Net censorship? Tax activist's streaming broadcast knocked off air

Actually, I believe the big government crowd wants BOTH.

Then it behooves you to work to assure the "big government crowd" is in the minority by encouraging the moral virtue people that is the necessary condition to the proper functioning of a republic. Good and moral government is not automatic, it takes the effort and virtue of the people to accomplish.

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.

Planned consequence of a spiritual law in the "bread cast upon the waters" category

I submit this for your consideration:

We know from history:

The founders of this nation were strongly rooted with the Judeo-Christion ethic. Whether or not specific individuals espoused the Christian faith or none at all, their motives, goals, and world view was nurtured in that broth;
The more thoughtful and the primary movers and shakers in creating this republic were well versed in history, political theory and very well aware of the uses of intrigue and misdirection in achieving strategic goals;
They were reflective and careful to select a specific form of government "Republic" with an eye to assure it functioned in response to the people en-mass but through representation of the people's virtues and moral state rather than direct action of the mass itself.

Thus we have a two part machine, one part the people injecting a portion of themselves into the controlling elements of the whole. The controlling elements arising of that body of the people, refect back the state of their virtue and moral integrity in the enactments of law enforced upon the people;

The net result when the people are righteous, they are blessed with righteous government. When they are less than righteous they are blessed with a government suited to there natures.

The nation, the machine, becomes a snare and a goad meeting out reward and punishment to direct the whole toward a righteous goal.

Consider, nations as snares and traps to goad the people towards rightousness and a focus on the eternal as opposed to immediate gratifications :

Understand an allagorical connection of the biblical term "snare" with "nation"

Joshua 23:13

"13": Know for a certainty that the LORD your God will no more drive out any of these nations from before you; but they shall be snares and traps unto you, and scourges in your sides, and thorns in your eyes, until ye perish from off this good land which the LORD your God hath given you.

Then apply it:

Luke 21:32-35

"32": Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

"33": Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

"34": And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.

"35": For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

Contemplate the words of Paul, in regard the vision of the founders of this nation:

Romans 13:1

"1": Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

"2": Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

"3": For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

"4": For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Just a thought :0)

To a large extent you are right. A nation sometimes gets exactly what it deserves. So far, the people haven't spoken up to correct serious problems that have developed within our Republic, in sufficient numbers to galvanize attention of our representatives. I believe that may be changing.

The "We The People" effort may be just the vehicle to do that. Whoever knocked the broadcast off the air will probably be found. They should have hell to pay! Since it was reported that two computers in the White House, and eight at IRS were on the site last weekend, at least we can know that those boys are listening. Perhaps, someday real soon, they will get the message.

A message being sent by MILLIONS not paying the income tax. A message being sent by a growing number of people that have spent their lives in the IRS, or allied fields such as attorney's, and CPA's. Also, numerous IRS agents, who have left their jobs, at great financial loss, when they could not in good conscience work anymore for this run-a-way agency.

This is the type of 'problem' that must be corrected, in order to have a country that we all can be proud of.

Incidentally, some of the scriptures you quoted were written with King James looking over their shoulders. They were sure to translate with the King's understanding of subservience to the crown in mind. A more pervasive theme in the Bible is this: A King, or a government that steals from, or is unjust to the people, will suffer eternal judgement. It is past time for them to repent!

The "We The People" effort may be just the vehicle to do that.

Inasmuch as Schulz has indicated that he LIKES the present Internal Revenue Code, fat chance.

Whoever knocked the broadcast off the air will probably be found. They should have hell to pay!

And it will be found to be local ISPs who found their bandwidth getting hogged by a misconfigured multicast.

A message being sent by MILLIONS not paying the income tax.

If you can persuade that many people to be that stupid, you can persuade them to demand--and GET--repeal of the Internal Revenue Code. But, as I observed earlier, Schulz likes the damn code.

Also, numerous IRS agents, who have left their jobs, at great financial loss, when they could not in good conscience work anymore for this run-a-way agency.

Actually, they found they could get more money huckstering warped interpretations of the tax code to gullible folks who think that there's some magic secret way to never have to pay taxes.

If the Internal Revenue Code goes away, these dweebs would have to get honest work.

Incidentally, some of the scriptures you quoted were written with King James looking over their shoulders.

Actually the King James is essentially the 1599 Geneva Bible with it's marginal notes removed. It was the commentary and notes King James objected to and the reason for his commissioning a Bible less shall we say, specific, in its aids for understanding the message.

http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/genvbbl.htm

"In addition to being the reason for its popularity, the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible were also the reason for its demise. These strongly Protestant notes so infuriated King James that he considered it "seditious" and made its ownership a felony. James I was particularly worried about marginal notes such as the one in Exodus 1:19, which allowed disobedience to Kings. Consequently, King James eventually introduced the King James Version, which drew largely from the Geneva Bible (minus the marginal notes that had enraged him). During the reign of James I and into the reign of Charles I the use of the Geneva Bible steadily declined as the Authorized King James Version became more widely used. In 1644 the Geneva Bible was printed for the last time."

This is the type of 'problem' that must be corrected, in order to have a country that we all can be proud of.

Isn't going to happen until virtue is the norm of the people. That is what is meant by

Romans 13:1

"1": Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

"2": Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

The secular rulers can only function subject to the "higher powers" in response to the reflection of virtue and righteousness of the people. Those "higher powers" are not secular government my friend, they are the powers of the Lord and his legion.

That is the message of Roman's 13:1, which I perceive.

The secular rulers can only function subject to the "higher powers" in response to the reflection of virtue and righteousness of the people.
Poppycock! Secular rulers can and should function according to their own understanding. Lot, who as an elder and judge, sat at the gate of his city (Gen. 19:1) and could've become as corrupted as the people of his city and didn't. That instance alone should give you an understanding of your misconception, but I doubt it will.
That is the message of Roman's 13:1, which I perceive.
To me you perceive it as government is all justified no matter their action and can never do wrong and we should never question it or our place as subservient to it. That is what I perceive from your statement. What about Daniel being ordered not to pray, for one instance?
Romans 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid (how much more so should the one entrusted with that power be afraid when they do evil); for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

And those evils are even spelled out later in the chapter...
Romans 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

And when the ruler does evil of his own how can he pass rightful judgement upon others?

Rethinking Romans 13

By your argument here that other guy is guilty and should've been convicted, civil case or not.
Yet you contend that he only desreved a warning when the law you show today implies he should've been convicted?

What did I say in the other thread? Willful must be established. I stated Violation of a civil injuction, then Mr. Bell would be in line for aid and abetting. Was that not sufficient for you?

Where was this cut-n-paste for the other thread and how do you justify this in one instance and not the other?

Had to find the web reference before it could be used.

My statement here, "if he [Schu;lz] provides direct aid for someone to act on."

Are you telling us, of your knowledge Schulz has aided & abetted?

And when the ruler does evil of his own how can he pass rightful judgement upon others?

I notice you fail to consider the predicate I raised. Your usual mode, read out of context or don't read what goes contrary to your preconceived notions.

This is a representative republic, how do such rulers get into office? A reflection of the virtue of the electorate.

From my predicate in reply #41;

"Good and moral government is not automatic, it takes the effort and virtue of the people to accomplish.

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.

Planned consequence of a spiritual law in the "bread cast upon the waters" category

We know from history:

The founders of this nation were strongly rooted with the Judeo-Christion ethic. Whether or not specific individuals espoused the Christian faith or none at all, their motives, goals, and world view was nurtured in that broth;
The more thoughtful and the primary movers and shakers in creating this republic were well versed in history, political theory and very well aware of the uses of intrigue and misdirection in achieving strategic goals;
They were reflective and careful to select a specific form of government "Republic" with an eye to assure it functioned in response to the people en-mass but through representation of the people's virtues and moral state rather than direct action of the mass itself.

Thus we have a two part machine, one part the people injecting a portion of themselves into the controlling elements of the whole. The controlling elements arising of that body of the people, refect back the state of their virtue and moral integrity in the enactments of law enforced upon the people;
The net result when the people are righteous, they are blessed with righteous government. When they are less than righteous they are blessed with a government suited to there natures.
***
Just a thought :0)"

I find it interesting that you have chosen to quote the scripture of Romans 13, exactly as I presented it as though it were not present in the base reply #41. Just an oversight I am sure.

Are you telling us, of your knowledge Schulz has aided & abetted??
No. Are you telling us, of your knowledge, that Schulz or Bell aided & abetted? You're sure ready to cook 'em both.
Had to find the web reference before it could be used.
Yeah...okay.

And as for your "predicate"..."Good and moral government is not automatic, it takes the effort and virtue of the people to accomplish...you're wrong IMO from a basic point.
The people can be moral and virtuous and elect someone that they believe is also "good" only to find out later that the person they elected wasn't so "good" after all...ref X42. Some people even go out of their way to directly vote in someone who they abhor just to keep someone else from being elected even though they too are basically virtuous...ref Election 2000.

I find it interesting that you have chosen to quote the scripture of Romans 13, exactly as I presented it as though it were not present in the base reply #41. Just an oversight I am sure.
Yeah, partially. I forgot about it already being there. Your interpretation of the scriptures got me a little heated. You still didn't get as far down as v19 though and you are not even addressing the Lot and Daniel aspects I raised. We are not to be blind automatons to "the higher powers" like you imply.

Such a ruler is removed as consequence of a virtuous electorate in a representative republic,...
BS! X42 wasn't kicked out of office though there was enough evidence to bury anybody else and "the electorate" sure was virtuous enough in their condemnation of his actions! I can't believe you're saying, and believing, this!
Oh, I get it..."in a representative republic" and we're a Democracy now. That is why it didn't happen. Missed your conditional clause the first time around.
...or doesn't get into office in the first place.
Weeeell...too many liars and too much obfuscation to eliminate the second option and, as I stated, the person the electorate votes into office may not really know the person they're electing as well as they think they do, though it be no fault of theirs.
Would any of us have known of President Bush's DUI charge if some snooping Democrats hadn't found out about it? I think not. He was willing to let that dirt stay under the rug without any of the rest of us knowing about it. What else will we ever know.
As virtuous as the electorate can get it will never be virtuous enough to ferret out all the deceptions.

BS! X42 wasn't kicked out of office though there was enough evidence to bury anybody else and "the electorate" sure was virtuous enough in their condemnation of his actions! I can't believe you're saying, and believing, this!

Public opinion polls had Clinton at above 50% approval during the entire impeachment farce. There was more than enough evidence that he was a lousy President to get him kicked out of office in 1996--and he wasn't.

Please note that ancient_geezer said a VIRTUOUS electorate would have removed him.

I find it singularly difficult to describe America, as a whole, as "virtuous." Many Americans are virtuous; however, many are thoroughly UNvirtuous.

Sorry, America elected the folks who made the present-day Internal Revenue Code because enough Americans believed that they could get something for nothing. They are not victims; they are volunteers. Unfortunately, they dragged the rest of us into the swamp with them.

I believe it is estimated that 300,000,000 citizens were murdered by their own government in the history! That's why we should be exporting knowledge of our Constitution and form of government, that is light years ahead of anything else out there.

The good news is that our Constitution guarantees us certain rights.

The bad news is that we have to dust it off, and stand up to use it, otherwise it is effectively useless. When the government forgets its limitations, and goes beyond the bounds of its Constitution, then the people must stand up to stop it.

Lets be realistic, the three branches are supposed to be acting as a check on each other. That is no longer substantially the case!

Our governmental form was put in place because power and influence corrupts morals. Those in power require an extra dose of close attention from the people who put them in office. I don't believe that those in government are following the common moral denominator in our society, but rather they are setting the pace. To paraphrase the Bible:
'An evil ruler brings shame and ruin to the people'.

Such a ruler is removed as consequence of a virtuous electorate in a representative republic,...
BS! X42 wasn't kicked out of office though there was enough evidence to bury anybody else and "the electorate" sure was virtuous enough in their condemnation of his actions! I can't believe you're saying, and believing, this!

The point is a virtuous society would have removed him. But then you may think the following represents a virtuous society?

Romans 1:
http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/kjv2www?specfile=/texts/english/religion/kjv/kjv-pub.o2w&act=text&offset=5728591&textreg=0&query=reprobate

"28": And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

"29": Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

"30": Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

"31": Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

"32": Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Can you show exactly what you're talking about there? I'd like to know what lawless behavior you consider them to be advocating and what unlawful conduct you believe they're supposed to be encouraging.

Check their website bookstore, and the authors represented as the folks representing their ideals.

Erwin Schiff,

http://www.taxprophet.com/hot/june98.html
http://www.quatloos.com/Tax_Protestors_Page.htm

Bannister & Conklin

http://ottoskinner.com/a-banister.html

etc.

Otherwise I just consider your remarks snide, spiteful, and somewhat slanderous.

You do anyway, so I'm not particularly worried about it.

I think we might have more in common than you think, geezer. One of the areas where we don't seem to concur is: court cases. Court cases do not necessarily show the truth of a matter. They only show the opinion of a judge, based on his reasoning, which is typically based on precedents. Often time the reasoning is wrong, and is overturned later. It is my contention, that in income tax matters, the foundation reasonings are incorrect. That is the reason that there is so much confusion around this issue.

I do not concur with your oft stated opinion that people that disagree with what we will call 'the official line', are therefore enemies of the Constitution, and or 'scam artists'. They may be right, or they may be wrong, time will tell. Of course with the years of legal sophistry piled on to the issue (something condemned in the scriptures), its not hard to understand why this might happen.

But keep in mind, your reference to Otto Skinner, is to a person who may disagree with Joe Bannister, but who definitely believes and PRACTICES, income tax avoidance, based on the law. I think he has good points that should be carefully considered, but I do not agree that the ex-IRS agent Joe Bannister should be condemned for that which he personally has come to believe. I believe his motives are pure. I would be very careful to impute impure motives to another, you do not know their mind.

In conclusion, on the matter of King James. I know that he disliked the Geneva edition, but be aware that the KJV in the N.T. is strongly biased toward obedience to the King, or the government. I think that reason alone, even apart from understanding the whole of Holy Scripture, shows us that to give essentially blind obedience to any government of man, will lead to tyranny and mass death!

Question Authority!

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.