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: 2671
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
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: RidinShotgun, Tauzero, Cynicom, christine, Zipporah, aristeides, HOUNDDAWG, Pinguinite, robin, noone222 (#0)
It's a reasonable question. Remember what happened to Gordon Kahl.
Read New History
Gordon Kahl didn't have the grassroots awareness that the Browns have, thanks to the internet.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
Fair question, indeed. Normally gov loves to show their captives doing the perp-walk all chained up.
One major difference between the Browns and Gordon Kahl is that Kahl didn't tie himself down to a "compound" where fake patriots could waltz in and surround him. Even so, from what I can recall, the mentally challenged daughter of the people who took Gordon in down in Arkansas, turned him in and it all went swiftly downhill from there. Its fair to assume the Browns have been separated and could possibly be undergoing diesel therapy, being moved from place to place so they can't be located by their supporters. I doubt if they're dead, but being alive is probably exremely difficult for them right now. And all we can do is stand around wringing our hands. Pukesville.
Federal Inmate Loccator www.bop.gov/ inmate_locator/index.jsp The Bureau is responsible for the custody and care of sentenced Federal inmates, as well as a significant number of pretrial detainees and pre- sentenced offenders for the U.S. Marshals Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The Bureau also has custodial responsibility for District of Columbia felons sentenced to terms of imprisonment. Name Register Number Age Race Sex Release Date Actual / Projected Location Sorry. No Inmate Named EDWARD LEWIS BROWN Age: 65 Race: White Sex: Male found. Locate a Federal Inmate (includes all inmates from 1982 to present) Name Register Number Age Race Sex Release Date Actual / Projected Location Sorry. No Inmate Named ELAINE ALICE BROWN Age: 64 Race: White Sex: Female found.
Unless displaying the captives will make the sheeple think or unless the captives are dead or injured.
Read New History
I ask everyone I know if they know about the Browns' story and attempt to educate if they sem interested. That's about the best that I can do.
Read New History
Sorry. No Inmate Named ELAINE ALICE BROWN Age: 64 Race: White Sex: Female found. The Soviets would have been jealous of these tactics.
Read New History
Why is the 1st we've heard from their "arrest" from the jackboots instead of the Browns during the assault??? I thought they had visitors helping, cell phones, internet...why nothing from them prior to the raid??
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition i'll NEVER understand why they did this. they had to have known this is the MO of the feds.
Do we know if Ed carried while in his home?
That's exactly what is going on, I think. I got arrested by ATF a long time ago and got a guided tour of every jail in New Hampshire for a couple of weeks so I couldn't be found by friends. They actually indicted me at 1 a.m. in a private office so the lawyer who was trying to represent me couldn't attend. The last thing they want is for these people to be bailed out quickly. I don't have much sympathy for the Browns' cause but I have sympathy for them personally. At least they're in jail in New Hampshire...the jails are kinda crude, but they're not likely to be mistreated. I had cops and jailers making phone calls to friends to let them know where I was. They could have been fired, probably, but they hated the freakin feds more than I did.
Honi soit qui mal y pense
There's no 'bail' to be involved. They have already been sentenced to jail. Last I read they were turned over to transport authorities, apparently to put them in the facilities where they are to serve their sentences.
Ed "Lewis" as chose to be called at the end of his freedom turned out to be a few cards short of a full deck. God bless him and his wife but they made a mess of what remains of their life. If I were making their income I'd have hired a crackerjack CPA and paid as least tribute as possible to the authorities and gone on with my life.
The battle that they chose to fight has to be one of the most risky of them all. Even AJ has decided to pay his tribute so that he can do what he does...
Hopefully not the max security one in CO that puts people in solitary confinement 23.5/7. That place is an insanity factory.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
There are tons of people who do this that we never hear about. Ed was the exception that chose otherwise as a matter of conscience, for which we respect him.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
won't they put in federal prisons? are you saying that the locals who work in the NH fed prisons are likely to be kinder?
in all the pics and video i saw, he had a piece on his hip.
Thanks - that just makes it stranger and stranger to moi...
They couldn't have done it without the Feds.
Read New History
They have more conviction and courage in their little fingertip than you'll ever hope to have.
conviction and courage, yes, but you can't deny that their decisions from beginning to this end has ruined their lives. they are both in their 60s. the feds are going to pile more charges on them and they'll be lucky if they ever see each other again. as hard as this is to say, they'll probably die behind bars. not only that, the government will take everything they own. so much for the Live Free or Die motto. i would bet that right now they're regretting the decisions they made too. Tom Cryer lucked out in his case. he said so and he and Larry Becraft both advised everyone, "folks don't try this at home."
Agreed.. now what? What they've worked for all their lives will be gone.. done ..finished. All the time and money wasted for what was a losing proposition from the start.. there are battles and there are battles this isnt one that was winnable IMO.
Courage? Mr. Brown, prior to his battle w/the IRS, was a multi millionaire. Toward the end of his odyssey, he referred to himself as “Mr Lewis“. He mentally fell off the cliff and took his wife with him. He's forever is relegated to the patriot KooK Hall of Fame and someone whose tactics should be a reminder of the insanity that grips some decent folks in the patriot movement.
What we are seeing in cases such as this is the same thing ancient tyrants did when they had petty lords in far off regions ignoring their demands for tribute: They lay siege on the recalcitrant, they eventually go in, seize the recalcitrant, and promptly impale him for all to see. They seize all his property, and cast forever his memory as an enemy of the state. These two will never see the light of day again, sadly.
These two will never see the light of day again, sadly. IMO it was a fool's mission.. those who have money will not win.. and as I said b/f to what end? Exactly what has happened.. they've lost everything.. their legacy is just as youve said.. enemies of the state. Those who encouraged these people to stay the course.. need to be flogged.
I agree, and since not a soul except a few on scatered internet forums know of their troubles, their effort was a waste.
And the contrary is also true. Many folks choose to fight the system only to be beaten down like a dog, w/o anyone except their immediate families knowing the devistation they suffer. Here’s my best advice for anyone who gives a rip what I think; if you have assets, and choose to stay in America, pay the bastards the least amt. of $ you can get away with. If you have nothing,be my guest and test all these wild tax theories. Should they fail, bolt the nation.
Since we don't even know where they are, let's withhold judgment.
My god, so was Paul freakin Revere's.
There are things more important than money.
If anyone failed, it was us, the ones who knew and did nothing; who know and do nothing.
We don't really know if they're in a jail in New Hampshire, do we? If they're being treated to diesel therapy, like they did to Rep. George Hanson who wrote "To Harass Our People" detailing IRS abuses (a book everyone should read), they'd no doubt be spending more time in the air or on busses than they would be in any particular facility. The thing that confuses me is that I was under the impression that the Browns were never alone on their property and that there was a constant stream of supporters staying with them. If that's true, there could be a lot more to this story than we're currently hearing and I guess the only way we'll know about that for sure is if the friends and families of people who were supposed to be there start wondering why they aren't checking in with them on a regular basis.
When I visited Ed, he carried a 45 tucked in the back of his pants. I was let in without a search and without much skepticism. I found the lack of scrutiny quite unsettling.
Dumber people than me have done it.
Not good, at all. Thank you for the report.
I suppose they didn't like the idea of living on the run while their self- sufficient property just sat there vacant. Besides, running would be especially hard for a woman of Elaine's age. And obviously they believed they'd have enough support for their cause ... sadly, the shoe just hasn't pinched enough toes quite tight enough yet so widespread support just isn't there. Of course by the time it is finally there, it'll be WAY too late.
No, Revere had an army of patriots behind him and he/they fired a shot. We don't, hence a useless effort.
Ed alienated a lot of potential support. I know this from first hand experience with him. Anyone with any sense bailed out on him pretty early on.
Dumber people than me have done it.
So you think no patriots suffered greatly at the hands of the king PRIOR to Paul Revere's ride? It all started that night? He came with a ready made army and there was no quibbling, or violent disagreements amongst the colonists about which course of action should be taken.
Anyone with any sense bailed out on him pretty early on. Sure. Everybody wants to run the show and I suppose he was no different in that regard, since it was his show. And his conviction. Unfortunately, people can be right and still piss a lot of people off in the process. Whether or not he was right isn't mine to judge, it was his neck on the block, so I'll cut him some slack.
I'll cut him all the slack in the world while I pray that my involvement in the beginning doesn't get me a 10 year bid. lol
Dumber people than me have done it.
My point is all this founding rather nonsense is ancient history. What back then could be challenged, man to man, on even terms with muskets is now an absurd notion. For Ed “Lewis” Brown to have an open door policy to his home while at the same time thinking he could put a dent in a Kevlar vest with a .45 cal. was lunacy. I’d have paid my taxes, call me what you want.
There's another option for those who don't mind playing paperwork: Create a network of business entities and trusts that own and control one another. Whenever you personally need money, you borrow it. Borrowing money is not a taxable event, and even the IRS acknowledges that. Of course if you do that perpetually, then by the time you die you owe millions, so that's something you have to live with.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
No one's safe and vocal people are especially unsafe, so everybody pretty much jams a sock in it. But the revenuers can go after anyone they want at any time they want and write the story after the fact, however they please, knowing a large enough percent of the population will swallow whatever garbage is waved in front of their faces. Like old blind ladies in wheelchairs really DO deserve to be tased, and kids who drop a chunk of cake on the sidewalk really SHOULD have their wrists broken, and idiots who show up with cameras at the wrong places and times are a genuine threat to society, so they MUST be arrested and charged. With something. And if all else fails to generate enough fear, there are the revenuers.
angle ol' buddy, When I sent my letter to President Reagan in 1983 I said that I'd never file another return "for the convenience of the IRS again!" Now, people in that income bracket actually pay a smaller percentage than working stiffs who are subject to wage withholding, and if Bush had his way the Browns' corporations would be completely exempt! If I made that kinda bux I'd stay barely in compliance so I could trumpet info that damages their collection and enforcement efforts, just as attorney Larry Becraft does. And, because the Browns actually filed incorrect documents and hid income I wouldn't exactly hold them up as shining examples of principled resisters. If they were principled they'd work in professions that allow them to shift funds away from the IRS' grasp and not misrepresent the actual numbers, instead of pretending to comply while stuffing money into mattresses. Remember, they were not involved in the tax education movement before their legal troubles began, so it wasn't so much about principled patriotism as it was avoiding taxes. And, they didn't use the methods that principled patriots use. I don't file at all. If I filed and fibbed then I wouldn't claim to be acting on principle if I was targeted for prosecution. That doesn't wash in my code of ethics. __________________________ And, to others: Why do you assume that the Browns are in NH? They could be in GITMO by now. In fact, when you consider that the enforcement of PROHIBITION was at its all time worst immediately before repeal (the govt didn't want to let go) that's probably what the govt will do to someone before the issue is settled once and for all.
"BOYCOTT AIR TRAVEL! LET'S PUT THOSE TSA IDIOTS ON THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE!
Wrong. The Price They Paid by Gary Hildreth Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Five signers were captured by the British as traitors, and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary Army, another had two sons captured. Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. What kind of men were they? Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists. Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated. But they signed the Declaration of Independence knowing full well that the penalty would be death if they were captured. Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the British Navy. He sold his home and properties to pay his debts, and died in rags. Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British that he was forced to move his family almost constantly. He served in the Congress without pay, and his family was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him, and poverty was his reward. Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer, Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton. At the battle of Yorktown, Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed, and Nelson died bankrupt. Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed. The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months. John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying. Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his children vanished. A few weeks later he died from exhaustion and a broken heart. Norris and Livingston suffered similar fates. Such were the stories and sacrifices of the American Revolution. These were not wild eyed, rabble-rousing ruffians. They were soft-spoken men of means and education. They had security, but they valued liberty more. Standing tall, straight, and unwavering, they pledged: "For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
I was let in without a search and without much skepticism. I found the lack of scrutiny quite unsettling. i asked you about this on the other thread before i saw your posts here. gooooood lord, what the heck were they thinking? everyone knows the feds infiltrate these groups. everyone should have been vetted.
Ed said way too much, taunted the feds way too much, and was way too lax in his security for my taste.
Dumber people than me have done it.
been there done that. i'm sorry that my husband and i started our fight with them. the lesson learned and learning, if you got anything, they're not going to leave you alone and they're going to try to get everything you own. they don't play fair ever cuz there is no law....no law that they have to abide by.
Is this the story that came out several years ago? One that I believe Pat Buchanan made note of; there were numerous radio hosts that did likewise. IIRC, it was essentially debunked.
They can certainly tie up everything in your name........from a safety deposit box, to all banking accounts, car titles, land titles, wages, investments, and the like. And the good folks at the IRS can lie when answering you and it doesn't absolve you from what they declare is due them. If you keep tabs on who told you what, if they're in a generous mood, they will defer any penalty and interest if you can tell them who gave you the bad info.
I was once so naive in thinking that the government, police et al would obey the law if pressed. You learn otherwise once you deal with them. I also reached a point where I knew it would be pointless to continue banging my head up against a wall.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
If you have nothing, the IRS leaves you alone. They only bite into juicy targets that are easy pickins.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
That's why so many people like the guy. If a million people would stand up and do what he did the income tax would be dead in America. A few here and few there is a start. Bowing down to these SOBs will make you a slave. If you can live with that then you have no right to be free.
God is always good!
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.
Certain criteria are expected of everyone in a free and transparent society which expects financial support from the citizens. An honest response to the simple question "what law makes me liable for or subject to the income tax"; a question that has been asked by many people numerous times would be a good place to start. While I remain ignorant of the Brown's particulars I question the methods being utilized by most government agencies that promote continued misconceptions on the part of citizens that have asked for clarification. Further, confiscation of personal property, bank accounts, computer hard drives, and other materials necessary to litigate the issues prior to litigation deprive the citizen (individual) of due process and equal protection under the law. There is an articuable bias towards the IRS being demonstrated in most tax cases to such an extent that these hearings/trials operate as summary judgments independent of the evidence. Simply put, we're instructed from childhood about how free we are, how we are the government, and how superior our system is to others that aren't predicated upon a written constitution which serves as the foundation for all other laws, regulations and codes. Our educational process doesn't include much effort towards our legal knowledge by the time we reach legal majority. More accurately stated we know nothing of the law or court procedures after completion of 12th Grade, yet we're bound to operate within the laws, which are plentiful. Even trained lawyers specialize in limited areas because there are so many categories to be addressed. A system that demands the participation of everyone regardless of their intelligence or education level should be a simplified one to be fair and in the case of the IRS Code it doesn't appear that even the creators comprehend it. Lastly, when the system of law doesn't appear to square with the fundamental (constitutional) law, and an individual with an alleged right to redress requests an answer to this discrepancy, incarceration, confiscation and litigation do not contribute much to the notion of honest and transparent government. Our government forgives billions of dollars in debt annually, mostly that of foreigners while at the same time it pulls out all of the stops to prosecute its own citizens. Forgive me for calling a spade a spade, but regardless of the hidden principles upon which tax laws rely upon to justify collection, the people that operate to enforce them act contrary to all commonly accepted behavior conducive to a civilized society. Ed and Elaine are just 2 more casualties of the federal notion of FREEDOM. I'm of the opinion that this behavior on the part of the IRS will continue until a violent revolution takes place because there appears to be no shortage of assholes who will do anything to obtain a pay check and the IRS has managed to hire a sufficient number of them. I have been asked at times to explain withdrawal from the system to people that have become interested in the subject. I usually refuse because it's not a simple silver bullet sort of solution that is easily understood, nor does it make life simple. It becomes a way of life not enjoyed by the timid. I did it strictly because I determined the SSN fit all of the requirements of the Mark of the Beast that is described in the Bible. There are a lot of other reasons to be sure, but not many that instill the intestinal fortitude necessary to take on the federal government. I determined that the penalty for accepting the Mark outweighed anything the government could do to me. So, my decision to withdraw completely from their system had little to do with the potential repurcussions government might impose, but upon the penalty God will impose. Most people are able to convince themselves that my determination re. the Mark is in error especially when they come under pressure or decide the inconvenience is ludicrous. I don't blame them for their decision and subsequently I generally reject requests to proselytize the withdrawal process. I think anyone serious enough to withdraw must have the conviction and will to carry it out independent of me. I might add that it must be a spiritual conviction that supercedes all concerns one might have regarding freedom, materialism or life itself. The guys on the other side of the equation play for keeps, they've shown themselves to be callous murdering thugs and to underestimate them is fatal. To assist someone else in taking such a position is a responsiblity that I am not inclined to take mainly because people usually have the wrong motivation to begin with and secondly they usually do a half assed job of it and remain "in" the system. My fervent hope is that the system will implode and afford the opportunity for people to opt out of any replacement system.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
Well written rebuttal.
I once invested in a business situation that caused a great deal of grief and heart-burn. After much litigation and associated expense I asked myself ...wtf, and then resorted to analyzing the pros and cons. In the end I was able to console myself by considering the experience, knowledge and some of the people involved, that I would never have otherwise known, as the value received. All of the challenges strengthen us, the mistakes educate us and in my case made me re-evaluate the temporary arrangements we enjoy in this life and the fact that they can change for a million reasons, some righteous and others not. All things indicate to me that we're on the precipice of events that will require the training and determined patience we're getting now. God, I hope I'm wrong.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
There are things more important than life.
Thanks ... there's a movie available at netflix called "The Take" about the collapse of the Argentine economic system and its rebirth. It's worth viewing because it demonstrates the difficulty in establishing a new system free from the qualities and parties that tainted the previous one.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
The thing that blows my mind is that BushCheneyInc murder at will in the name of our country. No one is surrounding their homes and dragging them to prison. The Browns, however misguided, resisted what they perceived as illegal confiscation of their wealth. And where are they?
I just love it when somebody says something "was debunked" without telling us by whom it was debunked, or when, or giving any details of its debunking. So are you saying these people didn't exist? Or that they just weren't harmed by the British? Are we supposed to believe the run-up to the revolution was sterile and passive? What?
thanks for that history review of sacrifices
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice."
Read New History
And there are more important things than "toys". Many people don't rock any boats simply because they're afraid they'll lose the toys they've worked so hard to get.
You bet. Unfortunately, it doesn't put us in a very good light by comparison.
The people in power today wouldn't be able to name a half dozen of these folks, never mind follow the blueprint they left us for a Republic. This isn't America and the people enforcing the rules have no rules.
So are you saying these people didn't exist? Or that they just weren't harmed by the British? Are we supposed to believe the run-up to the revolution was sterile and passive? What? Some are true and some false according to Snopes, I also remember it being said it wasn't all together true at the height of it's going around.
Ment to ping you to post 69.
Its worse than that. Most of the rest of us couldn't name a half dozen of these folks, either. We've totally lost our roots, so we're withering and turning brown (in more ways than one.)
How sad. They died in vain.
You don't disagree with my post. You state that you have chosen to take your own path, with the risk to you that carries. I think you're painfully wrong about several things, chiefly these two: 1. Your following anything said in the Bible, as if it matters to this issue. I don't believe the Bible is anything more than a collection of stories, legends, half truths, and dogma. Christianity and what it has "accomplished" through group think is more vile than the income tax. 2. Your allusions to the need for some violent overthrow of the system. We have a political system, and if you want to change the law, we have a way to address that. I'm a libertarian, not an anarchist, and certainly not a revolutionary. I favor massive reform of the taxing system, as I've stated in other posts, but I believe in effecting those changes through accepted political methods. You follow an ancient text written by goatherders or stolen from Mesopotamia pagans, while speaking of others being brainwashed by tales told them since childhood. We live in this world, not the one you've constructed in your head, which only works as long as you - like the Browns - can avoid detection.
Well legends have a ring of truth to them, but they are dressed up for a better sell to keep it going. I don't think there's anything wrong with that necessarily as it does serve as a reminder, It's just not all together true is all. I don't believe they died in vain. I have a small hope not all is gone, albeit that hope realistically is diminishing rather quickly.
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.
I have a small hope not all is gone, albeit that hope realistically is diminishing rather quickly. Actually, if you take a good look around at the direction this country has taken in the past three hundred years, you'll have to admit that they did, in fact, die in vain, regardless of whether or not you know their names and circumstances. But believe me, no one will remember the Browns in three hundred years (maybe three hundred days) and shoot, Pat Tillman's murder was being covered up before his body was even cold. We're making progress.
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.
But believe me, no one will remember the Browns in three hundred years (maybe three hundred days) and shoot, Pat Tillman's murder was being covered up before his body was even cold. We're making progress. There's really no argument to anything you've stated here sadly other then the fact that they died in vain. They submitted a concept if nothing else and a precedent to follow. It can be done but it requires to much work, people are to lazy to be free, to irresponsible. Maybe that will change again someday. The revolution happened with a small group of people, yet another good example. Huge change in this country is usually done by the few with the majority kicking and screaming all the way, yet another thing to focus on. :)
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.
I think if those who died could rise up from their graves and get a look at us today, they'd beg to differ with you. They would probably agree, however, that people who cheer the incarceration of the few who actively rebel against tyranny are too lazy and irresponsible to deserve freedom. And, of course, if you read the anti federalist papers you'll see that there were people way back then who predicted that a central government would result in our downfall.
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.
You'll most likely find my post offensive, and it's not my intention. It's all a matter of perspective RS. As has been stated, the Browns were tax evaders not tax protesters. They did more harm to the cause then good. They went thru the system and were found guilty, and as a last stitch attempt they attached themselves to the tax moment, They lied, hid money and were generally dishonest. They have misrepresented people in the the tax movement as liars. One can not change the law if they aren't willing to at least be honest about the circumstance. In other words, The ends doesn't justify the means. You can't lie, evade, be willfully deceitful , be an active fugitive who's been found guilty and still proclaim you're wrongly accused and innocent. I think people who want to advocate a tax change need to have a more honest spokes person to represent them. Personally I wouldn't touch the Brown case with a ten foot poll. He went about everything back-assward. Yes I want change, but I refuse to attach myself or my name to anything less then an honest attempt. I have to also say I agree with much of what the poster Paul Revere says, their ideology mirrors mine in the fact of not being an anarchist, and attempting change thru legal means. There is a time and place for civil disobedience.. I don't think this case is one of those times.
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. This is a discussion. It's not simply about what you say in one post. I was responding to a specific post, wherein there was mentioned the need for violent action. If you're going to use one of my posts as an excuse to say what you want to say, at least pay attention to what I have addressed in this thread. There are some on this thread who have suggested such things, and I have addressed those statements. Your attempt to avoid that prior discussion as the basis for my statement is disingenuous. You're fighting a straw man, not my commentary, so there's no need for me to comment to your post further.
Why would I find your comments offensive? I just find them somewhat less than brilliant. The "movement" to revise tax laws to make them more equitible has been underway for several decades now. You'd almost think you guys were running a cancer research lab, or something, as slow as its going. Maybe we should expect some progress by the next millinium?
Agreed. As icons, the Browns are not a good selection. They are hardly what I would call legit tax protestors. If we want to make heroes of tax protestors, the ones who deserve that status are all those little guys who would have owed nothing or next to nothing if they had filed, but chose not to on principle. Making the Browns out to be heroes is wrong, IMO. They did everything wrong. They used the tax protest movement as their last bastion of denial. Now they've completely ruined their lives and will be lucky if they ever see each other again. It's a terrible toll to pay for their personal greed and obstinence.
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.
Mentioned by whom? Strangely, you also accused noone of an alleged call for violence. I checked both his and my posts and couldn't find any reference at all to a "need for violence". Perhaps you could back up your accusation with a direct quote from the specific post in question? Thanks in advance.
Nah, I've wasted enough time with you. You don't have the intelligence or knowledge for a decent conversation. Also, you lack reading comprehension. Go pester someone who cares about your opinion.
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.
I agree, RS. For those of us who still cling to the past, I'd venture to say, presently, the towns of Concord and Lexington couldn't muster enough folks for a Sunday picnic never mind an anti-government militia. This beast system is safe as far as I can see.
Couldn't find that specific post, huh? How humiliating for you.
I don't know that I cling to the past so much as I want to better understand the parts of it that've been buried for political reasons and for the monetary gain of the few at the top.
As I said, "Nah, I've wasted enough time with you." Still trying to learn how to read at middle school level? Keep working. You'll get that GED yet, Gomer.
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. ----------------- 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.
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.
Derry Brownfield www.gcnlive.com was mentioning the Brown's being zapped with a DARPA electronic disorientation device just now - nothing factual, just speculating about how they could have been taken down.
in light of how it ended, i'd say that's pretty a safe assumption.
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
Wouldn't something like that also effect the infiltrators who were there to make the arrest? I like Derry, but that kind of speculation isn't especially helpful, IMO.
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.
Infiltration is the name of the game. And we all know who always wins that game.
1. I am not saying they did or did not exist, and at this point in life, I'm not planning to do much, if any, research, about it. I merely noted that a few years back there was this, or a similar article/story/whatever, that came to the public's attention. And many noted/notorious people jumped on the bandwagon on reporting that our Founders gave their all. 2. I cannot remember the details of who did what, when, or where, or even why.....nor do I much give a shit--with your attitude, who gives a damn anyways. I was/am hopeful someone else might remember more details than I did. I'm sure Buchanan was one who talked about the fates these honorable men met, or allegedly met. 3. It turned out that it was not the case; that for all the detailed stories that were given out were simply not factual. I cannot remember who did the researching to come to this.......and again, I don't much give a shit. My respect for the Founders doesn't go to how they died, or by whose hand. 4. You can believe whatever you want to about the run=up to the revolution being sterile or unsanitary or passive or impassive........or as you say, 'what'.
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."
Thanks, Japedo..........I couldn't and still can't remember all the details at the time this was happening. Just one of those 'things' that stick in your mind for some goofball reason. This "Sometimers" disease really irritates me at times.
So, short of not giving a shit about who said or did what before, during or after the revolution, what is it that you respect about the founders ... keeping in mind that only survivors ended up being founders. The ones who died fighting it were just dead. Luckily, its not of earth shattering importance to me whether or not you like my attitude, it works just fine for me.
My brother hired a young man, 25 years of age, a couple of years back, that was from the Concord - Lexington area. He couldn't even tell my brother a thing about what happened there--all Pete could say was something like 'some important battle happened there, maybe a really big one'. The guy's Dad was involved with local government there, so it wasn't a case of just born there and moving off. He grew up there.
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.
The dumbing-down is wildly successful, I'd say.
Brown is dumb for talking that way. It's just as well that he has been taken away to begin his prison sentence. Add that to being holed up, and the comments about not being taken alive. A real jerk. Elaine must have been the brains of that outfit.
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.
On this, I agree.
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?
I suspect you would have been a "Torie" way back.
You're right, I don't disagree with your original post in the least. I do disagree with several things in this latest post though, but am not interested in addressing them here. The point I'd like to make above all is that the system itself is never inconvenienced even when it is stampeding rough shod over innocent people that are trying to comply with a set of policies that the policy makers themselves are unable to comprehend. The system employed today does not meet the standards of lawful application that were etched into the constitution, and the responses from agencies responsible for implementing or enforcing the policies are non-existent except when litigated wherein no one knows any more after litigation than they did prior to it.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
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.
If speaking the truth makes me a 'torie', big woohooo. Now that he has lost it all, including the likelihood of never seeing his wife again, I should have said JERK, not just jerk. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, nor a patriot if prefer, to realize that he doesn't have the $$$$$$, the lawyers, or guns, nor time that gubmint has. Threatening a judge or his kids is about as STUPID as one can get, unless, of course, he actually tries to carry such folly out. Sugarcoat it all you wish, angle, the guy is a JERK, or jerk, or
I am not at all claiming anyone put a gun to his head to get him to say those things, I'm saying he was obviously assured these things would be done by someone(s) else and like a stupid fool, he believed and repeated it. He said if the feds killed him, un-named others would kill the feds (and their kin). Truthfully, what he said sounds more hysterical than calculated to me and I'm willing to acknowledge that people have breaking points and often say/do stupid things under intense pressure. I'm simply asking who those others were who were supposed to be doing all the revenge killing and suggesting that we'll never know. So again I ask, what trial? Do you think they're going to go after the genuine supporters? I suppose that could very well happen, but the Browns have already been convicted of breaking a law the feds were more interested in punishing than in producing any justification for. Others have been acquitted of similar charges, so like they kept asking before the whole thing went ape shit ... where's the law?
As I said, it's been reported that they will be facing more charges. Link and excerpt below. www.concordmonitor.com/ap...71007/FRONTPAGE/710070323 But Ed and Elaine Brown's story is far from over. The Plainfield tax protesters, who promised their followers an apocalyptic shootout with marshals and were instead arrested quietly Thursday, will likely face a raft of new charges and see many of their key supporters prosecuted, said experts who have watched the case. On Friday, U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier said the Browns were in transit to federal prisons where they would begin serving 63-month sentences for tax-related charges. They were convicted in January of conspiring to hide Elaine Brown's dental income from authorities, but managed to avoid serving time for nearly nine months, as they rallied antigovernment support and holed up in their well-equipped home. So far, the Browns have faced no legal sanctions for their behavior, which included issuing explicit threats against judges, prosecutors and local law enforcement figures, stockpiling weapons, and assembling a barrage of improvised explosives devices, according to court documents and statements from Monier. But in a press briefing Friday, Monier suggested that the Browns will face new charges for that conduct. "Unfortunately, the Browns have turned this into more than just a tax case," Monier said. "By their continuing actions, allegedly, to obstruct justice, to encourage others to assist them to obstruct justice, by making threats toward law enforcement and other government officials, they have turned this into more than a tax case." Several experts who watch the tax protest movement said the Browns could face a range of new charges, including conspiring to impede the marshals, illegal weapons possessions, criminal threatening, obstruction of justice and possession of explosives.
Speaking the "truth"? C'mon now. It's merely your opinion, your perspective. And I say your perspective is that of a gubmint apologist and supporter. Picking on Ed Brown whilst BushCheneyInc are murdering and stealing in the name of your country? Puhleeze spare me your righteous indignation about what a "jerk" Ed Brown is for trying to resist tyranny as he sees it.
What friggin law?
The system employed today does not meet the standards of lawful application that were etched into the constitution, and the responses from agencies responsible for implementing or enforcing the policies are non-existent except when litigated wherein no one knows any more after litigation than they did prior to it. I agree with your post. We are being ruled by people who do whatever they want, and they justify it by criminalizing any who disagree. If someone asks a police officer why he's tasing another person, the questioner is not merely a citizen concerned about police abuse. He's a criminal interfering with an officer while said officer is making an arrest, probably for convulsing without a license. Nowhere is this more prevalent than with the IRS when they target a person they consider a tax protestor. The problem is that the public in general doesn't like the IRS or paying the income tax, but they also don't like it when someone else ignores the system they feel bound to follow. For this reason, tax protestors do not have widespread support. They have a very narrow vein of support, and that is only among those who understand the arguments made. I think only by redirecting the populace away from the current system, and towards either a flat tax or a federal sales tax can we hope to end the current system. You can't do it with anything less than strong popular support. That means we need an idea that is so strong, it overwhelms the corporate lackeys who create, regulate and enforce the current tax system.
Okay, I missed that. So they're probably in for life now. Gotta make EXAMPLES of them to scare the rest of the population into greater leaps of faithful and voluntary compliance.
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.
I think only by redirecting the populace away from the current system, and towards either a flat tax or a federal sales tax can we hope to end the current system. You can't do it with anything less than strong popular support. That means we need an idea that is so strong, it overwhelms the corporate lackeys who create, regulate and enforce the current tax system. Your first paragraph perfectly defines the phrase, "we are our own worst enemy". To the second paragraph I would point out the huge percentage of the populace that wants to end the war, and the huge percentage of the populace that wants a new investigation into 9/11. How's that working so far? You'll never overwhelm the corporate lackeys as long as every single thing we and they do and own is denominated in the fed's privately owned money factory (you and the lackeys only borrow dollars from the real owners).
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." Thanks for posting that. I was not aware Brown had said such things. I am always going to take the approach that the law should be followed, and if you wish to challenge that law, do so in the systems set up for it - the judicial and political systems. I'm a lawyer, and I'm always going to advise people to follow the law, and the law is what the enforcers say the law is, unless YOU can disprove them. Not just IRS law, all law. I can challenge laws in courts, in the political arena and in the public dialogue. I do all three, and they are the paths our country finds acceptable. If others want to practice civil disobedience, that is their path, not mine.
Didn't I already tell you to blow me? Buzz off, I'm talking to people who understand words and sentences when they read them.
LOL, I wonder how Christ would feel about you lawyering for his sake. He'd probably tell you that you're only doing it for money's sake and lightning would strike you.
Jesus was a myth. Sorry. Santa and the Easter Bunny, too.
In your dreams, buddy.
the corrupt rotten systems...riiiight.
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.
I'm not enamored of choices that include civil disobedience or violence. You don't have to like reality to know what it is.
Well, I guess he told you. You are not worthy to even post to him, let alone disagree with the opinion of a "lawyer". He's right, you're wrong, end of story. (sic)
Santa and the Easter Bunny, too. If I had my choice of myths, I'd surely put lawyers in that catagory and make Santa real.
Two lawyers are like a pair of sissors. The two sides can snip away all day long and never hurt each other while chopping whatever gets between them into shreds. ;)
The problem you and I both have on this thread is the nature of those who argue against us. They do not argue from knowledge, but from emotion. It is analogous to arguing with a person who believes the Bible, or the Quran, or some other religious text is the answer to all questions. Because that person will only accept the world as viewed through their favored prism, you cannot argue with them using logic, facts, or reasons. We are talking to people who think the law of the land is whatever misperception they have about what someone intended 100 years ago, or 220 years ago. Some guy thinks he knows what the founding fathers intended, and he's confident that interpretation is the one. Some guy thinks he knows what the income tax amendment means. You and I deal in the reality of America today, not what we wish it would be. That is what separates us from several posters on this thread. To them. it's a holy war, and unless we sign on for their largely meaningless talk, we're not patriots to the cause. I consider most of what I read on a thread like this to be no different from the ignorant grousing one might hear at the end of a bar, the ranting without purpose and idle threats towards the government. Talking big with no intention of ever acting on it.
I wasn't talking to him. I was talking to someone with whom I agreed. What the matter? Did some big bad lawyer spank your behind some time?
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
That's because you don't know the difference between your fantasies and reality.
Unfortunately I do. That's why I said IF I had a choice.
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.
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.
Good post and good advice. I agree with you 100%.
Outstanding post, I couldn't agree more. I wish people would use less emotion and more reason when getting behind causes.
Thanks. It's unfortunate that for many in online communities, there is no appreciation of the difference between knowing the law and liking it. I hate much of the law, hate much of the judicial system, and know better than anyone how often it leads not to justice, but to injustice. No one knows better than me that money talks and bullshit walks in the law. If the law is on one side and the money is on the other, bet on the money, not the law. Sad, but true.
This is probably a good time to change the thread title to "Tax Lawyers Unite".
Our tax laws need major overhaul, and that means gaining popular support for an idea. We will never change it by having tax protestors fall on their swords, and really, no good is accomplished by their sacrificing themselves on the altar of big government. A constitutional amendment is one way I think the people could replace the income tax with a fairer tax system. I will always favor the legitimate paths of resistance, however lengthy and laborious they may be.
You've gotten a thousand dollars worth of tax advice. Free. You won't take it, though, will you?
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.
Thanks. In a year you can send me a bill saying "this bill is one year old" and I'll send you a birthday card. And since you're an expert on tax code, it shouldn't have been all that difficult for you to pull up the clause where it states "who must file". You didn't do that, though, did you? But I should take your advice?
You argue like a teenager, so I treat you like one.
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.
Argue? Me? You said your advice was worth a thousand dollars and I want you to earn it. Show us the code ... who must file?
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.
Hehehe.........you are one funny dude. Have you tried out for the latest commedian reality show or sumthin? Whatever would possess you to think I have any like or respect for the two dumb sonsabitches whom you think are Murder, Inc., or whatever? What planet do you live on? I was against the bushes and cheneys before you were ever born, sonny. With that said, I call a spade a spade........a jerk is a jerk, a lyin sonofabitch is a lying sonofabitch....I don't care about party, nor tax status. Anything else ya wanna complain, or should I say, whine about? Or tack a label on or call a name? Have at it..... If you think you have a reason to doubt me, check with chrissie-- she's known me for quite a few years now, as has loddy.
Quibblin' over the Browns and their well-intentioned misadventures is a sideshow to the more important emerging fascist state. I just don't agree with Ed Brown being a jerk. Hell He's going to prison while the pricks are having parties and planning their retirement in Paraguay. He at least did something. Naive, too-trusting, not saavy enough, OK. A jerk? I can't in good conscience allow someone who at least did something to be called a jerk unopposed.
No. They've brought it to the attention of some. That's a helluva lot more than what most are doing.
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.
Get your jollies on with your boyfriend, weirdo. As to my lawyer experience, I know enough to have a well-connected one. And I've seen blatant disregard for the law in many a courtroom with more than a few corrupt judges. Lawyers ain't all that respectable, in my experience.
Sounds a bit like this thread.
Sounds a bit like this thread. Sleeper agents, they're here, they're everywhere.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
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.
Actually, I think most are really ham-handed and very obvious. But a few are good, the ones you're never quite sure about.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
Yeah, and I forgot to mention Liberty Forum.
Everyone take a deep breath, or two, and try and remember why most of us are here. For me, it's to read the breaking news of the world, the weird, and interesting information that other members post. Let's try to be civil to one another, but if that's not possible, there is a Bozo Filter, and an Ignore Thread filter at our disposal. We have enough known enemies of freedom, without making enemies of those who should be our friends and allies. imo Peace all.
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.
Thanks Lodwick. I'll vote for him in the primary (in NH), I honestly don't see much of another choice. To be honest, I'm a bit disheartened with the state of this nation. There was a time I considered myself a 'broken glass republican' today I'm a Capital L libertarian, although the party itself is in dire need of major direction. It needs to learn the art of winning people to their side and being focused.
I think where disruptive trolls are not allowed, it becomes more sly.
Ron Paul for President - Join a Ron Paul Meetup group today!
I guess it all depends on who determines who is being a disruptive troll. Personally I detest banning, even of those who probably richly deserve it.
angle, we could banter back and forth all day about it....and get nowhere. You are more impressed that the fella did 'something'--anything, it seems--while I'm not impressed at all that he would be willing to give up all he's worked for all his life INCLUDING his family and family life. Ed's not a spring chicken, nor is Elaine, and to think of coming out of prison and trying to start life anew at that late time isn't something most people would think was very smart. I could have called him a whole lot worse--in fact, I typed several different words, before I erased again and settled on just plain and simple 'jerk'. He isn't dumb in the sense of lack of intelligence. He is dumb in the sense of throwing it all away rather than realizing he can't fight the system and then compounding it with the stupid statements made on a radio program or in news outlets or whatever. He doesn't have enough $$$$$$$$ to wait out the gubmint, nor enough lawyers to make any sort of convincing case in a court of law. Perhaps you're right........and I should have just called the old boy a gambler. AFter all, he gambled that he could do it and get away with it; he gambled he could win in court; he gambled that he could outlast them hole up in his 'hilltop fortress/compound/whatever'; he gambled that he and Elaine could just finish life all hunky dory. About the only thing I could possibly concede in that last scenario is that all of this is a sham; that they wound up getting secret accounts overseas somewhere; and that once they serve their time in prison, they can just take off and go live there and laugh at the system on the million or two that they stuffed away. On all other parts of the scenario, he gambled and he LOST.
Oh, Jim.......there's no problem......I only meant that you and Chrissie are both people who can attest to how much I *puke* 'love' the bastard in chief. Hell, I've even banned myself for language used as it regards him. It just struck me funny that angle would even bring up the liar in chief and vice liar in chief as though I have in any life said anything good or positive about those two...as though somehow I was for 'them' and again the Browns.
.. his ride was prior to the battles of Concord and Lexington.. and the colonists were ready to fight.. so.. quite a bit different
I think it's easily apparent that Ed Brown was, for all intents and purposes, advocating a violent revolution, and that revolutions are either construed as valiant or stupid, depending solely on whether they're successful or not. Since it's apparent that Ed Brown will not succeed (some political figures have risen again after prison), he'll get the stupid label regardless of whether he was brave or not. Wars are hell and always have been.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Then what are the volumes upon volumes of revised statutes doing in all the law libraries? I'd say cherry picking the law is somebody's favorite passtime. And then there's precedent setting, which knows no cherry picking bounds.
That's possible, but he isn't in jail for advocating revolution. Well, at least not yet. He's there for refusing to pay the piper. The only political figure I can think of who took on the IRS was Rep. George Hanson and believe me, he barely survived their loving attention, much less rose again. Oh, and then there's Traficant, still languishing behind bars for telling it like it is. So who rose from the ashes?
The problem with the LP is that it's next to impossible to organize a bunch of people who are so devoted to non-conformity, which libertarians are. It's the people who believe life should be regulated and controlled that organize much better. Makes me think that the deck is stacked against freedom lovers regardless of the political machine being run.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
I'll concede that RS. When everything's illegal everyone's a criminal, I know the drill. Tax evasion is what we're talking about here with this case. He paid money on some income and hid a large chunk of it to avoid the tax, that's what he was convicted on. It was only as a last stitch effort he attached himself to an already established movement. I believe there are many groups which are taking on the latest and greatest expansion of government. Winning small battles but not the war on rights. At this point I'll join any legitimate cause that's taking on the big brother out of control infringements.
Makes me think that the deck is stacked against freedom lovers regardless of the political machine being run. A post full of wisdom! You've hit the nail on the head. So what should we do?
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. The issue here is one of perception. You, like the majority of the vested, appear to want to believe that the "rules" still have any meaning in the various socially accepted arenas. There have been a few victories in those arenas lately, but I find it hard to believe that it will be allowed to continue. Life is more complicated than simple thoughts and simple homilies. We can all do better than condescension. I posted the Goldwater snippet, written by Karl Hess, for a reason. Here's the full quote: "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." BTW, wasn't Paul Revere a good buddy of Al Hamilton's?
Read New History So WHY did they not take as many of the jackboots with them as possible and begin ARII? Do they not know they will die in prison? Something FUBAR is amiss. No rational person could take the prison option at their ages, especially unjustly.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition If he suggested the judges and kin would pay for his incarceration, then I'd consider them revolutionary fightin' words. I'm not up on the details of what the Browns were convicted of. I assumed it was willful failure. If they filed false documents..... well, what difference does it make in substance? Matters to the sentencing guidelines but not much else. There are patriots that stand on principle, and there are those fake ones that are just looking to have more money. But there is some gray area between those two as it's not wrong to be jealous for money you've rightly earned. If it's yours, then it's yours. Who are we to blame someone for the method they choose to keep what's rightly their own? Sure, Ed may face more charges, perhaps enough to ensure he's never a free man again. Then again if Ed realizes that, he may attempt suicide, which would be a political victory for him. The feds might see value in leaving him hope of one day being free again and choose not to prosecute him further. Mandela. I recall mention of someone else who ran for president from prison. I think that was in Europe but I don't recall the name. I think he won, also. In this country, I can't think of any, though we've only had such opportunities for the past 50-60 years since before that our system was reasonably decent and didn't have political prisoners, so far as I know.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
I believe there are many groups which are taking on the latest and greatest expansion of government. Winning small battles but not the war on rights. At this point I'll join any legitimate cause that's taking on the big brother out of control infringements. I'd be willing to bet there isn't one out of a hundred people who couldn't be convicted for evasion if the taxman really wanted to make mincemeat of them. Figures lie and liars make figures. Anyway, ya know what its like to be smack dab in the middle of doing something and suddenly discovering that whatever it is you're doing is self-destructive and stupid? I don't know, maybe you'd take a page out of someone else's book who seems to have a better plan. Or maybe you'd keep right on doing the self- destructive stupid chit because there are risks involved in that other plan. Its a personal choice. I don't see many groups winning small battles .. granted there are a few. I hear many more talking ... and talking .... and talking about it.
Sadly, I have no idea. Very sadly. But if the system can't be saved, the next best thing is to do what you can to protect yourself. (Did I mention I'm in Ecuador now?)
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
I think the initial part of the trial went according to the prosecutor's plan until the Brown's figured out it was a kangaroo court. From what I can gather, the real heavy fightin' words didn't start coming out until sometime after that point. Ah, Mandela. You're right. I was only thinking of the US. Maybe SA jails are less brutal than ours. Think how easily the gray areas could be removed by allowing people to keep their earnings.
Michael Herzog related a story today on something that happened when he and John Stadtmiller took Randy Weaver up to the Brown's home. A Good Morning America producer wanted Ed to appear on that show. The show's policy for interviews even if you're president (according to this producer) is to limit the amount of time for an interview. In his case, it probably would have been 5 mins max. Ed refused to do the interview if they wouldn't give him 30 mins. Michael asked him to please consider the number of viewers he would reach and even offered to help him write key points that he thought would have been important. Ed wouldn't even consider it. Apparently, it's his way or the highway. If he had done this, it would have changed the entire course of events, imo.
You're the wisest man I've heard today.
Read New History i don't know why they did a lot of the things they did. read my post prior to this.
He was like that with EVERY media request. I implored him to talk to the media! He didn't or wouldn't understand that any lamestream publicity is good for him, even if they do a hit piece. It was a hit piece that got me interested in the case.
Dumber people than me have done it.
But I think the majority of patriots who have given interviews have regretted it. They edit them down and demonize them. I think the wisest rule is only live interviews that cannot be edited. Would the GMA interview been live?
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Ecuador is no tax paradise. I don't think there is one though Uruguay might come close. But the nice thing about Ecuador is there at least aren't phony lines about our having a bill of rights. If you have money, you can get what you want done, whether inside or outside the courts. In that respect, you can at least be sure what the rules are.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Time for some Salmon news... just for a nice break. With the way that time is going by, you may have to go back a couple'hundred years now... Thank you.
A consumption tax is constitutional as long as it doesn't invade the privacy of the purchaser by attempting to require government I.D. to track the purchases for some reason or another, such as if a limit were set according to income or wage level by which a cut-off would take place. The reason a consumption tax is legit is because one could decide not to make the purchase if one didn't want to pay the tax.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
Nice - I had to re-apply for a voter card after I learned that Dr.Paul would be running.
Cool. With all that's going, what we don't need are more "problems." I'm too old, too tired, and too pissed, to deal with them. ;-)
You and I deal in the reality of America today, not what we wish it would be. 1st, you're talking to real "people" with questions, misperceptions and in most cases much angst direcly related to conditions currently existing in America that appear inconsistent with the original intent upon which the country was established. I don't think it necessary to elaborate on each separate issue instantly, but people taking issue with current existing conditions such as the private issuance of fiat currency and the associated cancerous out growths ie., "national debt", income tax, IRS Gestapo and a great multitude of parasitic lawyers, need not be humiliated. Viewing the preceeding commentary on this thread does in fact give me the impression of a drunken bar room argument between slobbering shit-faced patrons. Your ego driven remarks indicate a self-inflicted elitist opinion of yourself that even if justified serves no purpose. Earlier, I mentioned a personal belief that underlies my choice to abstain from any governmental or corporate relationships that might by their existence infer my acceptance of them or status as a member/participant. You replied in an unnecessarily arrogant fashion by referencing biblical authors as goat herders. My comments weren't made in an attempt to persuade anyone else that they take up the goat herders handbook as a reliance defense, my remarks simply let others know that withdrawal from the system is a serious matter that demands more committment than a whimsical interlude created at a patriot meeting. People from all walks of life have in some way or another worked to destroy the favorable conditions intended for this country after the revolutionary war for "independence". I don't think I'd get much argument here, or anywhere in this galaxy for that matter, that attorneys have been "the" most corrosive element contributing to our immediate unacceptable conditions. Lawyers are toadies that rely upon a system of institutionalized grief that results from laws they legislate then litigate. The more lawyers the more litigation. I don't know what happens to well intentioned law students that become callous assholes by the time they earn their degree (or choose a respectable profession), but having had more than ample contact with lawyers and judges I can fairly attest to their mediocrity in most instances. Not only are they made callous in law school, they are convinced, commanded or somehow cowed into submission and acceptance of the status quo. With the current opinion of the President and the Congress more negative than at any other time in history, privacy eliminated, wars concocted, citizens tasered, grannys searched, police state tactics, torture, perverted, bribe taking, lawyer politicians, devaluation/debauchery of the currency ... it's not at all unnatural that people would seek solutions. Some might even look back in time trying to determine where we may have gone wrong or taken a position that time has demonstrated to have been a mistake. That is the reality of America today. Another smart-assed, smart mouthed, sharp tongued lawyer is the last thing any of us or the country really needs. You follow an ancient text written by goatherders or stolen from Mesopotamia pagans, while speaking of others being brainwashed by tales told them since childhood. Proving anything about the goat herders might be difficult but the fact that we've been brainwashed and propagandized into a herd mentality is obvious to anyone near a mail box on April 15th, or anyone witnessing 6 and 7 year old children "PLEDGING ALLEGIANCE" to a flag (good little serfs), High School graduates subject to laws that they haven't been taught anything about ... Mr. Revere, if its brown, and warm, steaming, and looks like shit and smells like shit ... it probably is shit, or on second thought it might just be a lawyer.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
If he had done this, it would have changed the entire course of events, imo. A Good Morning America producer...well there's a sure bet Ed would have gotten a fair shake, not. With the content filters on the media, how can you possibly be so naive as to come to this conclusion. Look what happened to Rosie.
He laid it on the line though, didn't he? Maybe Ed wasn't too bright about the reality of a possible revolution. Nonetheless, he made a stand. More than 99.99% of the rest of the Umercun peepl.
I'm not going to waste my time reading another installment of your mad rantings, so I didn't read this latest pile you've dumped on the thread. You're a religious nut. Bug someone who values your opinion. I don't.
Standing ovation for your contributions to this thread, noone. The fact that those puffed up in their own "wisdom" don't believe in God, doesn't hinder His plans to bring their "wisdom" to nought.....and as you well know, lawyers were some of the ones He saw coming 2,000 years ago, and singled out for "Woe" [Luke 11]].
Riiiight. The same God who said Jews were his chosen people? You're worshipping a book full of myths, half truths, and stolen stories.
I agree with you, angle....and as of a few moments ago, he STILL was not listed as being at any prison, and therefore is most likely being given the "diesel therapy", or is dead. 9. EDWARD BROWN 03923-049 65 White M 04-30-2012 NOT IN BOP CUSTODY www.bop.gov/iloc2/LocateInmate.jsp [I think it was Eoghan who provided the link]
yes...once upon a time.... www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Isa/65/15.html You're worshipping a book full of myths, half truths, and stolen stories. nope...I worship the God of truth, not the father of lies.
Right. Your imaginary buddy agrees with you about everything. Isn't that special?
mock me all you want....God is not mocked....as you will find out to your horror one day.
I agree w/your comments on this thread rowdee, and the level of stupidity among most Americans is actually the source of comedy on the late night Leno's and such. I have to laugh at those of well meaning folks who still think educating them is the answer. Anne Sullivan had an easier time with Helen Keller.
I talk to God every day, and he tells me you're full of shit.
then your god must be the father of lies.
Church: where one inbred retard tells other inbred retards stories they all share as mass delusions. Where's your god now, Moses?!
For those who wish to know how the law looks at the tax protester issues, here is a decent reference, which I encourage you to consult. Most of the material promoted by tax protesters is wrong. It's one part fantasy, one part stupidity, and one part wishful thinking. http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html Wishing the tax laws were not there is not the same as making them go away. I hope you will not listen to tax protester nonsense and will take the Brown's experience as a lesson. For the benefit of those who only take their direction from God, I'll quote Jesus. Those who have ears, let them hear.
"gift" from the delusional jews.... www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Isa/Isa066.html#4 ...and their god.... www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rev/Rev020.html#8 Where's your god now, Moses?! ...coming...
For the benefit of those who only take their direction from God, I'll quote Jesus. Those who have ears, let them hear. www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mar/Mar004.html#23 www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Mar/4/23.html Mat 13:9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear. Mat 13:10 ¶ And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. Mat 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: Mat 13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Mat 13:16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. Mat 13:17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous [men] have desired to see [those things] which ye see, and have not seen [them]; and to hear [those things] which ye hear, and have not heard [them]. Mat 13:18 ¶ Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.......
http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html Wishing the tax laws were not there is not the same as making them go away. I hope you will not listen to tax protester nonsense and will take the Brown's experience as a lesson. For the benefit of those who only take their direction from God, I'll quote Jesus. Those who have ears, let them hear. But, more filers than non filers are prosecuted. And if you file and the IRS claims you lied that's felony evasion, but not filing (for an ordinary schmoe) is at worst a misdemeanor, and there always lots of chances to pay up if one chickens out. So, why risk A) a better chance of prosecution and B) a felony charge by filing when its much safer to avoid filing altogether? And, for young people who've never filed, well, if they never do and if the IRS/DOJ can't prove they even know how to then criminal charges are completely out of the question! And, it doesn't matter if so called tax protesters' understanding of the law is correct. all that matters is, it's possible to insulate yourself from seizures and liens and then live your life while not participating in the April Fools' Day (the 15th) ritual at all! The IRS threatened me 15 years ago and I'm still waiting for them to make good on the threat! If I allowed fear mongers to keep me from taking a stand I'd have been bled dry by now and still run a risk of prosecution if I pissed off some politician and he or she sent the IRS to silence me. And, with millions of pages of tax law there's no way anyone can be sure that they are in compliance unless they take no deductions and pay the max, and who can afford that? (That's the whole idea. As one revenoor testified, "The income tax isn't about raising revenue. It's about people control!") And, that's where you thoroughly compromised Judas goats come in to play! Now, get out there and tell those folks some realllly scary stories, okay? I l'l laugh my ass off when I think of you staying up late scribbling numbers and looking for ways to claim questionable "deductions", and paying some accountant to packrat receipts for you, then you driving to the post office and fighting to get in the queue and drop your return in the mailbox before the midnight "deadline"! BWAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH! Now, make sure you pay your taxes! BWAAAAAAAHHHHH!
"BOYCOTT AIR TRAVEL! LET'S PUT THOSE TSA IDIOTS ON THE UNEMPLOYMENT LINE!
I'm not going to help the government do its job, so I'm not going to dissect your comments. Let's just say I sincerely wish you good luck with that.
I have been in touch with Margot Katz of the Concord Monitor and have asked her to look into the whereabouts of Ed. She has responded that she will have an article in the Concord Monitor on this very subject tomorrow. It should be viewable on their website at http://www.concordmonitor.com/ She did not wish to disclose what she knows at this time.
Dumber people than me have done it.
Thank you hairy one.
Thanks for the follow-up.
Anytime fellas. Even if she has no real info, the fact that an article is written about it will work in Ed's favor in seeing to it that he is not, in fact, being Dieseled.
Dumber people than me have done it.
thanks, Critter.
The longer this continues, the more I worry about Mr.Brown's well-being.
On the "To" line, a comma is needed after the last name if you ping like that or system assumes "Pinguinite and the rest ..." is one big name. It didn't register for me. Just fyi... Thanks for the update.
Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec
Who are the Browns?
Exactly. With the suspension of habeas corpus, "don't ask, don't tell" applies to citizens who are disappeared by the government.
Thanks. Please keep me pinged.
Read New History The exact question I was asked by a "progressive" acquaintance when I mentioned them today.
Read New History here's the closet thing to Jesus in recent times >
I don't have video...coming from you, it's probably blasphemous anyway.
Armed Feds Question Bloggers In Brown Case Manhunt ensues as Marshals search for alleged "hit list" EXCERPT Hampton questioned the Feds on why they chose to visit the home of a blogger who has never advocated violence in light of a new report criticizing marshals for their failure to protect federal judges and investigate genuine threats of violence against them. END
Blog author receives uninvited guests from the gov EXCERPT: "Satire became reality Friday afternoon when half a dozen armed federal agents wearing body armor showed up at this author’s home and detained everyone in the house for nearly 90 minutes to determine who might pose a threat to the government." END
Atheism is the religion of the spiritually blind. Don't be too harsh, Paul's Handicapped !!!!!
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
this is NUTS and sure does not bode well for Ed.
.. as I said.. I think he was foolish .. and I still do.. if he believed that his 'stand' was going to do anything other than cause him a world of trouble .. if he believed it would do otherwise for he and his family..he was sorely mistaken obviously.
Well then, perhaps we should all just sit on our asses while having this country stolen out from underneath those same asses rather than risk being foolish. I'm saying the guy deserves some credit for making a stand against tyranny, more than most here can claim. If Paul Revere was shot to death before he put out the word, perhaps you would consider him foolish as well.
No, Sparky. You and your blind buddy are the guys spoken of in the Bible - the blind who lead the blind and they both fall in the ditch. You are very typical, however, of your brand of "Christian." You're all about your ancient stories and transformed pagan rituals. You worship your own ignorance and idiocy, and call it God's will. You're really no different than the Taliban and the retards who follow them. You're everything Jesus preached against, the antithesis of his views and teachings.
Imagine there's no heaven ....
...for you :)
Thank you...I didn't see this yesterday. It has been rumored that some militant supporters of the Browns have threatened revenge attacks. We would like to remind those people that their actions are completely abhorrent and will only bring untold misery to legitimate peaceful supporters of the Browns who are highlighting the case as part of a process of educating the public about the IRS and the illegal income tax. I wouldn't be surprised if federal agents provocateur are planning to do just that....bring untold misery...
I wouldn't be terribly surprised if the threats of revenge attacks were MADE by agents provocateur.
good point.
Blog author receives uninvited guests from the gov I'm reading this one now. Did you catch this comment??? "...I am not too surprised that your friend received that visit from the D.O.P. I have never been visited, but when I still blogged over at Daily Kos, My diaries were shut down for sedition by the Government. They were in no way close to seditious. They just spoke out about the corrupt Bush administration, and called to bring it down...... americanbadass607 said this on October 9, 2007 at 6:18 am" Now I REALLY wonder where BTP Holdings is....what with him being very vocal about needing more rope for the fascist creeps.
Hindsight is usually 20/20 ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montan a_Freemen
#2. To: JiminyC (#1)
#3. To: JiminyC (#0)
#4. To: JiminyC (#1)
Remember what happened to Gordon Kahl.
#5. To: JiminyC (#1)
questforfairtrialinconcor...stems-are-giving-way.html
"Yes, but is this good for Jews?"
#6. To: lodwick (#3)
Normally gov loves to show their captives doing the perp-walk all chained up.
#7. To: RidinShotgun (#4)
And all we can do is stand around wringing our hands.
#8. To: Eoghan (#5)
Sorry. No Inmate Named EDWARD LEWIS BROWN Age: 65 Race: White Sex: Male found.
#9. To: JiminyC, christine (#0)
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#10. To: RidinShotgun, IndieTx, JiminyC, Eoghan (#4)
One major difference between the Browns and Gordon Kahl is that Kahl didn't tie himself down to a "compound" where fake patriots could waltz in and surround him.
#11. To: christine. the thread (#10)
#12. To: RidinShotgun (#4)
Its fair to assume the Browns have been separated and could possibly be undergoing diesel therapy, being moved from place to place so they can't be located by their supporters.
#13. To: Mekons4 (#12)
#14. To: JiminyC (#0)
#15. To: Jethro Tull. everyone (#14)
If I were making their income I'd have hired a crackerjack CPA and paid as least tribute as possible to the authorities and gone on with my life.
#16. To: rowdee (#13)
#17. To: Jethro Tull (#14)
If I were making their income I'd have hired a crackerjack CPA and paid as least tribute as possible to the authorities and gone on with my life.
#18. To: Mekons4 (#12)
At least they're in jail in New Hampshire...the jails are kinda crude, but they're not likely to be mistreated. I had cops and jailers making phone calls to friends to let them know where I was.
#19. To: lodwick (#11)
#20. To: christine (#19)
in all the pics and video i saw, he had a piece on his hip.
#21. To: Jethro Tull (#14)
God bless him and his wife but they made a mess of what remains of their life.
#22. To: Jethro Tull (#14)
#23. To: angle (#22)
#24. To: christine (#23)
#25. To: angle (#22)
(Edited)
They have more conviction and courage in their little fingertip than you'll ever hope to have.
#26. To: Zipporah (#24)
Agreed.. now what? What they've worked for all their lives will be gone.. done ..finished. All the time and money wasted for what was a losing proposition from the start.. there are battles and there are battles this isnt one that was winnable IMO.
#27. To: Paul Revere (#26)
What we are seeing in cases such as this is the same thing ancient tyrants did when they had petty lords in far off regions ignoring their demands for tribute: They lay siege on the recalcitrant, they eventually go in, seize the recalcitrant, and promptly impale him for all to see. They seize all his property, and cast forever his memory as an enemy of the state.
#28. To: Paul Revere (#26)
These two will never see the light of day again, sadly.
#29. To: Pinguinite (#17)
There are tons of people who do this that we never hear about.
#30. To: Jethro Tull. everyone (#28)
I agree, and since not a soul except a few on scattered internet forums know of their troubles, their effort was a waste.
#31. To: Zipporah (#27)
IMO it was a fool's mission..
#32. To: Jethro Tull (#25)
Mr. Brown, prior to his battle w/the IRS, was a multi millionaire.
#33. To: christine (#23)
#34. To: Mekons4, JiminyC (#12)
At least they're in jail in New Hampshire..
#35. To: lodwick (#11)
#36. To: Critter (#35)
#37. To: christine (#10)
i'll NEVER understand why they did this. they had to have known this is the MO of the feds.
#38. To: angle (#31)
My god, so was Paul freakin Revere's.
#39. To: RidinShotgun, christine, all (#37)
#40. To: Jethro Tull (#38)
(Edited)
No, Revere had an army of patriots behind him and he/they fired a shot. We don't, hence a useless effort.
#41. To: Critter (#39)
Ed alienated a lot of potential support. I know this from first hand experience with him.
#42. To: RidinShotgun (#41)
#43. To: RidinShotgun (#40)
#44. To: Jethro Tull (#29)
Here’s my best advice for anyone who gives a rip what I think; if you have assets, and choose to stay in America, pay the bastards the least amt. of $ you can get away with.
#45. To: Critter (#42)
I pray that my involvement in the beginning doesn't get me a 10 year bid. lol
#46. To: angle, Jethro Tull, christine (#22)
They have more conviction and courage in their little fingertip than you'll ever hope to have
#47. To: Jethro Tull (#43)
My point is all this founding rather nonsense is ancient history. What back then could be challenged, man to man, on even terms with muskets is now an absurd notion.
#48. To: Critter (#35)
When I visited Ed, he carried a 45 tucked in the back of his pants.
#49. To: christine (#48)
#50. To: angle (#33)
If anyone failed, it was us, the ones who knew and did nothing;
#51. To: RidinShotgun (#47)
#52. To: christine (#50)
#53. To: christine (#50)
i'm sorry that my husband and i started our fight with them. the lesson learned and learning
#54. To: Jethro Tull (#29)
If you have nothing,be my guest and test all these wild tax theories.
#55. To: Critter (#49)
(Edited)
Ed said way too much, taunted the feds way too much, and was way too lax in his security for my taste.
#56. To: all (#0)
(Edited)
#57. To: Paul Revere, thread (#56)
#58. To: noone222 (#57)
The guys on the other side of the equation play for keeps, they've shown themselves to be callous murdering thugs and to underestimate them is fatal.
#59. To: christine (#50)
#60. To: RidinShotgun (#47)
"For the support of this declaration, with firm reliance on the protection of the divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
#61. To: angle (#58)
#62. To: christine (#50)
#63. To: rowdee (#51)
IIRC, it was essentially debunked.
#64. To: RidinShotgun (#47)
#65. To: Paul Revere (#56)
However, when citizens openly challenge the government...
#66. To: angle (#60)
There are things more important than life.
#67. To: robin (#64)
#68. To: RidinShotgun (#47)
Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence?
#69. To: RidinShotgun (#63)
I just love it when somebody says something "was debunked" without telling us by whom it was debunked, or when, or giving any details of its debunking.
#70. To: rowdee (#51)
#71. To: Jethro Tull (#68)
The people in power today wouldn't be able to name a half dozen of these folks, never mind follow the blueprint they left us for a Republic.
#72. To: Japedo (#69)
Some are true and some false according to Snopes, I also remember it being said it wasn't all together true at the height of it's going around.
#73. To: noone222 (#57)
(Edited)
#74. To: RidinShotgun (#72)
How sad. They died in vain.
#75. To: JiminyC (#65)
#76. To: Japedo (#74)
Well legends have a ring of truth to them, but they are dressed up for a better sell to keep it going. I don't think there's anything wrong with that necessarily as it does serve as a reminder, It's just not all together true is all. I don't believe they died in vain.
#77. To: Paul Revere (#75)
"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."
#78. To: RidinShotgun (#76)
Actually, if you take a good look around at the direction this country has taken in the past three hundred years, you'll have to admit that they did, in fact, die in vain, regardless of whether or not you know their names and circumstances.
#79. To: RidinShotgun (#77)
(Edited)
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.
#80. To: Japedo (#78)
There's really no argument to anything you've stated here sadly other then the fact that they died in vain.
#81. To: Paul Revere (#79)
The answer to that threat is not asinine talk of violent overthrow of the government.
#82. To: RidinShotgun, Paul Revere (#80)
They would probably agree, however, that people who cheer the incarceration of the few who actively rebel against tyranny are too lazy and irresponsible to deserve freedom.
#83. To: RidinShotgun (#81)
Where have I suggested anything remotely resembling a violent overthrow of the government? How did the Browns act violently against the government?
#84. To: Japedo (#82)
#85. To: Japedo (#82)
#86. To: RidinShotgun (#81)
How did the Browns act violently against the government?
#87. To: Paul Revere (#83)
I was responding to a specific post, wherein there was mentioned the need for violent action.
#88. To: RidinShotgun (#87)
#89. To: Japedo (#86)
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.
#90. To: RidinShotgun (#71)
Its worse than that. Most of the rest of us couldn't name a half dozen of these folks, either. We've totally lost our roots, so we're withering and turning brown (in more ways than one.)
#91. To: Paul Revere (#88)
Nah, I've wasted enough time with you.
#92. To: Jethro Tull (#90)
#93. To: RidinShotgun (#91)
(Edited)
#94. To: RidinShotgun (#89)
"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."
#95. To: Japedo (#94)
#96. To: The thread (#94)
#97. To: RidinShotgun (#95)
At least it seems there were a few wolves in sheep's clothing hanging around the Browns.
#98. To: RidinShotgun (#95)
#99. To: lodwick (#96)
#100. To: Japedo (#98)
They have the source coming from Brown himself RS.
#101. To: christine (#97)
in light of how it ended, i'd say that's pretty a safe assumption.
#102. To: RidinShotgun (#63)
So are you saying these people didn't exist? Or that they just weren't harmed by the British? Are we supposed to believe the run-up to the revolution was sterile and passive? What?
#103. To: RidinShotgun (#100)
Ed was merely REPEATING what he'd been told by alleged supporters, who may or may not have been federal agents.
#104. To: Japedo (#70)
#105. To: rowdee (#102)
(Edited)
My respect for the Founders doesn't go to how they died, or by whose hand.
#106. To: Jethro Tull (#90)
For those of us who still cling to the past, I'd venture to say, presently, the towns of Concord and Lexington couldn't muster enough folks for a Sunday picnic never mind an anti-government militia. This beast system is safe as far as I can see.
#107. To: Japedo (#103)
But I promise you, long after I'm gone, they're going to seek out every one of you and your bloodline."
#108. To: rowdee. the thread (#106)
My brother hired a young man, 25 years of age, a couple of years back, that was from the Concord - Lexington area. He couldn't even tell my brother a thing about what happened there--all Pete could say was something like 'some important battle happened there, maybe a really big one'.
#109. To: Japedo (#103)
#110. To: RidinShotgun (#107)
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.
#111. To: Jethro Tull, Paul Revere (#68)
This isn't America and the people enforcing the rules have no rules.
#112. To: Japedo (#110)
I guess we'll all have to wait for evidence or lack there of in court after the charges are brought.
#113. To: rowdee (#109)
A real jerk.
#114. To: Paul Revere (#73)
#115. To: RidinShotgun (#112)
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?
#116. To: angle (#113)
jerk
.
#117. To: Japedo (#115)
#118. To: RidinShotgun (#117)
So again I ask, what trial? Do you think they're going to go after the genuine supporters? I suppose that could very well happen, but the Browns have already been convicted of breaking a law the feds were more interested in punishing than in producing any justification for.
#119. To: rowdee (#116)
#120. To: Japedo, RidingShotgun (#115)
They broke the law, went to court were found guilty.
#121. To: noone222 (#114)
(Edited)
You're right, I don't disagree with your original post in the least. I do disagree with several things in this latest post though, but am not interested in addressing them here. The point I'd like to make above all is that the system itself is never inconvenienced even when it is stampeding rough shod over innocent people that are trying to comply with a set of policies that the policy makers themselves are unable to comprehend.
#122. To: Japedo (#118)
#123. To: angle (#120)
#124. To: Paul Revere (#121)
The problem is that the public in general doesn't like the IRS or paying the income tax, but they also don't like it when someone else ignores the system they feel bound to follow. For this reason, tax protestors do not have widespread support. They have a very narrow vein of support, and that is only among those who understand the arguments made.
#125. To: Japedo (#103)
(Edited)
"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."
#126. To: RidinShotgun (#124)
#127. To: Paul Revere (#125)
I'm a lawyer, for Christ Sakes!
#128. To: RidinShotgun (#127)
#129. To: Paul Revere (#126)
Didn't I already tell you to blow me? Buzz off, I'm talking to people who understand words and sentences when they read them.
#130. To: Paul Revere (#125)
do so in the systems set up for it - the judicial and political systems
#131. To: Japedo (#123)
#132. To: angle (#130)
the corrupt rotten systems...riiiight.
#133. To: RidinShotgun (#127)
I'm a lawyer, for Christ Sakes!
#134. To: Paul Revere (#128)
Jesus was a myth. Sorry.
#135. To: angle (#133)
He's right, you're wrong, end of story. (sic)
#136. To: Japedo (#123)
#137. To: angle (#133)
(Edited)
Well, I guess he told you. You are not worthy to even post to him, let alone disagree with the opinion of a "lawyer". He's right, you're wrong, end of story. (sic)
#138. To: Paul Revere (#136)
You and I deal in the reality of America today, not what we wish it would be.
#139. To: RidinShotgun (#134)
If I had my choice of myths, I'd surely put lawyers in that catagory and make Santa real.
#140. To: Paul Revere (#139)
(Edited)
That's because you don't know the difference between your fantasies and reality.
#141. To: angle (#131)
blah blah blah blah
#142. To: Japedo (#141)
#143. To: Paul Revere (#142)
#144. To: Paul Revere (#136)
#145. To: scrapper2 (#143)
Good post and good advice. I agree with you 100%.
#146. To: Paul Revere, Japedo, scrapper2 (#142)
#147. To: Japedo (#144)
Outstanding post, I couldn't agree more. I wish people would use less emotion and more reason when getting behind causes.
#148. To: RidinShotgun (#146)
This is probably a good time to change the thread title to "Tax Lawyers Unite".
#149. To: RidinShotgun (#146)
#150. To: Paul Revere (#148)
#151. To: RidinShotgun (#150)
#152. To: Japedo (#149)
#153. To: Paul Revere (#151)
You argue like a teenager, so I treat you like one.
#154. To: RidinShotgun (#152)
#155. To: angle (#119)
Picking on Ed Brown whilst BushCheneyInc are murdering and stealing in the name of your country?
#156. To: rowdee, chritine, lodwick (#155)
check with chrissie-- she's known me for quite a few years now, as has loddy
#157. To: Japedo (#149)
They have harmed the cause more then helped it.
#158. To: Japedo (#154)
I suggest a well organized movement staying within the confines of the law and a non-violent approach.
#159. To: Paul Revere (#137)
Did some big bad lawyer spank your behind some time?
#160. To: Japedo (#154)
#161. To: RidinShotgun (#158)
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.
#162. To: angle, RidinShotgun (#161)
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.
#163. To: angle (#161)
Sounds a bit like this thread.
#164. To: RidinShotgun (#163)
#165. To: robin (#162)
(Edited)
#166. To: rowdee, angle, all (#155)
#167. To: robin (#164)
#168. To: lodwick (#160)
#169. To: RidinShotgun (#167)
#170. To: robin (#169)
I think where disruptive trolls are not allowed, it becomes more sly.
#171. To: angle (#156)
#172. To: lodwick, angle (#166)
#173. To: angle (#31)
My god, so was Paul freakin Revere's.
#174. To: Paul Revere, rowdee, all (#121)
#175. To: Japedo (#141)
The law isn't there to Cherry pick
#176. To: Pinguinite (#174)
I think it's easily apparent that Ed Brown was, for all intents and purposes, advocating a violent revolution,
#177. To: Japedo (#168)
today I'm a Capital L libertarian, although the party itself is in dire need of major direction. It needs to learn the art of winning people to their side and being focused.
#178. To: RidinShotgun (#175)
(Edited)
Then what are the volumes upon volumes of revised statutes doing in all the law libraries? I'd say cherry picking the law is somebody's favorite passtime. And then there's precedent setting, which knows no cherry picking bounds.
#179. To: Pinguinite (#177)
The problem with the LP is that it's next to impossible to organize a bunch of people who are so devoted to non-conformity, which libertarians are. It's the people who believe life should be regulated and controlled that organize much better.
#180. To: Paul Revere (#75)
"Abe Foxman, my good friend and partner." - John Negroponte
#181. To: christine (#23)
they are both in their 60s. the feds are going to pile more charges on them and they'll be lucky if they ever see each other again. as hard as this is to say, they'll probably die behind bars
"There is no 'legitimate' Corporation by virtue of it's very legal definition and purpose."
-- IndieTx
#182. To: RidinShotgun (#176)
That's possible, but he isn't in jail for advocating revolution. Well, at least not yet. He's there for refusing to pay the piper.
The only political figure I can think of who took on the IRS was Rep. George Hanson and believe me, he barely survived their loving attention, much less rose again. Oh, and then there's Traficant, still languishing behind bars for telling it like it is. So who rose from the ashes?
#183. To: Japedo (#178)
He paid money on some income and hid a large chunk of it to avoid the tax, that's what he was convicted on. It was only as a last stitch effort he attached himself to an already established movement.
#184. To: Japedo (#179)
A post full of wisdom! You've hit the nail on the head. So what should we do?
#185. To: Pinguinite (#182)
If he suggested the judges and kin would pay for his incarceration, then I'd consider them revolutionary fightin' words.
#186. To: angle, all (#111)
(Edited)
#187. To: Pinguinite (#184)
Did I mention I'm in Ecuador now?
"Abe Foxman, my good friend and partner." - John Negroponte
#188. To: IndieTX (#181)
#189. To: christine (#186)
Ed wouldn't even consider it. Apparently, it's his way or the highway. If he had done this, it would have changed the entire course of events, imo.
#190. To: christine (#186)
Ed wouldn't even consider it. Apparently, it's his way or the highway. If he had done this, it would have changed the entire course of events, imo.
#191. To: JiminyC (#187)
#192. To: rowdee (#171)
#193. To: Paul Revere (#121)
I think only by redirecting the populace away from the current system, and towards either a flat tax or a federal sales tax can we hope to end the current system.
#194. To: Japedo (#168)
#195. To: rowdee (#172)
Oh, Jim.......there's no problem.....
#196. To: Paul Revere (#136)
(Edited)
We are talking to people who think the law of the land is whatever misperception they have about what someone intended 100 years ago, or 220 years ago. Some guy thinks he knows what the founding fathers intended, and he's confident that interpretation is the one. Some guy thinks he knows what the income tax amendment means.
#197. To: christine (#186)
#198. To: Zipporah (#173)
.. his ride was prior to the battles of Concord and Lexington.. and the colonists were ready to fight.. so.. quite a bit different
#199. To: noone222 (#196)
(Edited)
#200. To: noone222 (#196)
#201. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#200)
(Edited)
#202. To: angle (#198)
he made a stand. More than 99.99% of the rest of the Umercun peepl.
#203. To: Paul Revere (#201)
The same God who said Jews were his chosen people?
#204. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#203)
(Edited)
#205. To: Paul Revere (#204)
#206. To: rowdee (#106)
#207. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#205)
#208. To: Paul Revere (#207)
#209. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#208)
(Edited)
#210. To: All (#209)
#211. To: Paul Revere (#209)
Church: where one inbred retard tells other inbred retards stories they all share as mass delusions.
#212. To: Paul Revere (#210)
#213. To: Paul Revere, Jethro Tull, Tauzero, christine (#210)
For those who wish to know how the law looks at the tax protester issues, here is a decent reference, which I encourage you to consult. Most of the material promoted by tax protesters is wrong. It's one part fantasy, one part stupidity, and one part wishful thinking.
#214. To: HOUNDDAWG (#213)
#215. To: JiminyC, Paul Revere, HOUNDDAWG, christine, lodwick, noone222, Pinguinite and the rest of you folks interested... (#0)
#216. To: Critter (#215)
#217. To: Critter (#215)
#218. To: lodwick, Fred Mertz (#217)
#219. To: Critter (#215)
#220. To: Critter. all (#218)
#221. To: Critter (#215)
noone222, Pinguinite and the rest
#222. To: JiminyC (#0)
#223. To: exdem2000 (#222)
Who are the Browns?
#224. To: Critter (#215)
"Abe Foxman, my good friend and partner." - John Negroponte
#225. To: exdem2000 (#222)
Who are the Browns?
"Abe Foxman, my good friend and partner." - John Negroponte
#226. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#211)
(Edited)
#227. To: Paul Revere (#226)
#228. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#202)
www.prisonplanet.com/arti...007/091007_armed_feds.htm
#229. To: All (#228)
ladyliberty.wordpress.com...ited-guests-from-the-gov/
#230. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#227)
#231. To: angle (#228)
Hampton questioned the Feds on why they chose to visit the home of a blogger who has never advocated violence in light of a new report criticizing marshals for their failure to protect federal judges and investigate genuine threats of violence against them.
#232. To: angle (#198)
He laid it on the line though, didn't he? Maybe Ed wasn't too bright about the reality of a possible revolution. Nonetheless, he made a stand. More than 99.99% of the rest of the Umercun peepl.
#233. To: Zipporah (#232)
I think he was foolish .. and I still do.. if he believed that his 'stand' was going to do anything other than cause him a world of trouble .. if he believed it would do otherwise for he and his family
#234. To: noone222 (#230)
(Edited)
Atheism is the religion of the spiritually blind. Don't be too harsh, Paul's Handicapped !!!!!
#235. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#227)
#236. To: Paul Revere (#235)
#237. To: angle (#228)
#238. To: AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt (#237)
#239. To: RidinShotgun (#238)
#240. To: angle (#229)
http://ladyliberty.wordpress.com...ited-guests-from-the-gov/
#241. To: Zipporah (#232)
.. as I said.. I think he was foolish .. and I still do.. if he believed that his 'stand' was going to do anything other than cause him a world of trouble .. if he believed it would do otherwise for he and his family..he was sorely mistaken obviously.
There are worse things than prison or even death. Once we become convinced that cowering to dictatorial authority is tolerable we are slaves, our lives have little value, and men become pussies kissing the asses of jailor retards and political thugs. [As for me, give me liberty or give me death ... Patrick Henry] If not for a few men unable to live on their knees, we wouldn't have enjoyed the temporary luxury of freedom we today see disintegrating rapidly.
It's understandable that a woman might feel like you do Zip, but not a man.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#242. To: Paul Revere (#234) (Edited)
Up to this point I have refrained from religious or scriptural rebuttal to your irrational atheistic ranting in an effort to keep the discourse more secular, where you might stand a chance. I'm "not" a lawyer. (And you probably aren't either). Since you introduced the statement above I'll address it. Luke 11:46 ... And he said, Woe unto you also, [ye] lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers Luke 11:52 ... Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Luke 7:30 ... But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, Whether one actually believes the verses quoted above isn't the relevant point, the relevant point is that you (if you are actually a lawyer) are the antithesis of the teachings of Jesus. Frankly, your statement prevents me from believing that anyone capable of making such a ridiculous outburst could be a lawyer unless the standards of bar exams have been dramatically reduced in an attempt to allow the mentally impaired a law degree. This could very well explain the horrible condition of the judicial system and the reason todays lawyers simply do what the judge tells them to do. Most of the lawyers I've met should be greeters at Wal-Mart if placed where their talents suit the occupation. For your edification Mr.(self)Revered: Seven Woes: [Specific to lawyers]. Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. "Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them 'Rabbi.' "But you are not to be called 'Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called 'teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ. The greatest among you will be your servant. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. "Woe to you, blind guides! You say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.' You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? You also say, 'If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.' You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? Therefore, he who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And he who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. And he who swears by heaven swears by God's throne and by the one who sits on it. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self- indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, 'If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.' So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers! "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation. Some might question the divinity of Christ ... few would question his accuracy in appraising lawyers.
No, Sparky. You and your blind buddy are the guys spoken of in the Bible - the blind who lead the blind and they both fall in the ditch.
You're everything Jesus preached against, the antithesis of his views and teachings.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#243. To: noone222 (#242) (Edited)
You are completely clueless. Jesus preached against YOU. YOU'RE the guy he was talking about, but you're too stupid to realize it. YOU'RE the guy who thinks he's following THE LAW and preaching THE LAW. Jesus was not talking of civil or criminal Law. He was talking about Religious Law. The quotes you lifted are where Jesus was referring to guys LIKE YOU who worship their own devotion to religious ritual. He wasn't talking about lawyers. They didn't have lawyers. They had religious nuts like you who thought they were getting their signals from God. Your post is a TESTAMENT to your complete lack of understanding of anything that Jesus said. You're full of phony righteousness and don't have a clue what Jesus was saying. If Jesus comes back, you'll be one of the first to get a beating from him, because you claim to represent him and you are nothing like the person he applauded. You have none of the qualities Jesus held or admired, not a single one. You're a petty, ignorant, unintelligent, knee-jerk religious person who doesn't have a spiritual bone in his whole body, unless it's the one connected to the priest or preacher who last bent you over. You ARE the Pharisee, dumbass.
#244. To: Paul Revere (#243)
Your post is a TESTAMENT to your complete lack of understanding of anything that Jesus said. You're full of phony righteousness and don't have a clue what Jesus was saying. If Jesus comes back, you'll be one of the first to get a beating from him, because you claim to represent him and you are nothing like the person he applauded. You have none of the qualities Jesus held or admired, not a single one. You're a petty, ignorant, unintelligent, knee-jerk religion person who doesn't have spiritual bone in his whole body, unless it's the one connected to the priest or preacher who last bent you over. You ARE the Pharisee, dumbass. Calm yourself, you're appearing frazzled.
You are completely clueless. Jesus preached against YOU. YOU'RE the guy he was talking about, but you're too stupid to realize it. YOU'RE the guy who thinks he's following THE LAW and preaching THE LAW, as Jesus spoke of it. He was referring to guys like you who worship their own devotion to religious ritual, not lawyers.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#245. To: noone222 (#244) (Edited)
I'm appearing frazzled, Church Lady? You're the guy pulling verses out of his ass, verses you don't even understand. You'd better pray for forgiveness, and ask me to forgive you for your sins. If you die in your current sinful state, it's straight to hell for you.
#246. To: noone222 (#241) (Edited)
Wrong. Only a man who has never had be a man could agree with your lame notions of manhood. Have you ever served in the military? I'm guessing not. You strike me as a lifelong coward, like Bush, and equally devoted to religiosity and false pride.
It's understandable that a woman might feel like you do Zip, but not a man.
#247. To: Paul Revere (#246)
You really have your panties in a wad this morning. Try to relax, snookums. I served in Vietnam, 37ARRS [Air Rescue and Recovery Squadron - Da Nang]. You can't seem to get anything right, for such an intellectual.
Only a man who has never had be a man could agree with your lame notions of manhood. Have you ever served in the military? I'm guessing not. You strike me as a lifelong coward, like Bush, and equally devoted to religiosity and false pride.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#248. To: noone222 (#247) (Edited)
Sure you did. I don't believe you. You strike me as a guy who lies a lot, and you strike me as a coward.
#249. To: Paul Revere (#248)
Coming from someone claiming to be a lawyer, I must object to this latest knee jerk comment, not because you wouldn't recognize a liar, but as you most assuredly know ... it takes one to know one ... and you're a professional liar by your own admission ... ugh, if you weren't telling another lie.
You strike me as a guy who lies a lot, and you strike me as a coward.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#250. To: noone222 (#249)
I'll pray for you, that your heart and mind will open, and that you will understand the error of your ways, and confess your sins, and repent before it is too late.
#251. To: Paul Revere (#250) (Edited)
OK, you win. I repent that I improperly referred to you as a lawyer ... I should have been more accurate and used the proper terminology ... PETTIFOGGER better describes you. And I am truly sorry for that ! pet·ti·fog·ger (pt'-fOg'Yr, -fô'gYr) Pronunciation Key n. A petty, quibbling, unscrupulous lawyer. One who quibbles over trivia.
I'll pray for you, that your heart and mind will open, and that you will understand the error of your ways, and confess your sins, and repent before it is too late.
"The mighty are only mighty because we are on our knees. Let us rise!" --Camille Desmoulins
#252. To: Paul Revere (#245)
Gee Paul you are a bit high-minded aren't you. Now you think you are God. And that coming from someone that earlier in the thread stated "I don't believe the Bible is anything more than a collection of stories, legends, half truths, and dogma." Of course, that sentence was immediately followed by "Christianity and what it has "accomplished" through group think is more vile than the income tax." And further down the thread you stated "Jesus was a myth. Sorry." Why is it that so many assume and automatically classify anyone that studies Scripture as a Christian? Having said that, I would agree (at least to some extent - and it should probably be furthered by stating ALL "organized religions") with you concerning the "vileness" of organized religion. (Tough call - the "income tax" and especially the "enforcers" of it are pretty damned vile.) Has the thought ever crossed your mind that there might be people out there that study and believe Scripture that aren't part of some "organized religion"? Actually, I don't understand why you or anyone would think Jesus was a "myth" or that the Bible is nothing but a collection of stories, legends, half truths, and dogma. What discredits any of the authors of any books of the Bible to the point of labeling them inaccurate (at best)? In fact, there are MANY instances of prophesies (or predictions if you prefer) which came to pass later on - in some cases hundreds of years later - and can be proven historically. Just for one example, Isaiah prophesied about Cyrus (even correctly naming him) and events which would happen under his rule some 150 years prior to the birth of Cyrus the Great, the King of Persia. Coincidence??? There have been numerous archaeological finds which support many things spoken of in Scripture. And in fact, for the scrupulous, you can see these prophesies playing out STILL TODAY - over 2000 years after they were written. I honestly can't say I have ever heard of many other "authors" which can make such a claim (Nostradamus is the only one that comes to mind at all that may qualify). In your eyes they may have been nothing but a bunch of "goatherders" whose writings were mere fables, and you're certainly entitled to that opinion - but remember, it's just that - an opinion. There's no sense in bashing somebody for not sharing that opinion. If it was an issue brought before a court you could not advance any evidence which would back up that opinion. Any lawyer worth a grain of salt would know that too.
You'd better pray for forgiveness, and ask me to forgive you for your sins.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Steven Wright
#253. To: Japedo (#123)
A taxpayer may lawfully arrange his/her affairs to minimize taxes by such steps as deferring income from one year to the next. For the most part this assessment is correct. But there are 2 issues which should be addressed. (1) Where do NONtaxpayers fit in? You ARE aware that there is a LEGAL status of NONtaxpayer aren't you? They are not tax evaders, nor tax protesters, just NONtaxpayers that are under no legal obligation to file or pay. (2) While it may be said that individuals are entitled to take all lawful steps to minimize their taxes (and they certainly can), individuals are something which aren't recognized by the tax code. A person is... For some informative reading on the subject see this. Chances are, you are NOT an "individual", at least not according to the supreme court ruling in Hale vs Henkel...
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.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Steven Wright
#254. To: innieway (#252) (Edited)
Forgive him, Father. He knows not what he says. More Biblical nonsense from another person who takes their direction from myths and fables. You might as well build religion around the story of Chicken Little, since THE SKY IS FALLING is the major building block of your spiritual beliefs. I believe in God. I just don't believe the ridiculous stories people like you hover over, as if they were true. Wake up and smell the fiction.
#255. To: Paul Revere (#254)
So does Satan. What ridiculous story was that? Cyrus? Cyrus certainly existed, he was the King of Persia - that's easy enough to verify. That Isaiah had written of Cyrus 150 years PRIOR to Cyrus' birth? That is also easy enough to verify. Again, I believe I stated that I'm NOT a member of any organized religion, and agreed with you concerning what they are good for. And again, I ask you to provide EVIDENCE that Scripture is but "myths and fables". You also said to others further up the thread " You don't have the intelligence or knowledge for a decent conversation. Also, you lack reading comprehension." And I'm talking to people who understand words and sentences when they read them."I believe in God.
I just don't believe the ridiculous stories people like you hover over, as if they were true.
More Biblical nonsense from another person who takes their direction from myths and fables.
Apparently, you don't have the intelligence or knowledge for a decent conversation. Also, you lack reading comprehension. I like talking to people who understand words and sentences when they read them.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Steven Wright
#256. To: innieway (#255) (Edited)
All dumb conclusions on your part. Arguing with a person like you is a waste of my time. I have nothing to prove to you, and given your lack of comprehension skills, it would be a monumental waste of my time to attempt to prove anything to you. I post to give my opinion, not to satisfy your need to feel like you could have been a lawyer if only you'd had the time, inclination, brains, reading skills, and dedication.
#257. To: Paul Revere (#256)
Conclusions? That history shows Cyrus the Great was King of Persia is a "dumb conclusion"? That he was named in Scripture in the book of Isaiah is a "dumb conclusion"? No, you certainly don't. And on the topic for which I asked for evidence supporting your opinions, you CAN'T prove anything. What makes you think I would WANT or "feel a need" to prove that I could have been a lawyer? That's a dumb conclusion on your part.
All dumb conclusions on your part.
I have nothing to prove to you
I post to give my opinion, not to satisfy your need to feel like you could have been a lawyer if only you'd had the time, inclination, brains, reading skills, and dedication.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
Steven Wright
#258. To: innieway (#257) (Edited)
Awwwwwww. Won't the big bad lawyer give you any respect, shorty? I don't get drawn into silly discussions with people who think they know how to argue, but don't. Now go chase your tail some more, like a good little 5 pound dog, barking loudly the whole time. Here's a prophecy for you. You'll continue thinking you get direction from the Old Testament, and you'll continue spouting such nonsense because you don't know the difference between your imagination and history.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest