Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Audio Moblog

powered by

MP3 File



Anonymous Anonymous said...

The U.S. Marshals are not allowed to get on blogs because of the Marshal Service's internal policies.

At any rate, the Marshals are simply carrying out the orders of the court, and the court has ruled based on the evidence and Ed's and Elaine's cowardly failure to present a defense.

11:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"based on the evidence and Ed's and Elaine's cowardly failure to present a defense."

HAHA. your kidding right. Try reading the court documents at

12:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

can you give the number so we can make our own audio blog.

Thank you

12:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How could Ed and Elaine possibly put on any defense when the "kangaroo court" denied all their evidence?

Get real and learn the whole story first before farting out your bullshit.

1:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ed is not alone. Even those in the industry have to fight the IRS under their own rules. See this link.

And if you want to compare Watata's case with Ed's you should read the articles about his situation. He had very specific rules to follow for officers, and followed all the procedures, knowing he might end up in prison. He did not try to beat the system and in the end he won only because of publicity he received. The media may not be fair all the time, but the more people pay attention the more the media is forced to show the truth. Remember there are at least 17 others who refused to go to Iraq and Watata is the first officer. Did anyone notice the 17 others. Does anyone notice the thousands who are destroyed by the arguements Ed makes? No. They are the silent heroes. Ed is right about one thing. It's not about the rules or law any more. It's about who is going to stand up and take arms against these criminals. No matter what people think about Ed or what ends up happening, He is Justified>

1:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Origin of Tax Withholding

So where did the withholding tax come from? It was not part of the original income tax that resulted from the sixteenth amendment in 1913. Very few people paid any taxes back then anyway. The income tax did not directly affect the average American until World War II.

On the eve of the war, few Americans paid income taxes. Those that owed taxes paid them in one lump sum on March 15 (later changed to April 15). To pay for the war, the Revenue Act of 1942 lowered exemptions and raised income tax rates. But it also did something even more insidious—it instituted a 5 percent "Victory Tax" on all wages above an exemption of $624. The tax was to be collected by the employer and deducted from the employee's paycheck—just like the Social Security tax that began in 1935.

The Current Tax Payment Act of 1943 then revolutionized the income tax by making withholding taxes universal. The withholding tax was part of the new tax plan offered by Beardsley Ruml (1894–1960), the chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank and treasurer of R.H. Macy and Co. By 1945, about three-fourths of Americans were paying federal income taxes. And although the withholding tax was sold as a wartime emergency, like most expansions of government instituted during wartime, it has been a way of life for most Americans ever since.

The Curse of the Withholding Tax

The income tax allows the government to confiscate the wealth of its citizens. The curse of the withholding tax is that it allows the government to commit this crime systematically, effortlessly, painlessly, and benevolently.

Surprisingly, it was a free market economist who helped the federal government implement the withholding tax in the first place. As was pointed out by the Austrian economist, Murray Rothbard (1926–1995), in his 1971 article "Milton Friedman unraveled":

One of Friedman's most disastrous deeds was the important role he proudly played, during World War II in the Treasury Department, in foisting upon the suffering American public the system of the withholding tax. Before World War II, when income tax rates were far lower than now, there was no withholding system; everyone paid his annual bill in one lump sum, on March 15. It is obvious that under this system, the Internal Revenue Service could never hope to extract the entire annual sum, at current confiscatory rates, from the mass of the working population. The whole ghastly system would have happily broken down long before this. Only the Friedmanite withholding tax has permitted the government to use every employer as an unpaid tax collector, extracting the tax quietly and silently from each paycheck. In many ways, we have Milton Friedman to thank for the present monster Leviathan State in America.

The definitive anti-tax history by Charles Adams ($30), and see also his 10-hour audio course on tax history.

Ideally, the elimination of the withholding tax would force the American people to see exactly how much of their income is being confiscated by the government to fund its trillion-dollar budgets. This would, of course, have to be followed by sufficient outrage on behalf of the American people to reduce those budgets. The elimination of the withholding tax is also sometimes seen as freeing businesses from being tax collectors. But this would only be true if businesses also ceased to collect Social Security tax for the government.

But on a more practical note, there are two reasons why even if the withholding tax were eliminated it might not result in sufficient enough outrage at the level of government wealth confiscation and spending. First, the majority of the population presently pays little or no income tax. It is of no consequence to them if the "rich" have money withheld from their paychecks or not. And second, many out of this majority are not only not taxpayers, they are taxeaters who benefit from the redistribution of the wealth of those who actually pay taxes. The continued expansion by the Republicans in Congress of refundable tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit will ensure that the number of taxeaters will increase.

There is also one significant practical consideration that cannot be ignored. The chance that Congress would ever eliminate that which provides the government with a continual flow of revenue is zero. There is, therefore, nothing short of dramatically rolling back income tax rates (good) or eliminating the income tax altogether (better) that will even begin to tame the federal leviathan.

1:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

without updated info here the little interest you do have is going to go away. Ed, what did you think that you could just wait around for the IRS to come and the rest of us were going to come protect you. Grow up and get with a plan. You are not the only one out here trying to fight the government. Where are your guns, what are you going to shoot the agents with. 10 - 12 years and this is your play. Man you need a reality check.

3:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At any rate, the Marshals are simply carrying out the orders of the court.

what a bunch of bull--I'm just following Orders---said the slave.

Watata case proved following orders is no excuse for violations of the constitution.

Wake up you sissy government workers

5:40 AM  
Blogger My2Cents from Maine said...

Doug ~ Fantastic idea! You are so right when you say, how wonderful this new technology is for “We the People”! You are such a great inspiration! To think I have a voice! You know when our fore fathers first developed this great Country of ours, the majority of them really cared about Us the people, we could rely on there good judgment. We the people had a voice in our little town halls. But now we have nothing but network channels that push their ideas, and half truths on us… We have to sit and listen to their twist of what is best for us. And what’s even worse, that you made mention; is the commercials! Well am sure y’all catch my drift. Thank you so much!

7:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Back in 1969 a group of Black Panthers decided that a fellow black
panther named Alex Rackley needed to die. Rackley was suspected of
disloyalty. Rackley was first tied to a chair.
Once safely immobilized, his friends tortured him for hours by, among
other things, pouring boiling water on him.
When they got tired of torturing Rackley, Black Panther member, Warren
Kimbro took Rackley outside and put a bullet in his head. Rackley's
body was later found floating in a river about 25 miles north of New
Haven, Connecticut.

Perhaps at this point you're curious as to what happened to these Black
In 1977, that's only eight years later, only one of the killers was
still in jail.
The shooter, Warren Kimbro, managed to get a scholarship to Harvard and
became good friends with none other than Al Gore.

He later became an assistant dean at an Eastern Connecticut State
College. Isn't that something?
As a '60s radical you can pump a bullet into someone's head and a few
years later, in the same state, you can become an assistant college
Only in America!

Erica Huggins was the woman who served the Panthers by boiling the water
for Mr. Rackley's torture.
Some years later Ms. Huggins was elected to a California School Board.
How in the world do you think these killers got off so easily?

Maybe it was in some part due to the efforts of two people who came to
the defense of the Panthers.

These two people actually went so far as to shut down Yale University
with demonstrations in defense of the accused Black Panthers during
their trial.

One of these people was none other than Bill Lan Lee.
Mr. Lee, or Mr. Lan Lee, as the case may be, isn't a college dean.
He isn't a member of a California School Board.
He is now head of the United States Justice Department's Civil Rights
Division, appointed by none other than Bill Clinton.

O.K., so who was the other Panther defender?
Is this other notable Panther defender now a school board member?
Is this other Panther apologist now an assistant college dean? No, neither!

The other Panther defender was, like Lee, a radical law student at Yale
University at the time.

She is now known as The "smartest woman in the world."
She is none other than the Democratic senator from the State of New
York---- our former First Lady, the incredible Hillary Rodham Clinton.

And now, as Paul Harvey said; "You know the rest of the story".
Pass this on!
This deserves the widest possible press.
Also remember it, when she runs for President...
There is an agenda... it dates back years and years...
They have prepared.... They are prepared...
And WHAT have they prepared us For?
Think About It....


8:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It was not part of the original income tax that resulted from the sixteenth amendment in 1913."

Actually, that firt post 16th Amendment income tax law did require withholding. It didn't work very well (for example tenants were supposed to withhold taxes on rent paid to their landlords) so they scrapped it within a few months.

10:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ed didn't even try to present evidence in his own defense. To do so, he would have had to have shown up. Elaine was able to present evidence such as Larken Rose's video, but tried to present very little else.

10:53 AM  
Anonymous Scott said...

You watch Lt. Watada will be retried. He defintely threw a wrench into this kangaroo court system in place in this coutry, but they will get their pound of flesh. There isn't anyone with the honor or cojones in a position of judge or attourney in this country anymore. If there were they would tear down the National Security Act of 1947 that most of our leaders are hiding behind.

4:45 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home