Monday, March 26, 2007

Digging Deeper: Discussing "The Inherent Law"



Our special guest will be David Clarence. Discussion points:


Toward Liberty and Justice for All

This web page is devoted to raising issues that protect the rule of law in the United States. The rule of law consists of several important concepts:


Government decisions are made according to written law and rules

Government sanctions cannot be made up after the fact (ex post facto)

Rules are applied as much as possible consistently to all

Courts provide citizens consistent, written process (due process) before life, liberty, or property is taken

Courts provide reasons based upon the law for their decisions

Rule of law and due process are the bedrock upon which all American liberty and justice are based. Untold numbers of American and Englishmen in history have paid a dear price in effort, fortune, and even life itself, to bequeath to us the rule of law.

Unfortunately, through neglect and design, if not protected, the rule of law and all those values which it protects and we hold dear can be undermined. Over time, this page hopes to bring the American public's attention to dangers that are undermining the rule of law in America.

Click here for more.

1 Comments:

Blogger Thurston said...

In Showing of the Inherent law regarding the Federal Income Tax, questions of liability can also raise questions of constitutionality.

The recent case in the App. Ct. in D.C. shows that where an individual wants the law to be examined to its foundation to make a claim of Constitutionality in the immediate application, the Court must examine the law to its contemporaneous manifestation to the 16th AMendment (Myers v. U.S.).

As this was applied the Court then found for the Citizen and the section of law as applied by the IRS was struck as UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

SEE THE GOVERNMENT DOES GET ABUSIVE AND DOES APPLY ITS ARGUMENTS IN AN OVERBROAD MANNER!

If the definition of gross income is examined in its subjugation to all exemption provisions of Subtitle A, 861 is still there, and its contemporaneous legislation to the 16th AMendment proves that the Browns never made any "gross incoem" as defined by law.

Is this why the Judge does not want the LAW argued in HIS (but what s really OUR) court?

The judge just wants to determine facts without sonsideration of teh LAW that gives rise to facts.

This is tyranny and a railroad by allowing the unconstitutionally overbroad application of law to the property and persons of the Browns.

In the Economy Case it is clearly shown that those outside of the jurisdiction of the IRS cannot be grought into the jurisdiction fo teh IRC, even if they ever filed a return.

2:16 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

 

SITEMETER