| Wikipedia notes:
Edward Lewis Brown (born 1942) and his wife, Elaine Alice Brown (born c. 1940), residents of the American state of New Hampshire, gained national news media attention in early 2007 for not paying their federal income tax and refusing to surrender to federal government agents after having been convicted of tax crimes.[1] After the conviction and sentencing, a long, armed standoff with federal law enforcement authorities at their New Hampshire residence ended with the arrest of Edward and Elaine Brown on October 4, 2007.[2][3][4]
Wikipedia also notes the Tom DeLay connection:
Ed Brown
Ed Brown is a retired pest control officer.[1]
His Ghandian past:
Earlier felony convictions and pardon
In 1960, Brown was found guilty of assault with a dangerous weapon and armed robbery in connection with an attack on a man in Somerville, Massachusetts.[9] Brown was imprisoned at the Massachusetts Correctional Institute in Concord, Massachusetts, was paroled in January 1965, and was pardoned in July 1976 by then-governor Michael Dukakis, with the recommendation of the Massachusetts Advisory Board of Parole.[9]
That Michael Dukakis. First Willie Horton, and now this!
And now for something completely different! NOT!
Involvement in militia movement
According to an October 1994 article in the New Hampshire Sunday News,[10] Ed Brown was the spokesman for an organization called the Constitution Defense Militia and had become involved in the militia movement in late 1993. The newspaper reported that Brown designated various individuals and organizations as being part of a conspiracy to deprive Americans of life and liberty. Among the people and organizations named by Brown were then-U.S. President Bill Clinton, former President George H.W. Bush, Mikhail Gorbachev, The Council on Foreign Relations, the United Nations, the Trilateral Commission, the American Bar Association, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).[10]
Brown reportedly had stockpiled 18 months' worth of food, with weapons and ammunition, and believed that there would be a Federal government takeover of "private property, utilities, health facilities and the media." The 1994 article reported that Brown believed the militia was setting up its own "courts . . . for the purpose of taking back America."[10] The newspaper reported that Brown said he saw no way the conflict would end except in violence.[10] The paper stated: "Brown, who says he is an agnostic, admits it's easy to dismiss him as a nut."[10]
Well, sure it's easy to dismiss him as a nut.... because he is!
Don't believe me? Well, here's the New World Order Zionist/Bavarian Illuminati part of the show: Beliefs about religion, Zionism, Judaism, Freemasonry and taxes
The Concord Monitor wrote: "The Browns changed their names in late March after converting to a non denominational form of Christianity they learned from a man named Sonny. According to friends of the Browns, Sonny, who wears a long beard, all-white attire and sandals, flew from Hawaii to New Hampshire to visit the Browns and shared his religious and legal teachings over several days."[17] Elaine Brown was quoted as saying: "The only law book we now recognize is the Bible. The only way we're coming out of our home is either as free man and free woman or in body bags."[7]
The Browns alleged that they were not United States citizens, that they were non-residents of the United States for tax purposes, that the New Hampshire business tax laws were incorrect, null and void, and that labor could not be taxed.[18] According to a New Hampshire newspaper, the Browns had not paid some state taxes, and "face a state tax lien for business profit taxes" of $343,000. The paper reported that with penalties and accumulated interest, the combined Federal and state tax amount owed by Edward and Elaine Brown was over three million dollars.[19]
In mid-July of 2007, Ed Brown also announced that he would stop paying school and town property taxes to the town of Plainfield, New Hampshire. A local newspaper quoted Brown as saying: "They don't provide me any services, I'm not going to contribute to them anymore."[20]
The Concord Monitor reported that property tax bills were mailed to residents of Plainfield on June 1, 2007, with return envelopes. The Monitor stated that when an employee of the town of Plainfield opened the return envelope from the Browns, no check for the Browns' property taxes was included. Instead, the Browns included a note with the following statement:
Nay! Nay! The land . . . at 401 Center of Town Road, Plainfield, New Hampshire [the Browns' residence], and all that is in and upon it, including the Lords bodies, are in the kingdom of heaven, belonging to the Lord, have been claimed by him, and thus can be claimed by no man, nor can any man have beneficial interest in it. [ . . . ] Stand down and away from the Lords land and the bodies of the Lord. So it is written. So it is done.[21]
Edward Brown was also quoted as having made comments about law enforcement officials and the judge in his case:
I wouldn't want to be this U.S. attorney. I wouldn't want to be this judge or these other people. This James John or anybody else that decides to come down here. Their names are already out there [ . . . ] They are just as vulnerable as I am. And if they're so foolish and stupid to think that they're not, hey, doom on them.[22]
Ed Brown was reported to have stated in a radio interview in March 2007, in comments about federal authorities who were unwilling to see Brown's righteousness:
Once you've used the lawful word, you've done it the absolute proper way, and they still come at you, they are now attacking the Creator himself or itself, [ . . .] You kill them. That is exactly what the Ten Commandments tell you to do.[23]
In early June 2007 Brown claimed that the law enforcement officials surrounding his properties were part of a "Zionist, Illuminati, Freemason movement," and that the federal government had no jurisdiction in New Hampshire.[24] Referring to the warrants and court orders against him, Brown said "This is just paper [ . . . ] This is fiction. The entire American government is fiction. We created it, didn't we?"[24] The New Hampshire Union Leader also reported that "the Browns believe the IRS and the federal income tax are part of a deliberate plot perpetrated by Freemasons to control the American people and eventually the world."[25]
Wikipedia has much, much more, including a section on their trial, and for those who are really into it, check out the Wikipedia entry on Tax protester statutory arguments, which notes:
The courts that have been presented with such arguments have ruled them to be spurious, unpersuasive, or frivolous, or all three.
Paul, however, relies on Constitutional arguments.
In this video, he says in passing that the 16th Amendment was never properly ratified, but does not elaborate. However, Wikipedia gives us an idea of the kind (and quality) of argument to be found on the subject here:
Sixteenth Amendment ratification arguments
Amendment XVI in the National Archives of the United States of America. It provides that: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Amendment XVI in the National Archives of the United States of America. It provides that: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
One argument that has been raised several times (and always ruled meritless) suggests that the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified. This argument is based on the fact that the legislatures of various states passed ratifying resolutions in which the quoted text of the Amendment differed from the text proposed by Congress in terms of capitalization, spelling of words, or punctuation marks (e.g. semi-colons instead of commas).
Sure, you've heard of "strict construction" but these guys really mean it! Drop a comma, lose an Amendment!
More: The earliest reported court case where this argument was raised appears to be United States v. House,[1] about seventy-two years after the ratification. The best-known proponent of the non-ratification claim is William J. Benson, co-author of the book The Law That Never Was (1985), who testified in the House case to no avail. The Benson contention was comprehensively addressed by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Thomas:[2]
Thomas is a tax protester, and one of his arguments is that he did not need to file tax returns because the sixteenth amendment is not part of the constitution. It was not properly ratified, Thomas insists, repeating the argument of W. Benson & M. Beckman, The Law That Never Was (1985). Benson and Beckman review the documents concerning the states' ratification of the sixteenth amendment and conclude that only four states ratified the sixteenth amendment; they insist that the official promulgation of that amendment by Secretary of State Knox in 1913 is therefore void. Benson and Beckman did not discover anything; they rediscovered something that Secretary Knox considered in 1913. Thirty-eight states ratified the sixteenth amendment, and thirty-seven sent formal instruments of ratification to the Secretary of State. (Minnesota notified the Secretary orally, and additional states ratified later; we consider only those Secretary Knox considered.[3]) Only four instruments repeat the language of the sixteenth amendment exactly as Congress approved it. The others contain errors of diction, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. The text Congress transmitted to the states was: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Many of the instruments neglected to capitalize "States," and some capitalized other words instead. The instrument from Illinois had "remuneration" in place of "enumeration"; the instrument from Missouri substituted "levy" for "lay"; the instrument from Washington had "income" not "incomes"; others made similar blunders. Thomas insists that because the states did not approve exactly the same text, the amendment did not go into effect. Secretary Knox considered this argument. The Solicitor of the Department of State drew up a list of the errors in the instruments and - taking into account both the triviality of the deviations and the treatment of earlier amendments that had experienced more substantial problems - advised the Secretary that he was authorized to declare the amendment adopted. The Secretary did so.
Talk about tyranny! Surely, no one but Ron Paul can save us from the lawless disregard of spelling errors!
Oh, where is the Martin Luther King of spelling errors? |
