Are the Feds provocating another WACO with ED & Elaine Brown in NH to institute Martial law on Americans ?

Question

Ed & Elaine Brown have stated they will pay a tax on their income if the I.R.S. would show them the law requiring Americans to pay a tax on their labor (income).

Why would the I.R.S. rather murder Ed & Elaine Brown then simply show them the law so the Brown's can pay the money the I.R.S. claims they are owed ??




? ? ?

bostonianinmo

are you serious old guy???????

the income tax is a complete fraud It bypasses the US treasury and goes right to the central banks who print the money out of nothing. Then the privately owned federal reserve does not even disclose how much money they are printing from nothing.

That is why 10 term Congressman and Presidential candidate will ABOLISH THE I.R.S. !!

THEY ARE A COMPLETE FRAUD!!

But old timers are set in theri ways if you really looked into it, it's obvious you would be the one who feels stupid being fooled out of 30%-60% of your labor for the 90 years it looks like you been around. Or maybe you're just mad you been duped lo so many years and feel if you paid others should too. I can see how you will feel like a sucker

But If everybody but you is wrong, why won't the criminal government show Brown (& the rest of us the law).

clue: They can't show the law cuz There is None cuz it's a fraud

NGC6205

Nice try guy- but the 16th Amendment was never ratified. The Philanderer Knox lied about the paperwork on this fraud is public record


There is no law only COLOR OF LAW.

http://www.givemeliberty.org
http://www.freedomtofascism.com


ps- Are all the top contributors gov't shills that basically spend the day on the computer posting propaganda to perpetuate these gov't frauds on WE the PEOPLE ??

just curious.........

Judy

The Brown's don't owe anything to the private Federal Reserve bank that prints the money from nothing and charges American interest.

That nobody has ever won in court is a typical establishment lie.

Obviously you are either lying outright or have never heard of Former I.R.S. agent Joe Bannister who resigned from the I.R.S. because after 3 years of research he could not find the law and resigned because he didn't want to defraud and rob innocent citizens.

When people do lose in lower courts it is becuase the judges are corrupt and will not allow the law or Supreme Court decsions in the court room.

When they allow the law in the courtroom and don't allow the I.R.S. agents to purjure themselves all charges are dropped like they did in the case of Whitey Farrell.

You should really get educated or if you are purposely lying to people for your golbal banker friends at the I.R.S. you should be ashmaned of yourself.

SHOW US THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

This question has been asked and answered many times here.

The Browns have been shown the law. They just refuse to admit it is valid.

The 16th amendment to the Constitution clarified the power of Congress to levy an income tax. The amendment was ratified properly and tax protestor arguments are specious and without merit. Title 26 of the U.S. Code is the law concerning income taxes and it is also valid.

http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/taxprot.htm

Edit: Fine, go ahead and believe tax protestors. Don't pay your taxes. BTW, the 16th amendment WAS ratified. The Supreme Court of the time and every one since has verified that. Sure, there were minor capitalization and spelling errors and one state replaced lay with levy, but previous amendments had similar errors and were considered ratified. Another thing, the 16th amendment didn't actually give Congress any additional power. It CLARIFIED the power of Congress to collect a tax and defined an income tax as a INDIRECT tax which would therefore not need to be apportioned.

The law is contained in the U.S. Statues at Large, Volume 68A page 3 and was enacted in 1954 and was signed by President Eisenhower making it positive law. The codification of the law is found in Title 26 of the U.S. Code. This is considered prima facie law. However, since Title 26 is a direct reflection of that law, it is in essence positive law. The Brown's have been shown the law. Bill Benson has been shown the law. Joe Banister has been shown the law. Aaron Russo has been shown the law. BTW, Russo is an idiot because he talks like he knows the law, but he doesn't really understand how it is structured. The list goes on and on and on. Every single tax protestor that has challenged paying their own taxes has lost in court every time. Joe Banister has been acquitted a couple of times, but that is because he was in court for someone else's tax return that he prepared and the juries found him innocent of falsifying a prepared return. However, the people he filed returns for are currently serving jail time.

Top contributors get to be top contributors because we mainly give CORRECT answers. If you don't believe us, fine. Don't pay your taxes and take your arguments to court. You'll be called an idiot there too.

Show me ONE court case in the past 100 years where the courts said that a person did not need to pay income taxes.

One last thing, tax protestors and the tax protestor movement is actually quite small. While most people don't actually know the law, they know it exists. Your argument swings both ways pal. If everybody but you is wrong, how come you don't understand the law when it is shown to you? You can claim the 16th amendment isn't law, but that doesn't make it so. At this point, the 16th amendment is part of the Constitution and it would take an act of Congress and ratification by 38 states to repeal it. So, the 16th amendment is law. The Internal Revenue Code was ratified by Congress making that law. As I have explained previously, Title 26 is prima facie law representing the Internal Revenue Code. Just because you and a few other kooks say it isn't law, doesn't make you correct or your arguments valid.

To the person referencing some court cases as his source, you better actually read those. Those were criminal procedings and though the persons involved were found not guilty of CRIMINAL charges, they still had to pay their taxes. In fact, I'll just quote one of them here...

In U.S. v. Kuglin, CR-03-20111, near the end of the transcripts, pg. 776,
THE COURT: So anything else from the United States?

MR. MURPHY (Federal lawyer): Just one thing, to put Ms. Kuglin on notice, she has got to pay taxes, I think the court
ought to instruct her that that is the law. She has got to file returns and --

MR. BECRAFT (Lawyer for defense): Your Honor, that is going to be cleaned up totally.

THE COURT: Okay. Well, Mr. Murphy is not incorrect that it is the law, and I think what he's also saying is there will still be civil penalties.

MR. BECRAFT: I expect probably 90-day letters to be coming pretty quick.

THE COURT: Okay.

MR. BECRAFT: And there's going to be civil proceedings, and she is going to being take responsibility -- she is going to be doing things to respond to all of that like file returns, Your Honor.



So, if you want to foolishly follow believe Kuglin got away something, go right ahead. Please note the court said "Mr. Murphy is not incorrect that it is the law."

The other case, U.S. v. Long is similar. Long won his criminal case, but then lost his civil case and ended up paying taxes AND penalties.

So keep giving me thumbs down and believing tax protestor arguments. You will eventually get taken to court and you will lose.

Answer 2

No, thats the way the IRS and our "voluntary" earnings tax device works. effortless voters are compelled to "voluntarily" make a contribution to the IRS. To make that artwork this is important on social gathering to shoot or throw in detention center some tax evaders as an occasion to others. Thats what socialism is all approximately. Compassion for the destructive is merely the excuse. the technique is using deadly rigidity to take the valuables of one citizen and supply it to a distinctive. an illustration of this rigidity is regrettably an important reminder that the objective of the guy is to serve the State.

Answer 3

If a speeding truck runs you over in an intersection, the driver is violating the law but you're still dead.

The Government has a bigger hammer than you do. You can't win this one. Find another battle to fight.

Answer 4

They won't murder them, although they will seize their assets and possibly put them in jail if they continue to refuse to pay what they owe.

Tax protesters have used this ridiculous argument for years, and have lost in court each time it's gone there. Showing them the law, which continues to be done, doesn't phase them - they just continue to claim it's not legal.

Answer 5

THE LAW IS A CONTRACT THAT REQUIRES YOU TO PAY. IF THE IRS AND THE FED. LET THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG THERE WILL BE CIVIL WAR.

THERE IS NO LAW TO FORCE YOU TO PAY INCOME TAXES.

THEY GOT YOUR *** BY CONTRACT.

QUIT SIGNING THE CONTRACT YOU NEWBS.

Answer 6

No, they're waiting them out. No hurry.

It's been proven to them countless times. The Browns are idiots -- at least he is -- and refuse to accept the concrete proof that's been provided. They are now no more than common crimminals.

Nobody is shooting, so how do you come to the conclusion that the IRS wishes to "murder" anyone??

FWIW, there's no such word as "provocating." Maybe you meant "provoking?"