(Click on the underlined text to jump to each feature. To
return, use your browser's "back" button. Please keep in mind that
many more items of interest are to be found between featured
articles, so your most profitable course is to scroll through the
whole page...)
it would mean the government's been concealing and
denying the truth for years
on end,
and everybody knows THAT would never happen...
(Edward Snowden, come home! It was all just a bad dream; there really is
No Such Agency!)
Do you
know someone truly steeped in the Kool-Aid?
I mean
someone who finds it easier to believe that the far-better-educated,
far-more-suspicious-of-government Americans of a hundred years ago were
complete morons who granted authority to the state to take whatever it
wished from themselves and their posterity than to imagine that they
themselves simply misunderstand the true nature of the income tax? Even
while knowing that their beliefs about the tax are derived entirely from
the representations of those who profit from those beliefs (like tax
bureaucrats and "tax professionals")?
Do you
know someone like that? Shake them awake with the latest (fourteenth)
edition of
CtC!
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-- PLEASE DO IT!! But I'd appreciate your
doing so by directing your friends here themselves, rather than by copying
and emailing the material.
***
The Newsletter is interested in your work! If
you are a writer, scholar, or just a dedicated Warrior with a good
story to tell, please consider sharing your words and your wisdom with our
thousands of readers!
Click here to learn how.
November 9- In 1620, Pilgrims aboard the
Mayflower have their first sight of the New World. In 1688,
William of Orange captures Exeter, a major step forward in the
course of the 'Glorious Revolution'. In 1872, a fire breaks
out in Boston which goes on to consume 776 buildings over the
next twelve hours. Unhindered by FEMA, the citizens quickly
rebuild. In 1906, Theodore Roosevelt takes the first official
trip outside the USA of any sitting president (he travels to
Panama to inspect progress on the Canal). In 1918, the German
Revolution forces the abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II and
declares a republic (ultimately, the Weimar Republic). In 1938,
'Kristallnacht'-- a Nazi rampage against Germany's
by-then-largely-disarmed Jewish population begins. In 1965,
Roger Allen LaPorte sets himself on fire in front of the United
Nations building in protest of the Vietnam war. In 1970, the
U.S. Supreme Court refuses to hear a suit by Massachusetts
against the U.S. Secretary of Defense over the drafting of
citizens for service in an undeclared war (Vietnam). In 1989,
East Germany abandons efforts to prevent crossings into West
Berlin.
Anniversaries of interest for
each day of this week will be found throughout the newsletter
below.
You, like most folks, have been fooled into inadvertently
agreeing that your economic activities are exercises of
privilege, thereby allowing the tax to be applied to your
earnings. Why is this so hard for you to admit?
I GUESS THESE ACTUALLY LEAD TO A THIRD SIMPLE QUESTION: If you
really feel that all these things of which you complain are so
bad, why are you not helping more Americans understand the
nature of the tax and the ill effects of it being misunderstood
and misapplied?
Learn how and why you should ask every journalist in the
so-called "alt-media" these questions
here.
Are the presentations and
resources offered on this site and in my other work of any value to you?
Tim Kendrick has posted
a video
on YouTube regarding donations. I didn't know what to do about
it to begin with; I don't do what I do intending for anyone to
feel obligated in any way.
But of course, no one IS obligated. I will continue
to make my work freely-available here, and in my books for only
the cost of a cheap paperback.
Thus, even though I post it here below, Tim's very
thoughtful personal resolution and encouragement to others is
just an invitation for consideration by those who may not be
conscious of the fact that I can't do what I do without support.
No one is to feel any pressure from it; if it moves anyone to
act let it be solely because it seems right.
True American Joe Black Testifies And Shares Victories For
Liberty And The Rule Of Law
...as every American
should...
EDUCATED AMERICAN GROWN-UP JOE BLACK has
stood up and acted to enforce the law upon its domestic
enemies-- or, at least, upon agencies of the state whose
operators seem to happily exploit ignorance and mis-apply the
law at every chance for their personal benefit.
Get inspired and encouraged by Joe's video sharing his spirit,
his testimony and the acknowledgements he has secured:
Find more testimonial videos
here, and please, people, share these around as widely as
you can. To learn what, how and why to share your own testimony
(with or without mere practical victories to go along with the
far more important spiritual victories that are the real heart
of
CtC), click
here.
OVER THE YEARS, I HAVE FOUND MYSELF OBLIGED to
produce
debunkings of various bits of nonsense resident within the
activist community. The need has been especially acute in regard
to the so-called "tax honesty community", in which errant
notions seem to have no difficulty finding a home, and from
which I have therefore always held the
CtC community to be separate.
I have never done any of these debunkings with any
enthusiasm-- indeed, I always do them reluctantly.
I take no pleasure in pointing out the flaws in anyone else's
sincerely-presented work or conclusions, or sincerely-held
beliefs; further the debunkings are inevitably met with
acrimony.
Every errant notion has its defenders-- people who
have either pride or expectations invested in them. Some are
even defended by what seems to be policy, being false notions
deliberately injected into the community as distractions and
"defended" by a professional cadre of provocateurs.
Unfortunately, though, the nonsense does have ill
effects. At a minimum, these errant notions slow the progress
toward the truth of those who fall prey to them. Worse, in some
cases these mistaken or misleading ideas steer people into doing
themselves great harm. Consequently, debunking errors that
acquire traction is sometimes necessary as a matter of social
responsibility.
TODAY I FIND MYSELF FEELING OBLIGED to address a
wildly-errant notion long-resident in the fringier parts of the
tax-honesty community, and which could be said to be the binding
idea informing a community all of its own. I will take a stab at
labeling this notion as the
UCC/Redemption/Worldwide-Ancient-Conspiracy (URW) argument.
As best can be told by years of periodic exposure
to this general theory of reality, its basic ideas include,
among much else, that every government is a corporation in the
same sense that McDonalds is a corporation. Without explaining
how things managed to stumble along prior, the theory posits
that the United States itself became a corporation in 1871.
Further, this URW notion asserts that corporations can only
interact with other corporations, and therefore all Americans
are, by legal legerdemain, assumed to be corporations in all
dealings with, or impositions by, the state. Another assertion
swimming in these waters is that the US went bankrupt in
1933 and was rescued from this dilemma by the British, through a
depraved agreement under which American governments committed
every subsequent newborn's future wealth production to Britain
(or sometimes the Queen of England personally), secured by
transfer of ownership of the "corporate baby's" birth
certificate, in exchange for the bail-out.
There is much more to this URW absurdity; thousands
of pages of complex gibberish have been written fleshing out the
whole thing. And I expect to hear from its adherents about how I
am misrepresenting, or failing to properly clarify the couple of
portions I have described here.
Frankly, the whole package appears designed to
discourage debunking by reliance on its sheer bulk and confusion
as a defense. Talking about this at all generates a headache in
any rational person, and though I have addressed it a bit in the
past, mostly I have just thrown up my hands and moved on to more
productive uses of my time.
But in just the last week, I have had two people I
like and respect bring this subject up with me. Each has been
approached by folks who have drunk this Kool-Aid and seek to
entice my friends into the utter waste of time and energy
involved in skimming even the periphery of this dark cloud of
craziness.
Thus, while I will by no means offer a
comprehensive analysis of the URW universe, I will address the
couple of tenets I described above. This will suffice, for all
it takes to show any sensible person that an offered meal is not
wholesome is to point out one or two bits of dog-poo on the
plate, or, to put it a bit more decorously, "garbage in, garbage
out."
(In any event, the couple of things I'm going to
cover will have to suffice, because even mentioning this
craziness on these pages is embarrassing, and I'll spend no more
pixels on it than the bare minimum necessary...)
SADLY, LIKE FAR TOO MANY FOLKS victimized by
government "schooling" during their formative years (see the
great video I came across this week on that subject posted below
this article), those taken in by the URW scam have no knowledge
of history. This weakness is exploited by the scam's purveyors.
For instance, as mentioned earlier, part of the URW
storyline has the United States going
"bankrupt" in 1933 and making a deal to pull its fat out of the
fire with Great Britain. Under the terms of the (of course,
somehow completely secret) deal Britain (or the Queen of
England alone!) gained an ownership interest in the wealth
production or tax liabilities of all future Americans
(accomplished or memorialized by her purchase of their birth
certificates, you see...).
Just a few years after this alleged US bankruptcy
and rescue by the Brits Great Britain was at our door,
hat-in-hand, begging for aid, which we afforded it through FDR's
"Lend-Lease"
program. By the end of WWII, Britain was an economic basket
case. The idea that Britain was in a
position to rescue or buy-out the United States in the 1930s (or
anytime) is ridiculous.
Further, the whole "bankruptcy" assertion is itself
a product of naiveté. Called upon as "evidence" for this
assertion are certain speeches in Congress made during this
period.
Unrecognized or unacknowledged in regard to these
citations is that these speeches
were simply political rhetoric. These speeches were made in many
cases by senators and
representatives beholden to the
affluent interests who held the vast majority of federal debt
which was now to be re-paid in mere fiat currency rather than
hard money.
The speeches cast events and/or policies in a light, and with
expressions, calculated to excite perspectives and opinions
desired by those interests.
The policies railed against were dastardly, it can
be argued, and unconstitutional, as well. But they were not a
"bankruptcy". And that's a shame. An actual bankruptcy would
have had the feds repudiate the debt outright, and that would
probably have been a very good thing for both the short-term and
long-term health of the USA (just as it would today).
HERE'S
ANOTHER BIT OF DOG POO spoiling this
dinner. As part of the "corporate governments can only deal with
corporations" nonsense (and struggling to rationalize just how
government DO manage to deal with all us flesh-and-blood
people), there is a simply wrong doctrine
flogged by this same crew about "Social security Trusts".
But
there
ARE no "Social security trusts", and no Social security number
(or any other kind of number) is required for the tax to apply.
See
this, and read all the way to the end.
I'LL FINISH WITH ONE LAST CATEGORY of poo-- bogus
authority citations. Someone purveying the URW crankery sent me the
following (from, in this case, Minnesota's judicial rules, though
the same basic material can be found in many places) as "evidence"
supporting its assertions about the legal character and uses of
birth certificates:
Rule 220. Birth Certificates
The Registrar of Titles is authorized to receive
for registration of memorials upon any outstanding certificate
of title an official birth certificate pertaining to a
registered owner named in said certificate of title showing the
date of birth of said registered owner, providing there is
attached to said birth certificate an affidavit of an affiant
who states that he/she is familiar with the facts recited,
stating that the party named in said birth certificate is the
same party as one of the owners named in said certificate of
title; and that thereafter the Registrar of Titles shall
treat said registered owner as having attained the age of the
majority at a date 18 years after the date of birth
shown by said certificate.
Bereft of context, this language would be
provocative to anyone who hadn't already rejected the "birth
certificate" proposition just based on its sheer lunacy alone.
This is why this text is sent around by URW-promoters without
acknowledgement of the fact that this rule appears as one of the
miscellaneous provisions of
the state's judicial rules for registration of land titles,
some aspects of which require that a purported owner-disposer be
an adult.
In short, what is being presented as "evidence" is only evidence
that the whole kit-and-kaboodle is a scam. But that's not the
best item in the 'false authority" category. Here's the beaut,
that will be found littering the internet on websites and blogs
operated by adherents to this craziness, and presented as the
knockout punch in support of the URW theory:
"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial
person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a
government can interface only with other artificial persons.
The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is
foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the
tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no
government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can
concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial
person and the contract between them."
Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators
(3 U.S. 54: 1 L.Ed. 56; 3 Dall. 54)
Pretty telling, yes? Well it might be if a word of
it actually appeared in
the ruling, but of course none do.
Please everyone, remember, friends don't let
friends waste time and energy on nonsense. Be a good friend and
denounce this craziness whenever it is encountered.
P.S. Anyone exhibiting any indication of adherence
to this nonsense-- such as adding UCC section references to
forms or other paperwork; sticking a colon, or "of the family"
into their name; making references to "the strawman"; showing a
fear of zipcodes; and so forth-- should consider himself or
herself to be the kid in the middle-school hallway with the
"Kick me" sign on their back where any bureaucrat without
respect for the law is concerned.
Most of those exhibitions are legally harmless--
that is, most of them (though not all) do not invalidate a
return, or generate any other infirmity. Mostly such exhibitions
amount to mere eccentricities, from a legal standpoint.
But such exhibitions DO suggest, rightly or
wrongly, a credulousness and lack of understanding or confidence
that unscrupulous government officials can be expected to see as
signs of a soft target. Thus, such exhibitions, if seen by the
wrong person, are likely to draw harassment, resistance and
other bad behavior even in regard to otherwise flawless,
completely correct educated filings.
November 10- In 1871,
Stanley finds Livingstone near Lake Tanganyika. In 1928, Knute
Rockne asks the Notre Dame squad to "Win one for the Gipper!".
They do. In 1940, Walt Disney begins serving as an FBI
informant against "subversives" in Hollywood, according to at
least one biographer-- the family disputes this, but he does go
on to testify against some associates before the House
Unamerican Activities Committee. In 1969, 'Sesame Street'
debuts.
Scholar
Greg Sutton Shares Some Insights Gleaned From The Early Days Of
The Tax
GREG SUTTON ASKED HIMSELF a simple question and followed the
path to a nice piece of historical evidence of Congressional
intent regarding the nature of the income tax, and a good
explanation of some of the confusion on the subject amongst the
ill-educated.
“The internal revenue title, which comprises all
of the Code except the preliminary sections relating to its
enactment, is intended to contain all the United States statutes
of a general and permanent nature relating exclusively to
internal revenue, in force on January 2, 1939; also such of the
temporary statutes of that description as relate to taxes the
occasion of which may arise after the enactment of the Code.
These statutes are codified without substantive change and with
only such change of form as is required by arrangement and
consolidation. The title contains no provision, except for
effective date, not derived from a law approved prior to
January 3, 1939... The whole body of internal revenue law in
effect on January 2, 1939, therefore, has its ultimate origin in
164 separate enactments of Congress. The earliest of these was
approved July 1, 1862; the latest, June 16, 1938....”
When I looked up the
1862 statutes, to see what the presumed original law had to
say, I noticed that section 89 repealed an income tax that had,
unbeknownst to me, been enacted a year earlier in 1861:
Sec. 89. And be it further enacted, That for the
purpose of modifying and reenacting, as hereinafter provided, so
much of an act, entitled “An act to provide increased revenue
from imports to pay interest on the public debt, and for other
purposes,” approved fifth of August, eighteen hundred and
sixty-one, as relates to income tax; that is to say, sections
forty-nine, fifty, (except so much thereof as relates to the
selection and appointment of depositaries,) and fifty-one, be,
and the same are hereby, repealed.
I wondered what was so offensive with the 1861 Income Tax
statutes that they would be denied recognition by the code
writer’s, despite the rules of in para materia for statutes of
the same subject matter. It wasn’t until I recently found a copy
of
G. S. Boutwell’s, Marnual of Direct and Excise Tax System in the
United States, 1863, on Google Books that I figured it out.
Let’s go to the 1861 statutes that Boutwell provides in his
manual (click the hyperlink above) and see that what was so
objectionable to the code writers is plainly visible. We see on
the first page the header DIRECT TAX and then the beginning
section, Section 8, of that direct tax. Scroll down page by
page, noting that on each page the header reminds us that the
subject is a direct tax. Stop at the bottom of page 19 and find
Section 49. This section, along with Sections 50 and 51
following, imposes an unapportioned income tax within the
context of statutes imposing a direct tax. Of course, under the
Constitution all direct taxes must be apportioned, just as
Section 8 at the very beginning clearly shows.
So, you and the code writers’ might have asked, what were these
guys smoking? Sticking an income tax, clearly lacking
apportionment, in with a direct tax which is clearly
apportioned. You can imagine the confusion that such an
arrangement of statutes must have created. In the introduction
of Boutwell’s manual he mentions that he was answering hundreds
of letters a day from confused citizens when these statutes
first appeared. I would have written him too!
This had to be fixed, and to solve this egregious violation of
clarity and notice the law was “modified” by removing it from
statutory association with the apportioned direct tax. The 1861
income tax was repealed and re-enacted in its proper
association with its brethren, the myriad of other unapportioned
excise taxes and duties imposed by the 1862 revenue act.
From this discussion it is easy to see why the internal revenue
code writer’s would want to exclude the 1861 income tax as one
of the original enactments upon which the code is but a
restatement: they didn’t want the ambiguity and confusion
surrounding the 1861 income tax to in any way color the
Congressional intention from 1862 forward that the income tax
was in the nature of an excise and was enforced as such.
For those who are curious as to why the 1861 Congress would make
such an egregious mistake in the highly regarded and honored
rules of clarity and notice in writing tax legislation, we must
venture off to the Motherland and study her tax system, because
her system is the system of internal and external revenue that
the Founder’s adopted when the words “duties”, “imposts”, and
“excises” (in whatever particular order) were inserted into the
taxing clauses of the Constitution. The British, during the
period known as the Enlightenment and specifically the Glorious
Revolution of 1688, switched to primarily indirect taxes as the
means for government to pay its bills and service the debt.
Britain became the laboratory for the Classical Liberal wing of
public finance to perfect its indirect taxation science.
Not just America, but the rest of the Classical Liberal world
looked to Britain as the trendsetter in taxation. The record of
congressional proceedings is replete with references to “what
the British were doing” when it comes to the topic of taxation.
But when it comes to a tax that garnered world-wide attention
nothing comes close to Pitt’s Property and Income Tax of 1799
and its follow-up, Addington’s Property and Income Tax of 1803.
This was the first time that the British had resorted to direct
taxes for revenue since, at least, 1688, to fund the defense
against the Napoleonic hordes. So naturally, all the public
finance eye’s were on the British to see how it all turned out.
Addington’s version was especially commended for its relative
ease of collection, due to the use of stoppage-at-source for the
property tax portions of the legislation and for the collection
results that had exceeded expectations.
What Pitt and Addington had done in both tax bills was to
incorporate an excise tax that the British had used since the
1720’s in with the direct property tax portions of the
legislation. This excise or duty was originally known as the
Office Duty, but first Pitt and then Addington changed the name
to the more obtuse and general term: Income Tax. As time went
on, the entire legislation, both the property and income tax
portions together, took on the shortened moniker of just Income
Tax. That, and the excise portions of the comprehensive taxation
scheme, by their association with the direct tax portions,
became to be erroneously but conveniently described as direct
taxes also.
By the time of the Civil War, when an American legislator talked
about an income tax he was more than likely referring to the
British version, which had for sixty years been a staple of the
British internal revenue system. (But the clarity of his
understanding, considering the above natural tendencies towards
abbreviation and convenience affecting the British tax (taxes,
actually), is uncertain.) So when Congress was forced out of
necessity to resort to internal revenue to fund the
it’s-not-going-quite-as-earlier-predicted Civil War prosecution,
it would be no surprise if the British Property and Income Tax
was the immediate choice to solve the fiscal woes of the
treasury, just as it had repeatedly done for the British,
especially as wartime measures.
And lo and behold, the 1861 apportioned direct tax, with its odd
rider of an unapportioned income tax within its statutory
structure, is a rather obvious attempt by Congress to best adapt
the British Property and Income Tax to the method-of-collection
restrictions imposed by the Constitution. Of course, as the
previous discussion reveals, Congress failed to properly
disassociate the excise portion, or Income Tax, from the Direct
Tax portion, leading to ambiguity and confusion as to the true
nature of the 1861 Income Tax portion of the tax. But that was
taken care of a year later with the 1862 Income Duty.*
* Though the re-enacted tax was
originally labeled a "duty"-- perhaps to emphasize its
distinction as indirect which was being emphasized by the repeal
of the 1861 version and its re-enactment in 1862--
a provisions was inserted
in the Revenue Act of 1866 to ensure that a different kind of
confusion be avoided:
"And wherever the word "duty" is used
in this act, or the acts to which this is an amendment, it shall
be construed to mean "tax," whenever such construction shall be
necessary in order to effect the purpose of said acts."
PRO TIP: By the
physics of the law, an indirect tax is necessarily a
privilege tax. Here's why:
The distinction between a
direct tax and an indirect tax is incidence. A
direct tax arises by the direct imposition of the
taxer, without any election of the taxed (other than
that of authorizing the taxing power in the first
place).
An
indirect tax arises by the taxed
choosing to to do
something by which the taxer's claim is then
created. The choice that is a valid object of an
indirect tax can't be anything done as an exercise
of an untaxable right. Nor can it be any activity of
necessity. A tax on anything done by necessity would
arise not by actual election of the taxed but simply
because the tax had been imposed by the taxer. Such
a tax, whatever it may be called, would be in actual
substance a direct tax, even if one that arose only
intermittently. Think of a tax on eating, for
example, or working, or engaging in trade with
others (all of which are things done by right as
well as by necessity, but you get the point).
What is left as the
valid object of an indirect tax is the exercise of
privilege-- something done not by right, and
therefore done by the permission of the taxer (who,
due to being possessed of an ownership right in the
thing being permitted, is entitled to claim of
portion of the proceeds when the thing is profitably
used).rong>
"[Although the Legislature
may declare as privileges and tax as such for State
revenue purposes those pursuits and occupations that
are not matters of common right], the Legislature
has no power to declare as a privilege and tax for
revenue purposes occupations that are of common
right."
If you're not talking this one up everywhere and
helping generate a buzz, you don't really want liberty and the
rule of law...
PRO TIP: The
argument that a concept explicitly given a statutory
definition for purposes of this or that chapter or
"title" has the same meaning as the common word the
legislature has borrowed for its label-- which
meaning plainly didn't suit the legislature's
purposes, hence its replacement-- is a preposterous
reading of the law.
“It is axiomatic that the
statutory definition of the term excludes unstated
meanings of that term.”
Meese v. Keene, 481
U.S. 465 (1987);
“[W]e are not at liberty to
put our gloss on the definition that Congress
provided by looking to the generally accepted
meaning of the defined term.”
Tenn. Prot. & Advocacy Inc. v. Wells,
371 F.3d 342 (6th Cir. 2004).
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
November 11- In 1620,
the Mayflower Compact is signed. In 1864, Union General Wm. T.
Sherman orders Atlanta burned to the ground. In 1889,
Washington becomes the 42nd sovereign American state and is
admitted to the union as such. In 1918, World War I ("The War
to End All Wars") ends. In 1926, U.S. Route 66 is established.
Another Batch Of Victories For America's
True Heroes
States only obey the law when people stand up to
enforce it
ROGER M. IS AN EDUCATED, ACTIVATED and dedicated
American hero, standing on his feet to restore the republic and
enforce the rule of law. Roger knows that liberty can't exist
where the state is unconstrained by the law.
Having learned the law controlling the taxing
authority of his servant governments-- even
the parts of the law which the state would rather he not know--
and having discovered that his activities and the earnings
therefrom are not actually subject to the income tax, Roger
invoked the whole law and recovered everything withheld from his
earnings and turned over to New York in connection with that tax
during 2014:
***
JOSEPH H. HAS ALSO LEARNED and applied the law. By
way of
this filing, Joseph has established that his economic
activities were not of
the excisable variety, and has reclaimed everything withheld
from him and given to the United States during 2014 in
connection with the tax-- Social security and Medicare
extractions included:
BRUCE AND NILA DAVIS have reached back a few years
and corrected erroneous allegations (and admissions) about the
taxable character of their earnings in 2011 by way of an amended
return, having since learned the truth about the tax and its
limits. The United States has flatly and unambiguously
acknowledged the accuracy of their conclusions:
***
AND PAUL B. HAS ALSO RISEN to his all-American
grown-up feet and acted to enforce the law. This has special
meaning for Paul-- as a military oath-taker, Paul is duty bound
even more explicitly and deliberately than most to protect the
rule of law from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Paul knows that when Americans enable a state's
ambition to be free of the law's constraints, either by
falling asleep at the wheel or by letting themselves be
intimidated into inaction, the Constitutional design for
liberty and the rule of law is in even greater danger than if
the country were invaded by external aggressors. Paul isn't
having it, not on his watch.
By way of
this filing Paul has enforced-- and thereby hugely
strengthened-- the law. Paul applied the tax to
his 2012 earnings where it is proper, and prevented it from
being applied where it
is not proper, resulting in this recovery two weeks ago of the majority of what
was withheld from him that year and given to the United States
in connection with the tax, Social security and Medicare
extractions included:
DON'T YOU WISH EVERY AMERICAN was as responsible
and upstanding as Roger, Joseph, Bruce, Nila and Paul? Think
about
what that would do for our once free and prosperous country,
and re-dedicate yourself to spreading
this file to everyone you can.
Join me in celebrating and honoring these heroes of
the republic (and
all their fellows)-- real American men and women who know
what it means and know what it takes to be free people enjoying
the benefits of a legitimate
rule of law.
JOIN ME IN ALSO CELEBRATING American hero Paul Eberle for stepping up to the
camera and declaring his resolution
to act on behalf of the Founders' plan for the preservation of
our liberty against the anticipated corruption of the state. See
Paul's inspiring testimony
here.
Other testimonials can be seen
here.
In light of
the actual evidence, those
who doubt or
deny the accuracy and correctness of
CtC just
because government officials make weaselly
representations against it are like the 16th-century Europeans who
were mystified by
Copernicus getting all those
astronomical predictions right even though the
church had said he was wrong.
ARE YOU JUST LEARNING ABOUT the crime against your
rights and the rule of law by means of a heinous crime by which
Doreen Hendrickson is being victimized? Get up to speed with
this and
this, and this film:
The longer but much more comprehensive and
question-answering backstory (the "why" history leading up to
this unprecedented assault on the First Amendment and principles
of due process) can be found
here.
DOREEN'S ADDRESS: Doreen Hendrickson 48564-039, FPC
Alderson A-4, P.O. Box A, Alderson, WV 24910. She would love
to hear your encouragement, uplift, appreciation and solidarity,
and she can even be sent paperback books, as long as the
envelope in which they are packaged has clearly written at the
top: Paperback Book Enclosed.
Anyone wanting to send Doreen a few dollars for her
commissary account (with which she can get better food, soft
drinks, clothes and other amenities) can do so by mailing a
money order made payable to Doreen Hendrickson 48564039. Mail
to:
Federal Bureau of Prisons,
Doreen Hendrickson
48564-039
Post Office Box 474701
Des Moines, Iowa 50947-0001
DO YOU NOTICE THAT MESSAGE ON THE T-SHIRT being
worn by the lovely model of the 'I Stand with Doreen'
care-bracelet? It reads, THINK. It's not illegal yet!
But you know what? The charge against Doreen is an
effort by the state to make it so.
Doreen was charged, remember, with
criminally-refusing to cede control of her expressions to the
state. Now, I'll grant you that technically her thoughts would
remain her own, but if the state can dictate what everyone says,
then pretty soon that atmosphere of controlled expressions will
result in first influencing, and then ultimately controlling
what everyone thinks.
If the State gets away with establishing the
precedent that every written expression-- even just those on
testimonial instruments-- can be required to echo the state's
preferred view of things, the fate of free thinking and liberty
is obvious (and it's not good).
November 12- In 1912,
the frozen bodies of the Scott expedition are found on the Ross
Ice Shelf in Antarctica. In 1981, the space shuttle Columbia
becomes the first spacecraft to be launched twice. In 1990, Tim
Berners-Lee publishes the design of what becomes the World Wide
Web. In 2006, South Ossetia holds its second referendum to
validate its 1991 declaration of independence from Georgia (the
first one in 1992 having gone unrecognized by the international
community). 95% of ethnic South Ossetians participated (66.2%
of the population), and the vote was 99% in favor of
independence. The vote was monitored by observers from Germany,
Austria, Poland, Sweden and several other countries.
Nonetheless, most Western governments refuse to recognize this
second affirmation of the will of the people either, in part
because the government of Georgia refuses to do so...
*****
NEW! Orders of twelve or more books now come with a free DVD
containing six informative and inspiring videos-- 112 minutes in
all. Click
here for the details.
Do you have a victory to share?
Click
here to learn how to do so.
If you're working on one, and just getting stonewalled
or speed-bumped, you can still be recognized! Go
here to learn what to do.
Ignorance of the true nature of the "income" tax
has gagged, gutted and seduced-into-disgrace America's
ministerial community. This must change.
You're a
passenger on a riverboat that relies on regular
contributions of fuel from the passengers to
keep moving forward. You see an unsurvivable
waterfall ahead, and note a
soon-to-be-irresistible current growing stronger
each day. What does common sense suggest?
Time, unfortunately, is on the side of the
well-funded disinformation specialists
Illuminating anniversaries of this week:
November 13- In 1916,
Australian Prime Minister Billy Hughes is expelled from his
party (and post) over his support for conscription. In 1927,
the Holland Tunnel opens for traffic between New Jersey and New
York. In 2002, Iraq agrees to the terms of UN Security Council
Resolution 1441 concerning inspections for alleged "weapons of
mass destruction", while maintaining that it is already in
compliance with previous disarmament demands. No such weapons
were found by the inspection teams, but Iraq's alleged continued
possession of these WMDs was nonetheless used as a pretext for
the March 2003 invasion by the United States. The WMDs have
still not turned up...
Are You Having Trouble Spreading The
Word?
SKEPTICISM (SOMETIMES INVOKED BY FEAR) IS TO BE
EXPECTED when you're trying to explain to someone that
everything they've been encouraged their whole lives to
believe about something as entrenched and significant as the
income tax is basically nonsense. So here's a way to help
cut through the resistance:
Ask your listener how he or she would react if
you were to show an announcement from the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue admitting that the tax doesn't apply to the
earnings of most Americans and is misapplied most of the
time because people don't understand how it works? Or how
about if you showed a ruling from the Supreme Court saying
the same?>
Now you just have to explain that
you're going to show exactly those things-- but because
the state really doesn't want people to know this, these
things haven't been said quite as forthrightly as we would
all wish. It's going to take a bit more work to take these
admissions in than is sufficient for just reading a press
release. But it'll be worth the effort...
IF YOU'RE NOT SPREADING THIS LINK with every bit of
energy you can, to school libraries, homeschool
families and community groups, your neighbors, your
family members, your pastors and
co-congregationalists, journalists, lawyers, CPAs,
members of congress, tax-agency workers, Wikipedia,
Anonymous, WikiLeaks, the Tax Foundation, everyone
in the "tax honesty" movement, the 9/11 truth
movement, other activist movements and everyone
else,
you have only yourself to blame for your
troubles with the tax, and a whole lot else of which
you might complain. It's on you.
WRITE A NICE, FRIENDLY AND BRIEF introductory note
explaining what will be seen at the link-- cryptic
is bad; excited is good-- and then send this WMI
(weapon of mass instruction) far and wide.
"I am a great believer in luck, and I find the
harder I work, the more I have of it."
A teacher asked
her 6th grade class how many of them were fans of Big Government.
Not really knowing what a Big Government fan is, but wanting to be liked by
the
teacher, all the kids raised their hands except for TJ.
The teacher asked TJ why he has decided to be different...again.
TJ said, "Because I'm not a fan of Big Government."
The teacher asked, "Why aren't you a fan of Big Government?"
TJ said, "Because I'm a libertarian."
The teacher asked him why he's a libertarian. TJ answered, "Well,
my Dad's a libertarian and my Mom's a libertarian, so I'm a libertarian."
Annoyed by this answer, the teacher asked, "If your dad were a moron and
your mom were an idiot, what would that make you?"
With a big smile, TJ replied, "That would make me a fan of Big
Government."
Real Americans don't accommodate fog, lies and a sliding scale of
adherence to the rule of law. Real American men and women stand up for the
truth and the law, come what may, knowing that it is only by setting the bar
at the top and enforcing it, come what may, that liberties are secured.
"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
OUTREACH!!!
JOB ONE, PEOPLE!!! SPREAD. THE. WORD.
ONLY ONE THING WILL WIN YOU YOUR LIBERTY:
Spreading the truth. Accordingly, I've assembled
outreach resources into a new, dedicated page. Find it
here, and please, USE THESE TOOLS!! I can't
do this all by myself.
"In a time of
universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary
act."
-George Orwell
*****
Test Your
"Income" Tax IQ!
CtC Warrior
SanDiegoScott has put together a great little 20-question quiz
to test your knowledge of the law regarding the United States
"income" tax. Test yourself, test your friends and family!
Test your accountant and tax attorney, and help them learn the
liberating truth!!
Here's my question to you: If an evil person is
guaranteed that he can inflict physical pain upon others and
guaranteed to never suffer pain himself, what happens to his
willingness to inflict pain?
You say, "What do you mean, Williams?" OK, I will make
my question more concrete. Suppose a young punk knows that he can
knock out an innocent person and never suffer physical pain himself,
such as being knocked out; what happens to his willingness to play
the knockout game? Suppose a rapist knows he can brutally rape a
woman and never have to suffer physical pain himself; what happens
to his willingness to rape?
Suppose we guarantee school students that they can
assault a teacher and never suffer similar pain themselves; what do
you think happens to assaults on teachers? Finally, suppose we
guarantee prison inmates that they can toss urine and feces
cocktails on prison guards, a practice called gassing, and suffer no
physical pain; what happens to their willingness to gas guards?
You can answer those questions. Let's look at other
effects of the liberal vision.
After every tragic shooting, liberals and progressives
call for more gun laws. They exploit American ignorance as to why
the Framers gave us Second Amendment protections.
Now ask yourself this: Have you really done
all that you can to
urge everyone
you
know to also stand up and act in the only way that will really
bring about change in your lifetime?
Even as ardent a statist as Abraham
Lincoln, in announcing his willingness to burn the Southern states to the ground in order to
keep them paying the tariff for the benefit of Northern interests in
his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861, paid at least lip
service to the Founders design of leaving control over the fuel
available to feed the fires Washington wants to light in the hands
of the individual citizenry when he said, "Doing this I deem to
be only a simple duty on my part; and I shall perform it, unless my
rightful masters, the American people, shall withhold the requisite
means..."
November 14- In 1910,
Eugene Ely performs the first aircraft take-off form the deck of
a ship. In 1969, Apollo 12, the second manned mission to the
Moon, lifts off. In 1971, Mariner 9 becomes the first
spacecraft to orbit another planet (Mars). In 1972, the Dow
Jones Industrial Average close above 1,000 for the first time.
In 2001, the United States proxy "Afghan Northern Alliance"
takes Kabul, having driven the Taliban from the capital on the
pretext that it was harboring Osama Bin Laden, when, in fact,
the Taliban had offered to turn Bin Laden over to the United
States upon presentation of at least some evidence of his
involvement in the events of 9/11. To this day, the events of
9/11 are not listed by the FBI on its
Bin Laden "Wanted" poster, with the explanation
reported to be a "lack of hard evidence" of his involvement
in those events. In 2002, the United States House of
Representatives votes down a proposal to create an independent
commission to investigate the events of 9/11.
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
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.
Have You Taken
A Military, Law Enforcement or Public Office Oath To Uphold And Defend The
Constitution?
"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
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...
&
'The BOSTONIAN'S Paying the EXCISE-MAN, or TARRING & FEATHERING' (1774)
(How our forefathers responded to arrogant "Rule of Law defiers"...)
“All truth
passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently
opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.”
-Arthur
Schopenhauer
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...)
*****
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
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'?"
November 15- In 1777, the Continental Congress
approves the Articles of Confederation. In 1920, the first
assembly of the League of Nations takes place in Geneva,
Switzerland. In 1939, the cornerstone of the Jefferson Memorial
in Washington, D.C. is laid. In 1971, Intel releases the first
commercial single-chip CPU.
"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:
Is this newsletter of any value to you? If so, please
consider a donation
to help keep it available, or it soon won't be. Donations can
be sent to:
Want to get on the Newsletter mailing list? Just send an email from
the address you want added to SubscribeMe 'at' losthorizons.com with
"Subscribe me" in the subject line, and your name in the body!
To comment on any article in this newsletter (or to read
comments of
others), click on the
below.
(It may take a while for your newly-posted comments to
appear; also, please understand that this is NOT a place for posing
questions
about individual tax situations.)
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.
below.