Mid-Edition Update

(Scroll down to see all articles in this update)

They Protest Too Much

It’s known as "projection": the trait by which one attributes to others various "dark side" attitudes and motivations. The current practice of accusing the Iranian government of warlike intentions in order to rationalize one’s own desires to attack that country is one example. Another instance is found in the efforts of numerous Democratic party supporters to explain the opposition to Barack Obama’s policies as racist-driven. Such "liberal" commentators as Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Alan Colmes, Colbert King, and Frank Rich, along with former president Jimmy Carter, have strained and contorted their minds to suggest that "much" of the criticism of Obama programs – particularly that found in the "Tea Party" movement – arises from people who are uncomfortable with a black man as president.

How has race played into the Obama presidency? To begin with, we must identify the factors that led to this man being elected to that office: (a) he was the "not George Bush" candidate, and (b) for many, he was the opportunity for the United States to have its first non-white president. These considerations, alone, led to his victory in 2008. He offered no clearly-defined programs or policies: "change" and "hope" were about the only words to appear on his behalf on billboards and bumper-stickers. He did not campaign on promises to escalate American wars in the Middle East; to expand the American empire; to nationalize the banking, insurance, auto manufacturing, and health-care industries; or to circumvent the often dilatory processes of Congress by his appointment of "czars" to run the varied sectors of American society. "Hope" and "change" were sufficient bromides to persuade a thoroughly befuddled Boobus to stagger into voting booths to elect this man.

In these post-2008 years, I totally dismiss everything establishment Republicans and conservatives have to say about Obama’s shortcomings and their own "alternatives." It was the unprincipled mindlessness of this crowd – cheering on every utterance offered by the Bush/Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld contingent, as well as their neocon media flacks – that produced the immoral and destructive policies that got Obama elected; policies he now kicks into high-gear! Ron Paul was – and continues to be – the only Republican to condemn the GOP’s embrace of rampant statism. The dismal state of this party is seen in its contemptuous treatment of Ron.

If race is to be considered a major factor in the assessment of Obama, what is to be said of the support he received during the 2008 campaign? I saw a number of post-election polls indicating that, among black voters, Obama received some 95% of their support. Some 40% of white voters, on the other hand, selected Obama. While traditional party loyalties may explain some of this differential, that 40% of white voters favored Obama, while only 5% of blacks voted for McCain, may introduce a racial factor that "liberals" want to overlook. When, on election night, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews announced "I’m going to do everything I can to make this thing work – this new presidency," to what "thing" was he referring? It certainly was not the success of any announced policies, as nothing of any substance had been promised. I received similar comments in e-mails from "liberal" friends, causing me to wonder if a black president’s programs were to be favored over those of a white president and, if so, why? Are those who try to convince you that race motivates many of Obama’s critics, projecting their own sense of uneasiness for allowing race to be the basis for their support?

One cannot understand modern political behavior without grasping a basic truth of which your high-school civics class teacher did not inform you: we have a one-party system consisting of two interconnected franchises, each under the complete control of the political establishment. If you would like to put Janus-like faces to this arrangement, think of that frequent media guest, David Gergen, a man who served as a bipartisan presidential advisor to Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton. Or look upon the married couple, Mary Matalin and James Carville: she a valued GOP advisor to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney; he a Democratic advisor to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

AS YOU RAISE YOUR VOICE in righteous opposition-- even outrage-- at the fastening of another unconstitutional chain on the American public under the name of "National Health Care" by the political cabal in Washington, you don't find yourself being hindered by the nagging suspicion that perhaps there's something about the legislation that you don't understand, or aren't aware of, which makes it all legal despite appearances to the contrary, do you?

You don't pause and settle yourself down with the thought that since our elected officials are the ones who enacted this law, it must be proper, and the how and why is simply escaping you because you're not trained as a lawyer, do you?

You don't put aside your concern because you know you can count on the courageous and incorruptible judiciary, and those great folks at the DoJ, to see to it that if there IS anything wrong with the legislation, it'll get taken care of through "the judicial process", and your interests will be properly looked-after that way, do you?

In short, you don't stand down and put your faith in "the system" to do the right thing, do you?

No you don't.

YOU DON'T STAND DOWN because you know perfectly well that something that violates the plain words of the Constitution, or isn't clearly authorized by that fundamental law, is illegal, and nothing within its thousands of pages of text can change that, no matter what that something might be.

You don't stand down because you know perfectly well that not only can our elected officials NOT be counted on to confine themselves to what is lawful and proper, but they can be counted on to sell whatever authority our complacency allows them to assume to the highest bidder, and the law and our interests be damned.

You don't stand down because you know perfectly well that the judicial process is more often than not just a creative rubber-stamp for the corruptions of the political elite who choose the judges and prosecutors, and the only one that's going to look out for your interest in enjoying the benefit of the rule of law is you.

You don't stand down because you know "the system" will screw you, lie to you, sneer at the Constitution and treat you like a fool and a tool.

If you're wise, you even know that "the system" is (accurately) counting on the fact that if it succeeds in overcoming your opposition now, in a few short years you'll come to believe that there must just be something about the legislation that you don't understand which makes it legal, because if there hadn't been, our elected officials would never have proposed it or voted for it, and the courts would have struck it down.

NOW I ASK YOU TO THINK ABOUT ALL THIS as we move into the last month of the primary "tax season".  Especially, I ask you discuss all this with your companions at every "health care legislation protest", and "bailout protest" and "tea party" and the protest of whatever will be the next outrage by those running and feeding off the corrupt state that rallies the opposition of the people.

Those standing with you at each of these current and fleeting moments of wakefulness desperately need to learn the truth about the biggest exploitation of their ignorance and complacency that there is, and the one that finances and facilitates all the outrages that they DO recognize-- the systematic mis-application of the "income" tax.  Those good folks standing with you right now over the "outrage de jour" have unfortunately harbored a life-long belief that despite the nagging suspicions that arise when they actually read their copy of the Constitution or even just think hard about how the tax is applied, there must be something about it that they don't understand which makes it legal, because if there weren't, our elected officials or courts would have done something about it.

The insidious thing about ignorance is that the ignorant don't know what they don't know, and the human mind always favors perspectives to which it has become accustomed, however groundless those perspectives may be.  This produces a lot of resistance to revisiting long-settled misunderstandings.  But when re-heated by a new passion, the human mind can be re-forged to new perspectives.  Right now, a lot of Americans' "irons" are hot, and now is the time to strike.

Pass out copies of CtC or WGRaM, or any of the ever-growing array of outreach tools available here.  Write to every pundit that has been energized by the present assault on the rule of law but is blind to the really big one with which he or she has been living so long as to now view it as "just the way things are".

UNDERSTAND, AND I MEAN REALLY UNDERSTAND, that the CtC-educated community is the stake poised over the chest of the vampire, and the vampire knows it.  A whole lot of energy and effort are being expended right now to try to blunt that stake, and dissipate the force behind it back into the "way things are" fog.  It's up to you to keep the stake sharp, and pile on the weight.

***

“The size of a lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, because the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad.  The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them more easy victims of a big lie than a small one, because they themselves often tell little lies but would be ashamed to tell big ones.  Such a form of lying would never enter their heads.  They would never credit others with the possibility of such great impudence as the complete reversal of facts.”

-Adolf Hitler

*****

Photographed on 1-70 in Missouri.  America is waking up.

*****

So What Is An Excise, Anyway?

Speaking of Spreading the Word, CtC Warrior Greg Sutton has written up a nice little exposition on "excise taxes" that makes a fine handout with which to alert casual contacts to the fact that there's something they need to learn about the "income" tax.  Download it here for printing and distribution; and again, visit this page for more resources.

*****

*****

Glenn Greenwald has shared some good words about the "terrorism" hysteria promoted by those who would be our ruling class, and their sycophants in the mainstream media:

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed—and hence clamorous to be led to safety—by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

-H.L. Mencken

EVERY WHICH WAY BUT LOOSE

Since August of 2003, when the revelations of CtC were first published, the IRS has been engaged in a desperate struggle to regain its hold of fear and confusion over those now equipped with an understanding of the long-hidden secrets of the "income" tax, and to stop that understanding from spreading.  We have seen, for instance:

• two revampings of the Form 4852 during that time-- both attempting to obscure the scope of that form's proper use;

• a carefully inaccurate allusion to a typical CtC-educated filing sit as #1 on the IRS "Dirty Dozen" list for a year (then quietly get relocated to #5 and then #7 as CtC-educated filings merely increased, and continued to prevail, making the misdirection of the listing too obvious for the agency's comfort);

• Mis-directional ploys such as the "Questionnaire" discussed here;

• a multitude of constantly tweaked agency "FAQ" and "Truth About Frivolous Argument" publications seeking to instill doubts about what is taught about the law in CtC in the minds of careless readers, worthy of attention only in order to enjoy the agency's entertaining efforts to imply what it cannot simply declare, but wishes a naive reader to take from the reading.

We have also seen a series of transformations in the means by which the occasional loose-cannon IRS staffer attempts to persuade a CtC-educated filer to stand down.

For a while, fairly brazen declarations that a filing meets the statutory definition of a "frivolous return" was the popular approach.  Brazen or not, of course, these notices were always mere exercises in intimidation, which careful analysis readily revealed to be fallacious.

Everyone must come to his or her own conclusions, but consider: The notices strive hard to give the impression that the tax agency can unilaterally disregard the target's filing, and can tack on a penalty as well.  BUT they say that the agency will generously refrain from imposing the penalty, if only the target withdraws the original filed testimony and replaces it with what the agency wants attested-to (which, remember, the target is simultaneously being told would be legally meaningless, because the agency can unilaterally disregard that original testimony at will...).

What is being implied is that, either way, the amount of tax owed is going to end up being whatever the agency dictates-- the filer's return notwithstanding.  The only optional element is the additional penalty, which the agency is offering to forego out of the goodness of its heart.

Well, if this is true..., WHY SEND THIS "LETTER" AT ALL?  If the agency has the power to unilaterally make these decisions, there is absolutely no point to asking the target to do anything!

If the agency (or its client) has the power it is suggesting, its correspondent would simply get a notice along the following lines: "Dear Mr. XXX: We have calculated your tax liability for 200X, and converted $XXX of your withheld property in escrow to our ownership.  An invoice for the outstanding balance [if any] is attached.  Your filed return was frivolous, and provided us with the authority to add a $XXX penalty to your tax liability.  We have [added or foregone] this penalty." 

After all, if the agency has the unilateral authority it is attempting to suggest that it does, why would it care whether another return was filed?  (Readers of 'Cracking the Code...' will know the answer to that, of course.)

Instead, the agency DOES make this "threatening" request; and/or "proposes" calculated liabilities to which it asks its target's agreement in order to have effect (see examples of this here).  Sometimes it begins sending endless "levy notices" to the unbending filer (which notices, insofar as they concern years when only accurate, educated returns have been filed, only allege liability for a penalty, and not for any tax related to the year in question-- even when the target has received a complete refund of every penny withheld or paid-in in connection with that year...).  The sum of all of this is, of course, that the agency DOESN'T have the unilateral authority which it suggests that it does, and where accurate, educated filings are concerned, its "frivolous letters" are just exactly that: frivolous letters.

Bothke v. Terry, 713 F. 2d 1405, at 1414 (1983)

Nonetheless, as more and more warriors have forcefully pointed out to more and more IRS workers that inappropriately sending such threatening-looking letters cuts very close to the criminal under a variety of federal and state laws, the tax agency has scrambled to adjust.  For one thing, the "frivolous" notices have been carefully and repeatedly modified toward ever-more obvious legal meaninglessness, in order to deflect potential charges of constructive fraud, witness tampering, extortion, etc.

At the same time, these legally dicey threatening-sounding notices have been largely replaced by a comical kind of delay tactic, in which the agency sits on a filing in silence, and when contacted with an inquiry to the effect of "Where the h*ll is my property?!", responds with a claim that the agency can't find the filer's return and a request that the offended filer please send a fresh copy, or a series of "We need 45 days to look into the matter-- please be patient-- don't call us, we'll call you..." notices.

In this series of articles, we take a close look at many of these gimmicks, ploys and dodges in order to accurately perceive their true character, and take in and appreciate the underlying message, which is that efforts like these are engaged in only when the actor has  no real basis for its actions.

Enjoy.

***

EVERY WHICH WAY BUT LOOSE- XXXIII

In May of 2007, CtC Warriors Joan and Lowell Thompson were faced with a bluster and bs attack by the IRS, which sought to intimidate these good Americans into perjuring themselves and declaring their non-federally-connected receipts to be so connected, and therefore taxable as "income", even after their testimony to the contrary had already been filed:

  Joan and Lowell, firm in their commitment to the rule of law, stood fast:

 

Lowell and Joan were treated to another effort a month-and-a-half later (unfortunately not preserved to share here), and again responded with firmness and confidence:

 

 

It took nearly a year, but eventually Joan and Lowell got the "surrender" by the agency to which they were entitled (and in a form we've not seen before):

 

 

It'd be nice if these bureaucrats would just forget about all these shameful ploys as soon as they recognize that they're dealing with CtC-educated Americans, instead of clinging to the hope that maybe they've stumbled upon the odd one or two that might let themselves be intimidated into collapse, wouldn't it?

 

Someday...

 

In the meantime, though,

 

Watch out for that robot!  I THINK IT'S GOING TO EXPLODE!!

By the way, this isn't the only time Lowell and Joan have had to deal with this nonsense.  They had the same ridiculous ploy tried on them the next year as well, this time for 2006.  See how THAT went on page 28 of the ever-growing Victories collection.

 

***

 

Isn't it too bad everyone hasn't done like Joan and Lowell, and read CtC-- the exclusive source of the complete, accurate and liberating truth about the "income" tax?  You can help change that, and thereby help transform America.  Click here to learn how (while you still can-- see below...).

 

***

 

THE PRICE OF BEING RIGHT Corrupt elements in the federal government have tried four times over the last five years to keep the liberating truth revealed in CtC from the eyes of the American people.  Now, as another "tax season" approaches, they're trying again.   MAKE YOUR DONATION NOW  to help preserve the Rule of Law   Click here to learn about this 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

 

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!)

• Illuminating Anniversaries Of This Week

• Surely You Didn't Think It Would Be Easy...?!

• Posted Victories Climb Past $10,675,000.00!  Posted This Week:

• A Warrior's Second Victory-- Federal For 2006;

• Another Second Victory-- New York For 2009;

• A Warrior's First Victory-- California For 2009;    

• A Warrior's Third Victory-- Federal for 2009;

• Another Warrior's Third Victory-- Federal For 2009;

• And A Warrior's First Victory In Enforcing The Constitution: Federal For 2009, After A Little IRS Balkiness!

• This Week's Reading Recommendations: 'Hating The Government Finally Goes Mainstream' and 'Gods And Monsters'

• Every Which Way But Loose Episode XXXIV: Another Warrior Victory Over A Balky IRS-- On The Day After "Tax Day"!

• This Week's Tax Tip: More On §§ 6201(d) and 7491 "Additional Evidence" Requirements

• All That It Takes To Prove 'Obamacare' Unconstitutional...

• Today's Real Price Of Gold: $1235.00 (See: Regarding Money)

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

Illuminating Anniversaries Of This Week

April 30- In 1492, Christopher Columbus receives his royal commission.  In 1789, George Washington takes the oath of office as the first President of the United States.  Unlike modern holders of the office (and a few bad moves during his tenure notwithstanding), he means it.  In 1803, the United States purchases the Louisiana Territory from France for $15 million.  In 1812, the Territory of Orleans becomes the 18th of the several states, styling itself 'Louisiana'.  In 1900, Hawaii is declared a territory of the United States, with Sanford B. Dole as governor.  In 1900, Casey Jones wrecks the Cannonball Express.  In 1927, the first United States federal prison for women opens.  In 1938, Porky Pig goes on his first rabbit hunt.  In 1945, Adolph Hitler and Eva Braun commit suicide.  In 1993, the World Wide Web goes public.  In 2004, photos of grotesque detainee abuse by officials at the United States Abu Ghraib prison facility in Iraq make it to the media.  In 2009, Chrysler files for bankruptcy.

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!