Skip to comments.
WHERE DID THE CONSTITUTION GO? Here are some answers. (IMPORTANT!)
The Aware Group ^
| 22 Sep 02
| Howard Freeman
Posted on 09/22/2002 7:21:03 AM PDT by 11B3
When I beat the IRS, I used Supreme Court decisions. If I had tried to use these in court, I would have been convicted.
I was involved with a patriot group and I studied supreme Court cases. I concluded that the supreme Court had declared that I was not a person required to file an income tax--that the tax was an excise tax on privileges granted by government. So I quit filing and paying income taxes, it was not long before they came down on me with a heavy hand. They issued a notice of deficiency, which had such a fantastic sum on it that the biggest temptation was to go in with their letter and say, "Where in the world did you ever get that figure?" They claimed I owed them some $60,000. But even if I had been paying taxes, I never had that much money, so how could I have owed them that much?
(Excerpt) Read more at theawaregroup.com ...
TOPICS: Announcements; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Free Republic; Government
KEYWORDS: ucc; usainc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
To: B4Ranch
Sent them an email, thanks.
To: Doctor Stochastic
Humpty-Dumpty Your successful effort in proving you are an expert on very fat things that fall off walls reinforces everyones opinion of you.
To: Common Tator
Don't you even check your sources? Posting incorrect references it just reduces your credibility.
To: Doctor Stochastic
Delightful! I read it through for probably the 20'th time in my life. Thanks.
yoe
24
posted on
09/23/2002 9:08:22 AM PDT
by
yoe
To: Doctor Stochastic
Don't you even check your sources? Posting incorrect references it just reduces your credibility. You corrected me to impress other readers that you are more knowledgeable than I am. If your efforts were to make me more credible, you would have emailed me in private.
Dumb people are impressed with mastery of detail and find it very important. Smart people are impressed with the mastery of strategic thinking. It is the prime difference between smart and dumb people and their perception as to who is credible and who is not.
In the future perhaps you should confine yourself to impressing dumb people. I'll bet you are very good at it.
To: Common Tator
Would you like some Brie with that whine?
I will complement you in public when you deserve it. So far you seem only to be angry that I pointed out your ignorance.
To: boris
I work in the Graybar building in New York. Am I in trouble?
27
posted on
09/23/2002 9:49:15 AM PDT
by
Gumlegs
To: Demidog
28
posted on
09/23/2002 12:34:05 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
"White Man's Ghost Dance'
Perhaps a very apt metaphor. Sad, if the metaphor is 'true'.
To: headsonpikes
Never mind what words like "Sovereign Citizen" or "Lawful Money" mean -- what does "abracadabra" mean? -- it's what they do that counts. Unfortunately, Constitutionalist words don't do anything but lose court cases and invite sanctions. Constitutionalism is the white man's version of the Ghost Dance. Believing you are invulnerable to bullets puts you in more, not less, danger of being shot.
30
posted on
09/23/2002 12:53:37 PM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Roscoe
Yes, certainly a striking metaphor. I like it for that reason alone!
I have no illusion that I am bulletproof. ;^)
To: inquest
But when they start getting into these dogmas such as "The Constitution only recognizes laws that involve an injured party, and that don't compel performance" or some such, when anyone the least bit conversant with American history knows that to be utterly false, I just can't give them any credibility. Rational thought has been known to impair one's ability to accept this sort of thing ;)
To: 11B3
I hope this guy has a Sam's Club membership. That way he can get the tin foil he needs so much of by the case, cheap.
33
posted on
09/23/2002 1:02:40 PM PDT
by
RonF
To: general_re
Has that been my problem? Tpaine advised me to get help, I guess that's what he was referring to.
34
posted on
09/23/2002 6:58:37 PM PDT
by
inquest
To: Common Tator
Such simple, irrefutable common sense, Tator. Now let's see how many understand it.
35
posted on
09/23/2002 7:10:42 PM PDT
by
rdb3
To: Roscoe
A Harvard educated lawwer once told me that the common law was dead. She was wrong. So is this vapid author you link.
36
posted on
09/23/2002 7:58:22 PM PDT
by
Demidog
To: Demidog
It's as good as dead to delusional ignoramuses who read all manner of nonsense into it. You know, like claiming that the "common law" exempts "white couples" from marriage licenses.
37
posted on
09/24/2002 1:01:39 AM PDT
by
Roscoe
To: Common Tator
>But the law is what ever the judges say it is.<
BINGO! We have a winner!
Eyes
To: Roscoe
You know, like claiming that the "common law" exempts "white couples" from marriage licenses. Common law exempts ALL couples from marriage licenses. God you always get it so wrong.
39
posted on
09/24/2002 6:25:06 AM PDT
by
Demidog
To: Demidog
Common law exempts ALL couples from marriage licenses. Actually, only 10 states recognize common-law marriages contracted within their borders.
40
posted on
09/24/2002 7:29:08 AM PDT
by
Roscoe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson