| sheeple from freeing themselves from the IRS thugs. | |
|
|
|
Posted on 01/16/2003 9:13:51 AM PST by JohnHuang2
By Diana Lynne
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
"Someone doesn't like our message," a constitutional activist has concluded after his streaming web-based broadcast urging Americans not to pay taxes to the federal government until it addresses a series of "grievances" got knocked off the air.
Bob Schulz, founder of the constitutional education organization We The People and planner of numerous tax-reform protests – including a personal 20-day hunger strike – to press the federal government to prove the legality of the income tax, suspects his latest endeavor may have been intentionally thwarted.
On Jan. 7 Schulz launched the debut of WTP-TV's live multicast streaming broadcast "The Liberty Hour," a program designed to lay out the rationale for a citizen action movement to "bring our servant government back under the control of the people and our Constitution."
Schulz maintains it's un-American to pay taxes to the government until it answers to "grievances" regarding the income tax, the USA Patriot Act, the War Powers Act and the Federal Reserve.
"As our Founding Fathers clearly held, retaining and keeping in our possession the money that we would otherwise have turned over to the government, is the only real practical, non-violent method to corral those that have seized power from the people," Schulz said, according to a transcript of the broadcast.
Schulz quotes the Founding Fathers in an act of the Continental Congress in 1774 in asserting the right of redress of grievances before taxes is deeply embedded in U.S. law.
"If money is wanted by rulers who have in any manner oppressed the people, [the people] may retain [their money] until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility," he said in the broadcast.
But not much more of the broadcast was heard.
According to Schulz, 3 minutes and 40 seconds in, the transmission of the broadcast was cut off. WTP-TV's Internet provider, who prefers not to be named, reported everything on his end to be working properly and immediately began working with his provider, Time Warner Cable, to investigate the problem.
On Friday, the provider reconfigured his system to offer an archived version of the WTP-TV broadcast for 1,500 viewers at a time. WTP provided links on its website for readers to download the file.
Schulz said the next day computer logs indicate that two computers at the White House were used to watch the entire hour-and-23-minute event and eight computers at the IRS were used to view and download the file.
By Sunday evening, 10,031 people had viewed the broadcast and another 5,300 people downloaded the file to their computers, according to WTP.
But thousands began experiencing "sluggishness" in downloading the file, with the process taking up to 15 hours instead of 15 minutes.
"Something or somebody had so severely throttled our provider's 'big-pipe' transmission bandwidth that downloading was slowed to a 'crawl,'" WTP reports. "Urgent calls by our provider to his provider, Time Warner, for an explanation of the reason for the loss in transmission capability resulted, finally, in Time Warner's suggestion: 'Turn them off' ... referring to WTP."
In the interest of protecting his own business, which was also suffering from the bandwidth interference, WTP's provider reluctantly removed them from his server on Monday afternoon. As soon as he did so, his full bandwidth capability was restored.
"We sincerely hope that on top of the other constitutional problems and issues we don't have someone interfering with our constitutional right to free speech and the right to petition," Schulz told WorldNetDaily.
A spokesman for Time Warner Cable, a division of media giant AOL Time Warner, could not comment on WTP's problem but citing the company's general policy said, "We do not throttle or block individual websites or portals of any content."
"We have an obligation to manage traffic so that all customers get the service and speed that they purchased," he added and explained that when they get complaints from other customers about "bandwidth hogs" they take action. He defined "bandwidth hog" as "someone using so much bandwidth that it causes degradation in the network and other customers experience a decline in service and speed."
The size of the broadcast's data transmission was 63 megabytes. Schulz said his provider's "big-pipe" transmission bandwidth was capable of handling 1.5 million viewers at one time without the quality of the broadcast being affected. The provider's numbers indicate only 113,000 viewers accessed or tried to access the broadcast, using up less than 10 percent of his purchased bandwidth capacity.
"I hope that this incident will wake people up to the fact that, even in America, there are 'gatekeepers' and censors who decide what you need to know and what you do not need to know," wrote former IRS Criminal Investigation Division Special Agent Joseph Banister in an e-mail to WND seeking support for WTP.
"As hard as Americans work every day to provide for themselves and their families, it is unconscionable that the 'gatekeepers' have decided Americans don't need to know the truth about the income tax system that they struggle with year after year after year," he said.
WTP decided to launch its "pro-active, non-violent mass" citizen action movement, in November after government officials ignored an invitation to respond to its petitions – endorsed by approximately 14,000 citizens and hand-delivered to President Bush and all 535 members of Congress – at a rally on the National Mall.
Holding to its motto "Acta, Non Verba," or "Deeds, Not Words," WTP plans to provide "How to Stop Withholding" instructions and forms for employers and "How to Stop Filing Tax Returns and Paying" instructions and forms for employees, retirees and the self-employed.
It also plans to set up a legal defense fund, institutionalize citizen vigilance in all 435 congressional districts in the country, called "Internet Ward Republics," and schedule national strikes, boycotts, and days of prayer and fasting.
Schulz told WorldNetDaily his organization is taking "various technical and non-technical steps to insure the continued availability" of its Internet broadcasts.
JimRob pays for all of the bandwidth he uses; Schulz doesn't.
This isn't "the government," it's really annoyed backbone network admins who weren't expecting Schulz to inject that much traffic.
Taking your wife to McDonald's instead of Outback.
The income tax is, sad to say, constitutional. It is an exceptionally foolish way of raising necessary revenues. However, foolish and stupid laws are not a priori in violation of the Constitution--preventing their passage or getting them repealed is OUR lookout as citizens.
Yes I do.
This carny barker is going to end up in court swearing he was merely distributing his "tax advice" for "entertainment purposes".
Won't make any difference if he provides direct aid for someone to act on.
From the Department of Justice Criminal Tax Manual
26 USC 7206(2) makes it a felony to:
Willfully aid[] or assist[] in . . . the preparation or presentation under . . . the internal revenue laws . . . of a return . . . which is fraudulent or is false as to any material matter, whether or not such falsity or fraud is with the knowledge or consent of the person authorized or required to present such return . . . .
This statute is known as the Internal Revenue Code's aiding and abetting provision, and applies not only to tax return preparers but to anyone who causes a false return to be filed. United States v. Sassak, 881 F.2d 276, 277-78 (6th Cir. 1989); United States v. Hooks, 848 F.2d 785, 789 (7th Cir. 1988); United States v. Williams, 644 F.2d 696, 701 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 841 (1981).
[skipping some]
For example, in United States v. Causey, 835 F.2d 1289, 1292 (9th Cir. 1987), the Ninth Circuit upheld the conviction of the defendant for causing 18 individuals to file false tax returns claiming refunds, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 287 and 2. The defendant argued that the government failed to establish that the persons actually submitting the false claims knew they were false. The Ninth Circuit distinguished the two subsections of 18 U.S.C. § 2 and found that under subsection 2(b) a person "may be guilty of causing a false claim to be presented to the United States even though he or she uses an innocent intermediary to actually pass on the claim to the United States." 835 F.2d at 1292.
The court then held that in a section 2 prosecution for violation of section 287, the government does not need to allege or prove that the person actually submitting the claims knew them to be false. Id.
Tax protestors who cause third parties to prepare and file false returns may be charged under 26 U.S.C. § 7206(2). See United States v. Holecek, 739 F.2d 331 (8th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1218 (1985) (return preparation); United States v. Kellogg, 955 F.2d 1244, 1249 (9th Cir. 1992) (defendant assisted in preparation of returns filed by others); United States v. Condo, 741 F.2d 238, 240 (9th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1164 (1985) (preparation and mailing of false Forms W-4); United States v. Erickson, 676 F.2d 408 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 853 (1982).
Providing advice and material to taxpayers, who in turn file false returns, is sufficient to sustain a section 7206(2) conviction. See United States v. Kelley, 769 F.2d 215 (4th Cir. 1985). In Kelley, the defendant argued that he could not be lawfully convicted of violating section 7206(2) because "he . . . did not actually participate in the preparation of any of the forms [Forms W-4] but only gave advice that his listeners were free to accept or reject." Kelley, 769 F.2d at 217. Rejecting this argument, the court said:
The contention ignores reality, for he did participate in the preparation of the forms. He told the listeners what to do and how to prepare the forms. He did so with the intention that his advice be accepted, and the fact that the members paid him for the advice and promised assistance warranted an inference of an expectation that the advice would be followed. Moreover, he actually supplied forms and materials to be filed with W-4 forms. He did not take his pen in his hand to complete the forms, but his participation in their preparation was as real as if he had.
If they wouldn't have dumped his first attempt at the 'cast, then they wouldn't have run into bandwidth problems when users started multiple download threads.
So, you think the government just did that without any input from the citizenry?
Yes I do.
Takes two to tango my friend:
Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1742-1813). Scottish jurist and historian:
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
To remove taxation of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Federal tax rates are high because a majority of the electorate do not share proportionately in the burden their demand for largesse imposes on the minority of citizens.
The siren call for representation without taxation is the formula that got us where we are at today. The ability to hide or disguise taxation from the view of large sectors of the electorate allows the Congress to get away with the creation of the evergrowing monster that it fosters.
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-George Bernard Shaw
Liberty and freedom have a price, responsibility. If that price is avoided there are no brakes on the growth of government, the ultimate result is the end of freedom through creeping socialism.
The Honorable James DeMint (R-SC)
United States House of Representatives
THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 2001
12:00 noon"There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government. And at that point, DeMint warns, we have reached a major crisis in our democracy."
Milton Friedman as quoted by Northwest Florida Daily News, 10-16-2000:
Walter Williams, World Net Daily, 10-25-2000
According to the most recent U.S. Treasury Department figures, in 1997 the top 1 percent of income-earners (those with income of $250,000 and higher) paid 33 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent of income-earners ($108,000 and over) paid 52 percent, and the top 50 percent ($36,000 and over) paid 96 percent of income taxes. Guess what the bottom 50 percent of income earners paid?
If you're among those who pay little or no federal income taxes, what do you care about tax cuts? Moreover, if you think tax cuts pose a threat to government handout programs, you might be openly hostile and support Al Gore's silly "risky scheme" talk. So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?
| sheeple from freeing themselves from the IRS thugs. | |
|
|
|
its obvious the Bush apologists are in full swing here doing their fair share to disuade the sheeple from freeing themselves from the IRS thugs.
The Constitutional way for the people to free themselves of the IRS, income tax, payroll taxes and gift/estate taxes.
Keyes on Taxes & Government Spending:
- "The income tax in effect makes us vassals to the government – the politicians decide how much income we can keep. No mere “reform” of this slave tax, such as flattening the rate, can correct its fundamental denial of control over our own money. Only the abolition of the income tax itself will restore the basic American principle that our income is both our own money and our own private business - not the government's."
- "Replacing the income tax with a national sales tax would rejuvenate independence and responsibility in our citizens. True economic liberty and moral revival go hand in hand."
- "A national sales tax would also put the American citizen back in control of national fiscal policy. The best way to curtail government spending is to cut taxes, because they can’t spend what they don’t get. But with a sales tax, we could deny funds to a spendthrift government – and give ourselves a tax cut – whenever we make the private choice to alter our spending and saving habits."
John Linder (R Texas) offers a comprehensive bill to kill all income and payroll taxes outright, and provide a proper replacement:
H.R.2525
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 07/17/2001)
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
Refer: http://www.fairtax.org & http://www.salestax.org
See Also: Fairtax FAQ (NSBU)
Other bills, moving in the proper direction are:
To get the ball rolling and focus Congress Critter's attention:
H.R.2714
Sponsor: Rep Largent, Steve(introduced 8/2/2001)
Title: To terminate the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
A bill to prohibit he imposition of any tax by the Internal Revenue Code: (1) for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2005.
To sunset some agencies we don't need and rein in their expenditures:
H.R.2373
Sponsor: Rep Brady, Kevin(introduced 6/28/2001)
Title: To provide for the periodic review of the efficiency and public need for Federal agencies, to establish a Commission for the purpose of reviewing the efficiency and public need of such agencies, and to provide for the abolishment of agencies for which a public need does not exist.
Modification then enact and ratify:
H.J.RES.45
Sponsor: (introduced 4/25/2001)
Latest Major Action: 5/9/2001 Referred to House subcommitte.
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the Untied States Government from engaging in the business in competition with its citizens.
(Modified to prohibit all income, payroll, gift estate taxes as HR2525 calls for, or we will see European VAT style hidden taxes along with payroll excises to take over in the place of the of the current individual income tax(i.e. personal income tax) that Ron Paul amendment prohibits.)
And to keep em reminded that there is indeed a Constitution to pay attention to:
H.R.175
Sponsor: (introduced 1/3/2001)
Latest Major Action: 2/12/2001 Referred to House subcommittee
Title: To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.
Your beef is with Congress, not the IRS.
If the IRS were interpreting the tax code in a manner contrary to that wished by Congress, Congress would use its power of the purse to correct the IRS. They haven't.
The idea that, if you just manage to find the right magical incantation, the Internal Revenue Code won't apply to you, is a particularly silly one.
That's one of the reasons more and more serious consideration is being given to replacing the income tax as the chief source of federal revenue with another tax, like a national sales tax. I have a feeling enforcement of the income tax is becoming harder and harder.
But, it will take hard work.
Nobody has ever said it will be easy. It's up to the people to select virtuous representatives in a Republic; "Eternal Vigilence", slack off and the consequence for lack of electorate virtue is automatic and certain. Such is inherent to the functioning of a Republic.
Sir Alex Fraser Tytler (1742-1813). Scottish jurist and historian:
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819)
- "The power of taxing the people and their property is essential to the very existence of government, and may be legitimately exercised on the objects to which it is applicable, to the utmost extent to which the Government may choose to carry it. The only security against the abuse of this power is found in the structure of the Government itself. In imposing a tax, the legislature acts upon its constituents. This is, in general, a sufficient security against erroneous and oppressive taxation."
Springer v. United States(1880), 102 U.S. 586
"If the laws here in question involved any wrong or unnecessary harshness, it was for Congress, or the people who make congresses, to see that the evil was corrected.
The remedy does not lie with the judicial branch of the government."Champion v. Ames(1903), 186 U.S. 321
- 'But if what Congress does is within the limits of its power, and is simply unwise or injurious, the remedy is that suggested by Chief Justice Marshall in Gibbons v. Ogden [21 US 1, 9 Wheat. 1, 6 L. ed. 23], when [195 U.S. 27, 56] he said: 'The wisdom and the discretion of Congress, their identity with the people, and the influence which their constituents possess at elections, are, in this, as in many other instances, as that, for example, of declaring war, the sole restraints on which they have relied, to secure them from its abuse. They are the restraints on which the people must often rely solely, in all representative governments."
If one expects the Courts or any department of government to do the people's job, he is barking up the wrong tree.
PACIFIC INS. CO. v. SOULE, 74 U.S. 433 (1868),7 Wall. 433
- "Congress may prescribe the basis, fix the rates, and require payment as it may deem proper. Within the limits of the Constitution it is supreme in its action. No power of supervision or control is lodged in either of the other departments of the government."
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.
