Watchman

Gaelic

TRAITORS

Medicine?

The IRS Is Illegal

• The 16th Amendment was never ratified.

• Politicians use this tax money to disobey their own electorate.

• The IRS is contrary to the Christian principles of our Forefathers.

• The majority of the $1.8 trillion federal budget is used to finance the destruction of the American family.

• The IRS is a "voluntary tax".

• The 16th Amendment is contrary to the Holy Bible.

• Two thirds of those polled favor a repeal of the 19th Amendment.

• MP3 Audio About Section 861.

• IRS prohibited by I.R.C. � 7431 from disclosing confidential tax information.

For more information about the truth of the I.R. Code -
"Just the Facts" go to: http://www.save-a-patriot.org/

From: "Automailer - freedomabovefortune.com"
<automailer@freedomabovefortune.com>
To: <Charles Bruce>; "Stewart" <charles@christiancommonlaw-gov.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 8:09 PM
Subject: How Many IRS Agents Does It Take To Commit Fraud?


Freedom Above Fortune News

Dear Friends:

David Cay Johnston of the New York Times authored an article regarding  a
couple of really "swell" attorneys who worked for the IRS.  Mr. Johnston
reported on a federal court ruling that these attorneys defrauded the U.S.
Courts so that the I.R.S. could win 1,300 tax shelter cases.  I am sharing
the article that was recently shared with me.  Please see below.

Consider This: If only 2 IRS attorneys are capable of defrauding people in
1,300 different tax cases, what rational person would find it hard to
believe that the IRS, an agency of 100,000 strong and  possessing the
unparalleled power to economically destroy anyone it chooses, is capable of
defrauding an entire nation?

***************************************************************
2 Ex-I.R.S. Lawyers' Licenses Suspended for Misconduct
The New York Times
By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON
Published: August 21, 2004


The law licenses of two former Internal Revenue Service (income tax) lawyers
have been suspended for two years after a federal court ruling last year
that they defrauded the U.S. Courts so that the I.R.S. could win 1,300 tax
shelter cases.

W. Kenneth McWade was suspended by the Oregon Supreme Court in an order
dated Aug. 10 and released yesterday by the Oregon State Bar.

Four months ago Arkansas officials suspended the license of William A. Sims.

The United States Tax Court has also suspended both lawyers for two years,
and the I.R.S. director of practice has suspended them indefinitely.

The suspensions followed complaints brought by Michael Louis Minns, a
Houston lawyer who represented 124 of the tax shelter buyers, most of them
airline pilots. One buyer is seeking a $6 million refund.

The Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco found in
January 2003 that the lawyers had defrauded the court by making a corrupt
deal with a few of the pilots who bought tax shelters in the 1970's and
1980's. Under the deal, no IRS tax-collection actions would be taken in
regard to their tax shelters of these pilots in return for false testimony
that would hurt the other pilots.

The U.S. Court called this "extreme misconduct", and asked why the I.R.S.
had not disciplined the IRS lawyers, each of whom was also paid a $1,000
bonus for their work on the cases.

Mr. Minns then asked the I.R.S. in which state each IRS attorney was
licensed, so that he could seek their disbarment. The I.R.S. refused to give
the information, saying disclosure of their law licenses would violate their
confidentiality.

In fighting the suspension, the two IRS lawyers filed papers contending that
they had acted properly.

IRS attorney Mr. McWade, reached at home in Hawaii, said, "I guess the court
has decided that Oregon lawyers are not entitled to due process."  IRS
attorney Mr. Sims, did not respond to voice mail and e-mail messages.

The two men (attorneys) left the I.R.S. after their conduct came under
public scrutiny.

**************************************************************
******************************************************************

-For those who have received this message as a forward from someone else,
you can sign up to receive these messages directly by visiting
www.freedomabovefortune.com and clicking on "Mailing List".

-For those who are unfamiliar with what has transpired to date in this case,
please visit www.freedomabovefortune.com and click on "IRS LOCKOUT UPDATE"
or visit www.joebanister.blogspot.com .   You can also find archives of
informative radio shows at www.hearliberty.com .

-My sincere thanks to those who have prayed for the success of our efforts
and contributed to my defense fund. Your continued financial support is
enabling me to illustrate, in detail and in a very public manner, that the
IRS does not prevail against citizens because the agency adheres to the rule
of law, but that the IRS prevails against citizens because the agency
ignores the law, twists the meaning of the law, and overwhelms the citizen
with economic and legal burdens.  In a school yard, such tactics are called
"BULLYING".  In a government setting, such tactics are called "TYRANNY".
This effort is the equivalent of ganging up on the bully and sending him to
reform school where he belongs.
******************************************************************

Kind Regards,

Joseph R. (Joe) Banister, C.P.A.
Former IRS Criminal Investigation Division Special Agent
www.freedomabovefortune.com

--------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this e-mail because you asked to be informed of updates to
the Freedom Above Fortune website and Mr. Banister's speaking schedule.  If
you no longer wish to receive these notifications you may unsubscribe by
going to http://www.freedomabovefortune.com/mailingList/   and selecting the
'unsubscribe' option.
--------------------------------------------------------

Subject: NEW LAWSUIT PARALYZES THE IRS
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 00:52:50 -0500
From: Bill Utterback <BUtterb@connecti.com
To: BUtterb@connecti.com

from:  http://www.sightings.com/general/suit.htm

Major Lawsuit Filed Against IRS In US District Court In Oregon

             NEW LAWSUIT PARALYZES THE IRS

             If you'd like to get the IRS off your back, please take a
             few moments to read the enclosed lawsuit, which was
             recently filed in Federal District Court. The information it
             contains is a matter of public record and is provided to
             you free of charge. What you are about to read will
             shock you and could dramatically change your life . . .


             UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
             DISTRICT OF OREGON

             CASE NUMBER: CV 00-293-KI STEVEN M.
             BERESFORD, Ph.D., Plaintiff, v. INTERNAL
             REVENUE SERVICE, UNITED STATES
             GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF THE
             TREASURY, Defendant.

             COMPLAINT FOR REFUND OF TAXES,
             PENALTIES AND INTEREST. REQUEST FOR
             PERMANENT INJUNCTION. DEMAND FOR JURY
             TRIAL.

             INTRODUCTION

             1. Plaintiff alleges that he is a British citizen who has
             been a resident alien in the US since 1987. Soon after
             taking residence in the US, it came to his attention that
             the American income tax system is based upon voluntary
             compliance. Plaintiff believes that he cannot be legally
             compelled to obey any law that is voluntary, and that he
             therefore has no legal obligation to file or pay income
             taxes.

             2. At the beginning of 1996, plaintiff received a letter
             from defendant requesting payment of overdue income
             taxes for 1987, 1988, 1989. Plaintiff responded by
             writing to defendant stating that since the income tax
             system is based on voluntary compliance, he had
             voluntarily chosen not to comply.

             3. During the next year or so, plaintiff contacted the IRS
             offices in Portland and Seattle by telephone and certified
             mail on numerous occasions asking for an explanation of
             the term `voluntary compliance' so that he could
             determine his legal liability and comply with the law if
             required to do so.

             4. Defendant ignored these requests and issued an
             involuntary federal tax lien against him on 7/12/96 for the
             sum of $7,256.80. Plaintiff then filed an appeal of federal
             tax lien on 8/9/96 and again on 9/3/97 with the IRS
             offices in Portland and Seattle. These appeals were also
             ignored.

             5. On 2/5/98, defendant sent plaintiff a notice of intent to
             levy. On 3/3/98 and on 4/1/98 the IRS office in Portland
             finally notified plaintiff that his appeal had been
             disallowed, more than 18 months after he originally filed
             it.

             6. Plaintiff then wrote to the IRS office in Portland on
             2/15/99, 4/7/99, and 6/16/99 requesting a due process
             hearing. Defendant failed to schedule a hearing and the
             sum of $14,609.97 was subsequently withheld from the
             sale of plaintiff's home at 701 North Winchell street,
             Portland on 10/14/99 under protest in satisfaction of the
             lien. Finally, on 1/3/00 defendant notified plaintiff that his
             request for a due process hearing had been denied.

             POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

             7. According to the IRS Mission Statement, the Federal
             Tax Regulations, the Internal Revenue Manual, the US
             Supreme Court, and expert testimony given before
             Congress, the tax system is based on voluntary
             compliance:

             8. a) "The mission of the Service is to encourage and
             achieve the highest possible degree of voluntary
             compliance with the tax laws and regulations and to
             maintain the highest degree of public confidence in the
             integrity and efficiency of the Service." Federal Register,
             Volume 39, #62 (11572), March 29, 1974.

             9. b) "The purpose of publishing revenue rulings and
             revenue procedures in the Internal Revenue Bulletin is to
             promote correct and uniform application of the tax laws
             by Internal Revenue Service employees and to assist
             taxpayers in attaining maximum voluntary compliance."
             Federal Tax Regulations, Section 601.601.

             10. c) "The tax system is based on voluntary
             compliance." Federal Tax Regulations, Section 601.602.

             11. d) "Taxpayers in the United States assess their tax
             liabilities against themselves and pay them voluntarily.
             This system of assessment and payment is based on the
             principle of voluntary compliance." Internal Revenue
             Manual, Section 20:123 (7/15/96).

             12. e) "Of course, the Government can collect the tax
             from a District Court suitor by exercising its power of
             distraint ~ if he does not split his action ~ but we cannot
             believe that compelling resort to this extraordinary
             measure is either wise or in accord with congressional
             intent. Our system of taxation is based upon voluntary
             assessment and payment, not upon distraint." US
             Supreme Court, Flora v. United States, 362 US 179, 80
             S.Ct. 630 (1960).

             13. f) "Let me point this out now. Your income tax is
             100 percent voluntary tax, and your liquor tax is 100
             percent enforced tax. Now the situation is as different as
             day and night. Consequently, your same rules just will
             not apply." Testimony of Dwight E. Avis, Head of the
             Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Division of the Bureau of
             Internal Revenue, before the House Ways and Means
             Committee on Restructuring the IRS (83rd Congress,
             1953).

             14. Neither the Federal Tax Regulations nor the Internal
             Revenue Code define the term `voluntary compliance'.
             Hence plaintiff relies on the definitions of `voluntary'
             given in Corpus Juris Secundum (C.J.S. 92: 1029, 1030,
             1031):

             15. "The word `voluntary', which connotes an
             agreement, implies willingness, volition, and intent. It
             suggests a freedom of choice and refers to the doing of
             something which a person is free to do or not to do, as he
             so decides.

             Although for legal purposes the word `voluntary' is
             considered to be so simple and in such general use that it
             need not be defined, it has been defined variously as
             meaning acting by choice, acting of one's self, without
             compulsion, or without being influenced by another;
             acting with willingness; done by design or intention;
             purposed; intended; done of his or its own accord; done
             of or due to one's own accord or free choice; produced
             by an act of choice; proceeding from the will or from
             one's own choice or full consent.

             `Voluntary' is further defined as meaning free; willing;
             not accidental; spontaneous; proceeding from the free
             and unrestrained will of the person; proceeding from the
             spontaneous operation of the party's own mind, free
             from influence of any extraneous disturbing cause; of
             one's own will without being moved, influenced, or
             impelled by others; unconstrained by external
             interference, influence, or force; unimpelled by another's
             influence; not compelled, prompted, persuaded, or
             suggested by another; acting without constraint by
             extraneous force; without compulsion.

             In its legal aspect, and as commonly used in law, the
             word `voluntary' is defined as meaning gratuitous;
             without valuable consideration; acting, or done, of one's
             own free will without valuable consideration; acting, or
             done, without any present legal obligation to do the thing
             done."

             SUMMARY OF MATERIAL FACTS

             16. According to the IRS Mission Statement, the income
             tax system is based on voluntary compliance.

             17. According to the Federal Tax Regulations (sections
             601.601 and 601.602) the income tax system is based on
             voluntary compliance.

             18. The Internal Revenue Manual (section 20:123)
             explicitly states that the payment of income tax is
             voluntary.

             19. The US Supreme Court has ruled in Flora v. United
             States (supra) that the income tax system is based upon
             voluntary payment, not upon distraint.

             20. Dwight E. Avis, Head of the Alcohol and Tobacco
             Tax Division of the IRS, testified before Congress that
             income tax is 100 percent voluntary.

             21. According to Corpus Juris Secundum (supra), various
             courts have ruled that the meaning of the word
             `voluntary' includes: "the doing of something which a
             person is free to do or not to do; acting without
             compulsion; acting without constraint by external
             interference, influence, or force; acting without any
             present legal obligation to do the thing done."

             22. Plaintiff did not voluntarily pay income taxes for the
             years 1987, 1988, 1989.

             23. In response to defendant's request for payment of
             taxes for the years 1987, 1988, 1989, plaintiff repeatedly
             asked defendant to explain the meaning of the term
             `voluntary compliance', but defendant repeatedly failed to
             do so.

             24. Defendant issued an involuntary federal tax lien
             against plaintiff on 7/12/96 for the sum of $7,256.80. In
             response, plaintiff filed an appeal of federal tax lien on
             8/9/96 and again on 9/3/97, which defendant disallowed
             on 3/3/98. Plaintiff then requested a due process hearing
             on 2/15/99, 4/7/99, and 6/16/99, which defendant denied
             on 1/3/00.

             25. Defendant compelled the sum of $14,609.97 to be
             withheld from the sale of plaintiff's home on 10/14/99
             under protest by means of the above-mentioned
             involuntary federal tax lien.

             26. Plaintiff has exhausted the administrative remedies
             available to him by defendant, was at all material times
             referred to herein a resident of the State of Oregon, has
             his principle place of business in the State of Oregon, and
             relies on 28 U.S.C. Section 1346 (a)(1) and Section 1391
             (b) as giving the District Court of the State of Oregon
             jurisdiction in this matter.

             ARGUMENT

             27. Plaintiff argues that according to the true and correct
             usage of the word `voluntary' in standard English and in
             legal English (as outlined in Corpus Juris Secundum), he
             cannot ~ by definition ~ be forced or compelled to do
             something that is voluntary, such as complying with a
             voluntary law.

             28. Plaintiff argues that since the law clearly and
             unambiguously states that the payment of income tax is
             voluntary, defendant cannot lawfully force or compel him
             to pay income tax. Plaintiff argues that his position is
             supported by Tietjen v. Heberlein, 171 P. 928, 54 Mont.
             486; Akio Kuwahara v. Acheson, D.C. Cal., 96 F. Supp.
             38, 42; Brown v. State, 135 S.E. 765, 766, 36 Ga. App.
             84; Coker v State, 33 S.E. 2d 171, 174, 199 Ga. 20;
             Perryman v. State, 12 S.E. 2d 288, 391, 63 Ga. App.
             819; in which the courts ruled that a voluntary action is
             one that is done without compulsion or external force.

             29. Plaintiff argues that he has the freedom of choice to
             pay or not to pay income tax without any legal obligation
             toward defendant, and that his position is supported by
             Touli v. Santa Cruz County Title Co., 67 P.2d 404, 406,
             20 Cal. App. 2d 495, in which the court ruled that a
             voluntary action is one that is done without any legal
             obligation to do the thing done.

             30. Plaintiff argues that according to the IRS Mission
             Statement, the Federal Tax Regulations, the Internal
             Revenue Manual, the US Supreme Court, and the
             testimony of Dwight Avis before the House Ways and
             Means Committee, voluntary compliance forms the
             foundation of the entire income tax system and is not a
             subordinate or conditional regulation.

             31. Plaintiff argues that section 6321 of the Internal
             Revenue Code, which lays out the rule concerning
             federal tax liens, does not form the foundation of the
             income tax system and is therefore subordinate to and
             conditional upon the principle of voluntary compliance,
             which always takes precedence over it.

             32. Plaintiff argues that although defendant has the legal
             right to issue a federal tax lien under section 6321, such a
             lien must be a voluntary lien in order to conform to the
             principle of voluntary compliance, and that defendant
             does not have the legal right to issue an involuntary
             federal tax lien.

             33. Plaintiff argues that the involuntary federal tax lien
             issued against him by defendant under section 6321 of
             the Internal Revenue Code violated the principle of
             voluntary compliance and was erroneous and unlawful.

             34. Plaintiff argues that defendant acted erroneously and
             unlawfully by compelling money to be withheld from the
             sale of his home by means of an involuntary federal tax
             lien, because the involuntary compliance thus obtained
             violated the principle of voluntary compliance.

             35. Plaintiff argues that since the payment of income tax
             is voluntary, he has never had any legal or financial
             obligation toward defendant and has never owed
             defendant anything, and that any and all claims against
             him by defendant are false and without merit.

             CONCLUSION

             36. The law clearly and unambiguously states that the
             payment of income taxes is voluntary, as codified in the
             IRS Mission Statement and in Sections 601.601 and
             601.602 of the Federal Tax Regulations, and affirmed by
             Section 20:123 of the Internal Revenue Manual, by the
             US Supreme Court in Flora v. US, and by the expert
             testimony of Dwight E. Avis before Congress.

             37. The principle of voluntary compliance forms the
             foundation of the entire income tax system, and is not a
             subordinate or conditional regulation.

             38. Section 6321 of the Internal Revenue Code, which
             lays out the rule concerning federal tax liens, does not
             form the foundation of the income tax system and is
             therefore subordinate to and conditional upon the
             principle of voluntary compliance, which always takes
             precedence over it.

             39. Defendant does not have the legal right to issue an
             involuntary federal tax lien under section 6321 of the
             Internal Revenue Code, because such a lien violates the
             principle of voluntary compliance. Since the law clearly
             states that the payment of income taxes is voluntary,
             defendant acted erroneously and unlawfully by
             compelling the sum of $14,609.97 to be withheld from
             the sale of plaintiff's home on 10/14/99 under protest by
             means of an involuntary federal tax lien.

             40. According to the true and correct usage of the word
             `voluntary' in standard English and in legal English,
             plaintiff cannot be compelled to do something that is
             voluntary, such as the payment of income tax ~ which is
             voluntary. By compelling plaintiff to pay income tax by
             means of an involuntary federal tax lien, defendant
             violated plaintiff's intrinsic right to freedom of choice in
             the matter without compulsion or legal obligation.

             THEREFORE

             Plaintiff prays that the Court will uphold the true and
             correct usage of the word `voluntary', and will uphold his
             intrinsic legal right under the principle of voluntary
             compliance to exercise freedom of choice to comply or
             not to comply with the income tax laws without
             compulsion or legal obligation, and prays for judgment
             against defendant as follows:

             a) That the Court will order defendant to refund to
             plaintiff the sum of $14,609.97 plus interest.

             b) That the Court will order defendant to pay plaintiff
             administrative and litigation costs arising from the
             prosecution of this lawsuit in the sum of $11,150.

             c) That in view of plaintiff's decision not to voluntarily
             comply with the income tax system, the Court will issue a
             permanent injunction forbidding defendant from
             contacting him against his wishes and from directly or
             indirectly interfering in any other aspect of his life.

             Steven M. Beresford, Ph.D. (Plaintiff in propria persona)
             2/28/00


             A PERSONAL MESSAGE TO YOU FROM STEVEN
             BERESFORD

             As a result of this potentially devastating lawsuit, which
             was written by myself, the IRS is being represented in
             court by Janet Reno and the Justice Department. In order
             to win, I need to hire a good attorney to help me navigate
             the legal minefield, so I'm asking for your support.

             If you'd like to help me beat the IRS, please mail your
             donation to: The Steven Beresford Defense Fund, c/o
             Steven Beresford, 18803 SE 18th Street, Vancouver,
             WA 98683. Whether you send $10 or $1,000, your help
             could force the IRS to its knees and make them beg for
             your tax dollars in future. This is an important lawsuit
             that could end the tyranny of the IRS once and for all.
             But I sincerely need your support.

             Please forward this e-mail to as many people as possible.
             The more people who know the truth about voluntary
             compliance, the less power the IRS will have over the
             American public. Time is of the essence. Janet Reno is
             on the warpath, so please do it now, before you get
             sidetracked and forget. Thank you for your time and
             cooperation.

             Steven Beresford

             P.S. If you want to verify this lawsuit, feel free to
             contact Jian Grant (202-307-6422) who is the
             Department of Justice attorney.

*******************************************************************

From: Beaver Cole <mailto:bcole@longview.net>  
To: Wjpbr@aol.com <mailto:Wjpbr@aol.com>  ; t r u t h o u t <mailto:postman@truthout.org>  ; Info at PAC <mailto:info@pacinlaw.org>  ; American Patriot Friends Network <mailto:APFN@apfn.org>  
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:38 PM
Subject: FW: IRS AGENT UNCOVERS AGENTS!

Folks,

This came through today and thought I should share with the list.
There seems to be a information revolution going on thanks to the Internet.
We are seeing changes even in our main stream media to tell the truth coming
to light.
Money seems to be and has been the way in this world to get power and
control over other people`s lifes. My faith in God`s wisdom tells me that he
knows everything anyway.
In my opinion, our world is in a healing and truth trend as I typ and we
should pray for IRS agents...

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

  I was contacted by an ex employee of the IRS that wants to remain unknown
and he told me:

1.That there now is more undercover IRS agents than there ever were and that
they have infiltrated Patriot Groups, are on most Patriot Internet List, and
are the ones that volunteer to help everyone so their cover is good.
 2. That many major Law firms and many C.P.A.'s are now 10 percenters and
are turning clients in to the IRS without the Firm knowing about it and They
are getting paid 10% by sending their check to their home addresses.
 They snoop through other's files (on week ends when no one is around-check
out the files-& photo and make copies of incriminating information.
 3. Almost all large law firms that specialise in Taxation NOW has a Ten
Percenter working undercover as do all large C.P.A. Firms that do tax work.
 4. Most Tax Fighter Groups have two undercover agents (so they can cover
each others backs) and usually set things up so they can ask all members to
sign a petition (with their names and addresses) for a good cause, (but the
IRS gets a copy and then has a HIT LIST.)
 5. Some of the undercover agents are actually in charge of the Tax Protest
Group and the least suspected by the membershp.
 6. The IRS saves more money, and catches more tax protestors by using
undercover agents than they do using regular agents plus the agents get a
good size raise in pay for being undercover and a member of a tax protest
group.
 7. That our government considers the Tax Protest Movement more dangerous to
them than the Terrorists or any other group since they are more intelligent,
hard working and usually unknown by their neighbors, fellow workers, etc.
 8. That the government is more concerned about a General Tax Revolt than
another bombing of a building or other terrorist acts.
 9. Now that you have been warned, BE CAREFUL, &  KEEP A LOW PROFILE.
 BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU TELL OTHERS ABOUT YOUR ASSETS, AND ACTIVITIES.
 ETC.
 The undercover agent is usually the one that agrees with you and wants to
be your friend.
 He will volunteer for all the tough jobs such as sending out the newsletter
(he gets the mailing list)
 pickig up people, giving them rides, and will always attend all meetings.
He will tap all phones if he can, and plant mikes and carry a voice
activated small tape recorder with him.
 He will appear like a successful business man, and dress nice with nice
manners. He will agree with everybody and volunteer to help everybody.

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party