Monday, October 08, 2007

An Illustration of Law, the Ed Brown Case


This then is why unjust law in all its forms must be rejected, and not only rejected but ignored, and left unfollowed. When the government passes a law which directly infringes on your natural rights, or the rights of others, it is morally wrong, and thus invalid. It is true that the government may try to destroy the one who refuses to commit an immoral act, but it is also true that often they can not.

In the state of New Hampshire there resides a man called Ed Brown, who examined the income tax imposed upon him by the government, and found it unjust. Thus he pays it not, instead resisting the unjust forces of the law. Ed Brown is but a man, and the government rich in resources. Would it not be a simple affair to capture Brown, to force from his tight-clenched fist the earnings the government perceives he owes? Why then does Brown remain –relatively- unmolested?

The government acts after its own manner simply because it has no other choice. Should the government leave Brown alone, and allow him to retain that which he has earned, not one citizen would heed its previous menace. But should it force Ed Brown from his home, and take his income by force, would their not be condemnation from the general public?

For as a slave fears a master, so a master fears himself. One cannot enslave another without justification, and since justification for slavery is impossible, the master seeks to justify that which is impossible to justify. The government, for all its power and resources, needs the consent of Brown to take his income. If Brown would but concede that he owes to society part of that income, the government could continue to take it. But Brown owes nothing to society, nor society anything to Brown, and thus he does not pay. Because Brown refuses to be oppressed, the government cannot oppress him. Instead they surround his house and property, though they dare not enter within its boundaries. All the resources, all the men of the government, are suspended in limbo near the Brown house, neither advancing nor withdrawing. They dare not lose and they dare not win, they may only stay where they are now positioned. Thus has one man suspended the machinations of an unjust government. Read more here.

Editor's Note: The above article was posted on July 21, 2007.



Blogger Scott Haley said...


"But should it force Ed Brown from his home, and take his income by force, would their [there] not be condemnation from the general public?"---

Sadly...apparently not.

This is exactly why boycotting must be done on a massive scale in a planned, coordinated effort.


12:57 AM  
Blogger Jeremy Hier said...

Master of Puppets...

2:05 AM  
Blogger TruePatriot said...

The only problem with boycotting, civil disobedience & income tax withholding is that in this age, the Federal Reserve does NOT even publish the M3, which discloses how much $ they print! In other words, they print as much as is needed to pay all of the hencemen & cronies of the Gestapo... with OR withOUT our blood money!!!

4:51 AM  
Blogger YankeesPie said...

Hi.. I wish I had a number to reach someone with infomation directly instead of putting here..

I have found out that Ed is in transit to the Elkcon facility in Ohio... That is the reason the locator comes up with Not in BOP custody...

This is the number I called to recieve this information...

8:25 AM  
Blogger Scott Haley said...

To truepatriot:

Boycotting the Fed Govt involves a lot more than just the Income Tax. That's only a tiny part of it.

12:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home