common Law. This was explained by the Supreme Court in Enoch vs Williams cited in US 370, Page 1. You can listen to this beginning at the 50 minute mark to get a more complete description of how this works.

As the old saying goes - "Americans want their cake and want to eat it too." They WANT the 108 benefits of Social Security. Apply a bit of common sense folks - ANYTIME you sign up for something with BENEFITS, those BENEFITS will be paid for somehow. And the "income tax" is a legitimate (albeit underhanded) part of the CONTRACT you agree to when you get the LICENSE for the PRIVILEGE of working for the State or one of it's creations, a corporation - otherwise known as a Social Security number, or alternatively as your Taxpayer Identification Number.

Want to quit paying "income tax"??? Then you have a choice to make. Either try the argument Ed and Elaine Brown and many others have tried (and constantly look over your shoulder and always wonder WHEN your number is going to get drawn) and then hope like hell you can get lucky enough to have a competent jury; OR, drop out of the SS System (which IS voluntary), forget about the "money" you've paid in during your lifetime, forget about Medicare and the other 107 "benefits" of the program, and live your life under Common Law as outlined in Hale vs Henkle. MOST will choose to stay in the program to "get the 'money' back they paid in, and for the rest of those "benefits".

IN SHORT, it's the LICENSE (as always - which IS a contract) along with the terms and conditions of that contract that get you into a "mess" without a LEGITIMATE argument - because you AGREED to those terms and conditions whether you wanted to or even realize it or not.

innieway  posted on  2007-09-15   8:35:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: innieway (#1)

You can find it at Title 26, Section 7203 and Section 7243; and in Title 26, Section 301 - 335.

Those sections begin with, "Any person required..."

And, in Title 26 no one except the secretary is "required" to perform any act with respect to the payment of an income tax.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-09-15   19:35:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: HOUNDDAWG (#2)

Those sections begin with, "Any person required..."

Yes, which is anyone that works for the "State" (including fed gov).

By extension, this also applies to anyone that works in any position or "office" which is created by the State. Corporations fall into this category. Their corporate charter is filed with the Secretary of State, and (usually) approval is granted. ONLY the State has the "authority" to "create" a corporation.

In it's Corporate Charter, ANY corporation has the "authority" to make certain "demands" of it's employees - things like requiring a SS# as a condition of eligibility for hire. So if you want to work for GM, you will have to have a SS# on file with them. Think of the SS# as your "license" to work for GM. NOW you have done 2 things to put yourself into the position of being in the category of "Any person required..."
(1) You took a "position" which was created by the State.
(2) You got a "license" to take that "position", and agreed to all the "terms and conditions" of that contract - whether you know what they are or not.

Don't get me wrong - I'm on the same side of the fence as you are on the issue. Hell, I'm even convinced that the 16th Amendment was NOT properly ratified - and thus the whole squalid mess is BS. BUT, I'm trying to present the "logic" of why so many "tax protesters" wind up being convicted (WRONGLY convicted IMHO, but convicted nonetheless). I'm also trying to tell how to NOT pay the tax WITHOUT facing repercussions - which begins with opting out of the SS system (which is a little more involved than just saying "I want out", but doable)... Yes, there are OTHER "repercussions" such as you won't be able to work for GM anymore so you'll have to find a different means of "making a living".

Basically what I'm saying is that if you play the game you'll be playing by "their" rules - you'll be playing with Monopoly money, you can't change where Boardwalk is located, etc. Personally, I could give a rat's ass where Boardwalk is located, and the Monopoly money is meaningless to me - but I'm not playing the game, so NONE of those silly "rules" matter. I kind of like it better that way.

innieway  posted on  2007-09-17   11:31:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: innieway (#3)

I think you're right that the govt presumes jurisdiction over corporate workers (in addition to employees which are officers of a corp) for the reasons you've outlined.

But, they can't explain that without revealing that it's also possible to avoid it all, and they know that given the informed choice most would do just that.

In any case, jurisdiction obtained by fraud and deception cannot impose an enforceable contract, at least not on me.

As I've told various IRS peeps over the years, "If you put me up against a wall and promise to shoot me if I don't sign a 1040, I may very well agree to affix my sig. But, barring that, if you have some method whereby you can otherwise compel me to do so then use it. Until then you can kiss my ass."

In short, I ain't filing their damned old tax returns.

HOUNDDAWG  posted on  2007-09-17   15:58:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 4.

        There are no replies to Comment # 4.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


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