Games - Artwear - Wisdom Wall Art - Stationery - HomeschoolingDon't Tread On Me - Income Tax Truth - Comment - Home

 

 

Readers of 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' have already retained or recovered well over

from the federal and state governments-- including Social Security and Medicare 'contributions'-- and kept it in their own pockets where it belongs, simply by knowing what the law actually says.  These Americans have gotten back every penny they've paid or had withheld from them during the year in connection with the "income tax", and have secured written acknowledgements that they owed nothing-- many for several years in a row now.

YOU NEED TO KNOW THE TRUTH, TOO!!

 

The Lost Horizons News

Current Events and Continuing Education for June 25 through ?

"A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him."

-Ezra Pound

 

 

Dear Friends

 

The appellate court denied my motion for release on bond pending my appeal of the criminal assault being conducted on myself, my family, and the law itself.  My motion can be read here; the adversary's evasions can be read here, and my reply is here.  The page-and-a-half decision by the appellate panel, which was issued, on my request, in great haste less than a week after my motion went in, can be seen here.  I strongly urge everyone to read each of these through.

 

Due to this denial, I will have to enjoy the hospitality of Uncle Sam for awhile, until an actual appeal is briefed and heard.  It is my hope that this won't be too long, but we'll see.

 

In the meantime, I urge you all to stay on your feet.  Keep sending in those victories, and keep spreading the truth about the tax.  It is these things that will see our liberty from this scourge secured in the end, regardless of what happens to me in the meantime.

 

On behalf of my wonderful Doreen, and my children, who are the greatest blessings in my life, I ask you all to give what support you can.  The best way to do that is to order books, and see that they find welcoming homes.  This will allow Doreen to keep a roof over the kids' heads, and at the same time be the best way to move the ball of greater public knowledge of the truth about the tax, and the outrages being committed to keep that truth hidden, downfield toward the net.

 

Plain old donations will certainly not be unappreciated, as well, of course; to make them, please send to:

Doreen Hendrickson

232 Oriole St.

Commerce Twp., MI  48382

 

By the way, support of another kind is equally important, and thus I will very much appreciate your helping Doreen through this very trying time with a kind word now and then at doreen 'at' losthorizons.com.

 

Finally, here's a powerful new "Torpedo of Truth" that anyone in a legal contest with the law-defiers will find very useful, and which is also a very powerful eye-opening educational tool.  PLEASE spread it around to every single person whose contact information you can find, especially people in media, both new and old.

 

                                                                                          


                                                                                                               January 10, 2012
 


What You Don't Know Won't Hurt You.
It's What You DO Know That's JUST NOT TRUE That Does All The Harm
 


In a Dec. 26 column titled 'Gullible Americans', the great Walter Williams discusses routine lying by federal actors about costs or limits of measures they're promoting-- and the naivete of American citizens who repeatedly fall for the lies. Among the examples presented are declarations by supporters of the 16th Amendment that it would not result in the income tax reaching anyone but the rich. Williams argues that while the initial legislation following the amendment DID confine the imposition of the tax to high levels of income, it was not too long before the tax applied to everyone.

Ironically, Dr. Williams' column is itself a product of gullibility. The good doctor has fallen prey to dis-information about the income tax. Even more ironically, his article serves as a transmitter of the very nonsense that makes possible the offense of which it complains. Let's (as the doctor would say) take a look at it...

Two paragraphs are devoted to the subject of the income tax in the article:

"During the legislative debate before enactment of the 16th Amendment, Republican President William Taft and congressional supporters argued that only the rich would ever pay federal income taxes. In fact, in 1913, only one-half of 1 percent of income earners were affected. Those earning $250,000 a year in today's dollars paid 1 percent, and those earning $6 million in today's dollars paid 7 percent. The 16th Amendment never would have been enacted had Americans not been duped into believing that only the rich would pay income taxes. It was simply a lie to exploit American gullibility and envy.

"The fact of the matter is that the founders of our nation so feared the imposition of direct taxes, such as an income tax, that Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution says, "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken." It was not until the Abraham Lincoln administration that an income tax was imposed on Americans. Its stated purpose was to finance the war, but it took until 1872 for it to be repealed. During the Grover Cleveland administration, Congress enacted the Income Tax Act of 1894. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1895. It took the 16th Amendment (1913) to make permanent what the founders feared."

First of all, let's look at the several erroneous assertions in the background presented in the second paragraph. To start with, Dr. Williams says that the Lincoln-era tax was repealed in 1872. This is not true.

As originally implemented, the tax was imposed in two-year increments. When the 1870-1872 period ended, no imposition was scheduled for the following years, and the tax simply fell dormant. It didn't evaporate; other than a few minor bits and pieces that WERE repealed in December of 1872, the entire body of law related to the tax remained on the books and fully in force. In fact, the 1873 compilation of federal law under the title, 'The Revised Statutes of 1873' consists in very considerable part of income tax law.

What I say can easily be verified by looking at the "Preliminary Materials" reference tables of the current "Tax Code of 1986" (IRC). The tables are provided to identify the actual statutes reflected in the "code" sections. Most of their references are to sections of the 1939 code. The "Appendices" of THAT code refer in turn to the actual Statutes-at-Large from which each code section is ultimately derived.

The code references reveal that a huge chunk of the current income tax law was enacted well before the adoption of the 16th Amendment. (In the minority of current code sections derived from statutes enacted since 1939, references provided will point directly to the relevant post-1939 statute.)

In fact, the "Preamble" to the 1939 code attests to the continuity of the tax law all by itself. In that introductory statement, the compilers acknowledge in plain English that the authority reflected in their mid-20th-Century code goes right back to 1862. (See pp. 68-69 of 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' (CtC) for the text of the 1939 Code Preamble, or see 'The CtC Companion CD' for all relevant research resources, including the 1986 Code with Preliminary Materials; the 1939 Code with Appendices and Preamble, the 1873 Revised Statutes, the 1862 and subsequent tax acts, and much, much more.)


Following the 'repeal' error, Dr. Williams then mistakenly declares that the Supreme Court ruled the Tax Act of 1894 unconstitutional (in Pollock v. Farmers Loan & Trust, 158 U.S. 601 (1895)). The Court actually ruled a mere eleven sections of that act unconstitutional, leaving the vast majority undisturbed (and leaving the vast pre-1894 bulk of tax law undisturbed, as well...). See page 18 of CtC for the relevant portion of the ruling (or The CtC Companion CD for the ruling in its entirety).

Dr. Williams ends this paragraph with the declaration that, "It took the 16th Amendment (1913) to make permanent what the founders feared," by which he means "the imposition of a direct, general un-apportioned tax." He makes this dire statement in the belief that today's income tax is, in fact, a general tax.

Williams' assumption about the income tax is based on observing the manner in which the tax is routinely applied today in the distorting light of the notion that the 16th Amendment was an "initiating event" by which the current tax came into existence. As we have just seen, this notion is false, and the "light" it sheds is really an obscuring fog.

The truth is, the 16th Amendment is merely a feature in a much larger picture. When that whole picture is taken in, the real light of complete knowledge reveals that the tax, even though often mis-applied today in a corrupt exploitation of ignorance, is by no means a direct general tax.

Instead, the income tax remains the same tax which was Constitutionally-designed and implemented without apportionment prior to the 16th Amendment. It had for a few years been unable to reach a subset of its natural objects by virtue of the Pollock ruling, but the 16th Amendment overturned that ruling and allowed to tax to resume operation in essentially the same form provided for in the 1894 act.

To briefly summarize that bit of history: the 1894 act had sought to slightly expand the prior tax structure so as to embrace dividend-paid profits of the "Robber Baron" class of influence-buyers that had amassed huge wealth in the late 19th century in federally-subsidized railroading and banking and other "connected" activities. The Pollock ruling said this couldn't be done without apportioning the tax, since taxing the dividends amounted to taxing the source from which they were derived, which was personally-owned shares of stock. That, the court said, made it a property tax, and direct.

The 16th Amendment overruled this Court-erected barricade, and let these gains from private exploitation of public property be taxed for public benefit. It did nothing else, as the Supreme Court took great pains to declare over and over again during the decade after the amendment's passage. (See losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf for a concise but in-depth drill-down on this subject.)

The limited purpose and effect of the 16th Amendment was well understood at the time of its adoption. Knowing the whole picture, Americans of that time knew that the new amendment notwithstanding, the income tax was still not a general tax, but remained a tax only on specialized earnings-- "income" distinguished from "all that comes in" to just a subclass of that larger class.

Thus, even though the level of "income" to which the tax applied dropped precipitously from the initial ranges noted by Dr. Williams down to as low as $11,000 in today's dollars almost immediately afterward, for the next 27 years the annual average percentage of bread-winning Americans at all levels of earnings who even merely filed returns, much less found themselves owing any tax, was less than 9.5. (See losthorizons.com/Newsletter.htm#GIGAH for more on this.)

But...

Understanding of the true limits and scope of the "income" tax has faded as understanding of the history of the 16th Amendment has faded. It's hard to get the former right while getting the latter wrong.

By the mid 1940s, ignorance had become so rife that from that time since, the average annual filing percentage of non-dependent American earners exceeds 91! So Dr. Williams, bless his heart, can be forgiven for drawing the wrong conclusion from the bad information from which he was working.

However, alerting Dr. Williams to the error is critically important. A paltry few thousand might read this article and get the straight story. Hundreds of thousands at least will read Dr. Williams' errant column. Absent a published correction, each will be left seriously hindered in comprehending the strict and ongoing limits on federal taxation-- something deemed so important by the Framers that it is the only thing repeated in the whole of the Constitution (in Article 1, Sections 2: 3 and 9: 4).

Therefore, I ask you good folks to bring this matter to Dr. Williams' attention, and, if possible, even supply him with the authorities mentioned.  I'm not able to do this myself under my present circumstances, but I'm confident that if each of you make the effort and not assume someone else will do it, Dr. Williams will get this information.  His website is www.walterewilliams.com.   I'm sure a means of contacting him will be found there.
 


By the way...

When You Know What To Look For, You See The Truth About The Tax Acknowledged All Over The Place

For instance:

"...Messrs. Green will be directed to produce such books and papers as the supervisor may desire to examine, connected with their banking operations; it being understood that this right upon the part of the supervisor extends only to such books and papers as relate to their banking operations, and are connected with the internal revenue of the United States."

"It is said that this is an attempt at an unreasonable seizure and search into the private affairs of the citizens, against which they are protected by the constitution. [But t]here is no attempt to investigate any of the private affairs of the Messrs. Green, only an examination into so much of their business as relates to the operations of their banking house and is connected with the subjects of taxation; beyond this, he has no right to institute an inquiry."

This is language from the ruling in Stanwood v. Green, 1870 U.S. Dist. Lexis 279 (1870), which is cited by the Supreme Court in United States v. LaSalle Nat'l Bank, 437 US 298 (1978) to clarify IRS authority to examine books and records. The high court also uses this citation to make the point that this authority goes back all the way to the 1864 revisions of the federal income-tax structure.

Read that language again:
"[O]nly such books and papers as...are connected with the internal revenue of the United States."
"[O]nly an examination into so much of their business as...is connected with the subjects of taxation; beyond this, he has no right to institute an inquiry."

The distinctions being drawn by this clear speaking court are clear, bright, and remain the law today: Some of the business of these Americans MAY be connected with "the subjects" of taxation and the internal revenue of the United States. Some may NOT be.

That which is can be the legitimate focus of an IRS examination. THAT WHICH IS NOT IS NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS!

Nonetheless, even the most expensive, self-confident tax attorney in the country will tell any client that when the IRS demands a look at his business records, they mean (and can lawfully demand) a look at ALL his business records. That attorney will believe (or will be confident that his client believes) that ALL business activity is "connected with the internal revenue of the United States" and is among the "subjects of taxation".
 


And so the rule of law crumbles and is supplanted by habits of subordination and the notion that the government is subject to no limits-- unless each of us denounces these destructive misunderstandings wherever and whenever we find them, and replaces them with the liberty-supporting, Founders-honoring easily-proven truth.

The sad fact is, the modern Statist dis-information machine is like an infestation of cockroaches in America's kitchen. The happy fact is, you get to be the pesticide.

Soak 'em down!

*****

Ron Paul is a bug-stomper extraordinaire. Support him.

Learn about the existential threat facing America today-- and what the Founders provided for our defense against it-- at losthorizons.com/TheShield.pdf


 

GETTING IT GOOD AND HARD

A brief look at 100 years of Fiscal Folly; and a nice confirmation of CtC scholarship using four-generation-old data from the IRS itself.

Over the course of the last 100 years, Americans have foolishly indulged the dangerous conceit of imagining themselves able to discern angels from devils, and that angels are to be found amongst their own ranks. This has led to a laxness in our proper jealous regard for our liberties and the rule of law, and deeply-misplaced confidence in the good-faith and competence of public officials.

We should have known better, and at one time we did. "Let us hear no more of faith in the goodness of men in high office, but bind them down by the chains of the Constitution!" thundered Jefferson, and for a long, prosperous time, that's how we rolled.

Jefferson's attitude served us very well indeed for 125 years or so. But early in the last century we got so rich, and so full of ourselves, and so misled by pretentious official pomposities that we let slip the chains. As H. L. Mencken warned us at the time, we have since gotten the government we deserved for our foolishness, and we have gotten it good and hard.

LET'S LOOK AT JUST ONE OF THE PRICES WE HAVE PAID FOR BEING TAKEN IN  BY "GOOD GOVERNMENT" EYEWASH...

In Tom Woods Jr.'s recently-published 'Back on the Road to Serfdom' (ISI, 2010), PhD historian Brian Domitrovic contributes an essay titled 'Economic Policy and the Road to Serfdom: The Watershed of 1913'. In it, Domitrovic points out that except for a couple of years afflicted by abortive governmental interferences in the natural economy (involving the clearing of the accumulated ill-effect of "greenback" fiat currency circulated during Lincoln's War, and a flirtation with the monetization of silver in the 1890s), American economic growth during the 50 years prior to 1913 AVERAGED a muscular, extraordinarily prosperous 5% PER YEAR!

What's more, neither unemployment nor inflation existed during this period at all.

In 1913, everything changed. The engine of monetary debasement known as the Federal Reserve was successfully fastened upon the body politic that year. Injections of fiat currency and manipulated interest rates began poisoning the economy almost immediately.

That same year, the income tax was revived after a 40-year slumber. Unlike the Fed, the income tax began its new run benignly, functioning as designed and capturing for public benefit a portion of the profits enjoyed by those using public resources to make their money.

Within just over a quarter-century however, subtleties of its design had allowed revenue-hungry governments to begin mis-applying the tax. By 1940, the siphoning of increasingly large volumes of wealth out of the hands of independent producers and its reallocation for political and private benefit by means of that mis-application had commenced.

The assault on the natural economy through both the Federal Reserve and the misapplication of the "income tax" have continued ever since, and here's the bill: Since 1913 the average annual growth of the economy has limped along at a relatively anemic 3.26%. Domitrovic calculates that the differential of 1.74% from the 5% growth rate produced by the unimpeded natural economy of the prior 50 years resulted in a loss to American well-being of a staggering 4/5ths of the wealth we ought to be enjoying right now.

That is, had we not drunk the Kool-Aid and allowed the gimmicking of the economy by the political class, we would be 500% better off than we now are. As much as we would like to imagine ourselves as affluent, we are living in the basement of the mansion we could have and should have built during the last 95 years.

But even that 500% is just a hint of what we've lost by letting busybodies, cronyism and corruption pollute and distort our natural economy. That 500% is a static calculation-- pure math. Added to it would be some incalculable enhancements because the diminished output since 1913 was not just a suppression of the natural economy; it was a distortion of economic activity, manipulated by a corrupt political class for its own benefit and that of its cronies.

Had the economy been allowed to continue in its natural state without the afflictions of the Federal Reserve and the misapplied "income tax", economic activity would have remained pure and productive. We would have enjoyed massive compounded growth above and beyond the merely predictable. The 20th Century saw a staggeringly-rapid and bountiful increase in technical knowledge. Productivity would have reached heights of which we cannot even dream had that knowledge been efficiently coupled with capital, innovative thinking and entrepreneurial spirit focused on market-satisfying purposes, rather than being skewed by self-interested manipulations of those in control of state violence.

Instead, we have had the steady bleeding of the productive economy by currency debasement. Worse, because its inflationary effect is not immediately felt, the first recipients of the debased currency enjoy a higher value from it than all currency soon will have. This gives those recipients an illusory appearance of economic virtue (as though they had served the market well and been rewarded accordingly), and an unfounded strength in resource acquisition.

The first of these illegitimate effects influences the assumptions and decision-making of other economic actors (with false information leading to bad decisions). The second allows the early recipients to absorb and sequester more capital resources than their actual productivity and attunement to the satisfaction of market interests merits. Since these early recipients are inevitably government-favored enterprises selected for purely political reasons, the dynamics of the process steadily erodes the economy from efficiency to inefficiency.

Then, in addition to the currency-debasement affliction, we have also been suffering the gimmicking of the tax structure to reward political allies of those in power, and to punish and hinder their competitors. This results in less productive economic actors dominating the market and subjects us all to higher prices and less growth and opportunity.

Further, the relative paucity of our wealth accumulation during the past century has not only failed to make us rich, but it has lagged far behind the outright destructive effects of the ongoing government meddling responsible for that poor performance. This has tragically resulted in America going from being the most prosperous society in human history when the government interference with the natural economy began to now being the biggest aggregate debtor in human history.

A NICE HIGHLIGHTING OF THE TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX BY IRS DATA

Those inclined to read Domitrovic's otherwise excellent treatise should note that while his conclusions about the "income tax" as a destructive force are sound enough as regards the last 70 years or so, he mistakenly extends that period all the way back to 1913. This is an error resulting from a basic and still all-too-common misunderstanding of the nature of the tax not yet corrected by Domitrovic's discovery of CtC scholarship.

Citing data from the Tax Foundation, and referring in particular to the period from 1913 to 1920, Domitrovic observes that "the new income tax system hit persons making as little as $1,000 a year ($11,000 in today's terms)." ('Back on the Road to Serfdom', p. 8.) Erroneously imagining that the "making as little as $1,000" referred to everyone earning that amount from any gainful activity rather than only those receiving that much from federally-connected activities, Domitrovic concludes that the tax was therefore widespread in its reach and impact.

Certainly, if Domitrovic's belief that "income" means "all that comes in" in the context of the tax was correct, his conclusion that a rate structure reaching everyone with $1,000 in "income" ($11,000 today) meant that a majority of the adult working population-- indeed, an overwhelming majority-- would have been subject to the tax. After all, even non-union factory workers earned half again as much during this period.

But Domitrovic's conclusion is a classic case of GIGO-- Garbage In, Garbage Out-- because his misunderstanding of the tax skews him into error. The fact is, not even a fifth of the gainfully-employed heads-of-household population of America was affected by the tax in any way until as late as 1940.

This is because Domitrovic's misunderstanding of the tax was not suffered by the American population in 1913, or for many years afterward. More than a quarter-century had to pass from that year's revival of the 1862 tax before fading memories of the purpose and character of the 16th Amendment and a sustained propaganda campaign encouraging worship of the state had produced enough American ignorance about the subject for Domitrovic's assumptions about its widespread impact to become sound.

Census and IRS data reveal that between 1913 and 1939, and even while as little as $1,000 of "income" was taxed, there wasn't a single year in which more than 17.3% of non-dependent, gainfully-employed, earnings-capturing Americans filed a tax return. The average percentage per year for that whole twenty-seven years-- which included the "Roaring Twenties", by the way-- was a mere 9.36% (see http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/saez/piketty-saezOU04US.pdf).

Starting around 1940 the "income tax" DID become a major contributor to the economic dysfunction plaguing the last 95 years, and grew as a destructive force like Topsy from that point forward. In that year, misunderstanding led to so many Americans coming to believe themselves subject to the tax that the percentage of earners filing returns jumped to 25.7. In 1941, the figure was 45%. By 1947, the figure was 91.7%, and it has stayed in that neighborhood ever since.

Prior to the 1940s, our grandparents and great-grandparents practiced a more educated and jealous regard for their liberties and the rule of law. But over the years those wanting to live by the "political means" rather than by the more-demanding "economic means" misled enough Americans into the same error about the nature of the tax that produces Domitrovic's mistake today.

Ultimately, the folks at whose privileged gains the tax is really directed succeeded in turning it into a scourge against all the rest of us, just by dumbing us down on this subject. The benign income tax became recast as the evil vampire that has preyed upon us all good and hard ever since.

***

By the way, educated eyes can find shiny nuggets underscoring the misunderstanding suffered by most present-day Americans concerning the limits of federal authority. A fellow prisoner here who has recently become CtC-educated, and thus sensitive to things which most readers would just pass over without comprehension like a phrase in a foreign language, furnishes us with a great example of how evidence to this effect can be found all around by those with eyes to see it.

This good man was pleased to show me the following passage from a book he happened to be reading titled, 'Titanic's Last Secrets', by Brad Matsen (Hachette Book Group, USA, 2008). On page 210, working from notes previously published in 'The Titanic- End of a Dream' by Wyn Craig Wade in 1979 (pp. 134-135), concerning efforts by Senator William Alden Smith and Sheriff Joseph Bayliss to investigate the cause of the tragedy:

"The following morning, Bayliss served the subpoenas while Smith grappled with the implications of a report that had reached him at breakfast. The British consul in New York was at that moment on a train to Washington to protest the Senate's treatment of the crew of Titanic and White Star officials. The IMM [International Mercantile Marine, a J.P. Morgan trust] lawyers had spent the better part of the night on the phone with senators and congressmen friendly to J.P. Morgan, arguing that a federal committee could not legally subpoena foreigners in the sovereign state of New York.

...

"Smith didn't want to risk letting Morgan swing enough weight to quash his subpoenas in New York, so he decided to go back to Washington and continue his hearings on federal territory."

No changes in Constitutional delegations of jurisdiction or authority to the federal government have occurred since Senator Smith understood those limits, just as no change in the limits of federal taxing authority, and the nature of the income tax, have occurred since our grandparents time. Today, the notion of limits recognized by Smith and Grandpa alike seem alien to their less well-educated (or deliberately mis-educated) descendants.

But this change in perception is not because those limits have changed. It's just because we're only now waking up from our decades-long nap, during which the servants have re-decorated to suit themselves, knowing we weren't watching. The house still belongs to us, though. We just have to come fully awake, shake out the cobwebs, and set things back to rights.

***

Ron Paul in 2012

Ninety-nine years of Federal Reserve poison is more than enough.

***

My appeal is due to be heard at long last on Nov. 18. I will be grateful for your prayers and good wishes that the panel is guided by respect for the law, and even more for your efforts to inform and direct media attention to this matter.

 

*****

THREE STRANGE STORIES

A federal judge orders water to run uphill; federal judges admit to still believing  in Santa, the Tooth Fairy and Mr. Binkie; and the strangest, most disquieting story of them all...

***

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS WATER TO RUN UPHILL

Detroit, Michigan: In a bizarre ruling subsequently upheld by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and declined for review by the United States Supreme Court, a federal district court judge in the Eastern District of Michigan issued an order in 2007 commanding water to run uphill.

The order was requested by the Dept. of Justice (sic) in a suit against Peter and Doreen Hendrickson, which is ostensibly based on a belief that when the federal government returned everything that had been withheld from the Hendricksons' earnings in connection with federal taxes during 2002 and 2003 it was all a big mistake.

However, throughout all the proceedings in the suit, the government made no effort to prove that the Hendricksons actually owe taxes for these years (and the Treasury's own records acknowledge that, in fact, the couple DOESN'T owe any tax for those years, and were entitled to the return of their withheld property). Instead it simply asked the court to force the Hendricksons to say that they do-- under oath and over their own signatures-- so as to provide the government with a pretext for seizing the money from them.

The bizarre order that resulted is the legal equivalent of demanding that water run uphill. The dictated words commanded by the court are intended to be treated as TESTIMONY. But such words can never be testimony-- it is a legal impossibility. It's not just legally "awkward" or "bad form" or "inadmissible". It is flatly impossible.

By definition and by nature, coerced declarations written by others are NOT testimony-- no matter what the government wants to pretend. They CAN'T be, even without regard to what is said. Only a statement freely made and affirmed by the speaker to be what he or she personally believes to be true and correct can qualify as testimony.

Testifying can be coerced (that is, someone can be made to testify without compromising the validity of what then is affirmed by the speaker to be his or her testimony). But the content of testimony cannot be.

(Of course, content the government wishes to dictate CAN be testimony. But it can only be the testimony of the dictator-- as long as he or she affirms it as such.

Here, the government's failure to produce any competent witness willing to affirm under penalty of perjury what it wants to force the Hendricksons to say tells the tale of this "lawsuit". If it could produce such a witness, the government wouldn't need anything from the Hendricksons. Conversely, lacking such testimony it has no business even pretending to believe in the truth of what it wants said.

The sordid and shameful fact is, the government knows perfectly well that what it wants said is NOT true, and is instead acting completely in corrupt bad faith. This is obvious to any honest and competent observer just by virtue of the simple logic of these few paragraphs alone.)

So, since a court CAN'T cause testimony to be produced using coerced content, the judge's order to the Hendricksons is the equivalent of ordering water to run uphill. The judge can issue the order, but that doesn't make coerced expressions testimony, any more than calling a dog's tail a "leg" means that the dog now has five legs.

The feds really wish their courts DID have magic powers, though. They've been engaged for years in a campaign to prevent the ongoing spread of the information about the income tax revealed in Pete Hendrickson's first book, 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'. In that book, Hendrickson reveals that the income tax, a completely benign, desirable and important tax, has a much more limited range of application than is commonly understood or admitted to by most specialists in the legal and accounting professions.

Almost needless to say, the actual legal scope of the tax-- knowledge of which has been allowing Americans across the country to secure millions upon millions of dollars in complete, 100% refunds for nearly a full decade now-- is virtually NEVER admitted by tax agencies in so many words. But those agencies-- federal state and local-- continuously admit the truth in an even more direct manner, by the issuance of tens of thousands of checks, collection case "closing notices", and other on-paper acknowledgments identical to the "mistakes" made by the feds with the Hendricksons...

That's the reason for the "lawsuit" seeking this bizarre, impossible coerced "testimony". It is the hope of corrupt elements in the government that this charade will generate fog and fear about the truth and the law, and slow down the rate at which Americans are getting educated about the tax and forcing "mistake" after "mistake" from tax agencies and the ignorance-exploiting political class they serve.

Hendrickson has scans of hundreds and hundreds of these concrete, unambiguous acknowledgement.. uh, I mean, "mistakes"-- and the filings which prompted them-- posted on his website, losthorizons.com. He has also posted several dozen rare but especially interesting and informative cases, in which tax agencies have first tried to browbeat a refund claimant into withdrawing his or her claim before finally surrendering the money.

Such contests typically begin with an agency "invitation" to the claimant to reverse himself, through threatening letters and notices making what are imagined to be "offers that can't be refused". These scary mailings typically suggest some legal flaw in the claim, but never actually specify any such flaw.

The threats sometimes rise even to assertions that "penalties have been applied to your account" and other such dire-sounding rhetoric. "Bills" for "penalty amounts due" even get sent (but without ever suggesting that any tax is actually owed for the period involved...). These paper assaults have sometimes gone on for as much as 18 months, but in the end, after being met by firm, unbending resolve by the claimant, eventually the intimidation campaign is abandoned and the demanded refund is issued.

Entertainment doesn't get better or more usefully informative than this. Don't miss it.

And next time you notice a babbling brook, don't forget to check which way the water's running. Let it be a reminder to you that brooks aren't the only things that babble, and when it's people in power who are doing it, what's flowing is meant for your "refreshment", but it's not water.

(P. S. A two-year effort to enforce the law-defying order commanding Peter and Doreen Hendrickson to "testify" with government-dictated words and seize their money was stopped in its tracks six months ago upon the filing of this brief. An appeal of the entire district court judgment currently pending in the 6th Circuit can be seen here.)

 

###

 

FEDERAL JUDGES ADMIT TO CONTINUED BELIEF IN SANTA CLAUS

 

In a ruling issued in a Tax Court case early this year, and now a recent Court of Claims opinion, federal judges have revealed their continued belief in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy and, perhaps, unique invisible personal companions, as well.

The astonishing admissions have been made in order to shield the federal government from lawsuits brought by educated Americans seeking refunds of amounts erroneously collected as tax. By sacrificing their personal dignity and exposing their innermost squishy selves, these judges hope to spare other government officials from having to admit their inability to prove that the claimants in these cases actually owe any tax and the government has any right to their money.

 What's going on is that despite being unable to demonstrate that a tax is owed, the government really, really wants to keep the money anyway. These judges are good "team players", to whom self-respect (and respect for the rule of law) takes second-place behind looking after "the system" that has been pretty good to them so far.

These admissions are slightly indirect, of course. They take the form of an opinion that the claimants in these cases cannot be believed when they testify under oath to have learned things about tax law contrary to what they once had believed to be true, and now recognize that testimony they had made in earlier years concerning the legal character of their earnings was incorrect. 

That is, the claimants in these cases the government wishes to avoid had at one time believed that the income tax laws  somehow gave the federal government a legal claim to a portion of everything they earned or ever could earn, no matter how they earned it. They since learned that strict limits actually apply to what is subject to the tax, and that much is not subject.

The claims made by these folks reflect their new knowledge. They merely assert the claimants' belief that they do not owe the tax for a given period or in regard to given earnings and activities, and call upon the government to return amounts collected from them, or prove that a tax is owed. Everything involved, from the nature and character of the claim to the specific obligation of the government in such cases to prove the existence and amount of a tax debt, is in strict conformity to a detailed body of well-settled law. 

The judges took no issue with any technical or legal element of the claims. (Nor did they ask to see proof that a tax is actually owed.) Instead, they simply dismissed the suits on the basis that it is impossible to believe that the claimants actually learned something about the tax that they hadn't known before. Thus (goes the "reasoning"), the claimants must really still believe that everything they earn under all circumstances is taxable at the government's discretion, and the claims must be insincere. 

At the same time, these judges opine that the untested and unsupported third-party assertions that taxable activity was conducted by the claimant upon which the government exclusively relies in suggesting that a tax might be potentially owed are to be taken as true because... Well, there's never actually any reason articulated for this one-sided reflex.

Nor is there any effort to explain the judge's disobedience to the two separate federal statutes controlling these judicial contests and simple common sense, all three of which require that these assertions be proven by additional fact evidence, or be disregarded by the court.

Think about this. Why would a judge EVER need to assert such ridiculous views? It's not like doing so is within some lawful judicial discretion. It isn't.

Judges don't have the power (in any sense of the word) to read litigants' minds. Further, if they're going to purport to exercise such "power" anyway, why aren't they deeming the government's opposition to these claims to be insincere, rather than the other way around?  After all, the government is obviously insincere in opposing these claims. For nearly a decade now it has been honoring tens of thousands of identical claims, and is continuing to do so at the very same time it is filing its corrupt and plainly bad-faith briefs in these lawsuits. 

Further, it's not as if this treatment of these claims saved the government any trouble or expense (if it COULD prove that no tax is owed, anyway). In each case, the government has filed elaborate briefs in opposition to the claim. It simply never includes evidence of a tax being owed, and instead just asks for these dismissals. 

Why is this? If the government CAN prove it has cause to keep the money involved, it should just produce it right off the bat. It would win the suit legitimately; look good; and go to no more trouble and expense than it's undertaking in trying to dodge the contest, instead.  So, why do it "sleazy" like this, if there IS a real reason for denying these claims?

Well, WE can't read minds, and we'll admit it. But we don't have to in order to know ONE thing for sure: under this can't-learn-you-had-it-wrong-before "judicial reasoning", these judges reveal that they still believe in every imaginary creature in which they once expressed faith!

After all, this "doctrine" says it's impossible for someone to learn more about a subject and come to sincerely-held convictions contrary to those professed before. So those letters these judges used to write to the big guy in the red snowsuit tell us all we need to know about what THEY still believe...

It's difficult to say which position more thoroughly disqualifies these folks for positions of public trust and responsibility. They may be most disqualified for their egregious due-process violations in construing claims to be "insincere" and denying the claimants their day in court in order to protect a favored side in a case. 

Or maybe these judges are more properly disqualified from any position of public responsibility for still believing in Santa and Mr. Binkie, their special invisible friend...

Either way, folks like these don't belong in positions of power over other people's lives and property.

###

 

MEDIA INEXPLICABLY OVERLOOKS THESE TWO STORIES AND THE REALLY BIG STORY THAT LIES BEHIND THEM FOR YEARS

 So now we come to the weirdest and most remarkable and disquieting story of them all: The inexplicable brickwall of silence about the corrupt, law-evading, liberty- and rule-of-law-threatening behavior of federal attorneys and judges discussed in the two stories above by nearly every media voice across the land (and, of course, the same, and even more protracted silence about the endlessly-proven liberating truth about the income tax those attorneys and judges are struggling to evade and suppress).

This has mystified me for years.

 WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN for a reporter or correspondent or pundit to take notice, and lend his or her voice to the critically important task of spreading the word about the actual limits of the tax? 

WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN before someone blessed with a bully pulpit is prompted to help see that it's not just those trying to keep the copper-top farms running that know the liberating, prosperity-restoring truth? 

WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN to get someone in the media to help ensure this information reaches enough Americans to restore the restraint on Leviathan designed by the Founders, by the benefit of which America became the richest, freest and finest country the world has ever known by the early years of the 20th Century, and since the falling away of which during the 1930 America has become the largest sinkhole of ruinous debt the world has ever known?

Is there something about the vocation of journalism that makes one wait until corruption such as that described above has oozed out in enough density of layer after layer to bury and smother the currently accessible revelations and easily-seen evidence, so that the truth simply can't be made clear to the next, yet-more-poorly-educated generation of Americans, who will then be ever-more firmly bound in harness and ever-more thoroughly exploited and abused?

Have all journalists been co-opted?  Is that vocation peopled entirely by cowards? Or fools?

I know these words will make me no friends in the ranks of those upon whom I call, but frankly, I am at a loss.

I have posted millions of dollars, hundreds of cases, and years and years worth of rock-hard, fully-documented, can't-explain-away evidence FROM THE HANDS OF DOZENS OF TAX AGENCIES THEMSELVES.

EIGHT LONG YEARS of intense government efforts to suppress the book, and to discourage those who have read it from acting on what they learn with an endless series of creative charades-- all of which collapse in the face of solid commitment by the citizen and end with the satisfaction of the citizen's claim (while simultaneously millions of dollars in checks and other relief are issued without a word to the vast majority of educated claimants)

THE DoJ'S DESPERATE RESORT to bizarre contortions such as are described in the stories above in its effort to evade any legitimate legal contest.

The elaborate contrivances in the years-long project to imprison Pete Hendrickson (a subject too substantial to discuss here, but see http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf).

The checks and other concessions to the realities of the law are not "things slipping through the cracks"; and the contortions undertaken by government actors to fight this revealed, liberating, Leviathan-restraining truth about the tax are not "just the way things get done in the quirky courts". Everything we're talking about here is completely unprecedented.

Everything we're talking about here is the story of the century.

So, why isn't it being treated that way?

What has to be done to get journalists, Americans themselves, to take notice?

It's really important that we figure out how to make this happen, because this is NOT just an academic matter, after all. Although I tried to spice the preceding stories with a little humor, there's actually no room for any of that here. Snarcasm, absolutely, but not humor. You'll understand why I say that in a moment...

###

FINALE

Judges really can't make water run uphill, or make coerced statements into actual testimony. Nor can they read minds and competently ascertain the sincerity of a claim, so as to lawfully deny anyone his or her day in court. (I'll not say anything about whether any of them really do still believe in Mr. Binkie...)

But they WILL exercise these god-like powers, if allowed to do so unopposed. And YOU and YOUR CHILDREN will suffer the consequences.

Once these pretenses develop a little inertia they'll not be confined to protecting a giant tax scheme (although that's bad enough by itself).

It won't be long before it's YOUR inconvenient claim against the state that's being deemed "insincere" and tossed out of court-- whatever it's about, as long as it's inconvenient to the state.

And it won't be long before it's YOU-- or your neighbor, or your co-worker, or your kids-- being made to "testify" in service to the state's purposes.

And that'll be that.

Finis.

The End.

***

Visit losthorizons.com to begin learning the astonishing, liberating truth about the income tax (and about the sustained efforts by government beneficiaries of ignorance on the subject to keep you from that knowledge).

*****

RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT

Make 2012 the year the world ends for statist looters and thugs in America

 

REGARDING SOURCES OF CONFUSION ABOUT THE INCOME TAX  9/04/11

(A few words concerning the nature of the tax generally; the care and feeding of pathological delusions on that subject; the recent outcome of a repeatedly successful rule-of-law-upholding couple's suit in the federal court of claims; and "sources" and the 16th Amendment.) 

The cognitive obstacles on anyone's path to truly understanding the income tax are sometimes few, and sometimes many and varied. 

A few impediments are nearly universal.  For instance, almost everyone starts out having to get past the "big lie" notion that governments have an automatic legal claim to some or all of any wealth that changes hands in America-- or even outside of America if an American is involved in the transaction! This notion has Americans as serfs of their governments, a percentage of whose labor and investment output belongs to those governments by right. It imagines your right to make fruitful use of your resources and energy to really be just a privilege, for the granting of which the state is entitled to seize "its share". 

Simply articulating this ridiculous idea reveals its absurdity. And yet, belief in it on a gut level is incredibly widespread. This is due in part to its being encouraged in every way possible by government actors, their clients and cronies (to whom much of the yielded-up wealth is passed) and those in tax-related industries, such as "tax attorneys" and many in the accounting and "human resources" professions. These folks have kept a hypnotic drumbeat of this and other socialist nonsense pounding relentlessly for generations now, which has deeply embedded many bizarre, indefensible and essentially self-hating psychopathologies into the American subconscious.

It is also due to ignorance about what the income tax really is (a fee for the profitable use of federal stuff), and how it actually works (a subject too large for this short paper, but see 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'). The average person sees governments TREATING Americans as serfs, and getting away with it. That observer thus concludes that somehow, serfdom is the lawful status of an American, and that everyone else must understand how and why, even though he himself seems to have slept through that particular high-school civics class. 

In fact, there is just a cleverly designed scheme that induces ignorant Americans to CREATE a government claim to a portion of their earnings even when they HAVEN'T actually done anything taxable. These self-inflicted claims are then executed by tax agencies always eager for more money, and are enforced by courts that discreetly decline to point out to the victim that they authorized the exaction themselves. (American law presumes that everyone knows what he or she is doing.) 

Together, these several behaviors can make it LOOK like the claimant government is acting on its own authority, and thus make it LOOK like feudal serfdom is being practiced. But really, it always is, and always has been just ignorance being exploited through a very mature and entrenched scam. 

Happily, more and more people now recognize that their ancestors were not morons, and there ISN'T some bizarre Constitutional contradiction legitimizing their enserfdom. It's just a shame that decades went by during which ignorance reigned and was thoroughly exploited before Americans began reacquainting themselves with the truth.

The mistaken belief that governments have an inherent claim on the proceeds of all economic activity can cause its victims severe suffering. After all, as P.J. O'Rourke pithily observed, giving money and power to politicians is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. Embracing the notion that the state can lay direct claim to your wealth on its own authority not only gives the boys liquor and wheels, but ties you to the bumper of their car, as well, and dooms you to being dragged along for the wild and ruinous ride. 

Thank goodness the CtC community is out there now, cutting victims free...

Other cognitive hazards on the road to knowledge and freedom are more particular to any given traveler, although most share a common grounding. They arise from a difficulty in recognizing that the tax is as simple as it really is, and consequently perceiving subtleties and significance where neither are actually to be found. Today I want to focus on a mistaken notion about the meaning of "source" in the context of the tax.  

I'm prompted to this rumination by having just looked at a federal court of claims ruling cited in support of a dismissal of a CtC-educated couple's suit to compel several refunds. The couple is appealing, and I've been going through the dismissal in order to help them organize their arguments.

The dismissal is almost comical, and would be if real people weren't being affected. 

The feds don't contest the legitimacy of the refund claims per se, and make no effort to directly argue that the couple actually owe taxes for the years involved (2004, 2005 and 2006). Nor could they credibly even attempt to do so. 

These good folks have received complete refunds and on-paper acknowledgements that their earnings DON'T qualify as the federally-connected subclass of receipts subject to the tax ("income") for each of the last four years (2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010). The economic activities they engaged in during these latter years were the same as those involved in the years for which they have had to sue. 

The difference between the two periods is that the original filings for the years not yet refunded had been pre-CtC-education, and the couple had, as they later realized, mistakenly declared their earnings to be "income". After learning the truth, these good folks filed amended returns correcting their mistaken declarations and seeking the return of their property. 

As said, the government didn't attempt to prove that these folks actually owe any tax for the older years in response to the suit. It simply asserted, without evidence, testimony, or frankly, anything but their mere declaration, that the testimony on the couple's amended returns must be insincere; their refund claims invalid; and the court without jurisdiction to hear their claims. 

The judge adopts this naked assertion without a visible blush. She observes that the amended return testimony differs from what appeared on the originals and contends that this makes its sincerity "not plausible" (but buries this lone and ridiculous "explanatory" note within 39 pages of such convoluted gibberish as to dissuade most folks from wading through it and discerning its actual emptiness). 

In support of her authority to dismiss a claim she has decided to treat as "invalid", the judge cites a ruling made last year in another case, in which a plaintiff made a series of references involving the term "source" which reflect a mistaken notion of its meaning and significance in the context of the tax. The case is Kehmeier v. United States, 95 Fed Cl. 442 (2010). In the ruling, Kehmeier is quoted from his Complaint as saying that information contained in his return is based on his "Constitutional right to resort to the source whence his income is derived as secured under the Fifth Amendment guarantee to property", and that: 

"The source of the income in question is plaintiff's personal property and, a national tax imposed on the income from personal property is a direct tax...and is subject to the regulation as to apportionment. Because no tax-imposing operation exists anywhere in the Internal Revenue Code that is currently being apportioned, no tax is payable."

Kehmeier is further quoted as saying that the IRS "insists on assessing a tax on the income from this Plaintiff's own labor..." and that he determined the amounts that had been withheld from him, and which he sought as refunds by: "[c]ompany[-]provided records [and] my Constitutional right to resort to the source..." (The bracketing and other formatting elements in this quote are as rendered in the court's opinion.)

It is clear that Kehmeier imagines that the "source" of earnings determines (or limits) the taxable character of the amount received.* But this is not true. In fact, the purpose of the 16th Amendment is to dispose of that very argument in the particular circumstances in which it had once been held to apply. 

In the context of tax law, "source" acquired the status of a Constitutional term by its appearance in the 16th Amendment. As used there (and as thereby defined since for purposes of tax law), "source" means property from which is derived a discrete gain. The word appears because the amendment's purpose is to suppress a source-related doctrine of the Supreme Court expressed in an 1895 ruling in the case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan and Trust, 157 U.S. 429 (1895).

Pollock owned stock in Farmers' (now Citibank) and was due dividends based on profits resulting from its many and various investments and other activities. Farmers' intended to diminish the dividends by deducting and paying the "income" tax first, and Pollock sued to prevent that. 

Pollock made no argument concerning the characterization of the gains involved as "income". He simply argued that to tax dividends and rent derived by the recipient due to the ownership of stock and real estate (which were called "sources") is to effectively tax the sources themselves. Since the sources are personal property (continued the argument), the tax is a property tax rather than an "income tax", and must be apportioned under the Constitutional rule in Article 1, Section 9. The court agreed, and ruled 10 sections of the then-current income tax law unconstitutional.

The Pollock ruling had the effect of keeping enormous profits from the use of public property and prerogatives enjoyed by multi-millionaires of the Roaring Nineties and early Twentieth Century in the banking, railroading and other federally-subsidized and -controlled businesses from being shared with the larger community whose federal creature's stuff had been used to produce them. In response, the 16th Amendment was proposed and eventually declared adopted. 

The amendment was designed to sever the court-perceived connection between the protected source and an otherwise tax-suitable gain. It dictates that no private gain from the use of public privilege can be shielded from the tax by resort to an argument about the source being personal-property, as was briefly true under the Pollock ruling. Thanks to the amendment, those enjoying private gains from federal privilege must return a portion to the federal treasury. 

So, in tax law "source" has nothing to do with whether a gain is "income" (or taxable). Even the Pollock ruling didn't hold that because a gain was derived from personal-property it therefore couldn't qualify as "income". It only ruled that such property-connected gains couldn't be taxed under the "income"-excise structure.

The "Pollock" doctrinal exceptions having been undone by the 16th Amendment, IF a gain IS, in fact, the product of the exercise of a federal privilege(whether directly and personally or through investment), the gain is "income" (a measure of potential liability for the excise), and remains potentially subject to the tax NO MATTER WHAT it was derived from, or how; and no matter what the form in which it is realized. (I say "potentially" because not all "income" is actually taxed). 

Importantly, the reciprocal is also true, of course. Something that DOESN'T qualify by virtue of proceeding from the exercise of federal privilege ISN'T "income" as meant in the law and isn't subject to the tax, no matter from what source it is derived, nor what form it takes. 

The happy fact is, the income tax is really very simple. Granted, there is an enormous body of law associated with the tax. But even so, difficulty understanding the subject is mostly a self-inflicted problem. Aside from deliberate fog generated by beneficiaries of the status quo, the greatest source of confusion on the path to understanding is the impulse to imagine that the law DOESN'T mean what it says, or means what it DOESN'T say. 

But the law DOES mean what it says-- in fact, it must. Keeping that firmly in mind is the most important rule for a student of the tax. (Reading ALL the relevant law, so as to know what the law really SAYS, is the next most important rule...)

Here's a little trick that'll help keep one's feet on the right path. Consider how the tax is known: The "Federal Income" Tax. Right there in that label, taken exactly as said, and simple as pie, we see the actual object of the tax distinguished from the broad class represented by the common word 'income' into the special tax-relevant subclass of "federal income". What could be easier to understand? 

Below, you'll find three hyperlinks. Follow them each in turn, and read what you find, in turn-- carefully and thoroughly. You'll learn things critically important to the American people, and more important now than ever before in our history.

DON'T miss this opportunity. And when you're done, please share what you've learned with others.

*(Kehmeier also apparently fails to understand that "income", when used in the context of the tax, means "gains that qualify as being subject to the unapportioned income tax". Thus, regardless of what he may believe qualifies as federally taxable without apportionment and what does not, he had effectively declared his earnings to qualify for the tax. At the same time, he put $0s on his tax return where "income" receipts are to be reported, thereby providing the court with a rationale for deeming his filing invalid.) 

*****

To get a concise, illuminating introduction to the liberating truth about the tax, see http://losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf .

To get the comprehensive picture, including details on what Congress has provided for correcting the all-too-typical misapplication of the tax to earnings to which it DOESN'T apply, see http://losthorizons.com/Cracking_the_Code.htm  for the published, real-deal-in-your-hands-and on your-coffee-table edition; or http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf for the no-charge (but donation appreciated) .pdf version.

To learn about the eight-year-long corrupt effort by beneficiaries of widespread ignorance of the truth, see http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf .

 

 

08/05/11

 

MEET THE TROLLS

 

For the ninth year in a row, the accuracy of the liberating, people-empowering, Leviathan-restraining revelations about the real character of the income tax in 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' (CtC) is being demonstrated in the most practical manner possible. Complete refund checks, closing notices, lien and levy releases and other concrete acknowledgements of that accuracy by federal and state tax agencies are flooding mailboxes across America, just as in all the previous years since the book was first published.

In light of these long years of unambiguous admissions by government agencies, now churning out in their tens of thousands, it shouldn't be necessary for me to write the commentary that follows. But sadly, even while reluctantly complying with the law when demanded by upstanding, well-educated readers of CtC, the same agencies harbor nests of specialists whose job is to do what they can to slow or even stop the spread of the liberating truth about the tax.

Like sweaty, bile-fueled little trolls lurking under cognitive cross-overs, these operatives crank out blog and news-group posts, and even entire websites, focused on undermining the CtC-educated community and stunting its growth. All of these feverish efforts are richly salted with frustration and hate against good Americans who have now read the law for themselves, found that it doesn't say what the hired help has been telling everyone it means since before any of us was born, and have stood up and stepped off the "Kool-Aid Express To Ruin and Despotism" on which ignorance about the law will guarantee you a seat. All of these efforts rely on lies and logical fallacies to discourage the liberated and frighten them back on the bus, and to keep others from learning the truth in the first place.

Happily, upon competent examination every mendacity cranked-out by troll-kind simply underscores the accuracy of CtC and the desperation of its enemies. So, while having to discuss this stuff is a chore, it is a fruitful one from which we can all take intellectual and spiritual nourishment. We can also enjoy a little welcome entertainment watching the slinky trolls take their richly-deserved tumbles."

Select the book title in the first line from apostrophe to apostrophe inclusive, and click on 'insert', 'hyperlink' on the toolbar, and hyperlink it to open with a new page with http://losthorizons.com/Cracking_the_Code.htm

 

SOME PEOPLE ARE LIKE SLINKIES--
NOT REALLY GOOD FOR ANYTHING, BUT YOU CAN'T HELP SMILING
WHEN YOU SEE ONE TUMBLE DOWN THE STAIRS

 

A Critical Look at Selected Trolleries

 

P. S. A Road Map to Winning the War of Truth v. Lies

It's this simple: When the New York Times or the Washington Post or USA Today or your hometown daily publishes or discusses or acknowledges what you read in this pamphlet (and especially what you read in the chapter 'Why All The Troll-Work Is Futile'), the truth will win. That will happen shortly after Lew Rockwell, Alex Jones, Justin Raimondo, Glenn Greenwald, Paul Craig Roberts, Jacob Hornberger, Ron Paul and other big voices on the side of liberty and the law publish, discuss and acknowledge this material.

Those good folks will only publish, discuss and acknowledge this material once enough of YOU good folks forward it to them, and insist that they read it carefully and react to it seriously and thoughtfully (rather than just skimming it quickly and adopting a dismissive, "What I THINK this says can't possibly be true..." attitude, which will be their reflexive inclination).

A CAREFUL reading of this material, and SERIOUS and THOUGHTFUL reaction to it by these folks will have the good effect desired because what they will read is, of course, completely and demonstrably true, even though it will turn much of what they have each long believed completely on its head. A thoughtful and honest reaction will necessarily be that of acknowledgement, astonishment, excitement, agitation and the moving of this liberating information onto the national stage and into the national consciousness.

Once on the national stage, the truth will be assaulted, smeared, laughed at, growled at, declared irrelevant, evaded and misrepresented, until ultimately it is universally acknowledged and accepted. Because again, it's nothing but the truth. Then the war will be over, and the good guys will have won.

So, each of you please do your best to see to it that Lew, and Ron, and Glenn, and Justin, and Paul Craig, and Will, and William, and Thomas E., and Thomas Di, and Karen K., and all the other good folks with big voices who are doing THEIR very best to uphold the law read this pamphlet and learn this liberating, law-sustaining, Leviathan-restraining truth.

Don't leave it to others to do, because if there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that those "others" are leaving it to you.

It's on you, and you can do it. And not long after you have, we'll all celebrate V-IT Day ("Victory over the Ignorance Tax Day") together."
 

*****

This Week's Tax Tip

On the Use of a 4852

May 10, 2011

The use of certain government-published forms is by no means obligatory or inherently significant in making use of what is revealed about the law and the tax in 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' ( CtC) but it certainly can be convenient, and can help ensure that everything needing to be said in a rebuttal is said, when a rebuttal is appropriate. See http://losthorizons.com/tax/Misunderstandings/GovernmentPrintedForms.pdf for more on this. 

However, there have long been some folks who have harbored anxieties about using such forms. These anxious and sometimes regrettably anxiety-paralyzed folks imagine that irrespective of what one actually says on the form, it being the vehicle of those words somehow compromises the declaration. 

This unfortunate notion has deep roots in the non-CtC-educated "tax honesty" community, and is based on the misunderstanding that the tax is status-based, rather than privileged activity-based. Some believe, for example, that the tax applies to (and/or ONLY to) all earnings of "United States Citizens" (or "United States citizens"-- much store is put in some of these circles on whether or not "citizen" is capitalized)-- just because they are (or let themselves be perceived to be) such citizens (as opposed to "American citizens”; or union state citizens, such as a citizen of Michigan). 

Married to this "status" misunderstanding is the idea that the use of a 1040 declares one to be a "United States citizen", either simply because it is a form published by the United States, or by reading the title of the form as "United States Individual" (Tax Return)-- that is, a tax return to be used by a "United States Individual" (read to effectively mean "United States citizen").

Another version of this chain of misunderstanding sees the status issue as being geographically-based, and the key to be "residency" (imagining that where you are when you earn money determines whether or not the money is "income" and subject to the tax). The same basic misconstruction of the use of a 1040 is applied in this case, too: the use of the 1040 declares oneself to be a "U.S. person" and therefore a "U.S. resident"). (See http://losthorizons.com/tax/Misunderstandings/CitizenshipAndTheFourteenth.htm http://losthorizons.com/tax/Misunderstandings/snakeoilwarning.htm; and also the appendix of CtC for more on these misunderstandings.)

Similar anxieties have been conceived of by some of these folks concerning the use of Forms 4852, in which it is imagined that use of the form constitutes an "admission" of having the status of an "employee" (as that term is relevantly defined in tax law) or being in "employment" (as that term is relevantly defined in tax law). This is then somehow imagined to make any assertion of amounts of "wages" received on a 4852 which is contrary to what appears on a W-2 inherently invalid. 

There is no valid basis for such fears. Obviously, even if one WERE an "employee", reports on a W-2 of “wage” payments related to acting in that capacity can be wrong, just as they are if one is NOT an "employee". Thus, one's status has no inherent relevance to the use of a 4852, and any concern about an imagined implication that its user is an "employee" (or in “employment” -- a term defining a special subclass of “employees” which will be discussed in more detail later) is groundless. The use of the form supports no implications either way, because that status has nothing to do with its use. 

Little more should need to be said to put a proper perspective on the use of a 4852, and any fears of implications therefrom.  But because it offers a good framework for laying out several important principles of logic and law, and because these notions about the use of government-produced forms are periodically injected into dialogues within the CtC community, a more detailed discussion of what is and what isn't implied by the use of a 4852 will be worthwhile. Therefore, while everyone must do his or her own study, and come to his or her own conclusions, I want to share the following thoughts on this subject as a new Tax Tip. 

WHEN YOU FILE A 4852 AND 1040 rebutting an erroneous W-2 which inaccurately asserts payments of "wages", 

YOU ARE NOT saying you're not an "employee" or in "employment", or that the payer is not an "employer".

 Rebutting an erroneous W-2 with a 4852 doesn't involve saying anything about any of these things, because they don't enter into the picture.  Even federal "employees" can receive payments for services rendered from the federal employer for which they work which don't qualify as "wages", which are not subject to tax, and from which any "withholding as tax" that took place would have been done in error. (See 26 CFR sections 31.3121(b)-4, 31.3401(a)-2 and 31.3401(c)-1, for instance.) Therefore, whether you are or are not an "employee" is not inherently relevant to the rebuttal of erroneous "wage"-payment assertions. 

AT THE SAME TIME, you are also NOT saying you ARE an "employee"-- there is nothing on the face of a 4852 to which your signature relates that says "I am an "employee" (or "in employment"), or that the payer/withholder involved was/is an "employer" relative to you, as those various terms are meant in the law.

Nor does the use of a 4852 affirm or dispute the aptness of the creation of a W-2 about you in the first place. A 4852 is designed to do neither of these things. The form is designed simply to correct assertions about how much you were paid that qualified as "wages", and how much was "withheld” from you “as tax" (and/or how much was paid to you as deferred "wages" in the form of a pension). Its use doesn't declare you to be (or not be) an "employee", or declare the person whose testimony you’re using the form to rebut to be (or not be) an "employer". Whatever is true about those issues has no relevance to what a 4852 is used to declare.

ALL YOU'RE SAYING by the use of a 4852 is that someone created a W-2 or 1099-R containing erroneous assertions that you were paid "wages" in particular amounts, and what the correct amount of "wages" paid to you is.  You are also declaring how much was diverted from amounts owed to you by the application of "withholding" rules which only provide for "withholding as tax" based on the amounts of "wages" paid, (plus whatever you answer to the questions on lines 8 and 9).  What you’re NOT doing is arguing about WHY anything that may have been paid to you doesn’t qualify as “wages”; or explaining or defending anything at all.

Think of it this way: Say one day you find in your mailbox a copy of an allegation by a resident of a nearby town who claims to have seen you illegally parked in a spot posted for 15-minute parking only between 12-6AM weekdays.  Your accuser says he has submitted the allegation to the town clerk, and copied you.  Needless to say, you promptly act to correct the record.

At the town offices, you find a “Rebut a Bogus Illegal Parking Accusation” form. The form doesn't ask you to declare whether you were in town that day, or whether you have a driver's license, or whether or not you actually own a car.  It just asks you how many minutes you were parked at 123 Elm Street at between 12:00 midnight and 6 in the morning on February 15, 2011. You fill in the blank with "None".

Now, did using this form to say "None" admit (or deny, for that matter) being in town that day, having a driver's license, or owning a car? No. Its use in the manner described just says you weren't parked at that spot on that day during those hours.

RETURNING TO W-2s, if, subsequent to your rebuttal of a W-2 with a 4852 (and for some difficult-to-imagine reason), a challenge were to be issued specifically "accusing" you of being an "employee" (or in "employment"), then it would become time to rebut that accusation.

BUT SUCH A CHALLENGE WOULDN'T BE MADE, and wouldn't be fit or legally-meaningful. The issue of being an "employee" is irrelevant within the narrow context of the return process, since even payments made to "employees" are not automatically "wages" or subject to "withholding [of amounts] as tax", or to the "income tax". Establishing whether someone is or isn't an "employee" doesn't make or break anyone's assertions about the payment or receipt of "wages". 

Making such a challenge would be like the town in our "parking" model coming back and demanding to know if you were parked in town that day.  The answer would be, "What difference does THAT make?!" 

If you drew a real nutcase correspondent, who shot back with, "If you weren't a "town parker" that day, why did you use a TOWN FORM to deny parking at 123 Elm Street for more than 15 minutes between 12 midnight and 6 AM, EH?!", you would point out that the form you used is published by the town for rebutting erroneous "illegal parking" accusations, and that's what you used it for.

 You would further point out that nothing on the face of the form to which your signature applies declares you to be (or not be) a "town parker". (You might refer your excited correspondent to examples of how status specifications are made when they are meant to be indicated by the use of a form, such as the federal W-9, on which one of the explicit declarations is that of being a "U.S. Person").

 You would point out that even the instructions provided for the assistance of those who can't figure out how to complete it, which say that it is the form to be used by "town parkers" who have been erroneously accused of illegal parking to rebut the accusation, DON'T say that ONLY "town parkers" are to use the form, or that NON-"town parkers" are NOT to use it. Nor do those instructions refer non-"town parkers" to any other instrument or process to which they must resort for their rebuttal to be understood. (As an example of how restricted use is indicated when it is meant, you might point to federal Form 843 "Claim for Refund", on the face and in the instructions for which is plainly said that the form is NOT to be used for claiming "an overpayment of income taxes", and that such claims should be made by way of a tax return, instead.) 

 

Finally, you would say, "By the way, we STILL haven't gotten past the, "What difference does THAT make?" issue... Unless you have some kind of evidence to present beyond the mere accusation that I parked illegally, you've got no basis for carrying on about this in the face of my rebuttal, whether I was a "town parker" that day or not.”

"B..B..B..But," might sputter your persistent pit-yorkie, "I'm deeming your rebuttal to be "frivolous", and therefore not taking it into account!" 

"Why?"

"Because using it says you're a "town parker"..." 

"As was just made clear, no, it doesn't; and as was also just made clear, that's irrelevant, anyway."

 Pretending not to have heard you, your bureaucrat might rush on: "...and it says you didn't park illegally, and, uhhh... and that makes it "frivolous" because ALL "town parkers" park illegally!"

"Wow! Talk about "frivolous"...!"

 "ARRGHH! GO AWAY!!"

"See ya." 

 

Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

 Recognize what is relevant and what isn't. Keep your focus on what is.

 The fact is, whether you were parked in town that day has nothing to do with whether you parked in that restricted place; and the question would never be asked. If it WERE asked (and if you hadn't been), you would then testify that you hadn't been parked in town that day.

 BY THE WAY, none of this means or implies that you are asserting that the exceptions to "wage" qualification of payments to federal employees apply to you. Unless you ARE an "employee" as defined in the law, they don't (but at the same time, unless you are such an "employee" none of the rest of the "employee"-related provisions apply to you, either, and no payment to you can qualify as "wages"). It just means that "employee" status is not a first-tier determinant as to whether one has, or could have received "wages", and so it is irrelevant to the questions and assertions on a 4852.

BY THE WAY II, any withholding that may have taken place is obviously not evidence of its own fitness. Some folks have expressed anxiety over the use of 4852s due to the lines on the form for reporting amounts "withheld as tax". The fear is that declaring that amounts were "withheld as tax" is to endorse the FITNESS of such withholding, because it is only from "wages" that the sort of "withholding" described can properly be done.   

 Simply describing this circular reasoning makes its invalidity clear, and little more need be said. Considered without the distortion of anxiety, it is clear that to acknowledge that amounts were "withheld as tax" is to acknowledge nothing but the truth. Those amounts WERE "withheld as tax"! They were just WRONGLY "withheld as tax", as is being said at the same time by one testifying to not having received any of the "wages" to which such withholding properly applies, and by which it is to be measured.

When you see a ridiculous argument to the contrary, attempting to contend that by declaring that withholding took place one is “admitting” that what was withheld from was “wages”, you can take it as firm evidence that the speaker is a moron, or a dissembler with no real and honest position to argue (or both).  

FURTHER... 

You are NOT "correcting" the W-2 by submitting a 4852. Correcting the W-2 can only be done by the party who created it in the first place, and would typically be done by way of a Form W-2c (although a creator that became educated in the truth about the tax, and whose company wasn't actually a federal entity might do it just by way of a personal affidavit...).

 Rather, by submitting a 4852, you are CORRECTING THE RECORD-- by which is meant the evidentiary record in the files of an entity claiming the right to impose a tax based on amounts of "wages" paid (a government, in other words). Until you speak with your submission, that record consists of only the W-2.

 Your 4852 corrects the record by introducing accurate contrary information. It is not a correction of the W-2 (which means making the W-2 itself accurate); it is a correction of the record of information initially created by the W-2.

                                                                                          *** 

AS LONG AS WE'RE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I want to take this opportunity to also address a very common misunderstanding about the meaning of "employment taxes", which results from the use of that phrase to describe certain tax provisions the codified representations of which are gathered in the IRC in a subtitle of the same name (Subtitle C). That aggregation and an overly-casual use of the phrase "employment taxes" by accountants, lawyers and others causes many to have difficulty remembering that these taxes are just "income" taxes like all others. They are simply a subclass of "income" taxes which are measured using specially-defined terms denominated as "employment" and "employee" (and in some chapters even more narrowly, such as "railroad employee"). 

The use of these terms or that title for the subclass doesn't make them "taxes on being employed", or "working taxes", or in any way anything other than, or different from, "income" taxes of all other varieties and denominations.  They are still taxes on the exercise of federal privilege.  This subclass simply involves certain specific exercises of privilege, and certain special application protocols which are related to that specialized exercise, making it proper or helpful to distinguish them accordingly.

The text of 26 USC 3121(l) offers a good illustration:

"The Secretary shall, at the American employer's request, enter into an agreement (in such manner and form as may be prescribed by the Secretary) with any American employer (as defined in subsection (h)) who desires to have the insurance system established by title II of the Social Security Act [42 USCS sections 401 et seq.] extended to service performed outside the United States in the employ of any 1 or more of such employer's foreign affiliates (as defined in paragraph (6)) by all employees who are citizens or residents of the United States, except that such agreement shall not apply to any service performed by, or remuneration paid to, an employee if such service or remuneration would be excluded from the term "employment" or "wages", as defined in this section, had the service been performed in the United States."

 Read that again carefully, if necessary. This language clearly distinguishes between services performed by an employee which DO qualify as "employment" (and payments for the same, which therefore DO qualify as "wages"), and services by, and payments to, an employee which DO NOT so qualify.

This is because chapter 21 of the Code, where 3121(l) is found, uses a special definition of "employment" to narrow the application of its "wages" definition to federally-connected workers (and to just a subset of such workers). This is distinct from the structure of chapter 24-- the general "withholding" chapter-- where the narrowing of ITS "wages" definition to federal-worker remuneration hinges on its custom definition of "employee".

It is because of that difference that the language quoted above distinguishes between 'employees' and those in "employment", treating them as non-concurrent categories. In chapter 21, 'employees' is defined (more-or-less) as anyone who would meet the common definition of that word. But all those who meet THAT definition are NOT in "employment" as THAT term is defined in the chapter, and on which its definition of "wages" depends. Thus, we can see that for purposes of the "employment taxes" subtitle of the IRC, being a commonly-defined 'employee' has no inherent relevance to the application of the tax. In short, "employment taxes" doesn't mean "taxes for being employed". 

TO SUMMARIZE, while there definitely ARE traps of meaning and presumption set for the unwary in the tax structure (and no one knows this better than the CtC-educated), it is just as important to eschew paralyzing or misleading paranoia such as fears related to the use of certain forms as it is to recognize and avoid the real snares lurking in the statutory design.

It falls to each of us to diligently apply logic and knowledge to every aspect of the law with which we must deal. We must also apply common sense. 

Applying common sense means recognizing that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. It also means recognizing that those seeking to sustain the decades-old "ignorance tax" for another few years until they have looted every penny of wealth out of the hands of average Americans won't hesitate for a moment to prompt and exploit any stumble into uncertainty and confusion by CtC-educated Americans which might discourage them from acting personally, and from spreading the truth about the tax to every corner of this great country. Don't be taken in by paralyzing and divisive misunderstandings injected into community dialogues periodically, such as those discussed here suggesting that the use of a 4852 is inherently contradictory when one is rebutting an errant W-2.

Be a careful warrior. But also be a warrior illuminated in your knowledge, surefooted in your reasoning, and powerful in your confidence. 

Visit the “Every Which Way But Loose” series to read fully-documented case studies of CtC-educated Americans dealing with tax agency misrepresentations such as those discussed above at http://losthorizons.com/EveryWhichWayButLoose.htm

Enjoy especially revealing victories unhindered by bad agency behavior at http://losthorizons.com/tax/Highlights.htm  

Spread the Liberating Truth about the Tax: See http://losthorizons.com/NewsletterFeaturePage.htm

 Share your Victories for the Rule of Law: See http://losthorizons.com/NewsletterFeaturePage.htm

 Get CtC for Free (and send it to everyone): See http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf

 

 

An "Emancipation Day" Reminder

April 16, 2011 

As we wind up 2011's "tax season" we are treated to a multi-faceted irony. This year's "tax-day" has been postponed from the statutory April 15 to April 18 because a holiday observed in the District of Columbia called "Emancipation Day", memorializes an event relating to the ending of race-based slavery, fell on a Saturday this year. In order to ensure that it can be taken as a day off work, the holiday is observed on the preceding Friday, and that means “tax day” has to move.  This produces an irony that is rich for at least three reasons: 

For one thing, what is memorialized by "Emancipation Day" was not really an outright emancipation. Instead, the event celebrated was the passage of the "Compensated Emancipation Act" (CEA), under which tax funds were used to buy slaves from their "owners", and only in D C. However unquestionably virtuous in its freeing of some 3,100 people from horrendous victimization, the fact is that the CEA was a cynical political ploy.

Lincoln, who didn't care a fig about the existing slavery, and had both campaigned on a promise to support the preservation of slavery in the South, and had lobbied throughout his political career for the deportation of all blacks from America to Africa*, was not prosecuting a war of conquest against the breakaway Southern states in order to end "the peculiar institution". His interest was in retaining those states as a source of revenue for the benefit of the industrialized North under the tariff structure then in place. However, Lincoln recognized that the cause of looting the South for the sake of a bunch of rich industrialists didn't inspire too many young Northern men to risk getting their legs blown off. 

Casting his war as being prosecuted for the high purpose of abolishing slavery WAS inspirational. But it was awkward for Lincoln to make that pitch in order to raise troops while slavery continued undisturbed in the very seat of the federal government. Hence the ironic CEA-- a buy-off financed by taxes (rather than what it should have been: a simple declaration that all slaves in the district -- or the entire North, for that matter-- were henceforth free, and the former "owners" be damned). The act freed one group of privately-held slaves in order to re-capture, at bayonet-point, a different group of people for continued exploitation by a different group of private interests through the mechanism of the federal government. 

Second, it was under the same Lincoln that the "income" tax was initiated, and it is a virtual certainty that much of the buy-off under the CEA was financed thereby. That tax, while benign and, in fact, good and virtuous when properly understood and applied, came to be mis-understood and mis-applied, and to operate as a form of almost universal enslavement for generations until its actual limitations were re-discovered just eight years ago and laid out in ''Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America" (CtC). Adding to the irony, even though the truth about that tax has now been revealed, emancipation from its misapplication is being strenuously resisted by the federal and state governments... 

Third, it is by virtue of the government influence and control exercised over education in America-- an influence and control the exercise of which is financed by the funds extracted from the citizenry under the misapplication of the "income" tax-- that these facts are generally unknown by the American public. Thus, again, the incidence of this celebration on the statutory "income" tax deadline is a sublime irony.

Still, the irony, while broad, is paper-thin, for emancipation from the latter-day slavery of the mis-applied "income" tax IS going on, making for perhaps a fourth irony in the delay of "tax day". Because of that delay, occasioned by workers in the seat of the federal government having a tax-paid holiday, the self-emancipation that will be claimed by ten of thousands of American students of the information in CtC 2011 (maybe hundreds of thousands, this year) will be bumped to the week following the celebration of the officially-labeled “Emancipation Day”.  (By the way, if you're not one of those re-claiming your liberty, visit losthorizons.com.) 

Anyway, as we wind up this "tax season", it's important that we remember not only what the law is regarding federal taxing authority and its limits, but also WHY the law is what it is. We must never forget that the founders organized our system of government to make each of us part of the "invisible hand" (IH) by which all of society benefits through each individual looking out for his or her own interests in our civic character, as well as our economic character. 

The economic application of the IH principle takes advantage of the unique knowledge possessed by each person as to his or her own special skills, talents, and interests, and the incentive to maximize-- for one's own benefit-- the efficiencies and returns of every effort and investment. Each person being free to peacefully apply this knowledge and purpose organically ensures that overall quality and productivity are high and that resources are wisely allocated, all of which are to the benefit of everyone in the country. 

This freedom-oriented IH dynamic is in sharp contrast to any kind of centrally-controlled, dictated and regulated structure, in which choices become skewed by the interests of the controllers (at the expense of the controlled); efficiencies in resource-allocation are hobbled by the controller's limited knowledge of vast amounts of diverse and often highly-specialized information (if not entirely disregarded in service to some ideological or purely self-serving agenda of those making everyone's decisions); and incentives for high quality and productivity are anemic. 

The "civic" side of that IH design works in the same beneficial way in maximizing the quality of public policy, and protecting against the inefficiencies and sometimes outright destructiveness of central control. The civic IH mechanism provides for each American to retain individual power over what part of his or her substance is invested in public projects and purposes (with the only exception being through high-political-accountability-disciplined structure of apportioned direct taxation administered indirectly on the people through the agencies of the individual state governments). 

The civic IH design ensures that each citizen can both stop feeding fuel to a mis-directed "ship of state" that isn't going where they want to go, and evacuate a ship in the hands of the irresponsible (or mad), which is steaming full-speed-ahead toward the rocks of one kind of disaster or another. Thus, any grave errors of policy will be slowed and ultimately arrested  before becoming too destructive, as the highly tuned-in begin withholding their support, and prompt others to look more carefully at what it is to which they are contributing their support. 

Exercising our rights and responsibilities as good citizens-- in the manner provided for, and, indeed, relied upon by the founders-- is what CtC is really all about. Those who want to rule don't want you to know about your power in this regard, and don't want you to exercise your power. THEY want to be the ones deciding how much of YOUR substance will be burned to drive the ship to THEIR preferred destination. 

They want you to believe that it would be improper for you to look out for your own interests (including your interest in preserving and upholding the rule of law); that somehow it is socially irresponsible for you to NOT subordinate your preferences and purposes to those they would assign to you. Balderdash! 

The fact is, it is irresponsible for you to NOT elevate your preferences to primacy, and to view what are declared to be "public interests" as simply the interests of competitors. This is all "public interests" really are, whether sometimes congruent with your own interests or not. Either way, it is by you looking out for yourself, and acting to enforce the Constitutional provisions designed to help you do so, that America's needs are best served. 

So exercise your civic power, and meet your civic responsibilities, as the founders intended. Be a proud part of the "invisible hand" and exercise your lawful control over the engine that's driving "full speed ahead" for the rocks. 

Get CtC for free at http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf

Learn about the seven-year-and-counting desperate effort to keep you from learning the liberating truth about the "income" tax at http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf

Learn the truth about the tax and so much more at losthorizons.com 

 

*Two excellent books offering detailed, thoroughly-researched and annotated studies of Lincoln, his actual policies and politics (as contrasted with the myths taught about him for generations in government schools) and his enormously significant (and generally harmful) impact on American history are 'The Real Lincoln' and 'Lincoln Unmasked', by historian Thomas DiLorenzo. I highly recommend both of them. 

Also, I want to take this opportunity to recommend two other books that have helped me burn some of the idle time that's been forced on me over the last nine months. The first is 'The Sacred Nonaggression Principle' by Brian Wright. This book is an excellent study and analysis of the principles underlying libertarianism as a discipline, and of freedom as the ultimate goal and expression of truly ethical behavior in human relations. Visit Brian's website at thecoffeecoaster.com for more info. 

The other book I'm recommending today is titled 'On Your Own In Tax Court-- U.S. Tax Court without a Lawyer' by Lysander Venible. This book is a detailed package of information about how a tax court trial is conducted, and while students of CtC will normally have no occasion for doing so, anyone who has reason to go into tax court will benefit from knowing what this book provides before doing so. Visit www.TaxCourtHelp.net for more info.

 

 

The Final Rites of Spring, 2011

April 2, 2011

Well, here we are at the climax of 2011's Sorting-Out Season. This is the time each year when the culmination of the "income" tax season, and the choices made in light of the now long-available truth about the tax, divide Americans into two classes of citizens. 

On the one hand are real citizens. They are the courageous and the responsible cadre. They are the "This great country isn't going down into lawlessness and despotism on my watch" grown-ups. 

On the other hand are those who are nominally "citizens", but who really are subjects. Their personal civic authority has been entirely surrendered to the very parasites who eat out their substance and that of their children, and they are just a "see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, name-no-evil" mob of irresponsible adolescents who blithely (or timidly) stand by and do nothing except supply the coal to the gravy-train-for-the-politically-connected that is carrying them downhill at ever-greater speed toward absolute ruin and the Hell-on-Earth horrors of the unconcealed, unrestrained tyranny that will inevitably follow. 

Enormous efforts have been made by the corrupt State to push you into the latter camp. Primarily this is done by trying to persuade you that undertaking your own study of the law is inappropriate-- indeed, pointless-- because the law belongs to the State and means only what the State wants it to mean. 

The effort to dissuade you continues by suggesting that if you DO make your own study, and conclude that the law ISN'T the tool of those acting in the name of the State-- that it means what it says, even when that meaning is inconvenient to the voracious State (and that it's important that everyone understand this and act accordingly, or there is no real law, and no liberty)-- and if you make your understanding matter by expressing it in a practical manner (rather than just griping, or standing silent while your wealth is lawlessly stripped away), you will then be savaged by the wrath of the sociopaths infesting Washington and its myriad little fortresses of darkness currently littering this once and future great country of ours. 

So (continues the twisty little argument), just submit to the sociopaths from the get-go. Do what they want you to do and believe what they want you to believe (or at least profess what they want you to profess). Submit from the outset. 

It will be better for you, because resistance is futile... 

Everyone knows you can't fight City Hall; resistance is futile... 

It's OK to submit-- everyone else does; and anyway, resistance is futile... 

America is full of nothing but couch-potatoes and you're entirely alone; resistance is futile... 

What's the matter with you? Didn't you hear?! RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!!! 

Just lie back and get comfortable. It won't hurt a bit, as long as you don't struggle. 

(And this will remain true until you've let yourself be bled to the point where you CAN'T struggle, at which point it will start hurting A LOT, because then resistance really WILL be futile, and those feeding on you won't have to worry about maintaining your cooperation and quiescence...) 

 

For those who DON'T buy the baloney, and who are on their feet and standing their ground because they know that resistance to lawlessness and despotism is not only NEVER futile, but is always required of those who love and are worthy of the blessings of liberty and the rule of law, here is this week's Tax Tip: 

Don't Forget What Comes First                                                                                                                  (A Cognitive Cue) 

It's important to keep from letting the tail wag the dog in your understanding of the limitation of the tax. 

The exploiters of ignorance encourage everyone to imagine that all economic activity happens within the "federal universe", and that all receipts are "income" unless exempted by Congress. This, in turn, encourages the notion that it is by looking to the statutory definitions and other tax-related provisions of law that we discover whether our receipts qualify as "income", and taxable as such, under such designations and definitions as "wages", "self-employment income", and so forth; or prove that they do not. But this notion has things exactly backwards. 

One's non-federally-connected earnings as a commonly-defined 'employee' don't fail to qualify as "wages", for instance, because they (or one's commonly-defined 'employee' status) are not described in the statutes concerning "wages". It is precisely the other way around: it is because one's non-federally-connected earnings can't qualify as "wages" that they are not described in those statutes. The statutes aren't the description of everything Congress chooses to designate as "wages"-- they are the description of every employment-related receipt Congress CAN Constitutionally describe as "wages" (from which it then provides some number of exceptions in service to its own agenda). 

The fact is, even if the statutes, or some construction of them (whether legislative, regulatory or judicial) APPEAR to describe unprivileged earnings as being within their scope, they really do not, and one can take it as a given that the disconnect is simply not superficially obvious. 

Thus, even if a statute were to be found that says, "Pete Hendrickson's earnings are "wages", and subject to a non-apportioned federal tax", this wouldn't mean that the Constitution had been overthrown, or that my unprivileged earnings are subject to a direct federal tax without apportionment. It would simply mean that somewhere else in the law must be buried a special definition of "earnings", or even of "Pete Hendrickson's earnings", that reconciles the apparent contradiction. Somewhere will be found a section that says, "For purposes of chapter ___, "Pete Hendrickson's earnings" includes Pete Hendrickson's federally-privileged earnings", or even just "earnings includes federally-privileged receipts" etc.. 

In fact, even if a qualifying section DIDN'T exist, the construction that would have to be given to "Pete Hendrickson's earnings are "wages" and subject to a non-apportioned federal tax" would amount to the same qualified effect.  Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution is still the law to which the federal government is subject, and it still says that my non-privileged earnings (and yours) cannot be taxed by the feds other than through apportionment. As is true of all law, no matter what a statute facially declares, it CAN'T have (or be held to have) a meaning in conflict with the Constitution. 

Understanding this important aspect of the tax (and law in general) will help you immensely in dealing with the thicket of custom definitions, and the deployment of same by the tax agencies and legal departments that badly want you to be confused and uncertain of your ground. Knowing that whatever it may look like, the thicket must conform to the fundamental law, and must be held to do so no matter whether it is easy to see how it does or isn't easy to see how it does, will allow you to step right over the thicket. 

When confronted by a skeptic (or agenda-driven opponent) who challenges you to explain why your earnings don't fall within some definition or another, whether the broad "Gross income is all income..." definition in section 61, or a more specialized definition of a subclass of "income", like that of "wages" at 3410(a) or 3121(a), you don't have to argue over what is said in those definitions. All that need be pointed out is that the "no capitation other than by apportionment" Constitutional prohibition remains in force, and thus, whatever those definitions may appear to say to your unschooled correspondent, what they DON'T and CAN'T say is that non-federally-privileged earnings or receipts are federally-taxable without apportionment. 

Keep this very clear in your mind, and teach it to others as you introduce them to the liberating truth about the completely benign "income tax", and educate them about the completely pernicious "ignorance tax" by which they have been being victimized for their entire lives.  (For a detailed discussion of the subject of this Tax Tip, see 'What "Income" Means, And Why' in 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?'. (Visit  http://losthorizons.com/WGRAM.htm  to learn more about this companion to CtC.)

 

Now, armed with this clear understanding of what rules, and what is subordinate, and everything else you've learned in 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' , go forth into these last couple of weeks before April FOOL'S Day and choose your side (and help your neighbors, friends and family understand the choice that they inescapably face, as well).  Are you going to stand with the grown-ups who understand that Heaven knows how to put a proper value on its blessings, and it would be a strange thing indeed if Liberty didn't command a high price, as Thomas Paine helped the Founders remember 235 years ago? 

Or are you going to "lie back and get comfortable", and bleed away in a peaceful but ultimately fatal bovine torpor? 

What will you teach your children? To stand beside you?  Or to lie beside you? 

Will you teach them that the State belongs to the law? 

Or will you teach them that the law belongs to the State, and the State can make the law mean what it wants; that those who run the State are the law; that the Constitutional republic that is your children’s rightful heritage is dead, and that they will live their lives as ruthlessly exploited serfs because, you know, "resistance is futile"? 

Get CtC for free at http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf

Learn about the seven-year-and-counting desperate effort to keep you from the knowledge in CtC at http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf

Learn the liberating Truth about the Tax at losthorizons.com

 

 

It's All On You

2/18/2011  

"Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness." Exodus 22:1

"Be the change you want to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi

A couple of weeks ago, my darling Doreen sent you all my latest message "from Inside the Belly of the Beast" It was a discussion of the claims-based nature of the American (and English) legal system, intended to help everyone understand a couple of important concepts about speaking on your own behalf when thrust into a legal conflict.

As usual, 99% of the feedback to that discussion consisted of gratifying, heart-warming versions of, "Message received; we're standing up and standing tall!" accompanied by victory reports from a number of Warriors. At least one of these new victories is of the especially illuminating type suited to the 'Every Which Way But Loose' collection, coming only after staunch resistance to IRS threats and demands; and a Warrior shared news of a recent Tax Court victory over an IRS attempt to evade his educated filing, as well. Great stuff!

However, there were also a handful of comments of an entirely different character, which can be divided into two types: "What, are you crazy?! Look at what happened to you!!"; and "No worries... A knight on a white horse is due any day now, so I'm just waiting to be saved." Each of these prompted a few thoughts in response that I want to share with you today.

Before getting to the feedback and response, though, I want to review and slightly expand upon the previous message. It consisted of two parts. The first concerns the fact that when someone has expressed a claim against you, you WILL either affirm or deny what has been said, whether you like it or not, and even whether you understand that this is true or not. 

Let's dispose of the latter part right away: You are DEEMED to understand. Period. 

You've all heard, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." This DOESN'T mean that you can't defend against an alleged offense by claiming you didn't know you were doing something wrong. 

In fact, you CAN defend on that argument. That's what "willfulness" is all about, for instance. 

"Willfulness" is a concept that comes into play as a matter of statutory specification, such as in all "tax crimes", for instance. "Willfulness" specifically means "a deliberate violation of a known legal duty". If a criminal statute provides for a "willfulness" element, then it must be proven that the accused was under a legal duty, knew of that duty, and deliberately violated that duty. If the accused was ignorant of the duty, he didn't commit a crime, even if he violated the duty. 

Ignorance is an excuse under the general principle of "mens rea", as well, which means that no action can be a crime without a guilty mind-- a deliberate (or at least criminally negligent) demeanor. 

While it's true that "mens rea" isn't afforded much respect in a lot of prosecutions these days, that's not because it isn't an ancient principle, thoroughly integrated into our legal system.  It is. 

However, we have a lot of corrupt prosecutors who don't want inconveniences like the actual innocence of their victims to get in the way of their career trajectories; and there are a ton of utterly lazy defense attorneys out there who can't be bothered to argue the point, because they've learned they can make a nice living with much less effort and study by talking their clients into accepting plea-bargains. Judges are under no obligation to fill in arguments that defendants' fail to make, and rarely do so. 

Anyway, what the "ignorance of the law" thing really means is that you are presumed to be familiar with concepts like "acquiescence through silence", by which you are deemed to have assented to, or agreed with, allegations of which you have been notified, and which you have not then positively, and in a legally-meaningful manner, disputed, rebutted or corrected. Thus, you can't go into court and say, "Hey, I didn't mean "Yes"! I didn't know that I had to say something!!" 

OK, that brings us back to: You WILL speak in response to another's claim. Like it or not, you're either going to SAY "Yes", IMPLY "Yes" or SAY "No!". You can choose any of these three, but you can't choose "No answer!", or "I refuse!", or "I'm saying nothing, so if you act, it's on you!". Wrong. It's always on YOU, and if you don't say "NO" then you're saying "YES!" 

That brings us to the second point of the last message: If you stand silent (non-filing) in the face of assertions about you, or directly say you've engaged in taxable activities by declaring receipts on tax forms, it is YOU who provides the moral and legal energy that will be used to collect the tax. If you really DID engage in the activities, this is right and proper, of course. BUT IF YOU DIDN'T, your silence, or your more explicit false report, is not only a shameful disgrace which dishonors you, but it also legitimizes the state's every action against you. 

The bottom line is that one way or another, your moral and legal energy WILL be spent. It'll either be spent righteously, or unrighteously. There is no middle ground, and which way that energy goes is on you. 

Don't ever doubt the power of that energy. Your "Yes" is a green light, and authorizes the state to take your stuff (and treat you like you owe it duties as a subordinate, or as though you are under contract with it). Your "NO" is a hard red.

In fact, just take the lesson from what you see before you, plain as day. I and my family are suffering right now just to intimidate YOU into not saying "NO". If your "NO" could be ignored or evaded, that's what would happen. The scamsters would yawn, "You said "No"? Big deal. We don't need your "Yes", and your "No" means nothing." 

The fact is, when the scamsters want to take money you don't really owe, they DO need your "Yes", and your "NO" means everything. This is why the DoJ is trying to frighten you away from saying it even while simultaneously admitting its importance by asking the court in its PR lawsuit against Doreen and me to order us to take back our "NO!", and replace it with a "Yes". 

The government needs our "NO!" replaced with a "Yes" in order to have the pretense of a legal basis for its bogus suit, with which it has been trying to discourage you from speaking freely and honestly for several years now. Do you really think the scamsters would attempt to dictate our testimony, demand that we be barred from revealing that it is dictated, and even demand that we be made to declare our actual freely-made testimony to have been wrong-- at risk of the media catching wind of this transparent lawlessness-- without a desperate need? 

No suit asking a court to order coerced and dictated testimony-- something unprecedented in any area, not just regarding tax returns--has ever been attempted before or since.  Similarly, no one has ever been charged with the "crime" of just saying "No" except me. 

Neither is likely to be ever risked again. If tried again, the matter might end up before an honest judge (there are some) who would blister the DoJ's hind end with his or her outraged denial/dismissal and give the truth about the tax the sort of airing which the assault on me is intended to smother. Fearing this reversal of fortunes after having gotten lucky the first time out, the scamsters rely on folks looking at my circumstance and being frightened into surrender-- that is, they rely on frightening you into turning your own energy against yourself. 

Well, with that, we're already into the discussion about the "paralysis feedback". 

I referred earlier to two different versions of this feedback. Again, they can be summarized as, "How can I stand up in the face of what is being done to you?!"; and "I don't need to stand up-- the cavalry's coming!" Both of these reflect a misunderstanding (willful or not) of the inescapable fact that the only solution to their bad behavior is your good behavior: In the end, it's on you. 

The first of these fear-based reactions partakes of the age-old notion that "You can't fight City Hall," a notion suggesting that "City Hall" is some kind of overwhelming, unstoppable alien force that landed on Earth in the dead of night and is working its implacable will against the native population. "City Hall" vigorously promotes this notion... 

Word to the paralyzed: "City Hall" is simply a bunch of men and women looking out for their own interests-- just like you. All they have going for them when their interests are in conflict with yours is an assumed authority-- that is, an assumed "authorization to act" (which is all "authority" means). 

For decades, "City Hall" has heard nothing but "Yes" (explicitly or implicitly), and nary a cognizable "NO!"-- that is, one made as provided for by law, to which "City Hall" must pay attention. (Remember, prior to CtC, no one knew how to say "NO!" in regard to the tax, even when they should, and even when they tried to.) 

"City Hall" has taken you at your word. Acting on your (individual and collective) "Yes" (spoken or implied), they've eaten your lunch and grown strong, while you have grown weak. Things have gone on so far that you now look at their hugeness and their arrogance and you say, "You can't fight City Hall!" 

Of course, you CAN "fight City Hall", and you should, when "City Hall" is trying to exceed its actual authority. You just have to stand up and do it, and all that's involved is to stop being an unrighteous witness (whether due to ignorance or timidity) and to start being a witness for the truth. In fact, that's also your "work-out" routine. You start saying "NO!" whenever you should, and grow strong while they grow weak. 

There is no other way, and there needn't and can't be, either. Things got where they are today by millions of bad, cowardly, lazy decisions to just give "City Hall" the "yes" it wants. The only way to turn things around is through millions of good, courageous, active decisions to insist on the truth, no matter how scary doing so is made by junk-yard dogs who are used to having their way with you. 

In the end, of course, this "can't fight City Hall (how dare I stand up?)" thing is a "white knight syndrome" paralysis in the face of adversity. What it really means is, "I won't stand up and do what I know is right until somebody else makes doing so painless, unfrightening and easy." All I can say to that is, "C'mon, people! Grow up!!" You know perfectly well that if everybody waits for enough OTHER people to act before THEY act, then nothing gets done-- except exactly what each malingerer deserves to have done to him. 

Further, in the matter of the tax, you're the only one that can stop your "Yes" from being said when it shouldn't be, in any event. 

"Be the change you want to see in the world." There is no other way. 

The other variety of "paralysis feedback" is a direct "white knight" evasion, and each of the three or four responses to my earlier message that belong in this category were nearly identical. Each refers to organizations of activists who are asserting the impending "restoration of the republic" by virtue of things like registering themselves with their county clerks as replacements for current government officers, and the like. 

It isn't necessary to get into the virtues and flaws of the activism described, and the claims made. What matters is that optimism about the fruits of these activities is leading some to stand down from speaking their own truth in the expectation that there will soon be nothing to stand up for, because the junk-yard dog and its supporting staff are about to slink away, tails between their legs. 

Junk-yard dogs don't just slink away. They have to be told "NO!" over and over. Each one of us has to say the "NO!" ourselves, because it doesn't matter that some activist or group is saying "NO!" if individually you're still saying "Yes". It's on you, people. It's always on you. However, and not at all coincidentally, when you've said "NO!" enough times, and encouraged enough of your friends and family and neighbors to follow your example, you'll look around and discover that the republic has been restored... 

John Adams once observed that the liberty secured by the founding generation could only be preserved by a virtuous people. He didn't mean a church-going lot, or folks who were kind to puppies and children.  The virtues he was thinking of are courage, honor and integrity-- the virtues that equip a person to do what's right, even when it's hard. 

We all have it in us to be the virtuous people Adams and the other founders were counting on. We just have to face the fact that the responsibility is on us, and then be the change we want to see happen.

***

Get CtC at http://losthorizons.com/cc.htm , or download the .pdf version, with a documented history of government efforts to suppress the book included, at http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf .

P. S. If you got this as a "forward", you may not have any real idea of what I've been talking about! Ask your forwarding benefactor, who has thereby proven himself or herself to be one of the best friends you'll ever have, to tell you the liberating truth about the "income" tax.

Or visit http://losthorizons.com .

 

1/29/11

WHY IGNORANCE-TAX PARASITES HATE AND FEAR CtC

Here's something you need to understand about the truth and the law, and something those who want to exploit and abuse you without interruption don't want you to understand:

The legal system that operates in America is a structure for the assertion and enforcement of claims. It is nothing else.

It is not a champion of justice; it is not a seeker of truth.

When the legal system compels performance, it is enforcing someone's (positive) claim of a duty owed. When the legal system thwarts or punishes behavior, it is enforcing someone's (negative) claim of a trespass against his rights. 

The legal system doesn't know who has a legitimate claim to what. Knowing such a thing is neither in its nature, nor its purpose. The system is merely a claim-enforcement and conflicting-claim-resolution entity. It doesn't decide who has a claim to enforce; it simply makes itself available to claimants who have made that decision for themselves, and provides machinery designed to give both sides-- claimant and defendant-- a best shot at making their respective cases and arriving at a just and legitimate outcome (as long as everybody involved, especially the judge, competently and honestly plays by the rules). 

In a nutshell, our legal system is claimant-driven-- it is static unless and until someone makes a claim. When someone does make a claim, the legal system provides a format and venue for prosecuting that claim; and if the claimant is able to prove his case as provided-for by the rules of the process, the legal system will then help him enforce the claim. 

Looking at it from another direction, even someone who has a legitimate cause will enjoy no support from the legal system unless and until his (positive or negative) claim is asserted.  That forgotten bank account might really be the one YOU opened 30 years ago, but until you make your claim, that fact means nothing. 

Partaking of the same principle, silence is worse than nothing in the face of someone else's untrue claim against you. Silence means his claim is unrebutted, and therefore deemed agreed-to and proven (as a matter of necessary legal principle). Being unrebutted, agreed-to and proven, the claim prevails-- EVEN IF IT IS OBJECTIVELY UNTRUE. The mindless machinery of the legal system will move against you in support of the fiction on the claimant's behalf. 

And you know what? This is precisely proper.

The legal system is blind. It doesn't know who is right, or who has rights, or what they are. Only you (and other claimants) know these things, and can assert these things (even while also being required to prove these things). 

This brings us to CtC ('Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'), and why it is so threatening to the exploitive parasites that infest the District of Corruption. You see, the income tax is a claim-based tax. The claims are that the one alleged to owe the tax has engaged in “taxable activities” by using federal property or privileges to acquire wealth.  Because stuff belonging to the federal government was involved in the gains, it gets to claim a piece of the action.  (The feds have given state and local governments permission to take a piece of this same action, too.) 

Most of the millions of "taxable activities" claims made in America every year are false. The sorry fact is that due to decades of encouragement by hungry tax agencies, and precious little independent study of the law, lots of Americans are in the habit of sending the government signed forms ( “W-2s” and “ 1099s”) alleging federal connections to every payment they make to others, even while having no idea what they are really saying by doing so.  A huge volume of government income tax claims are based solely on these allegations.  But, like all claims, those that someone owes taxes to a government-- even objectively false claims-- can be enabled by agreement (either explicit agreement or by silence). When this happens, the claimant-government IS PUT IN THE RIGHT, in the eyes of the legal system and all others, and properly so. 

No one will EVER be able to say that the subsequent enforcement of that tax-debt claim was improper-- even if it's a complete fiction, and even if the very day after the target's property is seized, the government announces that the tax has never really applied to the sort of things that target had done. It's a simple legal formula: Someone said the target engaged in federal activity (meaning he became indebted to the government). The target didn't dispute this. What is fiction is now agreed by everyone involved to be "true"; and the feds took the money. No one's rights were violated; no fraud; no crime. 

On the other hand, if claims of tax liability are rebutted, the claimants are PUT IN THE WRONG-- unless and until they can and do somehow prove the claims right in a valid, adversarial contest in an impartial court. Unless and until that proof is forthcoming (which it cannot be, if the claim is objectively untrue), any enforcement of the alleged tax debt is illegal. But this alignment of the law on the side of the truth can only happen if the target of an invalid tax claim makes his or her own testimony, when and how it counts. 

CtC teaches the reader how and why to switch from being the ignorant and helpless enabler of objectively untrue claims against him to being a claimant on his own behalf and/or a legally-effective defender against illegitimate claims made by others. CtC teaches the reader how to say, in a legally-meaningful manner, "You don't have a legitimate claim to any of my money, and what's more, I want back everything of mine that you are holding!" And THAT'S the problem for the parasites. 

You see, as I mentioned above, unless and until any person rebuts the claim made by another, that "other" is deemed to have proven his case, in the blind eyes of the legal system. That is, even when making an objectively false claim, the target's failure to rebut puts the claimant in the right, and the system can and will act to enforce the claim in good conscience, and with the approval of all observers, current and future. 

On the other hand, when a claim is objectively false, and the target DOES say so in a legally-meaningful manner, then the claimant is put in the wrong, and that makes all the difference. Then the legal system cannot act on the claimant's behalf in good conscience and with the approval of all observers, current and future-- especially those who might be on some future criminal-liability tribunal. 

Quite the contrary, in fact. Once false claims have been rebutted, the claimants-- and anyone who facilitates them-- enter the category of outlaws if they attempt to enforce the claim. 

Now you understand the problem of the parasites infesting DC, who want to go on happily fattening themselves and their friends on your hard work by making, and enforcing, false tax claims. Anyone who studies CtC learns what the law actually means by "income" (and what it doesn't). He learns how tax claims get made, how to rebut them when they are wrong and how to make claims to recover withheld or paid-in amounts. Once that knowledge has been put to use, any parasite attempting to make and enforce a false claim against that educated American does so without any protective legal justification. 

FALSE CLAIMS PROPERLY REBUTTED CAN NEVER BE LEGITIMATED. 

Unfortunately, the legal system is NOT really blind-- at least, not reliably so. Those appointed to administer the system have their own views, and their own agendas, as do those who appoint them and advance them. The administrators are supposed to leave all this at the office door, but they're human. They will be objectively honest and faithful to their trust only in proportion to the articulation and sturdiness of those who wish it to be so. As a consequence, even asserting one's legitimate claims, or rebutting the illegitimate claims of others doesn't guarantee immediate and painless justice. 

BUT... 

NOT asserting one's legitimate claims and NOT rebutting the illegitimate claims of others DOES guarantee INJUSTICE, in the sense of an objectively wrong outcome. At the same time, this inaction leaves the legal system off the hook for any responsibility, and even though you may think everyone does or should know better, it also leaves the claimant "technically" IN THE RIGHT, and future study of the affair will unambiguously come to this conclusion. 

On the other hand, ASSERTING one's legitimate claim, and/or REBUTTING the illegitimate claims of others, puts a legal system that tolerates or contributes to an illegitimate outcome AND the illegitimate claimant IN THE WRONG. Future study of the affair will unambiguously come to THIS conclusion, with all the possible liability and recriminatory ramifications of that conclusion. 

SO... 

In the end, it is YOU who decides whether you're going to authorize the evil little totalitarian fiction that the state has an automatic claim to everyone's earnings, and gets to decide how much each person keeps for himself, for his family's needs, and for his own security. It is YOU who empowers the state as the arbiter of how much of your wealth and hard work gets handed over to the politically-connected class on Wall Street, or to the armaments industry, or to the prison industry, or to the welfare industry-- and how much goes to pay for the hard work of handing out all that money to these cronies and clients. As long as YOU play along, that's how it goes, and when it goes that way, you've no right to even complain. 

At the same time, of course, it is also YOU who can decide to step back up into the sunshine of respect for the truth and the rule of law, including the Constitutional limits on federal taxing power and practices. That's what the CtC Community is all about-- courageous, committed individual Americans, actually taking meaningful steps to restore the republic. 

Right now America is in another season of truth or lies.  Right now, YOU have the chance to choose. 

PLEASE. Use your power, make your choice, and honor the sacrifices made by your ancestors to give you the freedom to do so. 

Or..., don't.

Keep hoping someone else is going to come along and fix everything, so that you don't have to pipe up or get up. 

That's surely easier, and it seems safer, of course-- as appeasement and conflict avoidance always do. 

BUT, HOW'S THAT BEEN WORKING FOR YOU? 

And is it going to be better or worse when you face this question again next year, if you do the wrong thing now? Are the bad guys going to be weaker, or stronger after you've given in to them for another year? 

How about you? Stronger? Or weaker? 

Give it some thought. 

I hope you all understand that the seven-year assault on CtC and on me personally by the tax-feeders is for one purpose-- to intimidate YOU into letting this year's brief opportunity for testifying freely, honestly and on your own behalf slip away. That is, those who can't win legitimately want to do so by scaring you into paralysis, or yet another year of "playing it safe" by "playing along". That's how THEY win every time, even when they haven't got any real cards to play. 

By the way, I'll answer the "weaker or stronger" question posed above: The more times you compromise your principles, the easier it gets to do so. 

So, don't let them win this battle and gain control of your testimony. Speak your truth. Stand your ground, and keep your feet. Your dignity is worth it. 

Besides, the worst they can do is accuse you of not believing what you say. This would be to browbeat you into saying what you don't believe...

I leave it to you to decide which is worse. 

***

Get CtC at http://losthorizons.com/cc.htm , or download the .pdf version, with a documented history of government efforts to suppress the book included, at http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf .

 

P. S. If you got this as a "forward", you may not have any real idea of what I've been talking about! Ask your forwarding benefactor, who has thereby proven himself or herself to be one of the best friends you'll ever have, to tell you the liberating truth about the "income" tax.

 

Or visit http://losthorizons.com .

 

If you got this direct (you good Warrior for the Truth and the Law, you), be somebody's else's best friend, and forward this message. You may end up with a little explaining to do, but what are friends for, if not to help show each other the way out of the darkness of servitude and exploitation and into the light of liberty?

 

 

 

IT IS TIME FOR THE LIBERATING TRUTH TO GO VIRAL 

The 2011 "Season of Lies" is about to begin, during which thousands of companies across America will crank out millions of "information returns" (W-2s, 1099s, K-1s and so forth). All of these will allege that the named party engaged in taxable activities. Most of these allegations will be false. These false allegations will oblige CtC-educated Americans to go through the annoyance of rebutting erroneous allegations in order to recover withheld property or keep themselves from being harassed for taxes not owed.

Worse, those false "information return" allegations will induce NON-CtC-educated Americans to improperly sign over as much as 45% of their earnings to a rapacious state who will use much of it to pay functionaries to "supervise", order about, and interfere with the very schmucks from whom it was mulcted-- and to do the same to the rest of us, too. Adding insult to injury, those functionaries will be paid enormously more for their counter-productive obnoxiousness than even the GROSS amount earned by the average schmuck from whom the huge chunks of wealth that finance all of this are extracted.

In keeping with one of the more unfortunate aspects of human nature, those who have been taken in (and thus "taken"), will afterward be enthusiastic sponges and echoes for the various sophistries used to justify it all (better that than face the fact that you're a schmuck). Further, they will be subconsciously hostile to facts that threaten to demonstrate that they have been victimized. Thus, a huge socially- and economically-destructive, and nanny- if not police-state constructive lie gets both exploited and nourished at the same time.

I think it is important that the liberating truth get equal time!

Therefore on this, the 7th day of Christmas and the last day before the new year, I am happy to announce: 

THE RELEASE INTO CYBERSPACE, AND THENCE, I HOPE, INTO EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN HOME, OF THE 12TH EDITION OF CtC AS A FREE EBOOK!! 

It is time that the keys to lock the rapacious state back down to the limits designed by the Founders are put into every hand. It is time the truth about the tax goes viral. 

PLEASE help make this happen. 

Download the book at http://losthorizons.com/CtCforFree.pdf

Send it to everyone. 

Ask everyone to send it to everyone else. 

The regular printed CtC remains available, of course, as do 'Upholding the Law' and 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?', the sequel to CtC. Visit http://losthorizons.com/cc.htm for ordering information. But while we wait for the book that furnishes the tools for the restoration of the Founders' dream of a fully-empowered, fully-in-charge American citizenry to show up in every home library, let's get it on every virtual desktop, and in front of every pair of eyes in the country RIGHT NOW. 

Whether the truth rules, or is pushed aside by lies, has just been a matter of how many people come to learn it, since that truth was first put to paper seven years ago. Seven years is long enough to wait.  Let's spread the liberating truth about the limits on federal taxing power the way jealous regard for all the peoples' liberties was once spread over this land. 

It's up to us, as it always has been and always will be.

 

 

 

December 23, 2010

Warriors, here's the next thing to send to the media people to whom you sent the "whistleblower" PR piece I sent you all on Friday, Dec. 3 (or as an opener to anyone new): 

DO YOU CARE THAT YOUR GOVERNMENT IS WILLING TO BREAK THE LAW TO KEEP INCONVENIENT TRUTHS FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC? 

Here's a question for you: Say the federal government sued to take custody of your children. They provided no evidence of a cause-- they merely alleged that you had done things for which they were allowed by law to divest you of your rights to your kids. However, in the same suit, the government asked the court to order you to sign an affidavit DECLARING yourself to have done those "divestment-qualifying" things. 

Say the judge then granted the feds' "Motion for Summary Judgment" in the case-- without a trial, or even a hearing, just by "finding" everything alleged by the government to be true, and that therefore no issues are in controversy for trial. This despite you having filed sworn statements in the action declaring the allegations to be untrue. 

Say further that the judge then ordered you to sign the affidavit declaring the government's allegations to be true or go to prison for contempt until you do; and what's more, that you were not allowed to indicate on the affidavit that you were signing it under duress-- because otherwise the bureaucracy that was supposed to take custody of the kids would refuse to act, due to recognizing the affidavit as invalid, and the government's claim illegitimate.

What would you do? 

That's the question facing Peter and Doreen Hendrickson right now, in the face of federal District Court judge Nancy Edmunds' having done precisely what is described above, in a suit precisely as described above. It's not their kids the feds want to seize, but their money, and the affidavits they are being commanded to produce-- with contents dictated by the government, and under orders to conceal that this is the case-- are amended tax returns. 

Understand that the Hendricksons are NOT being ordered to testify. They already HAVE testified. The government just doesn't like what they said, so it is ordering them to change that testimony to something it likes better. 

This assault on the rule of law is taking place even though the feds have never disputed the original returns the Hendricksons filed years ago. The feds have never issued "notices of deficiency", conducted audits, filed liens or ever done ANYTHING to assert any claim against these folks before bringing this "lawsuit" out of the blue, with its unique request that the defendants in the suit be ordered under threat of prison to declare that the government has an interest in their money which the government itself has never been willing to make in any of the ways that the law says it can and must. 

In fact, the federal Department of Treasury has always agreed-- on its own formal Certificates of Assessment, and over the signatures of certifying officers-- that the Hendricksons owe no taxes for the years involved (2002 and 2003) and never did, and that their original returns are perfectly valid. 

Nonetheless, the IRS and DoJ filed a suit precisely as described above almost four years ago. The action has played out just as in the little example above, with Judge Edmunds, on Wednesday, Dec. 15, telling the couple that either they sign the farm over to Snidely Whiplash, while concealing that they are being ordered to do so, or little Nell gets run over by the train! 

But, of course, you start to walk away, saying, "Hey, that's just about taxes. Not my thing..." 

Sure, right. And RICO is just used to prosecute mobsters. 

Get real. 

Got kids? 

Think about the little analogy above. 

How about real estate?

Think how much more convenient it will be for corrupt officials to bypass the politically-charged "eminent domain" process and just make you sign over your property or make you declare that it is in disrepair, or out of code, like the Hendricksons being ordered to declare themselves in debt to the feds.

Ever disagree with any government policy or practices?

Think how much cleaner and neater and more pleasing to the bureaucratic sensibility it will be to do "voluntary" commitments, with the consent forms all in order and no messy protests in the record... Even the Soviet Union hadn't thought up that little trick. 

Do none of these get your motor running?  Think creatively.  The bad guys will. 

When the rule of law crumbles, everybody is in greater and greater danger, and in the hands of an ambitious government, grown increasing accustomed to serving its crony-clients without any restraint, this kind of precedent, if allowed to stand, is a sword hanging over the head of every American. 

But really, as ominous and troubling as are these predictable applications of this new way of torturing the once-proud rule of law, they don’t hold a candle to the significance of what the government is trying to cover up by ordering the Hendricksons to produce these false documents. 

Very briefly, in 2003, Peter Hendrickson wrote a book presenting the results of a deep study of the income tax that he had begun several years before, when the tax code and underlying law became available in digital form, and able to be effectively examined for the first time since the now-3.5-million-word monster of a code first crossed the 500,000-word mark many decades ago. Upon implementing the astonishing information about the tax revealed in the book-- 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'-- the Hendricksons became the first people in history to legally reclaim EVERYTHING withheld from them in connection with the federal income tax scheme-- including Social Security and Medicare withholdings.  At the same time, by means of the filings the government is trying to force them to change, the Hendricksons properly established the fact that they owed no income taxes despite having perfectly typical earnings from perfectly typical jobs. 

Tens of thousands of other Americans, in ever-increasing numbers, have been doing the same ever since, after reading this liberating, individual-empowering book. 

The product of Hendrickson's research is not weird theorizing a la Irwin Schiff, or blustery arguments that the tax is unconstitutional, or that it only applies to foreigners (such as is imagined by Wesley Snipes and those who counseled him). Instead, Hendrickson simply presents in-depth information about what is found in the "fine-print" of the tax law-- fine-print the IRS somehow fails to include in all the forms and documents it sends out to millions of American businesses and individuals every year, but fine-print which the agency obeys when it is properly invoked, albeit sometimes reluctantly. 

Hendrickson's research starts with the origin of the tax in 1862, and covers all enactments since, the legislative history, the relevant court rulings and every other authority on the subject. All of that research has been checked and rechecked by thousands of initially skeptical readers, including attorneys, CPAs, doctors, engineers and others from all walks of life, whose own complete refunds are now posted on Hendrickson's website, losthorizons.com-- concrete evidence that the government itself agrees with Hendrickson, even as it struggles to suppress this information and frighten people away from it by assaulting Hendrickson and his wife. 

In fact, Hendrickson has millions of dollars worth of the refund checks received by these good Americans from the federal and 33 state governments posted on losthorizons.com, along with everything filed by these folks in many cases (and what he and Doreen have filed, also, of course). There are also lien releases, levy releases, deficiency-allegation "closing notices", garnishment reimbursements, Treasury Department transcripts and even complete documentation of episodes of readers of his books filing their claims for the return of their withheld money and being strenuously resisted by the government before ultimately winning the argument. These include the claim filed, the threatening and balking responses, the replies, the further threats and bluster, the sterner replies and restatement of the filer's position, and finally, the refund checks or closing notices. 

Now you have an idea why the feds tried to suppress Hendrickson's first book with four assaults in court alleging him to be "promoting an abusive tax shelter", only to be forced to abandon each of them due to being unable to make their case.  Now you can imagine why those losses didn't deter them, and they turned a year later to the Stalinist "lawsuit" in which they asked a judge to order Peter and Doreen to repudiate the freely-made testimony on their original tax returns with "testimony" dictated by the government, and declare themselves to owe taxes that the federal government has been unable to substantiate with any evidence.

Now you have an idea of why Peter Hendrickson has been the target of a sustained smear campaign orchestrated by the IRS and DoJ, even to the point of arranging hatchet pieces on him in the New York Times.

Now you will understand why the feds ended up struggling through four grand juries in order to produce an indictment of Hendrickson on charges that his claims of no taxable activity on his filed forms was incorrect, and that he even believed them to be incorrect, after even the heavily-publicized decree by Judge Edmunds in the civil “lawsuit”, almost surreally touted by the IRS and DoJ as a “loss in court” for Hendrickson, failed to deter any of the students of Hendrickson’s work.  Those readers continued acting to uphold what they now know to be the law of the land, and continued recovering and retaining control over their money and power.  Posted refunds and retentions on losthorizons.com have more than quadrupled since that lawsuit began.  The feds clearly felt the need to deploy an even more desperate and extreme measure in order to frighten Americans away from this liberating truth.

You may also understand why the government was unable to produce a single witness testifying to these things in the resulting trial, and instead relied on a series of abuses, such as the jury being prohibited by the judge from seeing the "fine print" Hendrickson revealed in the law-- which is just the straightforward and exact words of the statutes themselves, verbatim as written by Congress-- and on its being INSTRUCTED by the judge that what Hendrickson reported was incorrect (despite no evidence being presented to that effect). Being told that it was required to make its decisions based on those instructions, the jury understandably found Hendrickson guilty. 

Hendrickson, effectively silenced for the moment, as was intended by this criminal assault, is awaiting a reversal of this outrage by the appellate court in a federal prison in Milan, Michigan.  Meanwhile, his readers continue to receive complete, every-penny refunds from the federal and state governments, without interruption. 

I'm sure that by now you want to learn more... 

Read what you'll find at http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf.  It'll knock your socks off.

 

With The Media And The Country In A State Of Transformation,

 We Truth-Tellers Can't Afford To Miss The Moment 

It's not possible for me to adequately describe the potential significance of honest media coverage of CtC's revelations; or of honest coverage of the immediate, fearless, adamant and ongoing implementation of that liberating and Constitution-upholding information by Americans from all walks of life, all across the country. Nor is it possible for me to describe the potential significance of honest coverage of the increasingly desperate and draconian efforts to suppress that information and discourage that implementation by federal and state governments. 

Happily, I don't need to describe these things. You all understand how significant such coverage would be to our task of revitalizing the restraints on out-of-control government provided for us by the framers of the Constitution, and which our ancestors managed to maintain in place for 150 years (with the predictable consequence being our becoming the most prosperous country in the history of the world), but which the ambitious, avaricious operators of the state managed to slip free of over the last 75 or so (with the predictable consequence being our becoming the most debt-ridden country in the history of the world). 

It is also not possible for me to tell you when any given media voice is going to be ready to look and learn, and then deliver that coverage. This "readiness moment" changes every day, and neither you nor I will ever know in advance when your local paper, or your favorite blogger, or an Alex Jones or Lew Rockwell is going to be primed for exposure to this truth, whether because they're looking for an angle for a "TEA Party" story that day; have uncovered some other government corruption in another story already underway; or have just enjoyed the pleasures of a personal audit.

All I can tell you is that the errant federal government itself has written, and continues to write, the best, clearest and most unmistakable exposition of the accuracy of CtC with every week that goes by, and with every effort to suppress the liberating truth about the income tax uniquely revealed in that book. Your favorite media voice WILL take an interest at some point, and importantly break some ice, if the story is kept on his or her radar-screen. 

So send out what follows early and widely, and don't stop. The adversary of the truth is counting on you guys giving up on vigorously and relentlessly spreading the truth before they are forced to give up their lies. Don't let them have the satisfaction of being right. You've got to view yourself as a one-man or one-woman PR department, and work like a successful PR department does, which is at least as persistently as the competition. They endlessly spread lies; we've got to endlessly spread the truth. 

The Most Significant Whistleblower on Government Malfeasance in American History Languishes Unsung in a Federal Prison After a Corrupt Trial 

In 2003, Peter Hendrickson published his first book, 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America'. The book reveals how the federal and state governments have been systematically extracting trillions of dollars from hapless Americans for decades by exploiting a widespread, tax-agency-cultivated misunderstanding about the true nature of the income tax.

The fact is, while millions of Americans DO owe income taxes each year, because some or all of their earnings DO qualify as “income” within the statutory and Constitutional structure of the tax, many, many millions more do not, because THEIR earnings DO NOT qualify as “income”.  Those who don’t understand the specialized meaning of this term in the tax law subject themselves to taxes that they don’t really owe, including Social Security and Medicare taxes, as well as those more generically labeled, and state and federal tax agencies are happy to take the money. 

Hendrickson, who became the first American in history to recover Social Security, Medicare and all other federal income tax-related amounts withheld from him the same year ‘Cracking the Code’ was first published, has now written three books on the subject of federal taxing authority and other Constitutional issues. Tens of thousands of his readers have been getting all THEIR money back -- week after week for more than seven years now -- from federal and state governments that never really had legitimate claims to the taxes for which it was taken in the first place.  The feds, especially, don't like this one bit. 

During these seven years, the IRS and DoJ have tried repeatedly to suppress Hendrickson's books and readership. This began with a series of attempts to charge him with "promoting an abusive tax shelter" on the basis that what he reveals about the law is false. Four such assaults were defeated in federal courts in Michigan and California over the course of 2004 and 2005. 

Unable to successfully attack the information, the agencies then began efforts to frighten readers away from the books. In 2006, four days before "tax day", the IRS announced in a national press release that Hendrickson and his wife were being "sued" to recover complete refunds that the agency claimed were issued by "agency mistakes" (even while it continued to make tens of thousands of identical "mistakes" to ever-increasing numbers of Hendrickson's upstanding readers demanding the return of THEIR property). 

After sitting for 9 1/2 months on the Hendricksons' immediate motions to dismiss the suit on various grounds, the judge in the case, Nancy Edmunds, simply “found” all allegations in the government’s complaint to be “facts”.  She issued a “summary judgment” in the government’s favor -- without a word of explanation, without ever holding so much as a hearing, and without the government ever producing any evidence attempting to support its “complaint”.  It didn’t need to -- the fix was in.  A very readable legal brief detailing some of the key improprieties involved in this “judgment” can be found at http://losthorizons.com/PostCivilVacateAppealBrief.pdf.  The Hendricksons appealed, but the circuit court, which as a matter of policy defers to a district court’s “finding of fact” on the presumption that they are made in good faith and are based on evidence, upheld the judgment (but only by way of an opinion it refused to publish even after being asked to do so by the DoJ…) 

There has never been a single word of analysis or reasoning ventured to support the summary decree in this uncivil affair -- indeed the “final judgment” was written in its entirety by the DoJ attorney who “argued” the case for the government.  Nonetheless, the IRS announced nationwide that “Hendrickson has lost in court!” with as much fanfare as it could manage, and continues to do so to this day.  What it DOESN’T mention in its press releases and on its official and private-label websites is that the government has never gotten a penny from the Hendricksons, and that its own Dept. of Treasury records actually show not only that the Hendricksons have never owed a tax for the years involved, but that the feds still owe them the return of more withheld money.  

In fact, in a subtle but telling admission of the complete accuracy of what Hendrickson has revealed about the tax, the government, three years after the civil case summary judgment, has found itself having to ask the court to order the Hendricksons to create "amended" tax returns containing government-dictated numbers and other information, and to prohibit them from indicating that such instruments are coerced and not their own testimony. The idea, it admits, is that it can then pretend that the returns are voluntary admissions by the Hendricksons on the basis of which the government will further pretend that they do owe a tax for the years involved, and take money from them. This even though the whole pretext for the "lawsuit" in the first place was that such a tax debt had already long since been established... 

Despite all the fanfare with which the government tried to make much of its "civil action" against Hendrickson, no dent was put in his readership, or its activism. Indeed, the bogus assault had the opposite effect. Anyone who actually read through the filings in the case quickly saw that the government "complaint" was a corrupt ploy, and therefore just another admission that it has no legitimate argument to make against Hendrickson. 

Consequently, this backdoor admission of the accuracy of Hendrickson's revelations about the income tax simply joined the thousands of obvious and straightforward varieties represented by millions of dollars of complete refunds of withheld, paid in or seized property routinely and continuously being made to Hendrickson's readers by the federal and, so far, 33 state governments as well, sometimes even only after extended resistance by balky tax agencies trying to turn back the tide. Hundreds and hundreds of the checks, "closing notices" and lien and levy releases, along with the complete filings leading to all these results are posted on Hendrickson's website, losthorizons.com, which by the time of the "civil" government attack had grown to routinely logging 1.25 million hits every month from Americans stepping up to learn the liberating truth about the tax. 

In addition to his transformational (and Big Brother-inhibiting) revelations about the income tax, Hendrickson is a prolific essayist on other areas of law and public policy-- regularly publishing sharp criticisms of federal corruption and revealing well-concealed, but fully-functional legal limitations on government authority in a host of areas, from gun control to drug prohibition. In 2008, the feds escalated their efforts to silence him. 

In November of that year, after failing in front of three grand juries, the feds finally figured out how to get one to indict Hendrickson.  He was charged with ten counts of not believing what he has said in his books and the dozens of lectures on the tax he has made all over the country, and the hundreds of articles and legal papers he has written on the subject, and what the feds themselves have been admitting to be true for almost a decade, week in and week out. 

Technically, the charges allege that when Hendrickson said on various tax forms that he had not received any of the statutorily-defined payments known as "wages" -- which in tax law are NOT normal, undistinguished  ‘payments for labor’ but are a special class of payments made to government workers, office-holders and appointees, and a number of other specialized recipients, and which are subject to the tax -- this was untrue, and he believed it was untrue.  But the government couldn't produce any evidence of his receipt of such "wages" in the trial that took place in Detroit during late October, 2009. 

Indeed, not a single government witness testified about Hendrickson's receipt of anything at all, or that anything on his tax forms was false, incomplete, or wrong in any way.  But the government was allowed by the presiding judge to present to the jury hundreds of pages of briefs filed by the DoJ in the "civil" case containing unsupported assertions and speculations by government attorneys and others that the Hendricksons had received “wages” and “self-employment income” during 2002 and 2003, while being excused from producing any of the authors, who should have been made to face Hendrickson and explain their words to the jury, and risk impeachment over these suggestive statements. 

The jury, even after asking to see the actual words of the law relevant to the charges, and even despite Hendrickson's insistence that it be given this actual language of the law, was denied this request.  Instead, it was given only prosecution-written "interpretations" of these statutes -- per a ruling made by the judge AFTER the close of the defense presentation.  Jurors were told they were obliged to render their decisions in the case based exclusively on those completely inaccurate, but prosecution-serving "interpretations", which had been carefully designed to oblige the jury to convict. 

Nonetheless, as it has for three years since the “civil lawsuit summary judgment”, the IRS touts the outcome in this kangaroo-court trial as a “loss in court” for Hendrickson and what he teaches about the law.  It is, of course -- in the same sense that Galileo “lost in court” over the question of whether Earth revolves around the Sun, since he, too was convicted for his heresy and ended up imprisoned… 

Actually, Galileo’s story is not so apt an analogy, in one sense.  While both his “trial” and Hendrickson’s really involved the mere exercise of power against inconvenient men, rather than an honest truth-finding process, at least in Galileo’s case the Church resorted to what it sincerely believed to be authority supporting its position.  In the Hendrickson suppression, no one on the government side believes Hendrickson is wrong, and the prosecution and the trial judge did everything possible to avoid any resort to authority, knowing that all the authorities are against them.  Indeed, the judge even went so far as to prohibit the defense from bringing in IRS experts to explain aspects of the tax to the jury. 

Tellingly, despite this latest “loss in court” for Hendrickson and his revelations about the tax, his readers continue to get all their money back week in and week out, even as he sits behind federal razor-wire. 

Details on the history of the government campaign to suppress Hendrickson's revelations, with documentation, can be found at http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf. A very layman-friendly legal brief laying out the corrupt practices in trial that resulted in Hendrickson's railroaded conviction can be found at http://losthorizons.com/PostCrimAppealBrief.pdf.  For a quick introduction to the liberating truth about the income tax, see http://losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf.

Answers to a few typical questions from those newly introduced

to the truth about the “income tax

Q. Whatever Hendrickson revealed about the tax, won’t Congress just change the law if enough people keep learning it and acting on it?

A. The limited character of the tax is due to Constitutional constraints outside the control of Congress, not statutory design that Congress can change.  That’s why Congress hasn’t “done anything” already, even after this information has been in print for seven years, and is being used for the benefit of more and more Americans every day.

 

Q. If everyone stopped paying the income tax, wouldn’t the government have to shut down?  No more defense?  No more roads? 

A. First of all, “everyone” wouldn’t stop paying the income tax.  Many Americans DO owe that tax every year.  But the income tax is not about revenue -- it’s about politics.  The federal government has existing, legitimate mechanisms for raising every penny it raises now, without reliance on the income tax.  These alternative mechanisms merely impose a much higher degree of political accountability on spending the peoples’ resources than does the misapplied and misunderstood income tax (and make it much more difficult for politicians to re-distribute wealth to favored beneficiaries).  The framers of the Constitution set things up that way on purpose and for very good reasons.

 

Q. If it’s not about the money, why would the feds step outside the law to suppress this information? 

A. It’s about power.  As noted above, the misapplied income tax offers power without accountability.  Plus, the misapplied income tax is used to manipulate Americans in many different ways in service to various private interests.  But more than that, when you come to understand the truth about the income tax, you come to understand ALL the Constitutional limits to which the federal government is actually subject, as you never have before.  The feds don’t want Americans to regain that understanding, and the power to rein in the government that it offers.  It’s that simple.

November 29, 2010 

losthorizons.com

For more information, contact phendrickson "at" losthorizons "dot" com

 

 

Editorial…                                                                                                                    November 14, 2010

My Dear Warriors for Liberty and the Law, 

I greet you from within the belly of the beast, or so it feels.  I am not consumed, but merely swallowed; still, it is dark, damp and smelly here, and all about me are those who really ARE being digested, in the curious exercise in which a government grown corrupt eats selected insubordinates to gain a fearsome aspect imagined to be strength, even when each such morsel diminishes the moral muscle actually critical to its long-term endurance. 

Most of those whose lives are being consumed here are nothing but victims.  They are drug dealers, “financial criminals”, and the occasional machine-gun owner -- some pretty scruffy, and who you wouldn’t want living next door or dating your daughter (and others about whom you might feel the opposite).  Scruffy or not, none have any business being in federal custody at all, and are simply because of the abusive distortion of authority delegated under the ‘Commerce Clause’ that has helped transform “Uncle Sam” into “Big Brother Sam”, and which is the only real victim-producing crime connected with any of these prisoners. 

Of course, there ARE a few inmates here who really DID trespass against federal prerogatives.  I've met a few robbers of national banks, for instance; and one actual counterfeiter-- by which I mean someone who actually tried to make his own Federal Reserve notes (FRNs).  Although the feds themselves will never acknowledge it, this latter offense must be carefully distinguished from the mere offering into the market of an alternative to FRN paper trash, like the Liberty Dollar, which is not only a perfectly lawful activity, but one we need to see a great deal more of in these times. 

There are also some "identity thieves" and some tariff-evaders, and doubtless some others who are guilty of mundane assaults and burglaries and such against the person or property of other people actually committed within federal municipal jurisdiction, although I've not met any of those yet (at least none that have admitted to such offenses-- you never really know...).  The overall mix is such that while there is a constant sense of being in a very quirky, somewhat unpredictable and somewhat volatile crowd, it is not the constantly menacing sense of swimming amidst a pack of sharks. 

In fact, I've met some very likable people here, and 'Cracking the Code', 'Upholding the Law' and 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?' have been taken up by quite a number.  Further, while I would never recommend this particular resort, I have been taking advantage of the enforced excess of otherwise unproductive time and energy to get in a lot of miles on the track, and am regaining the fitness I had lost spending 16 hours a day in front of my computer for the last four or five years writing papers, books and newsletters, posting FAQs and tips, answering emails, and writing and responding to a ridiculous number of legal briefs.  Thin lemonade, perhaps, but better than nothing...

However, describing this prison is not my purpose in writing today.  Rather, I am writing primarily to apologize to everyone for my long "radio silence", and, far and away more importantly, to apologize for my tardiness in responding to the many of you who have thoughtfully and lovingly written to me and to Doreen during this phase of the government’s futile book-burning campaign against the inconvenient truth of CtC.

Your letters, cards, emails and gifts have been MOST deeply appreciated, and I am very sorry to have not been able to directly respond to each of you.  Unfortunately, there are logistical impediments to doing so and corresponding privacy concerns.  I can't simply address a letter from here in the way you would at home.  Instead, I have to enter address information into a computer which then allows the printing of a label which will permit a letter to go out.  The same is true of email (which Doreen prints and sends to me).  Thus, while I can receive mail from you without your privacy being compromised, mailing back to you is a different story.

So, here is my "group hug" of all of you at once, and my most sincere thanks to you all.  I can't possibly articulate what your expressions of affection and support mean to me, and to Doreen, because it is too much for mere words.  You'll just have to use your imaginations, and think big.

Regarding the other issue, the long "radio silence" between commentaries, let me explain that other than the time on the track, all of my "free" time here has been spent writing my appeal briefs for both the kangaroo-court criminal conviction and the similarly abusive 2006 PR lawsuit against Doreen and me, which is back in the appellate court on our Motion to Vacate the outrageous "summary judgment" issued long ago by Judge Nancy Edmunds.  You can see our brief in that appeal at http://losthorizons.com/PostCivilVacateAppealBrief.pdf.  My brief in the criminal case can be found at http://losthorizons.com/PostCrimAppealBrief.pdf.  I strongly urge everyone to read both through carefully and thoroughly.  You will find this to be a very rewarding exercise.  Afterwards, send these to everyone you know, along with the introduction found at http://losthorizons.com/ADocumentedCtCSuppressionHistory.pdf.

Finally, as you know, in my commentaries and messages I always try to inspire everyone to stand up with courage and commitment on behalf of our rights and the rule of law.  Today, I'm going to let some of you folks do that job for me, by sharing with all some of the inspiring and encouraging words sent to me over the months I've been imprisoned.  They have heartened me greatly, and I believe they will do the same for all of you:

 

"Hello Peter

I got your book because a very dear friend of mine purchased extra copies and gifted me with one of them, something I will now be doing myself... Today I filed my 1040 knowledgably...

Your being a guest of Uncle Sam right now is the cherry on top of all your work-- those subhumans could not have given you greater credibility. If you were a villain, it is likely they would have given you a medal."

 

"Just writing to let you know some exciting news. I filed my state taxes (07 and 08 amended, and 09 original) and they promptly processed the 09. I called to check on the others, and they said they were lost. Go figure. But I checked the website today, and it seems they've been found and the rest of my property is on its way. Yippeeee!"

 

 "The IRS refunded my 2009 return for $1861.00! I also wanted to say your supporters are thinking of you. I hope to contribute again to your cause in the near future."

 

 "I discuss the liberating truth about the "income" tax with anyone who seems even remotely interested. Please know that our prayers are with you..."

 

"Doreen,

Here's something out of our annual tithe to help out while Pete is away from home. May God help us all to work together in righteousness to build a 'good' America for our succeeding generations."

 

"I know things must be tough right now. Know that I hold you guys in my prayers."

 

"I am very thankful that you have written CtC and have just placed my order minutes ago. I have been looking for something like this where I can "stick it" to these tyrants that are hijacking our country. Filing accurate returns and upholding the Constitution will be my first step."

 

"Hi Doreen:

How are you and the kids holding up? I hope you are finding some peace and I hope Pete is keeping safe and pray for his safe return. I say a prayer every day for you all. Never give up and never give in."

 

"Pete,

I know it's hard and super frustrating, and I'm sure at times fearful with the thought of the usurpation of your liberty!

In the fight of 'right vs. wrong' many of the early battles are NEVER won; look at George Washington's efforts during the Revolution-- outside of Trenton and Yorktown, he lost every battle but won the 7-year War for Liberty. Stay strong and vigilant, your efforts will prevail-- sooner rather than later! My prayers are with you and your family."

 

"Hello Pete

Your persistence in standing-UP is so much appreciated. Best wishes."

 

"Dear Pete

I intend on holding to and supporting the truth as I have learned from you. If that means I join you, so be it. I will not be extorted from... not in my nature. You are not alone, and one day you will be vindicated, the truth revealed and the criminal element terminated."

 

"Greetings Pete;

I will do my part to continue the fight along side you. And I have every confidence that you will be victorious with your appeal! I wanted to share some good news-- my 2009 NY victory!! God bless, and I'll keep in touch."

 

"Please keep it up, Pete!"

 

"Pete:

You have no idea how much what you're doing, and going through, means to fellow Patriots. THANK YOU!!"

 

In addition to the much-appreciated warmth these words have brought to me, they also speak to a mission-related concern as well.  I am plagued by an ongoing fear that in my enforced absence from the arena, the myths and misunderstandings by which the beneficiaries of ignorance about the tax try to divert Americans away from the truth and into dead-ends and defeat will once again rage unhindered within the tax-honesty community, consuming vast amounts of energy, just as they are intended to do.  These expressions from you good folks are mightily reassuring to me on that score.

 

Still, because like rust, corruption and evil never sleep, I close with a renewed request of what I have always asked of all of you: Speak the truth, stay the course, stand your ground and share your testimony.  Remember that the purpose of this abuse of me and my family is to discourage YOU from acting, and to scare you into silence.

 

Don’t give these thugs the satisfaction of success.  Be a shining star, and help spread the illumination that is tyranny’s worst enemy and liberty’s best friend.

 

                                                                                                                        July 12, 2010

Dear Friends,

 

 

 
As I languished here in durance vile over Declaration Day weekend, I'm struck by the fact that what I am now experiencing is the very thing from which the CtC community works to protect themselves, their children and even their blithely ignorant and disengaged neighbors-- the unrestrained state, acting on the basis that it rightfully owns and controls everything. That's a pretty good description of how things are in a prison, as it turns out...
 
It was in recognition of how such things go if not attended to that the Founders did all they could to provide us with the tools to preserve our liberties and rightful supremacy as free, sovereign individuals by asserting our own claims and power over those of the state. The only thing they were forced to leave to fortune was whether future Americans would be wise enough to recognize the need, and would set enough store by their liberty and dignity to use these tools even in the face of corrupt efforts to discourage them.
 
Happily, it has been my privilege and pleasure to learn that the people of this great country are not wanting in wisdom, courage, dignity and self-respect, not to mention mature and loving regard for the future well-being of their children.  Once the truth of the danger is made known to them, they stand, and upon learning of the tools ready at hand, they act.  Even while the corrupt enemies of the law try to use what I am going through to frighten the CtC-educated community into silence and surrender to the outlaws, more and more Warriors stand and act, and speak and bear witness to the liberating truth and to the corruption behind the efforts to suppress that truth.  To paraphrase George S. Patton: "God, I love these fine men and women!"
 
Anyway, I do hope everyone will reflect for a few moments on the fact that letting the runaway state have its way in ignoring the Constitution and in claiming an ownership interest in everything is to allow an increasingly rapid slide to where my immediate circumstance becomes your and your childrens' way of life.  This is not because you or your children will wind up formally imprisoned; it is because a state unrestrained by competing and jealously-guarded widespread private interests eventually makes every place within the reach of its power into a prison, and there's no end to the sentence that everyone will serve for the crimes of apathy or cowardice.  You either fight it now all the way to victory, or start living the nightmare before very much longer.
 
By the way (and by way of lightening the tone a bit), I'm not actually languishing, of course.  Rather, I'm vigorously working on my appeal of this contrived and unjust conviction.
 
I ask all of you to help as much as you can, in the best way that you can, which is by ordering and distributing copies of CtC, 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?' and 'Upholding the Law and Other Observations', and by sending the files you'll find below to everybody possible-- especially folks in the media.  If you persist, the law will prevail.
 
Best Regards,
 
-Pete
 

 

 

 

The Good Folks At Wiki-Leaks: More Grown-Ups At Work                 August 1, 2010

 

Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.
-James Madison

 

 

People stand up, one by one, and with each arising the institutional evil against which they stand crumbles a little further.  Each rising up is also a putting-down; each assertion of individual power is a diminishment of the power exercised against us in the name of the collective.

 

Prominent in the news this week is the 2010 version of the Pentagon Papers-- a bravely-leaked, bravely-posted collection of documents revealing a variety of disquieting facts about the military aggression being conducted in the name of the United States against people in Iraq and Afghanistan, which those benefitting from these aggressions really don't want you to know.  However, since it's YOUR money being spent to pay for these ill-mannered and deadly bullyings, and YOU and YOUR children who will be blamed for allowing them, YOU need and deserve to know these things.  Now you do, because each actor involved in the revelations had the sand to do what's right, despite the danger in doing so.

 

Make no, mistake, the leaker and poster of these revelations risk their lives in doing what they have done.  The spin is that these revelations will put American soldiers in danger, but this is pure bs.  Those soldiers are already in danger, because they have been sent to do what they are doing.  What these reveleations really threaten are the schemes of those who send American soldiers into harm's way in the first place, in order to secure energy pipelines for private interests and private benefits, to maintain massive military contracts and the associated quid pro quos, and to distract and alarm the American people into quiescence while the bonds of permanent tyranny are fastened upon them.  These schemers leave bodies in their wake as a matter of routine, and would imprison or kill those behind these inconvenient leaks, or their posting on the internet, without a moment's hestitation.

 

Nonetheless, these brave folks-- the leaker, the poster, and anyone else who facilitated their reveleations-- have stood up, taken sober note of the looming threat to individual sovereignty and the rule of law from governmental secrecy, arrogance and ambition, and a widespread, carefully-cultivated sense among too many that "resistance to the state's lust for power is futile", and have firmly and maturely said, "Not on my watch!"

 

Bless them every one!  Whether they know it or not, these good folks are very much part of the CtC community.  They are doing what we are all about: restoring control over lives and property to the individuals to whom they belong, by fearlessly speaking truth, whether "power" likes it or not.

 

This Wiki-leaks story is definitely uplifting, and even though these heroes probably wouldn't know me from Adam, I thank them for acting on my behalf, just as I thank every one who rises to reclaim the power to dispose of his or her own property, by virtue of which that dollop of power won't end up being used against me or mine. There are two kinds of therapy for an unhealthy state: a proper diet and plenty of sunlight.  The CtC community is already diligently enforcing the dietary discipline prescribed by the Founders for keeping the republic fit and trim, and keeping themselves and their children prosperous and free under the rule of law.  Now the folks at WikiLeaks have poured on a lot of sunlight.

 

Go, Team!

 

"Put not your faith in men, but bind them down with the chains of the constitution."
-Thomas Jefferson

 

-Pete Hendrickson

 

 

Here Are Some More Of This Edition's Highlights

(Click on article and feature titles below to jump to the listed item.  Use the "Back" button on your browser to return to this contents section.  Better still, just scroll and read it all, including the many non-linked items that I'm sure you'll enjoy and appreciate!)

 

Regular Features:

And, as always, much, much more...

 

Dear friends, I'm delighted when anyone wishes to share what I have posted here with others!  Sharing this page is an important means of moving toward the restoration of the rule of law.  But I'd appreciate your doing so by directing your friends here themselves, rather than by copying and emailing the material.

 

Thank you for your courtesy.

 

***

 

You can't understand the present if you don't understand the past...

Illuminating Anniversaries Of This Week

June 25- In 1678, Elena Cornaro Piscopia becomes the first woman awarded a Ph.D.  In 1788 Virginia becomes the tenth state to ratify the U.S. Constitution.  In 1876, the Battle of the Little BigHorn is fought, resulting in a major victory for the Sioux and the massacre of George Custer's 7th Cavalry Regiment.  In 1947, the diary of Anne Frank, one of the millions of recent victims of a modern state allowed to operate outside the rule of law by a befuddled citizenry, is published.  In 1950, North Korea invades South Korea.  In 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court admits that the Second Amendment secures an individual Right to keep and bear arms after decades of looking the other way as this part of the fundamental law was routinely evaded by government.

 

Anniversaries of interest for each day of the upcoming week will be found throughout the newsletter below.

 

***

 

Use the "Back" button on your browser to return to the contents section, or just keep reading!

 

FOREWORD

This is just for those in the "tax honesty" community...

 

"It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."

-Samuel Adams

 

A Guest Editorial By The IRS

 

This week, as I battle for my freedom against a government machine that badly wants me silenced, and means to see this accomplished in a mere eleven days, I can't take the time to write my own editorial for this newsletter.

 

Happily (and ironically), though, I can leave this to the various federal and state governments themselves.  Every day for many years now these governments have been making their plain and unambiguous admissions to the accuracy of the people-liberating-and-empowering revelations in CtC, even while struggling to evade the truth in every other way they can dream up.

 

So, I'm just going to direct you, dear reader, straight to the admission of the liberating truth below, which will speak for itself, and probably more tellingly than anything I could say, anyway (followed by a brief call to action, to which I hope you will all attend):

 

If You're Not Standing Up, Then You're Standing Down

 

Taking Action (And ONLY Taking Action) Brings Results

 

Ever notice how everybody complains about the overgrown, arrogant federal government, but nobody actually does anything about it?  Well, actually, some of us DO do something about it.

 

The Americans you're about to meet know the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk.  These heroes read 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' and learned the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the "income" tax.  They know who's really in charge, and how, and why.  They're done arguing with the social director about the best arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic, and have gone down to the engine room to make some changes.

(Interestingly, April 15 was the date the Titanic sank...)

 

NOTE: Unless otherwise indicated, all posted federal victories are of ALL amounts withheld or paid in, which includes amounts withheld as ostensible "Social Security and Medicare taxes" as well as those more directly denominated as "federal income taxes".

 

CtC Warrior J. has learned the accurate truth about the law, and risen to take action.  Having concluded, after study of the relevant law, that his earnings during 2006 were not a result of any taxable activities, J. filed his federal forms accordingly.  On October 13, 2008, after first having to deal sternly with a corrupt IRS effort to frighten him into backing-down and turning over more than $16K of his property, J. secured agency acknowledgement that he was correct in his CtC-educated understanding of the law, as so many others have before him.  Enjoy J.'s first victory for the rule of law-- and the docs that produced it, and those involved in his little battle with IRS-- as episode XXXVII of the ever-entertaining, ever-enlightening 'Every Which Way But Loose' series, and at www.losthorizons.com/tax/MoreVictories43.htm.

 

Click Here To See Other Admissions Featured This Week

 

Click Here To See A List Of All Posted Victories

 

A Call To Action

 

To some of you, this will seem a wearisome repetition, I know.  I ask forgiveness from those who have already stepped up to the plate, and really taken their best shot.  But because I know that everyone has not done so, I'm issuing one more call to all of you who are truly committed to restoring the Founder's vision of a free people living under the simple protective umbrella of a government strictly limited to securing our individual rights by fundamental law.

 

PLEASE!

 

ALL OF YOU!!

 

Send the following files to EVERYONE in your email address book.  EVERYONE.

 

Not just to folks you think would be interested, but to those you think WOULDN'T be interested, because you know what?  At one time, most of YOU weren't interested, either.  You became interested, and then committed, because someone else took a chance on you.  Do others the same courtesy; show others the same respect.

 

Remember, the only reason government gets away with bad behavior is that not enough people know the truth.  You can change this, but only if you act.

 

SEND THESE FILES:

 

A Brief Introduction To The Liberating Truth About The "Income" Tax

 

A Documented History Of Federal Government Efforts To Suppress The Inconvenient Truth About The Tax

 

WHERE IS YOUR LINE IN THE SAND?

 

Download these illuminating, energizing files by right-clicking on each title above and selecting "Save link as".  Then attach them to an email and send it to everyone you know.

 

P. S. While you're at it, ask your favorite new-media pundit or producer why he or she has never done a column or a show about CtC and this uniquely productive community of upstanding Americans...

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

Mid-Edition Update, June 25, 2010

WHERE IS YOUR LINE IN THE SAND?

World Economic Collapse Explained In Three Minutes

Ike Hall's CtC Study Guide Is Complete Through Chapter Twelve

A Few Tips For Making Best Use Of This Site

...and much, much more!

 

Click any of the titles above to get this week's very important Mid-Edition Update!

 

HAVE YOU VALUED THESE FREE NEWSLETTERS OVER THE YEARS?  WITHOUT YOUR HELP, THEY WILL NOT CONTINUE.

 

*****

Cracking the Code- Volume Two

 

Click here to learn more,

or

Click here to order

 

And when you're done with the book, let me know what you think!

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

June 26- In 1284, the Pied Piper of Hamelin leads the children away.  In 1409, the Council of Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church elevates Petros Philargos as Pope Alexander V-- he joins the two other pontiffs extant at the time, Gregory XII and Benedict XII.  (The church now regards Alexander V as an "antipope".)  In 1870, Christmas is made a federal holiday.  In 1934, FDR signs the Federal Credit Union Act, creating a federal version of the loan associations which had already become widely popular within the several states.  In 1945, the United Nations is chartered.  In 1959, the Saint Lawrence Seaway opens.  In 1974, the first UPC code is used on a product.

 

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

-Edmund Burke

 

Green Zone

See this film.

 

Do You Know What Happens When YOU Decide To "Let Someone Else Do It"?

NOTHING.

 

"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. What I can do, I should do and, with the help of God, I will do."

-Everett Hale

(...and every other person who ever really deserved liberty)

 

"God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it."

-Daniel Webster

 

"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."

-Edward R. Murrow

 

 

Warriors, don't miss the now every-other-Tuesday PalTalk e-conference!  Click here for details.

 

'Real Americans Walk the Walk'

A New CtC Film to See and Share

Spread it around to EVERYONE!!

(Warriors!  Where Are YOUR testimonials?)

 

"To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers."

– Thomas Jefferson

 

Three great NEW animations:

'The Great Ducking Of America'

'Learn How To Get YOUR Stimulus Check'

'Improbable History- You Decide!'

See and share them all!

 

Take The Red Pill

 

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

'Knowing Is Better'

A new, 2-minute CtC video to see and share!

 

Click here to see or download the .wmv version (only 2.5 megs, and thus easily sent around by email), or see and share the large-format "high-def" version on YouTube here.

 

*****

 

CLICK HERE TO SEE WHAT UNDERSTANDING THE TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX CAN MEAN

 

Are you ready to learn that truth for yourself?

Begin your studies at www.losthorizons.com/Intro.pdf

 

Click Here for Outreach Materials

 

Click Here If You Have Won A Victory For The Rule Of Law

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

CLICK HERE FOR THIS WEEK'S FEATURED CtC VICTORIES 

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

June 27- In 1743, on the last occasion any British monarch will do so, George II personally commands troops in battle.  In 1844, Joseph Smith Jr., the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is killed by a mob in Carthage, Illinois, along with his brother, Hyrum.  In 1954, the USSR's Obninsk facility becomes the world's first nuclear power plant in operation.  It operated successfully until being decommissioned in 2002.  In 1966, the first episode of Dark Shadows airs.  In 1967, the world's first ATM is installed in Enfield, London.  In 1985, U.S. Route 66 loses its status as an officially-recognized U.S. highway.

 

JOIN THE THOUSANDS OF WARRIORS IN CtC FORUMS!

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

*****

 

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

-James Madison

 

How About You?

 

Are You Governing Yourself?

 

Get The Knowledge, Reclaim Your Power, And Stand With The Founders

 

 

MORE ILLUMINATING EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES

 

*****

 

Have You Visited This Page Yet?

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

 

CtC Warrior David Sides says, "Bumper stickers?  Nice, but NOT BIG ENOUGH!"

 

(By the way, Dave's got it precisely right-- If you want your power to be secure, your neighbors have to be empowered with the same knowledge that you've acquired.  Click here for ideas about spreading the truth-- which include normal bumper stickers available for free, by the way....)

 

THIS WEEK'S RECOMMENDED READING:

"I confidently trust that the American people will prove themselves...too wise not to detect the false pride or the dangerous ambitions or the selfish schemes which so often hide themselves under that deceptive cry of mock patriotism: 'Our country, right or wrong!'  They will not fail to recognize that our dignity, our free institutions and the peace and welfare of this and coming generations of Americans will be secure only as we cling to the watchword of true patriotism: 'Our country--when right to be kept right; when wrong to be put right.'"
-Senator Carl Schurz, October 17, 1899

 

Why Helen Thomas's Fate Makes Sense

By Bretigne Shaffer

When Helen Thomas was vilified and presumably forced into retirement following her remarks that Israelis should "get the hell out of Palestine" and return to "Poland, Germany, America... anywhere else," many commentators cheered, but a few expressed outrage:

"In another example of how one-sided the American media is in framing the issue of Israel," wrote Andrew Steele, "veteran journalist and opinion columnist Helen Thomas has been chased into retirement because of some remarks she gave when questioned on the street by a blogger."

"(T)he central issue," said Glenn Greenwald, "is not the perception that she's guilty of bigotry, but the wrong kind of bigotry.  Anyone who doubts that should compare the cheap, easy and self-righteous outrage orgy against the powerless, 89-year-old columnist to the total non-reaction in the face of the incessant and ongoing anti-Arab bigotry of The New Republic's Marty Peretz, or to the demands of then-House Majority Leader Dick Armey that the Palestinians leave the West Bank and go back to where they came from, and similar statements from Mike Huckabee..."

While it may well be that the attacks on Helen Thomas do reflect the media’s pro-Israel bias, they are more fundamentally a product of a much deeper hypocrisy, one in which the vast majority of us are complicit. Thomas is not the first to have suffered for having committed the offense of offending. Whatever the specifics of the offending speech, or the specifics of which group was offended, each of these incidents has one thing in common: They each make perfect sense within the framework of our culture’s beliefs, and are in fact a necessary part of sustaining those beliefs.

To understand why this is so, compare the fate of Helen Thomas to that of Madeleine Albright. In 1996, when Albright was US Ambassador to the UN, she famously asserted that whatever benefits the US government derived from imposing an economic embargo on Iraq were "worth" the deaths of perhaps half a million Iraqi children. Far from being drummed out of the public sphere for her offensive remarks, Albright went on to become US Secretary of State and was awarded honorary degrees from five universities. She currently serves on the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations and reportedly brings in between $60,000 and $75,000 for speaking engagements.

Or take the current secretary of state, Hilary Clinton, who more recently threatened Iran with a pre-emptive strike – an act that once upon a time was considered to be a war crime. Or, for that matter, all of those government officials who did in fact participate in a war of aggression against Iraq. Indeed, there is nothing out of the ordinary about politicians calling for mass murder, torture, preemptive war and other acts of barbarism, while their careers remain intact. Meanwhile, a comment that can be construed as racist, or offensive to certain groups, can ruin a mere plebeian. We have elevated name-calling to a higher offense than advocating (state-sanctioned) mass murder and wars of aggression. That the hypocrisy of this is not evident to everyone is an indication of our collective blindness to acts of evil when they are committed by those in authority.

This blindness is not solely an American phenomenon. Most people across the globe accept that there is a different standard of morality for governments, particularly in times of war. Even Christian Just War theory acknowledges the special privilege of those in "authority" to make war, and allows for civilians to be killed under the right circumstances. "War is different" is the unanimous mantra, asserting that even if we try to put limits on war (which will inevitably be enforced after the fact and by the victors, if at all) they will never be the same limits on violence that are imposed upon ordinary people in ordinary times. It doesn’t take much to extend this principle to all acts of government, creating an entire class of people and agencies for whom the normal standards of morality simply do not apply.

Like abused children, prohibited from engaging in the same violence their parents routinely inflict upon them, most people have come to internalize the twisted logic of their abusive relationships with their governments. Why is this? Through some combination of cultural conditioning, tribal instincts, our innate fear of our own independence, and outright propaganda masquerading as education, the great majority of the world’s population – and in particular, those who reside in democratic societies – have come to identify themselves with the governments that rule over them.

Click here for the whole article

 

*****

 

Held Over Recommendations:

 

 

Right-Wing Obamacare

by Daniel McCarthy

 

'Killing America's Kids'

by Fred Reed

 

'The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude'

by Étienne de la Boétie

 

'Too Legit To Quit'

by Myron Weber

 

Aren't you glad that as a CtC Warrior YOU'VE taken control of how much of YOUR WEALTH facilitates Washington's misbehavior?!

 

***

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

June 28- In 1914, Archduke Ferdinand of Austria is assassinated, sparking World War I.   In 1919, the Treaty of Versailles is signed, ending that war and imposing draconian sanctions on Germany, the effect of which was the rise of Adolph Hitler little more than a decade later.  In 1922, the Irish Civil War begins.  In 1967, Israel annexes East Jerusalem.  In 1992, the Constitution of Estonia is adopted.  In 1996, the Constitution of Ukraine is adopted.  In 2000, Elian Gonzalez is returned to captivity in Cuba.  In 2004, the U.S. declares its puppet government of Iraq to be sovereign in that country (up to a point...).

 

For more worthwhile words on topics of current or enduring interest, click here.

 

Click here to learn about the latest effort to keep YOU in helpless, exploited ignorance,

and about how you can help thwart it.

 

Or, if you already know what's going on, just CLICK HERE to donate.

 

Please do your part!!

 

"Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated."

-Thomas Paine

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

There is little more important to the long-term health of America than how our children are educated.

HOMESCHOOL YOUR KIDS!

***

Want to get on the Newsletter mailing list?  Just email your name to SubscribeMe 'at' losthorizons.com using the address you want added!

 

“Knowledge will forever govern ignorance; and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”

-James Madison

 

Are You Ready For More Power?

 

   

"Peter Hendrickson has done it again!  'Upholding The Law' does for individual liberties what 'Cracking the Code' did for tax law compliance: exposes the reader to the unalienable truth!"

-Jesse Herron, Bill Of Rights Press, Fort Collins, Colorado

 

CLICK HERE FOR THIS WEEK'S FEATURED 'EVERY WHICH WAY BUT LOOSE' EPISODE

 

CtC-Educated Lawyers: It's Way Past Time For You All To Queue Up!

 

[Y]ou really need to familiarize yourself with Pete Hendrickson's absolutely magnificent work at his website and in his book(s).  He has, brilliantly and lucidly, "cracked the code" regarding the federal income EXCISE tax(es)."

-Mark C. Phillips, JD

 

"...I find your work fascinatingly simple to understand."

-Jerry Arnowitz, JD

 

"Your book is a masterpiece!"

-Michael Carver, JD

 

"Received your book yesterday.  Started reading at 11 PM, finished at 4 AM."  "I have 16 feet (literally 16' 4.5") of documents supporting just about everything in your book." "Your book should be required reading for every lawyer before being admitted to any Bar."  "I hope you sell a million of them." 

-John O'Neil Green, JD

 

“Thanks again for your efforts, Pete. They mean an awful lot to a lot of people.” “…as an attorney, I am humbled by your knowledge and ability in navigating the law.  THANK YOU for your hard work and sacrifice.”

-Eric Smithers, JD

 

"I am an attorney and want to give a testimonial to your book, which I find to be compelling. I am exercising these rights for myself and my adult children. I'm even considering making this my new avenue of law practice."

Nancy "Ana" Garner, JD

 

Learn what these colleagues already know, then step forward and become part of a coordinated, mutually-supportive squadron focused on developing strategy and deploying the law in courtrooms across the country.  There's a lot of suing that needs doing right now.

 

Are you ready for a challenge that'll put some real meaning behind all the effort you went through to get your credentials?  Send me an email.

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

Have You Taken A Military, Law Enforcement or Public Office Oath To Uphold And Defend The Constitution?

 

Renew Your Promise

 

*****

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

June 29- In 1767, the British Parliament passes the "Townshend Acts", imposing taxes on many common items imported into the American colonies, shifting the payment of public officials from local communities to the British government (out of the new tax revenue), and reaffirming the use of "writs of assistance"-- general warrants used by tax agents to conduct "fishing expedition" searches without probable cause.  These measures prompted extreme reactions and resistance by the colonists, and contributed significantly to the development of revolutionary sentiment.  In 1956, the U.S. Interstate Highway System is born.  In 2006, the United States Supreme Court rules in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Bush administration's plans to try Guantanamo Bay prisoners in military tribunal Star-Chamber proceedings violates both U.S. and international law.

 

  IGNORANCE TAX: An unnecessary exaction suffered out of ignorance as to its lawful objects and the means of its application by someone too lazy, frightened or misled to learn how it really works and to what it really applies.  See "Income Tax", "Social Security Tax", "Medicare Tax" and "Federal Unemployment Tax".

 

 

 

"It ain't what ya don't know that hurts ya. What really puts a hurtin' on ya is what ya knows for sure, that just ain't so."

--  Uncle Remus

 

Do you imagine that you know what 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' says without having read the book (or that CtC is missing something relevant to the "income" tax)?

 

CLICK HERE

 

***

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

Click Here To Learn What This Cartoon Is All About

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error."

-United States Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

The Choice Is This Stark

 

Wear this new T-Shirt proudly, and tell the enemies of the law that if they don't like Constitutional limits, they should find someplace else to live!

 

***

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

Warrior Mark Phillips, JD Shares An Illuminating Glossary Of Key Terms In Tax Law

 

*****

 

'Don't Tread On Me' Polo Shirts Say It All!

 

 

Click Here To Get Yours Now!

 

*****

 

CLICK HERE FOR THIS WEEK'S 'TAX TIP'

 

*****

 

More Than Two Thirds Of The Several States That Collect "Income" Taxes Have Now Acknowledged The Truth About The Law As Revealed In CtC, And Have Issued Complete Refunds Accordingly!  See The Following Chart...

 

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

June 30- In 1805, Michigan is organized as a United States Territory.  In 1859, Charles Blondin crosses Niagara Falls on a tightrope.  In 1882, Charles Guiteau is hanged in Washington, D.C. for the assassination of President James Garfield.  In 1934, Hitler purges Germany of his political rivals on the 'Night of the Long Knives'.  In 1953, the first Corvette rolls off the assembly line in Flint, Michigan.  In 1997, Britain turns Hong Kong over to The People's Republic of China.

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

'The BOSTONIAN'S Paying the EXCISE-MAN, or TARRING & FEATHERING' (1774)

(How our forefathers responded to arrogant "Rule of Law defiers"...)

 

A Word To The Law-Defiers...

FOR SOME TIME NOW you've gotten away with it.  You've bled the public treasury; you've bled the American military; you've defied the Constitution and the rule of law in service to your own ambitions and interests.  But the fact that you've gotten away with it so far doesn't mean that the law has changed.  It hasn't.

 

Everything that was unconstitutional before your creative excesses remains so, and all of those creative excesses have been, and remain, illegal.

 

For instance, consider the "retroactive immunity" pretenses intended to shield the nation-wide warrantless wiretap teleco-conspirators.

 

DON'T make the mistake of thinking that Congressional and Presidential action on this bill has actually retroactively immunized anyone from anything.  It hasn't.

 

Neither Congress nor the president have the authority to retroactively immunize anybody, and especially not from civil liability to other people.  Even if the Constitution didn't prohibit such a grotesquely corrupt idea, when all is said and done, NO ONE can be relieved of his or her legal obligations to ME by the decision of ANY third party that isn't on a jury.

 

However much any corrupt political hacks want to behave as though they have shielded themselves and anyone else from the consequences of their joint lawlessness, it's only a dream that's due to evaporate as more of America wakes up.  The moment the rule of law is fully restored, THE LAWLESS ARE TOAST.

 

The same goes for anyone else imagining that they will find an enduring shield for their bad behavior in some creative, convenient "interpretation" of the law or "assumption of authority" on any other front.  NO.

 

When the time comes, "Hey, I had this Justice Department memorandum!" won't cut it.  Nor will, "I was just following orders!"

 

When the time comes, nothing will "cut it" but the law having its way.  And it will.

 

 

Too Late To Apologize: A Declaration

(A very entertaining music video)

 

I'm sorry to say that due to the characteristics of the new server I began using at the end of September, 2007, hit logging for the entire site is no longer possible.  However, just so you know:

 

CtC-related hits between April 1, 2006 (when logging began under the old server) and August 31, 2007 totaled 17,277,595!

 

YOU DIDN'T THINK YOU WERE ALL ALONE, DID YOU?

 

*****

 

HELP SPREAD THE LIBERATING TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

To make the best possible use of this website, please take advantage of the site map you'll find here.

 

Get your FREE* CtC bumper sticker and help spread the word!

Just send a stamped, self-addressed envelope to Lost Horizons, Bumper Sticker Offer, 232 Oriole Rd., Commerce Twp., MI 48382

(*If you want to throw a few bucks into the envelope to help with costs, that'd be nice, but it's entirely optional...)

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

The Willingness Of Some People To Trade Liberty For Convenience Is Without Limit

Some Observations About Current Political Efforts To Evade The Truth, Such As The "Fair Tax" Scheme

 

Regarding "Tax Reform"

 

"Taxes are not raised to carry on wars, wars are raised to carry on taxes."

-Thomas Paine

 

Where To Find Things On This Site

 

*****

 

Law Professor James Duane Says: "Don't Talk To The Police.  Period."

 

Honest Cops Agree...

 

*****

 

The Newsletter is interested in your work!  If you are a writer, scholar, or just a dedicated Warrior with a worth-while story to tell, please consider sharing your words and your wisdom with our thousands of readers!  Click here to learn how.

 

'Letters to the Editor' should be addressed to 'feedback 'at' losthorizons.com', with "Editor" in the subject line.

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

*****

 

Films That Belong In Every Home Library

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

CLICK HERE TO INSTRUCT YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES

 

*****

 

 

Warrior David Larson shares this beautiful little farce, wryly observing that, "Depositors have "..not lost one penny.." - OK we could agree on that simple statement  ..how about the purchasing power of that same penny 'not lost'?"

 

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

 

REGARDING MONEY

 

***

 

Return to Newsletter Contents

 

Click here to learn about the latest effort to keep YOU in helpless, exploited ignorance,

and about how you can help thwart it.

 

Or, if you already know what's going on, just CLICK HERE to donate.

 

Please do your part!!

 

"Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as freedom should not be highly rated."

-Thomas Paine

 

Illuminating anniversaries of this week:

July 1- In 1863, the Battle of Gettysburg begins.  In 1870, the United States Department of Justice (sic) begins official operations.  In 1921, the Communist Party of China is founded.  In 1931, United Airlines begins to do business (as Boeing Air Transport).  In 1963, United States Postal Service ZIP codes are introduced.  In 1968, the CIA's 'Phoenix Program' of terrorism and assassination begins its first campaign, in South Vietnam.  In 1979, Sony introduces the 'Walkman' portable, personal CD player.

 

Set a brushfire-- E-mail this newsletter to a friend

 

Last Word

 

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."

-Samuel Adams, Architect of the First American Revolution

 

OK, Now Back To Your Regularly Scheduled Programming:

 

 

Order Books, Warrior-Wear, or The CtC Companion CD

 

An "Income" Tax Related Site Map

 

E-mail this Newsletter to a friend

 

Newsletter Archives

 

Want to get on the Newsletter mailing list?  Just send an email from the address you want added to phendrickson 'at' losthorizons.com with "Subscribe me" in the subject line, and your name in the body!

 

PLEASE CONTINUE TO DILIGENTLY SPREAD THE LIBERATING TRUTH ABOUT THE TAX!!!

 

*****

 

About The Author

 

Pete Hendrickson enjoys the distinction of being the first American in history to secure a complete refund of Social Security and Medicare ‘contributions’ withheld from his earnings (along with all other property taken for federal taxes).  He is far from the last, though-- readers of his seminal work, ‘Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America’  and its just-published sequel, 'Was Grandpa Really a Moron?', have been doing the same ever since the book first appeared in 2003.

 

Hendrickson is also a widely-read essayist on matters of politics, public policy and law; many of these works are collected in his second book, ‘Upholding the Law And Other Observations’.  He is a member of Mensa; an award-winning artist; and has paid his dues as a youth soccer coach.  He is a long-time political activist as well, and has served as co-chair and platform convention delegate of Michigan’s largest county Libertarian Party organization; as a consultant to the National Right to Work Foundation and Citizens for a Sound Economy; as a member of the Heartland Institute; and as a member of the International Society for Individual Liberty.  He is a frequent radio-show guest on stations across the country.

 

Hendrickson's business career has included nearly a decade-and-a-half at the leading edge of the renewable-energy industry, both as Director of Purchasing and Materials Management and member of the R&D board at Starpak Energy Systems, the mid-west's then-largest solar heating and energy-recovery-and re-utilization company; and as founder and president of AFJ Inc., a high-efficiency lighting design, manufacture and installation firm.

 

Beginning in the mid-1990s and continuing for the twelve years before his present full-time focus on the restoration of the rule of law in America, Hendrickson directed purchasing activities for the $84 million-a-year multi-family-housing division of the Farmington Hills, Michigan branch of Edward Rose and Sons, with responsibility for 18,000+ apartments, direct supervision of 35 technicians and agents, and incidental authority over several hundred divisional workers.  He also ran the division's 10 cable television earth-station and distribution systems in four states, and designed and administered the company's website.

 

On rather the other end of the spectrum, amidst these more mundane pursuits Hendrickson co-founded and was the primary creative force behind a small board- and card-game company that enjoyed a modest success for several years.

 

 Hendrickson makes his home in southeast Michigan, with his wife and two children.  He is currently working on his next book.

© All written and graphic material on this page and website are copyrighted by Peter E. Hendrickson, unless otherwise attributed