Btw, a copy of
CtC from anywhere except the link above may not
be a current edition. CHECK. It matters. Also, there
ARE no e-book, Kindle or .pdf versions of
CtC. Don't get taken in by efforts to sell you--
or even give you for free-- any such thing.
"The preservation of a free government requires, not
merely that the metes and bounds which separate
each department of power be invariably maintained, but
more especially that neither of them be suffered to
overleap the great barrier which defends the rights
of the people. The rulers who are guilty of such
encroachment exceed the commission from which they derive
their authority, and are TYRANTS. The people who
submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves
nor by an authority derived from them and are slaves….."
No one can guarantee
success in all they do in life. But anyone can
guarantee that they DESERVE success in anything they
Happy Guy Fawkes Day!
Election Day, 2018. A Bit
It's particularly fitting this year
that election day comes so soon after Halloween...
SO, ARE YOU WORRIED about the election
outcome this week? You should be!
After all, the unprincipled,
progressivist nut-case Democrats might regain power.
Or, the unprincipled, neo-con nutcase
Republicans might retain power.
Whichever way it goes, as things
stand now, you and your kids are going to be
YOU SEE, AS THINGS STAND NOW, the winners, of
either party, will find themselves with far more
money in the treasury than is needed for their Constitution
duties. Those duties include little more than
courts, actual national defense, modest Depts. of
State and Treasury, a Post Office and a Patent
Office, a small immigration bureaucracy and a few
other offices of similarly focused function and
There is FAR more in the US treasury
than is needed for these lawful obligations of the
United States. The excess
will be spent (after some serious nest-feathering)
on a host of things inimical to your interests.
That excess will finance an army of
spies surveilling you; an army of "security
thespians" impeding and dictating to you; an army of
soldiers making enemies for you in other countries
which are no threat to you; and swarms of
petty functionaries with clipboards which endlessly
harass you and eat out your substance in
myriad other ways, as well.
Some, if not all, of your economic,
cultural and opportunity competitors will be
subsidized. Some, if not all, of your own attempts
to compete in these areas will be hindered and
penalized. Critical markets-- like
healthcare, for example-- will be distorted so
as to compel your subordination to the collective.
None of this will be new, of course.
All of it will just be the perpetuation of the
status quo, and it won't be affected by the
Managing to get Democrats in power
won't stop any of it. Managing to keep Republicans in
power won't stop it, either.
ONLY ONE WAY TO STOP THESE BAD THINGS. That
is for you to stop financing the state, and to explain to your neighbors that they
needn't give it money, either, and are crazy to do
Explain to those neighbors that, in
fact, the Founders and Framers set up the tax rules
in the Constitution for the specific purpose of
equipping you and them to rein in the state when it
gets the way it is today. Remind them that the
United States was intended to be,
"A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain
men from injuring one another, shall leave them
otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of
industry and improvement, and shall not take from
the mouth of labor the bread it has earned."
Trust me, the message will resonate.
You can walk into any room full of people-- whether
liberals, conservatives, progressives, or whatever--
and you will never find a single one who, if told
they have the legal option to either pay $1,000 in
taxes or to pay $10, will choose the $1,000.
SO, WORRY ABOUT THE OUTCOME TUESDAY!
It's a dire prospect, whichever way it goes.
But don't focus on it. Focus your
attention on the real solution to America's problem,
which elections only pretend to be.
That real solution is simple and
singular in its nature: Shrink the beast, which does
harm to you in direct proportion to its size, and
does it whether it has Democratic handlers any given
year or Republican ones.
In that latter regard, it has occurred
to me that some folks might misunderstand an
important historical fact related to this issue. It
occurs to me some might imagine that the first 140
years of our history, during which, on the whole,
liberty and prosperity increased, were somehow
distinguished by the blessing of unusually saintlike
It is easy and natural to make this
mistake. Every generation harbors fuzzy and
unrealistic views of ancestral virtue.
But this is just fuzzy
unrealism. The fact is, other than the typically
rare and unreliable exceptions which prove every
rule, those in office during those first 140 years
were no more saintly on average than are Nancy
Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, John Bolton or James
THEY JUST DIDN'T HAVE AS MUCH MONEY
WITH WHICH TO DO HARM. It's that simple.
So, stand up, act, and teach.
Sure, have some fun doing post-mortems
as encouraged by those against whom elections
are no solution but who want us all to imagine
otherwise, and to therefore do nothing but bitch and
vote. But just on Wednesday.
Starting on Thursday, do what really IS
the solution. Stand up, clothed in knowledge and
resolve. Act, and teach.
NOTE: Here are a few resources to help
with the teaching:
A subject broad and deep in
misrepresentation and misunderstanding.
MUCH IN THE NEWS JUST NOW is the
subject of "birthright citizenship" allegedly provided-for
in the 14th Amendment. There is, in fact, no such
provision, and the pretense to the contrary relies
entirely upon the glossing-over of inconvenient and
contradictory words in the law.
In this case, the phrase "or
naturalized" is the one conveniently disregarded, as
though its presence has no impact on the meaning of
the citizenship clause. But that phrase-- which translates as,
"or granted citizenship"-- is actually the key to
the meaning of the clause (or, at least, the key to
untangling misrepresentation or misunderstanding of
Here is the complete language of the
amendment, in relevant part:
"Section 1. All persons born
or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United
States and of the state wherein they reside."
So, let's insert the translation of
"naturalized", which will make immediately obvious
that this amendment clause is not intended to grant
citizenship to anyone in any normal sense of the
persons born or granted citizenship in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are
citizens of the United States and of the state
wherein they reside."
Obviously this language contemplates
and concerns persons already possessed of
citizenship by normal procedures-- either through birth to
citizen parents, or having been granted it through
As this more complete rendering of the
language helps clarify, the purpose of the provision is
not the granting of
United States citizenship. Instead its purpose is
the granting of state citizenship
to those who are already United States citizens.
A LOOK AT THE 14th AMENDMENT'S CONTEXT
AND HISTORY makes this yet more clear, revealing
that those for whom this clause was designed are the
persons naturalized by the Civil Rights Act of 1866.
That group consists of former slaves, all of whom,
if having been born in the United States, are
granted United States citizenship thereby:
Be it enacted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the United States of
America in Congress assembled, That all persons
born in the United States and not subject to any
foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed,
are hereby declared to be citizens of the United
States; and such citizens, of every race
and color, without regard to any previous condition
of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a
punishment for crime whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted, shall have the same right, in
every State and Territory in the United States, to
make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, and
give evidence, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell,
hold, and convey real and personal property, and to
full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings
for the security of person and property, as is
enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to
like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none
other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or
custom, to the contrary notwithstanding.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted,
That any person who, under color of any law,
statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall
subject, or cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of
any State or Territory to the deprivation of any
right secured or protected by this act, or to
different punishment, pains, or penalties on account
of such person having at any time been held in a
condition of slavery or involuntary servitude,
except as a punishment for crime whereof the party
shall have been duly convicted, or by reason of his
color or race, than is prescribed for the punishment
of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of a
misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished
by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or
imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the
discretion of the court.
Note that the overall language of the
enactment plainly has as its object only those
persons born into slavery, and now freed.
Harmoniously, the specific language refers to all
persons born in the United States-- while making no
reference or provisions regarding persons who
shall be born in the United States (none of
whom could then be born into slavery, the
institution having at that point been abolished).
Further, expressly EXCLUDED from the
group with which the act is concerned is anyone
"subject to any foreign power". This includes anyone
born with allegiance to any other country by virtue
of his or her parents' foreign citizenship-- such as
every baby that is the object of today's "birthright
("Subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is the 14th
Amendment's restatement by other words of the
Civil Rights Act's earlier phrase, "not subject to
any foreign power". It was perhaps restated thusly
in order to pre-empt exceptions based on a
claimant's argument that his parents are somehow not foreign allegiant.
Per the new version of the language in the 14th
Amendment, that negative, even if true, wouldn't be
good enough to allow a slip under the wire.)
THE REASON FOR THE 14th AMENDMENT
very briefly, is that after the slave population was
emancipated following the War to Suppress Southern
Independence, many states (North and South) refused
to treat freed slaves as citizens. The refusal found
expression particularly in the denial of voting
This denial of voting rights to the
freed slaves created a conundrum for the North. The
Northern state bloc faced the prospect of increased
Southern strength in Congress due to the entire
former slave population now being counted in full
(rather than at 3/5 each) for purposes of
determining the number of representatives in each
state's delegation. But with the freed slaves unable
to vote, the interests represented by the stronger
Southern delegations would likely remain just as
hostile to the Northern agenda as ever they had
been, simply with more power in their hands.
The solution was the 14th Amendment,
compelling every state to treat all United States
citizens living within their borders as citizens of
the states, as well. The expectation was that this
compelled citizenship would convey unabridged voting
Even so, the optimistic expectation of
proper state behavior was back-stopped. Recognizing
that even state citizenship might not be enough to
safeguard the Northern purpose against the acts of
what are, after all, sovereign states (and were
still thought of in that way, at that point), the
following fail-safe language-- which nicely
underscores the real and limited purpose of the
"citizenship clause" in Section 1-- was also
included in the amendment:
Section 2. Representatives
shall be apportioned among the several States
according to their respective numbers, counting the
whole number of persons in each State, excluding
Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any
election for the choice of electors for President
and Vice President of the United States,
Representatives in Congress, the Executive and
Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the
Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male
inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of
age, and citizens of the United States, or in any
way abridged, except for participation in rebellion,
or other crime, the basis of representation therein
shall be reduced in the proportion which the number
of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number
of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such
A GREAT DEAL MORE COULD BE SAID about
the 14th Amendment overall. If I ever am able to be
done with my advocacy for
truth regarding the income
tax and can move on to finishing the analysis of the
Constitution with which I have been noodling for a
number of years now, I'll say it.
For now, though, suffice it to say that
Section 1 of the amendment in no way mandates the
granting of citizenship-- either union-state or
United States-- to any child of foreign parents who
happens to be born on American soil.
Even the construction of the
amendment's "citizenship" clause by the US Supreme
Court in United States v. Wong Kim Ark (169
US 649, 1898), which did (mistakenly) find its way
to affirming a 14th Amendment-based
citizenship-by-birth claim of a man born to Chinese
national parents who were long-time legal residents
in the United States, does not avail advocates of "birthright citizenship" for the
children of non-resident (or illegal) aliens. In fact, Wong
defeats the advocates' argument.
In that case, the court only
found for Wong because of the status of those
parents as being in the United States by permission,
and under terms by which they were allegiant to the
United States during their time in the country. It
was during that period of allegiance and
jurisdictional submission that their son was born.
The Wong majority, as part of
the exhaustive explanation of its opinion, quotes
Justice Joseph Story in Inglis v. Sailors' Snug
Harbor (1833), 3 Pet. 99. There, Justice Story,
referring to Calvin's Case, Blackstone's
Commentaries, and Doe v. Jones, explains the basic
principle from which the Wong court proceeds in
finding that a child of
legal residents can acquire citizenship by
"Nothing is better settled at the
common law than the doctrine that the children, even
of aliens, born in a country while the parents
are resident there under the protection of the
government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto,
are subjects by birth." 3 Pet. 164. (Emphasis
The Wong court subsequently
extends the legal residence distinction directly to
its case at hand:
Chinese persons, born out of the United States,
remaining subjects of the Emperor of China, and not
having become citizens of the United States, are
entitled to the protection of, and owe allegiance
to, the United States so long as they are
permitted by the United States to reside here,
and are [thus] "subject to the jurisdiction thereof"
in the same sense as all other aliens residing in
the United States. Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886), 118
U.S. 356; Law Ow Bew v. United States 144 U.S. 47,
61, 62; Fong Yue Ting v. United States (1893), 149
U.S. 698, 724; Lem Moon Sing v. United States
(1893), 158 U.S. 538, 547; Wong Wing v. United
States (1896), 163 U.S. 228, 238. (Emphasis added.)
In the end this
distinction is directly rested upon in the narrow ruling
of the Wong court:
The evident intention, and the
necessary effect, of the submission of this case to
the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by
the parties were to present for determination the
single question stated at the beginning of this
opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United
States, of parent of Chinese descent, who, at the
time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of
China, but have a permanent domicil and residence
in the United States, and are there carrying on
business, and are not employed in any diplomatic
or official capacity under the Emperor of China,
becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the
United States. For the reasons above stated, this
court is of opinion that the question must be
answered in the affirmative.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark (169 US 649,
1898) (Emphasis added.)
Plainly, the children born to
non-resident aliens are in no way beneficiaries of even
the Wong court's expansive and mistaken
construction of the 14th Amendment's "citizenship
clause". Indeed, the express resort by the court to
the legal residence of the parents in finding for
Wong is the exclusion of all those not enjoying the
same distinction of circumstance, and thus a
left-handed ruling by the Supreme Court to the
effect that the children of non-residents are not
entitled to any such "birthright citizenship".
(It is also worth observing-- for the
sake of good scholarship-- that while much in common
and ancient law might have once weighed on the side
of "birthright citizenship" on grounds outside the
provisions of the 14th Amendment, the very adoption
of that amendment with its explicit purposes and
provisions on the subject has arguably now settled
the question in the negative.)
CAN YOU EVEN IMAGINE how abysmally
stupid someone would have to be to continue to doubt
or deny that
CtC has revealed the actual, complete and insurmountable
truth about the income tax in light of the overwhelming
logical evidence to the contrary? (Not to mention
outright lies and even
ludicrous hoaxes the executive and some corrupt
members of the judiciary have been caught at in desperate
efforts to conceal the truth...)
Plainly any such denier must either be
abysmally stupid or be an abysmally corrupt government
official or other person who sees him or herself as
benefitting from the lies about the tax by which America
has suffered for 75 years now.
Isn't this true?
An old joke, but in regard to this deceiver,
not a laughing matter at all.
““When principles that run against your
deepest convictions begin to win the day, then battle
is your calling, and peace has become sin; you must,
at the price of dearest peace, lay your convictions
bare before friend and enemy, with all the fire of your
Looking For A Litigator Who
Wants To Do Well While Doing Good
THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT presents details
of a long-running (and still-ongoing) violation of the
speech, conscience and due-process rights of two Americans.
The offenses, in a nutshell, involve a federal district
court attempting to dictate to these two folks-- word
for word-- sworn "testimony" they are ordered to make
in a legal contest with the government.
Click the link below to read the brief.
You'll find it thoroughly supported with relevant testimony
by the chief perpetrator and other similarly unambiguous
"Power concedes nothing without a demand.
It never did and it never will. Find out just what any
people will quietly submit to and you have the exact
measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed
on them, and these will continue till they have been
resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The
limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of
those whom they suppress."
"It does not take a majority to prevail...
but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting
brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
"A slave is one who waits
for someone to come and free him."
…The US may be
the only country in the world where people working
in the non-federal private sector must commit
perjury in order to owe and pay ‘God’s things
If you work in the
private sector, stop falsely swearing that your
private-sector earnings are federal “income”1.
Perjury is a crime. Exercise the law’s
provision for protecting your private-sector
earnings from the 154-year-old2 indirect
excise known as the federal income tax.
Rebut fraudulent allegations made by your payers
regarding the legal nature of your work and
the earnings derived therefrom, so that you
pay only your fair share. Join the hundreds
of thousands of honest, law-abiding Americans
who have been doing so for more than a decade.
Learn how for free at losthorizons.com.
1--“We must reject…
…the broad contention submitted in behalf of
the government that all receipts—everything
that comes in—are income…”.
United States Supreme
Court, So. Pacific v. Lowe, 247 U.S. 330, (1918)
2—The income tax in
the United States was first instituted into
law on July 1, 1862, during Lincoln’s presidency
under the excise laws of the United States.
The preamble to the 1939 Internal Revenue Code
traces its roots to this original income tax
Trolls Against The Truth: A
UNLESS YOU'VE LOOKED, you can have no idea
of the volume, intensity and mendacity deployed in the
government's efforts to discourage Americans from learning
what is revealed in
CtC. It's truly astonishing.
A lot of folks are aware of the show-trial
events in which my wife and I have received state-engineered
public beatings meant to scare people away from the
truth about the "ignorance tax" scam. But many are unaware
of the overall campaign. This is a shame, really, because
a focused propaganda effort like this one is a very
powerful acknowledgement of the significance of
While the majority of Americans do not
yet know how
CtC protects them from the vampire state, the vampire
itself certainly does. Dis-information campaigns like
this one make that very clear.
FORMER CBS REPORTER SHERYL ATKISSON describes
some aspects of this sort of dis-information campaign
in the following video. Despite the annoying preliminary
15 seconds or so of advertising, her presentation is
very much worth watching:
(H/T to Greg Belcher for finding
and forwarding this great presentation.)
Losthorizons.com is one of those websites specifically-targeted
by the corrupt interests at Wikipedia described by Atkisson.
The behind-the-scenes folks at that site won't allow
links on their pages to anything posted at
losthorizons.com, nor even just text corrections
of misinformation in their pages about the income tax.
That's the least of it. Click
here for some specific discussion of the enormous
scare campaign that's been actively spreading false
information in hope of discouraging legitimate media
attention, as well as men and women simply seeking the
truth about the tax and liberty from the scourge of
the "ignorance tax".
PLEASE GIVE SOME SERIOUS THOUGHT to the
fact that YOU being secure in your own freedom rests
on others learning the truth as well, and recognize
that it falls to you to help overcome the dis-information
campaign. Post and share
share your victories; help silence the agents-provocateur
and distraction-injectors whose nonsense is discussed
here; and widely (and frankly, impatiently) share
this page and
this page, challenging everyone in your address
book to disconnect the phone and the TV for an afternoon
and get educated.
Doing these things will be what makes it
An Excellent New Video About
The Government Effort To Suppress
CtC Has Hit YouTube!
DEREK CUSHMAN HAS POSTED a powerful presentation
on government lies, propaganda and misinformation about
CtC designed to discourage more Americans from reading
the book and getting free of the misadministration of
Watch it and share it, folks. This film
will help a lot of people who have been taken in by
the lies understand how they've been manipulated, and
prompt a proper desire to learn the truth about the
Well done, Derek!
P.S. If there were a thousand videos out
there debunking government lies and encouraging Americans
to learn the truth like this one does, the "ignorance
tax" scheme would collapse in a month. So,
Please Help losthorizons.com
Be As Effective As Possible!
OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS I've heard from
a number of folks that a firewall known as "Comodo"
blocks access to this website. This is apparently a
glitch in that program. This site is safe, as can be
seen by going
Please share this info with others in your
own address book so it gets around-- obviously those
suffering the ill effects of this defect in Comodo won't
be able to see it here themselves until they go into
their firewall settings and manually whitelist
I HAVE DONE MY BEST to lead this country
to liberty from the mis-applied income tax. I have labored
hard. I've shed a lot of sweat, a fair bit of blood
and more than a few tears. But I seem to be pretty poor
at that kind of work.
When I have asked all of you for what I
firmly believe is a necessary resource to move the ball
downfield and give all of us the best chance at justice
and an end to the assault on the rule of law-- simple
testimonial videos requiring nothing from any of you
but the phone in your pocket and three minutes of speaking
from the heart-- I have had only a handful of people
answer my call.
I CAN'T KEEP GOING THIS WAY. I have to
be able to turn my attention away from writing new persuasive
or skepticism-addressing articles week after week, and
toward research, analysis and educational presentations
that will benefit everyone already in this community.
I need time to do some suing, and to bring together
the resources and talent toward that end.
As said, it is my firm belief that your
testimonial videos are the resource that I need to make
big things happen, and they are unquestionably the thing
I need to allow me to turn my attention away from trying
to get horses to drink at the waterhole to which I have
led them. Your words, in your great numbers and all
in your own different ways, will do that better than
anything I write possibly could.
And yet, you are not providing them. This,
despite my having been asking you for them for many
Therefore, with enormous reluctance, I
am making portions of this website restricted access
only. People have been urging me to do this for years
now, telling me I should impose a charge to access my
work-product, so as to enable me to keep producing.
I have never been inclined to charge fees
for access. I ask for donations, and will continue to
do that, and if they do not come, then I will conclude
that my work is of no value to anyone, and I will close
But I now WILL charge a special something
for access to some key portions of that work-- testimonial
videos, as discussed, described and demonstrated
SELECTED PAGES CONSTITUTING primarily "legal
resources" pages now require passwords for access, and
to get a password, I need your video. Similarly, if
an email comes my way asking for guidance or assistance,
it had best have a video attached, if I don't already
have yours posted.
I hate to play it this way, but I want
I'll tell you a story from when I was coaching
my kids in soccer. Both of my kids at a certain age
in their careers had run into a wall common to all but
the very exceptional. They had gotten to be pretty good,
and they wanted to enjoy the benefits of their hard
work. But the arrival of this interest coincided with
a new self-consciousness which made them reluctant to
risk failing and looking foolish. So, they were hanging
back from seizing the main chance when it appeared,
and driving for the goal.
My solution was to post on the wall of
our dining room a couple of simple points about self-discipline,
the chief of which is this: You can't score a goal if
you don't take a shot.
That's how it is here, too. If you don't
stand up, you are laying down, and you'll never score
Here is what my kids live by now, in their
own version of that lesson. I hear it from them all
the time as they excel (accompanied by the sound of
a father's breast swelling with pride): Go hard,
or go home.
You, too. Go hard, or go home.
Send those videos.
Do I ask for a lot? I want your victories
to post, your financial support, your efforts at spreading
the word, and your beautiful faces and inspiring words,
too. It IS a lot.
But I'll let Thomas Paine explain:
"Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered;
yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder
the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we
obtain too cheaply, we esteem too lightly. Heaven knows
how to put a proper price on its goods; and it would
be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as freedom
should not be highly rated.”
We each have our reasons, and our story.
It's time, and it's needed, for you to share yours with
"The day we see truth and do not speak
is the day we begin to die."
-Martin Luther King, Jr.
What does it for you?
Is it simply because no moral and upstanding
person has any choice when it comes to telling the truth
over his or her signature, whether on tax forms or anywhere
Is it recognition of the critical importance
of the rule of law, and the knowledge that if everybody
leaves its caretaking to someone else, it will soon
be lost to us completely?
Is it the money?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
own rights as a human being, who is not and cannot be
not involuntarily subordinated to others?
Maybe it's just simple respect for your
general civic responsibility to be the grown-up and
enforce frugality and restraint on a big, powerful creature
of our own devising which otherwise is like a badly-raised
teenage boy given whiskey and car keys and let loose
on the road to wreak havoc?
Or is it, perhaps, a more acute anxiety
that if our bonfire of a state isn't damped, and quickly,
it'll soon burn down the house around us all?
What IS it that firms up your jaw and stiffens
It's time to take off the bushel and
share your light!
I would like you to think about what it
is that motivates you for a few moments (or all day,
if you like), and then send me your thoughts. I want
to put YOUR reasons to work inspiring folks who don't
yet understand what this is all about.
In this day and age, the most effective
way for you to share your thinking for the benefit of
others is to video-record yourself talking about how
you feel, and explaining what inspires and motivates
All you need is a webcam or cell-phone
equipped with a camera. If you don't have, or know how
to use, one of these, have a friend help.
If needed, write a little script for yourself.
Better, though, to just speak extemporaneously, after
spending a little time sorting out your thoughts and
getting down into your heart. Perhaps make it a video
of someone in your family, or a close friend, interviewing
Dress "business casual". Be well-groomed.
Keep yourself to no more than 2 or 3 minutes,
and keep in mind that the purpose is not to educate,
but to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE and ENERGIZE. Your video will
be one of many to be shared.
You needn't feel any obligation to be profound,
and you shouldn't try to explain anything about the
law, other than to say that you have read it and you
know it's on your side. You just need to be sincere,
and uplifting. Your object is to make your audience
want to have what you have, and to be where you are
in your heart.
Keep in mind that you're speaking to an
audience that doesn't yet know ANYTHING about the subject,
and whose first reaction is, "This must be illegal;
this must be dangerous; this is too good to be true."
You want to pull that audience right past such things,
and straight to a focus on truth, morality, and our
American heritage of liberty and the rule of law.
Remember: INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE, ENERGIZE.
Speak about rights. Speak about morality,
and the obligation of a grown-up and responsible person
to speak the truth and to enforce the Constitution.
Speak about everyone's duty
to give to God what is God's, always, and to Caesar
only what is really Caesar's. Speak of your obligation
to respect yourself, and to look out for the current
and future well-being of your children and your fellow
citizens. Speak of
CtC, and what its information has done for your
understanding and resolve. Show the book.
If you have had victories, describe them.
Better still, show them, if possible.
Be clear about just what you accomplished:
EVERYTHING back-- Social Security, Medicare and all;
a "notice of deficiency" closing notice; an on-paper
agreement or acknowledgment that your earnings weren't
subject to the tax and everything withheld or paid-in
was an "overpayment"; a transcript showing all $0s;
or whatever happened.
When you speak of state victories, name
the state. If you had to overcome balkiness from a tax
agency before winning any victory, describe that, too!
If you're in a battle now, speak of your
resolve to uphold the law, come what may. If you haven't
yet begun to act, speak of your decision to do so, and
Remember, your purpose is to INSPIRE, ENCOURAGE
If you're dealing with ongoing balkiness,
describe that, too, if you wish-- but be sure to explain
why you're not discouraged, and why you are not standing
down, not slinking back into the barn, and not choosing
to endorse the lies.
Mention what you do for a living, whether
you're a doctor, homemaker, lawyer, trucker, IT guy
or gal, or a retiree or student. Help people understand
that the company of grown-up activist Americans they
are being invited to join cuts across all demographics
and all interests-- with the common denominator being
respect for the law and love of the principles on which
this great country was founded.
This is your chance to get a LOT accomplished.
We've all had frustrating occasions of
trying to explain all this to a friend, neighbor, family
member or co-worker, only to pile up against the wall
of a mind not yet ready to listen and learn. Here is
your chance to address a self-selected audience of folks
who have themselves decided that it's time for them
to begin paying attention, and have clicked on your
testimonial for exactly that reason.
Further, think about this: You want judges,
bureaucrats, CPAs, lawyers, the HR people where you
work, your pastors, your neighbors and everyone else
to acknowledge the truth about the tax openly and straightforwardly.
How and why would these folks do this if YOU won't?
You want these folks to learn the truth.
Why would they even recognize that there is a truth
to be learned if you won't attest to having learned
it yourself? You've got to stand up, face forward and
chin up and tell these folks that you have studied and
checked and verified and seen the evidence and seen
the government evasions and you know that the tax is
not the capitation that the beneficiary government wants
everyone to think it is but a benign, but strictly limited
thing, and that they need to study and learn that, too.
Again, if you have victories to show, that's
nice, and powerful, too. But you don't have to have
victories to display in order to declare your knowledge
of what the law says. I've never flown around the world,
but I've seen the evidence and considered the arguments,
and I'm not hesitant to declare it a sphere...
Even those of you who haven't yet studied
CtC have surely read
this short document, and have verified everything
in it for yourself. You should therefore be declaring
its veracity and its message, loud and proud. Again,
if you won't say it, how can you hope that others will
ever even bother to look at the facts?
Be the change you want to see in the world,
or there won't be any change.
So, please make and send those videos
right away! You can share them with me via a cloud-based
drive space like OneDrive.Live.com or GoogleDrive, or
mail DVDs to me at 232 Oriole St., Commerce Twp., Michigan
48382, or even email to me if each file is no more than
20 megs (and you can break a video up if need be-- I
can reassemble them). Render as .mpg or mp4, if possible;
if not, send them how you have them and I'll make them
Remember, the restoration of institutional
respect for individual rights and the rule of law depends
on enough individuals insisting upon it. Do your part
to let those starting to rub the sleep from their eyes
know that there is a community already waiting for their
fellowship with open arms and open hearts and shining
See how some of your fellow warriors for
the truth have done their parts in videos sent over
the years, many of which are posted
"It does not take a majority to prevail...
but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting
brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."
Getting Free Of The "Income" Tax Scheme Is As Easy As
Falling Off A Bike
To get an idea of how today's "income" tax scheme works,
try this little exercise:
Think of the federal government as a guy named Bob,
who lives down the street from you in a town that is
really big on bicycles. Bikes get used for commuting,
deliveries, shopping, etc.. In fact, other than walking,
bicycles are the exclusive form of transportation in
Your neighbor Bob has a by-the-mile bicycle-renting
business-- "Bob's Bicycles". Bob's Bicycles is far and
away the biggest business in town.
Part of Bob’s success is because he does a lot of contract
business. However, Bob doesn't just get paid by riders
who have signed an agreement with him, or even just
those using Bob's bikes. Bob gets something every time
anybody in town does any riding at all, through an odd
combination of circumstances that took many years to
Here's how it happened...
Bob's Bicycles was launched long ago by the great grandfather
of the present Bob (Bob IV). Great Grandpa Bob started
out not only with a main location for his contract business--
he also had the bright idea of setting up spots around
town where he parked some of his bikes for use by the
more occasional rider, on an "honor system". Anyone
could take and use one of these bikes, but they were
expected to keep track of their mileage, and send Bob
a "1040 Mileage Ridden/Rent Due Form" (and the appropriate
rent), periodically. The initial design of the form
was like this:
rode a Bob's Bicycle a total of _____ miles
At Bob's rental
rate of $.15 per mile, I owe Bob $______
I said that Great Grandpa Bob planned to deal with these
occasional riders on the "honor system", and that's
true. But he liked his money, too, and didn't want to
miss anything that was due him. So, after setting up
the "self-serve" locations, Great Grandpa Bob went around
handing out "W-2, 1099 or K-1 Rider Reporting Forms"
to every other business in town. The forms-- accompanied
by notices that if Bob didn't get his rent from someone
riding a bicycle in connection with any business, he
would sue the company involved-- said:
CtC WARRIOR SanDiegoScott has put together
a great little 20-question quiz to test your knowledge of the law
regarding the United States "income" tax. Test yourself, test your
friends and family! Test your accountant and tax attorney, and help
them learn the liberating truth!!
"Never must thou take up a false cry, or join hands
with the guilty by giving false witness in their favor. Never must
thou follow with the crowd in doing wrong, or be swayed by many
voices so as to give false judgment; even pity for the poor must
not sway thee when judgment is to be given."
Doing A Little High-Payoff Math
IF EACH PERSON receiving this newsletter each week distributed as
few as 100 of any of
the great outreach tools featured here to co-workers, friends,
neighbors and family members (or just strangers on the street, in
the mall, etc...), we could have SEVERAL MILLION new Americans
suddenly introduced to the liberating truth about the tax!
Just like that! In one week!
C'mon, people, let's roll on this!
“Most of the important things in the
world have been accomplished by people who have kept on trying when
there seemed to be no hope at all.”
When directed to a page by topic or link, read everything.
I know that this can mean the investment of a lot of time, attention
and effort, but although some may imagine otherwise, I don't write
as much as I do because I can't think of any other way to spend
Furthermore, when you encounter a hyperlink within, or associated
with, the text you are reading, follow it!
It is pretty common these days for web-based material to be littered
with hyperlinks. Sometimes the purpose is to provide definitions
or examples, in order to ensure that folks reading the original
material aren't presented with a word or reference which they don't
understand. Sometimes the links lead to illustrations pertinent
to the original text.
It is common-- and perfectly understandable-- for folks who are
confident that they are familiar with language or references within
the main text they are reading to get in the habit of skipping over
included links. I do it all the time, myself!
However, I very rarely include links for definitional or explanatory
purposes; and when I DO make a link out of text in one page it is
generally to another self-contained page, rather than merely illustrative
material. These other pages contain material the clear understanding
of which I deem highly important for the proper and complete understanding
of the original page. (Links to
CtC Warriors and so on are obvious exceptions to this general
rule. On the other hand, a link to the victory
Highlights or 'Every
Which Way But Loose' pages, which might seem like such exceptions,
are not. The special selection of victories on those pages, and
the filed docs and tax-agency correspondences included therewith,
themselves constitute highly instructive material which merits careful
attention. Thus care needs to be taken in all cases.)
Please make a habit of clicking on all provided links and at least
looking briefly to ensure that the linked page is one with which
you are completely familiar from another study session.
Finally, please keep in mind that, annoying though it may seem at
first blush (but not, I trust, upon reflection), I constantly tweak
material already posted. Obviously this doesn't mean that every
page is in flux at all times, but it does mean that if you are directed
to a page that IS familiar, it's worthwhile to read it through again
if it's been a while since your last having done so.