The first time I came across this TP'er stuff was on FR and it had to do with whether the tax was constitutional or not. As a CPA, I was interested because I am interested in how the legal concepts evovled and I also was attracted to the idea that on the off chance that it wasn't I wanted to see for myself.
In school we spend most of our time learning to apply the law not learning its history or rules of contruction etc. I must say that your knowledge base on the origins of the income tax far surpass CPA's and Attorneys.
But anyways the threads that were posted back then were posted by relatively newbies on both sides of the arguments. The TP'ers referred abstracts from several cases where the opinion of the judge seemed to be agreeing with the TP'ers. So I printed out the actual cases from my library and read them during some quiet time. What I found was the judges did actually make those quotes however they were repeating the argument being made by the TP'er. As you know it is quite common that the judge's opinion clearly states the contrary opinion before exlaining why it is wrong. What the TP'ers had done was to omit the parts where the judge, after stating the issue, tore the argument apart.
It was then that I learned that either the TP'ers don't have the reading comprehension skills to understand what they are reading or they are deliberating misleading. The ones with the books and tapes are deliberate but the ones like onetomany may just be an unwitting dupe.
It was then that I learned that either the TP'ers don't have the reading comprehension skills to understand what they are reading or they are deliberating misleading.
I suspect most of the folks we run into here on FR, are actually well intentioned but terribly misled. I know from direct personal experience of how one can fall into the TP way of thinking, and by into the arguments put out by the TP gurus.
One is easily led to accept what one is inclined to desire or believe. The stock in trade of every con artist out there is to convince a mark that he can actually have what he believes. Unfortunately, the statements of the gurus are taken a face value and not really checked out, folks are intimidated by the endless array of books in even the poorest equipped legal library, and finding specifics take a specialised knowledge that few ever have opportunity to aquire. As a consequenc a legal quotation is simply accepted without question, afterall it fits common sense, right. Self evident no need to check on things.
It is easier to believe all judges are crooks bought off by the IRS than to do the research to find a truth you really don't want to know. The TP guru is viewed almost as a saint, just trying to help out his fellow Americans. His message is just not credibly contested by anyone in the group, they all want to believe, and there is no counterview to be had. Government, the legal system, anyone associated with law is automatically dismissed and not a credible source, they are all in on the conspiracy to defraud you out of your property.
How did I get out? I have this nasty quirk in my character flaw that causes me to question anyone in the role of a teacher and to attempt to become as knowledgible as they in the material presented. I once tried to draft a researched memorandum of a position against the validity of the income taxe; learned how to do legal research and was spoiled from the day forward. I found out how flimsy the arguments were in reality, and the cites invariable were partial, out-of-context, and represented the reverse of the actual judgements of the court.
Needless to say I got out fast. Unfortunately too many friends didn't and many them have paid some rather severe consequences for their desire to believe and their rejection of anyone who could really help them.
I must say that your knowledge base on the origins of the income tax far surpass CPA's and Attorneys.
It would probably do such folks some good to vigorously join the debate. I learned what I know from debating their arguments and answering them point by point out of research from material available here on the net.
I would guarantee those who approached the debate humbly, willing to do the objectiver research it takes, would come out with an education that they could never buy from a university.
Get enough of em educated & interested, we might even some some positive result in changing the laws.