Thursday, April 26, 2007

Those Who Have Eyes But Do Not See!!

By: Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

A response to the man who wrote: "THIS MAN NEEDS TO GET OUT MORE"
Roth & Company Tax Updates
ua: = Unknown Author

January 18, 2007


ua: > A New Hampshire man on trial for tax evasion has barricaded himself in his home. If this report from the Boston Globe is any indication, he may be taking more trouble than it's worth:

ua: > PLAINFIELD, N.H. --Ed Brown, with a handgun tucked in his pants and home prepared for a raid, hunkered down in his cement-walled home and waited for the U.S. marshals to descend.

ua: >The law never came.

ua: >Brown, on trial with his wife for not paying federal income taxes since 1996, faces charges of conspiring to evade taxes, conspiring to disguise large financial transactions and disguising large transactions. He said there is no law that requires federal income taxes.

ua: >He should have called me a long time ago. I could have saved him some trouble:

rk: Don't be so Cocky about your own limitation of Intellect, your own unawareness. Keep reading.

ua: > "Show me the law and I'll pay the taxes," said Ed Brown, who met with reporters standing in his driveway Wednesday.

Ed, if you're reading this, follow along closely:

ua: > U.S. Code Title 26, Section 1, has the useful name "Tax Imposed." It begins:
ua: > (a) Married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses
ua: > There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of--
(1) every married individual (as defined in section 7703) who
makes a single return jointly with his spouse under section 6013,
(2) every surviving spouse (as defined in section 2(a)),

ua: > a tax determined in accordance with the following table:
ua: > Section 1 goes on to list the taxes and rates on single individuals, heads of households, and estates and trusts, as well.

ua: > "Taxable Income" is defined in Section 63of Title 26. Other sections of Title 26 will give you helpful definitions like "gross income." AndSection 6012 provides a useful listing those required to file tax returns.

ua: > Mr. Brown, now that you've been shown the law that requires you to pay taxes, I'm sure you can work out something with the government. And good luck with the standoff thing.

ua: > More here.

ua: > UPDATE: Guilty on all counts.

rk: To the advice giving author of this piece, pay attention now for you will see what you had not the eyes to see before it was pointed out to you by the "Spiritually Sighted."

rk: First direct you attention to your own comment which states:

ua: > "It begins:

ua: > "(a) Married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses"

rk: Do you not see that such cited law applies only to those who FILE, who VOLUNTEER to pay such unlawful taxes by their act of volunteer filing?

rk: When you FILE, you grant jurisdiction to the FICTION through contract and become subject to the rules thereof.

rk: If Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, natural men or women DO NOT FILE, they do not VOLUNTARILY enter into contract or grant JURISDICTION to the government FICTION. They are NOT SUBJECT to the rules of the FICTION

rk: In other words, without such filing, a FICTIONAL corporate government HAS NO
JURISIDICTION over a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient Natural man or woman, Son and Daughter of God. Do you have the eyes to see such SIMPLICITY, which your blind intellect has missed?

rk: I clearly see what Ed and Elaine See, but millions of blind, mind controlled believers trained to react to the letter of the word DO NOT SEE, as they have been subjected to a lifetime of incremental and unrelenting Satanic mind control..

rk: The Browns follow God's Law. Blinded intellectuals such as you, the author of this piece, are enslaved by man's law, YOU VOLUNTEERED FOR IT!!

Raymond Ronald Karczewski© -- A Living Christ
"No other man but I in the recorded History of
mankind, including JESUS CHRIST, has directly
revealed to the World the SATANIC WEAPON used to
enslave mankind -- INTELLECTUAL THOUGHT!!"

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©


Blogger here2daygonetomorrow said...

Actually, the author is not unknown. As a matter of fact, I sent an email message to him (not a very nice one) after reading this article.

If you read the header before the articles they state:

The items below are informational only and are not meant as tax advice. Consult with your tax advisor to determine how any item applies to your situation.

Joe Kristan writes the Tax Update items, and any opinions expressed or implied are not neccesarily shared by anyone else at Roth & Company, P.C.

Address questions or comments on Tax Updates to Joe Kristan.

His email address is

2:10 PM  
Blogger here2daygonetomorrow said...

As a follow up after reading your post I have to, with all due respect, make this observation.

The only fact you have to know about the legality of taxing most American's labor, is that there just is NO law. That's it, it doesn't have to get any more complicated than that.

If you wish to bring religion, "fictions", voluntary contracts, granting jurisdiction to the government, corporations or any number of other things into the fray, those are whole different subjects. The income tax issue must stand on it's own. In the words of Tommy Cryer I would advise most people, "Don't eat that Elmer".

2:26 PM  
Blogger Broadlighter said...

I recently read Mary Elizabeth Croft:s book, "How I Clobbered Every Cash Confiscatory Agency Known To Man" which addresses the very principles that are playing out in the Ed and Elaine Brown case.

I'm still trying to figure all of this out, but from what I understand in Croft's book, the Browns made the mistake of agreeing to go to court. The tax court operates under admiralty law, not common law. By agreeing to appear in this court, the Browns subjected themselves to the rules of that court which are arbitrarily administered at the pleasure of the judge. That's why the Brown's constitutional rights are not being respected. This court does not recognize the constitution and it's restraints on governmental authority. All the Browns had to do was inform the court that they would not agree to contract with it at the outset and they would have been free to go. Somewhere along the way they made the agreement to participate.

If I am missing something here, please inform me.

3:30 PM  
Blogger here2daygonetomorrow said...

All I can say is, don't eat that either Elmer.

10:51 PM  
Blogger Scott C. Haley said...

For broadlighter---

RE: "All the Browns had to do was inform the court that they would not agree to contract with it at the outset and they would have been free to go."---

Why do you believe this to be so? The Establishment Powers-That-Be do not respect individual sovereignty one iota. They will simply issue a warrant for your arrest, whether you have agreed to participate in court or not.

I've seen some very good other information from folks who promulgate the "just ignore them" approach, but as a former HazMat regulatory compliance inspector for a large CA County, I can tell you that "just ignoring them" will only get you a Sheriff with a warrant.


3:25 AM  
Blogger Scott C. Haley said...

P.S. to broadlighter---

Even some sort of written declaration of individual sovereignty (or any similar document) will get you the same Sheriff with the same warrant.


3:32 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home