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

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

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 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!!

Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Are Ed and Elaine Brown Dead?
Source: Keene Free Press
URL Source: http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo ... ent&task=view&id=630&Itemid=36
Published: Oct 6, 2007
Author: Kat Kanning
Post Date: 2007-10-07 12:39:01 by JiminyC
Keywords: None
Views: 2799
Comments: 258

Are Ed and Elaine Brown dead? We don't know - the government won't tell where they are, so we cannot verify their condition. If Ed and Elaine had been hurt during their arrest, it would be in the government's interest to withhold this information, since they obviously fear a violent reaction to the arrest from Brown supporters. Until the government chooses to divulge information on the Brown's whereabouts, we will be unable to verify their condition and will have to assume the worst.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 164.

#56. To: all (#0) (Edited)

When dealing with something like the Browns, it is important to recognize that more than one issue is in play, and therefore, we should attempt to delineate among those issues.

For some, this is a taxpayer protest issue.

For some, this is an issue of IRS and government excess.

For some, this is simply the government doing its job.

The evidence seems to suggest that the Browns were not classic tax protestors, but classic tax evaders. Most tax evaders acknowledge their wrong, negotiate a deal, pay a penalty and back taxes, and avoid criminal prosecution or sanctions. The percentage of federal prisoners who are in prison for taxes is truly small. Without addressing whether the income tax is legit, we do know that the Browns actively misrepresented their income in filings with the IRS. This is much different from tax protest. This is tax evasion.

Classic tax protestors refuse to acknowledge that the IRS and that the taxes sought are legitimate. I'm not going to attempt to address that notion, because there's not much to discuss. Whether the income tax is legitimate is a question that has been answered by those who are in a position to indict, prosecute and imprison dissenters. The courts, the IRS, the prosecutors, and most importantly, the public at large, accept the income tax and the right of the government to enforce it.

When someone like the Browns hides income, then files false information, then espouses tax protestor status, then talks of not being taken alive, they open themselves up for maximum grief and government retribution.

I do not like it when our government uses its muscle against citizens. However, when citizens openly challenge the government, they must recognize that there are ways to challenge the government that have legal and social acceptance, and those that do not. We have an accepted way. It's in the court house and in the court of public opinion. It is not playing at tax protestor, talking big, and drawing in a line in the dirt with the federal government.

I am appalled at the way the IRS and our government sometimes behave. I am also appalled at the way some pit bulls attack people. One should understand when and how to interact with the IRS and pit bulls, and also know when and how not to.

Paul Revere  posted on  2007-10-08   4:03:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

However, when citizens openly challenge the government...

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."

JiminyC  posted on  2007-10-08   9:17:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

You clipped my quote so you could use a trite statement that has never been true.

Here's my actual quote.

"However, when citizens openly challenge the government, they must recognize that there are ways to challenge the government that have legal and social acceptance, and those that do not."

Life is more complicated than simple thoughts and simple homilies.

Paul Revere  posted on  2007-10-08   10:07:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

"However, when citizens openly challenge the government, they must recognize that there are ways to challenge the government that have legal and social acceptance, and those that do not."

Sure, until they pass new laws making what is currently considered a legal and socially acceptable means of challenging the government illegal and socially unacceptable. Stroke of a pen, dude. Don't protest anything on their side of the sidewalk, which is every side of the sidewalk, just buckle under and accept it all.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   10:16:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Sure, until they pass new laws making what is currently considered a legal and socially acceptable means of challenging the government illegal and socially unacceptable. Stroke of a pen, dude. Don't protest anything on their side of the sidewalk, which is every side of the sidewalk, just buckle under and accept it all.

That's a different topic, one on which I've already given my opinions on other threads. Yes, our liberties are now grievously threatened. The answer to that threat is not asinine talk of violent overthrow of the government.

I find such talk downright stupid, especially when made by people posting online to public message boards.

You have a right to be heard. You have a right to state your case, to go on youtube, to create your own website, to get as many people as you can to listen to you and follow you.

Paul Revere  posted on  2007-10-08   10:25:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

The answer to that threat is not asinine talk of violent overthrow of the government.

Where have I suggested anything remotely resembling a violent overthrow of the government? How did the Browns act violently against the government?

But since simply saying "no" to government usurpation isn't legally or socially acceptable anymore, it WILL ultimately result in violence, whether you or I want it to happen that way. And I'd even lay you pretty heavy odds that the violence will be engendered by the government itself, not a gaggle of wild eyed rebels.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   10:44:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

How did the Browns act violently against the government?

They were begging for bloodshed and put open death threats out on officers and town officials. Did they act? No, but they promised death to people to attempted to capture them, they were after all already found guilty and according to the existing law they were fugitives.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   11:09:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

They were begging for bloodshed and put open death threats out on officers and town officials. Did they act? No, but they promised death to people to attempted to capture them, they were after all already found guilty and according to the existing law they were fugitives.

I think saying (okay, shouting) that you'll defend yourself against an attack in your own home isn't quite the same as "begging for bloodshed".

I guess you have more faith in the justice system than some of the rest of us and that's okay, people have faith in a lot of things that are purely illusion/delusion.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   11:15:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

From WPTZ News LAINFIELD, N.H. -- A man convicted of federal tax evasion was quoted in a newspaper article making threats against local law enforcement officials on Friday.

In the New Hampshire Union Leader article, Ed Brown said that his supporters will find and kill local law enforcement officials if they kill him or his wife. Brown mentioned the Plainfield police chief and Sullivan County sheriff.

-----------------
"Threats were made that pertain to the Sullivan County Sheriff's Office, Plainfield police," said Plainfield Sgt. Lawrence Dore. "We're making a joint effort to accurately reflect our response to that."

The Sullivan County attorney issued a statement on Friday saying that Ed Brown was trying to increase tensions.

"Ed Brown has by his recent contingent threat to kill Sullivan County Sheriff Michael Prozzo and Plainfield chief of police Gordon Gillens attempted to increase tension arising from his continued refusal to obey the law," the statement read.

Source: http://www.wptz.com/news/13868618/detail.html

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   11:38:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I have no doubt that that's how it was reported in the newspapers, which are known for being truthful. But tell me, how do we know the "supporters" making these threats weren't feds? At least it seems there were a few wolves in sheep's clothing hanging around the Browns.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   11:44:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

They have the source coming from Brown himself RS. Perhaps your right, is there anyplace where the Browns deny making these threats? If so I'd like to view it. Thanks

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   11:54:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

They have the source coming from Brown himself RS.

I know, but I think if we look more carefully at how it was worded, Ed was merely REPEATING what he'd been told by alleged supporters, who may or may not have been federal agents.

I'm not saying he handled the situation well, just that we can have no idea how we'd personally handle a similar situation and therefore, I'll withhold judgement.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   12:00:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Ed was merely REPEATING what he'd been told by alleged supporters, who may or may not have been federal agents.

I dunno, according this they have him on a radio broadcast making the threats. It's going to be pretty hard to defend it, and from what I read they are going to be brining more charges against them.

Anyways, Source and quotes as follows.

http://www.concordmonitor.com/ap...E/710060355/0/COMMUNITY01

Instead, this turned ugly, with violence and doom on the horizon. Early on, Ed Brown said this could turn into another Waco if authorities pushed things too far.

In a sense, war was declared by the Browns. Their friends and supporters brought high-powered rifles to their fortress. The Browns vowed never to be taken alive, saying they'd leave their home only as free people or in body bags.

And then there was the harsh rhetoric directed toward Judge Steven McAuliffe, who presided over the Browns' tax evasion trial.

The Browns and their supporters have said that McAuliffe is the criminal. McAuliffe took himself off the cases of two men charged with helping the Browns. He said threats made against him could lead some to question his impartiality. U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier would not confirm yesterday whether McAuliffe received heightened security.

But that would be a reasonable assumption. Here's why:

"This is a warning," Ed Brown said in a February radio broadcast. "Once this thing starts, we're going to seek them out and hunt them down. And we're going to bring them to justice. So anybody who wishes to join them, you go right ahead and join them. But I promise you, long after I'm gone, they're going to seek out every one of you and your bloodline."

In a video posted later that month, Brown cited McAuliffe again. "I wouldn't want to be this judge or these other people. . . . Their names are already out there," Brown said. "They are just as vulnerable as I am. And if they're so foolish and stupid to think that they're not, hey, doom on them."

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   12:53:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

But I promise you, long after I'm gone, they're going to seek out every one of you and your bloodline."

Lets just take this one little quote ... if he's speaking of "after he's gone" and "they're" going to be seeking out the attackers, he's obviously speaking of someone besides himself. I wonder who the "they" are that he's referring to. I wonder who gave him that assurance. He was probably a huge fool for believing them, anyway.

Not casting any aspersions, of course, but here's only one group of people I can think of that thrives on blood vengence.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   13:14:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I wonder who the "they" are that he's referring to. I wonder who gave him that assurance. He was probably a huge fool for believing them, anyway.

I'm not sure who's behind it. I guess we'll all have to wait for evidence or lack there of in court after the charges are brought. I'm just saying it was said and he was advocating bloodshed at that point.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   13:19:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I guess we'll all have to wait for evidence or lack there of in court after the charges are brought.

Charges against whom? Evidence of what? If those promises were made by fake supporters to make the Browns look like whackos ... why would they publicly admit to being fakes?

Remember? That whacko Koresh was raping the babies. And remember? Saddam's whacko troops were throwing babies out of incubators. Want me to go on?

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   13:28:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

harges against whom? Evidence of what? If those promises were made by fake supporters to make the Browns look like whackos ... why would they publicly admit to being fakes?

RS, Are you insinuating that someone put a gun to his head and made him make the threats on radio and to journalists? That this is a conspiracy to discredit him? He himself made the claims and I have yet to hear anything about him denying the claims or about the claims being a form of misunderstanding. He openly advocated the death of officials and even went so far to name them and their family's. I don't care who said what to him, It's also a crime among the many he's committed.

*IF* as you say someone convinced him this was the case, that will come out in the trial is all I'm saying. How do you know they were 'fake' supporters? Being on many political boards, I can say without a doubt there are quite a few who are chomping at the bit to over throw the government in a blood bath. I don't think the government needs to put plants in to make this case known.

Most times I'm on the side of questioning authority, 911, this war, much of the police abuse and so on. Both Ruby ridge and Waco are atrocity's in the highest form, I will even concede that point and also wish to hold the authority's accountable. This case however I'm not willing to defend the Browns. They broke the law, went to court were found guilty. The Browns have done things that are blatantly against the law. They encouraged bloodshed and refused to follow the law at any time throughout this debacle. They believe themselves above the law and were attempting to become martyrs hoping and trying to bait a public suicide by cop. I will not discredit myself or important causes by attaching myself to him. He is an example of what NOT to do to make a point.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   13:45:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

They broke the law, went to court were found guilty.

What friggin law?

angle  posted on  2007-10-08   14:16:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Well the law about Tax evasion for starters, of which they were found guilty for. They hid a large some of money to avoid paying the tax on it.

Free advice here: http://law.freeadvice.com/tax_la...e_tax_law/tax_evasion.htm

What is the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance?

The courts recognize the fact that no taxpayer is obliged to arrange his/her affairs so as to maximize the tax the government receives. Individuals and businesses are entitled to take all lawful steps to minimize their taxes.

A taxpayer may lawfully arrange his/her affairs to minimize taxes by such steps as deferring income from one year to the next. (For example, interest on property sold on 12/31/98 is taxable as part of 98 income. If the property is sold on 1/1/99, it would be taxable as part of 99 income. This is legal to do.) It is lawful to take all available tax deductions. It is also lawful to avoid taxes by making charitable contributions.

Tax evasion, on the other hand, is a crime. Tax evasion typically involves failing to report income, or improperly claiming deductions that are not authorized. Examples of tax evasion include such actions as when a contractor "forgets" to report the $10,000 cash he receives for building a pool, or when a business owner tries to deduct $100,000 of personal expenses from his business taxes, or when a person falsely claims she made charitable contributions, or significantly overestimates the value of property donated to charity. Similarly, if an estate is worth $5 million and the executor files a false tax return, improperly omitting property and claiming the estate is only worth $100,000, thus owing much less in taxes.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   14:27:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

blah blah blah blah

The law is only for those who don't have a lawyer to buy their way out of it. The application of "law" is morally bankrupt and corrupt.

angle  posted on  2007-10-08   14:52:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

blah blah blah blah

The law is only for those who don't have a lawyer to buy their way out of it. The application of "law" is morally bankrupt and corrupt.

The law isn't there to Cherry pick, as stated you have the right to challenge it thru legal recourse. Some believe like the Browns that if you don't like the law you aren't required to follow it. They place themselves above the law by also stating the only law they follow is that of the bible.

The Browns willfully hid money to evade the tax on that money. They also aggravated their situation further by refusing to take part in their own defense. To further thumb their nose and see themselves above the law they made blatant open threats against peoples lives. They have been criminals throughout this entire case, nothing they have done is for righteous causes.

A dumb or stupid law should be repealed and confronted. Breaking the law only makes you a criminal and wins you little if any support.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   15:16:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I do not expect to change the opinion of anyone who feels strongly that the income tax is illegal. I don't even want to address that issue, because it is well settled by the courts that they will enforce the Code.

I do expect to have some impact on readers here who might not think solely in terms of their personal beliefs.

If someone does the things the Browns did, they make their battle personal, and they bring out all the worst of those in government. I do not defend those excesses, but I recognize them. People who wouldn't dream of taunting a pit bull will taunt the government, and the government is a lot more dangerous.

I hope that people who read this will understand that if they are cross ways with the IRS, their best path is not tax protest. That will only subject them to carpet bombing. Negotiate. Get professionals who do this for a living.

People who would never dream of trying to take out their own spleen will try to be their own adviser for tax matters. A guy who will spend 10k on a waverunner won't spend 2k getting good advice on tax matters. It's foolhardy thinking, often with bad results.

Once you piss them off, you're not going to be treated well. The goal is to get out of the trap, not change the IRS.

Paul Revere  posted on  2007-10-08   15:28:39 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

This is probably a good time to change the thread title to "Tax Lawyers Unite".

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   15:49:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

RS,

That's an unfair assessment. I have stated as did Paul Revere that we don't necessarily agree with all the laws. We agree to different methods other then what the browns advocate is all. Just because we advocate staying within the realm of the law to change things we don't like about it, doesn't mean we are defending bad laws.

I have stated more then once, that the Browns have done a disservice to real tax protest. They have harmed the cause more then helped it. Being a realist and stating the obvious doesn't make me a defender of tyranny.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   16:00:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Okay, I'll accept that. So what method would you suggest? And please don't say "call your representative".

When the rules are crooked (which they are) and the dice are loaded (which they are), playing the game will bankrupt you. Of course NOT playing the game will bankrupt you, too, so either way you're about to get screwed.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   16:11:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I suggest a well organized movement staying within the confines of the law and a non-violent approach. This country needs someone to inspire them to overcome the dark cloud of the government. This country as a whole lacks direction and lacks courage. When the people have to much to risk, very few will gamble when they know the cards are stacked against them.

I'm waiting for someone to inspire me.. so far I've seen very little. Lots of good ideas of how things should be, but very little direction in accomplishing that.

I don't know an easy fix for this, that's not to say I'm not open minded to one if someone presents it.

Japedo  posted on  2007-10-08   16:40:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I suggest a well organized movement staying within the confines of the law and a non-violent approach.

Do you have any idea how fast a serious (lawful) movement to alter the status quo is infiltrated and blown apart from within? I've seen that first hand on more than one occasion. Infiltraters join the group, they work to become everybody's best buddy and then little by little they begin to gnaw away on the integrity of the mission and the cohesiveness of the members. Whenever possible, they try to get the leaders to incriminate themselves.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   17:22:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Infiltraters join the group, they work to become everybody's best buddy and then little by little they begin to gnaw away on the integrity of the mission and the cohesiveness of the members.

Sounds a bit like this thread.

angle  posted on  2007-10-08   17:28:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Sounds a bit like this thread.

Internet forums are a prime target for infiltrators to create hate and discontent among liberty lovers. They'll agree with you on every single thing except the really important stuff. FreeRepublic is a prime example of how good they are at it.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08   17:35:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Actually, I think most are really ham-handed and very obvious. But a few are good, the ones you're never quite sure about.

robin  posted on  2007-10-08   17:36:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#167. To: robin (#164)

No matter how good they are at it, most eventually out themselves, especially when they become moderators. But I think the goal is more about continually interrupting good threads than anything sinister. At least I hope that's correct.

RidinShotgun  posted on  2007-10-08 17:42:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

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

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