$300,000 REWARD OFFER

Freedom Law School will offer $100,000 to the first person, who can demonstrate any of the below propositions. The winner can collect up to $300,000 if he/she can demonstrate all of the 3 propositions listed below:

1.Show what statute written by the Congress of the United States requires me to file an Income Tax Confession (Return) and pay an Income Tax. 2.How can I file an Income Tax Confession (Return) without waiving my 5th Amendment protected right to not give any information to the government that may be used to prosecute me? 3.Prove that the 16th Amendment of the United States Constitution, the Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which, according to the IRS and modern American courts permitted the Income Tax to exist, was lawfully added to the U.S Constitution.

Freedom Law School declares that:

There is no statute that makes any American Citizen, who works for a living in the United States of America, liable or responsible to pay the income tax. Individuals only become liable to pay the income tax when they voluntarily file a tax return, and the I.R.S. follows its assessment procedures as outlined in the Internal Revenue Code.

If there were a statute which clearly and unequivocally required the filing of tax returns, such a statute would be unconstitutional under the present income tax system to the extent that it would require individuals to give the government information which could be used against them to prosecute them criminally. Although the IRS and the modern American Courts claim that the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution permitted the Income Tax to be imposed on the compensation for labor of the average working man, this Amendment was not properly added to the U.S. Constitution.

The IRS, under our U.S. Constitution, cannot legally require information on 1040 returns from individuals--this is the reason why the IRS continually refers to the income tax as "voluntary."

See the end of this message for the procedure to claim your reward.

To help you start your investigation of these Income Tax issues

and taking a shot at our reward offer, we offer the following sources:

Go to www.freedomabovefortune.com and download for FREE the first chapter of the Report, INVESTIGATING THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX by Joseph R. Banister. This Report gives a detailed analysis of the above claims of Freedom Law School. Mr. Banister became a student of Freedom Law School in 1998 while continuing to work for the IRS as Special Agent Criminal Investigator for the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS. Mr. Banister's primary duty was to investigate and recommend prosecution of individuals who had violated the criminal tax laws of the United States. While working for the IRS, Mr. Banister wrote this report and presented it to the top management of the IRS in February of 1999 for a point-by-point refutal by the IRS. The IRS, with its large army of tax accountants and lawyers at its disposal, utterly refused to dispute any of the conclusions of Mr. Banister's Report. Mr. Banister has since quit the IRS in protest and had Freedom Law School publish and distribute his Report to the hardworking American Worker to inform them of this unlawful robbery of them. You may obtain a copy of this Report from Freedom Law School for $22. See ordering information below.

Visit our Book Store to purchase a copy of the book entitled WHY NO ONE IS REQUIRED TO FILE TAX RETURNS AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, by Bill Conklin. Mr. Conklin successfully had the 10th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals admit that the filing of an Income Tax Confession (Return) is voluntary. Mr. Banister started his investigation of the Income Tax's legal basis by first reading this book. Mr. Conklin offers a $50,000 Income Tax reward for anyone who can demonstrate the first 2 reward offers of Freedom Law School. If you can prove us wrong, here is another $50,000 to add to your cash stash. Caution: 3 people have previously attempted to collect this reward from Mr. Conklin. One of them lost to Mr. Conklin in court; the other losers were lawyers. One of the lawyers was Melvin Belli, the famous "palimony" attorney. You may obtain a copy of Mr. Conklin's book for $21 from Freedom Law School. See ordering information below.

You can obtain a copy of THE LAW THAT NEVER WAS, by Bill Benson who was a Criminal Investigator with the Criminal Investigation Division of the Department of Revenue of the State of Illinois. This book documents how not even a single state properly ratified the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for addition to the U.S. Constitution.

You may obtain a copy of Mr. Benson's book from Freedom Law School for $33. See ordering information below. You may obtain a copy of the videotape of the IRS Showdown in July 2, 1999, which was broadcast by C-Span 2, in which Mr. Benson, Conklin and Banister explained their findings about the Income Tax. The IRS, the President of the United States and heads of Congress were invited to refute the findings of these gentlemen, but they did not bother to show up. This 3.5 hour videotape is available for $30 from Freedom Law School.

Send CASH (NO CHECKS) to: Freedom Law School 1062-C Walnut St. Tustin, California 92780 (714) 838-2896

To apply for the rewards, mail your documentation to Freedom Law School at the address above. We encourage you to have your accountant, CPA, lawyer or IRS agent apply for the reward. Good luck!

-- easy money (easymoney@aol.com), January 03, 2001

Answers

Who do we have to demonstrate this to?

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), January 03, 2001.

Lars,

Be careful. Note how the challenge is specifically worded.

1.Show what statute written by the Congress of the United States requires me to file ...

Since most of the tax code was written by bureaucrats at the direction of Congress, you'd probably have to take these people to court and prove that actions taken at the specific direction of, and under the oversight of, a principal are equivalent to those actions taken directly by the principal itself. Maybe we could set a precedent. :)

2.How can I file an Income Tax Confession (Return) without waiving my 5th Amendment protected right to not give any information to the government that may be used to prosecute me?

Incidentally, this one has bothered me, too; the IRS's requirement that you list earnings from illegal sources, for example, seems to me to go square against the 5th Amendment. (Unfortunately, the courts apparently disagree with me on that.)

But there IS an answer: don't do anything that would subject you to prosecution. Do I win? :)

3. Prove that the 16th Amendment of the United States Constitution, the Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which, according to the IRS and modern American courts permitted the Income Tax to exist, was lawfully added to the U.S Constitution.

This one is easy, but again, the problem is that Tax Protesters don't understand how our system works: Congress passes the laws, the states ratify amendments and then the courts INTERPRET and APPLY these laws and amendments.

Simply put: once a court rules and establishes a precedent on something, that's the LAW.

The courts have ruled time and again that the 16th Amendment WAS properly ratified. Since they have the final say-so over the matter, it WAS. I have no doubt that someone could win on this last one.

But it'd be a waste of time, which is why most people (like me) wouldn't bother. These types of challenges are carefully-worded publicity ploys, primarily used by tax protesters to start arguments (and sell books[g]). Even if you prove the above assertions, they'll argue you to death about fine print, precise definitions of terms, etc., etc. You'd have to take 'em to court to win the money with no assurance that even have the assets to pay in the event that they lose. Not worth the bother.

But if you want an amusing example, see this one. This guy actually WON such a challenge voiced by tax rebel Irwin Schiff on CBS. The only reason he didn't collect was because he didn't respond within the 2 hour period stated in the challenge. :)

Perhaps this is the reason why tax protesters word their challenges MUCH more carefully nowdays, and are careful to provide escape clauses that keep them from actually having to pay when they're blown out of the water. :)

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), January 03, 2001.

The fact that you are okay with serious violations of your countrys constitution is why you are considered a lackey, poole.

To admit that you do not want to risk your property (like Decker) would be at least truthful, but you enjoy perpetuating the fraud by siding with the tyrants. You're worse than a useful idiot because you actually know it's unconsitutional.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 03, 2001.

Poole:

As far as the first question, and your additional question, bureauocrats working on behalf of congress would be under "work for hire", and hence anything they do would be considered the intellectual property of the "employer"-in this case, the U.S. Congress.

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), January 03, 2001.

KoFE -- looks like what you need to do is start lobbying for an amendment that abolishes the income tax.

-- helen (b@r.f), January 03, 2001.

Right Helen, lets make coffee and fire off a couple of letters :-)

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 03, 2001.

helen,

Exactly. :)

KoFE,

The fact that you are okay with serious violations of your countrys constitution is why you are considered a lackey, poole.

Well, I'll sidestep your assertion that there are "serious violations" of the Constitution (which is silly), primarily because people like you *LOVE* arguing minutiae, fine print, precise definitions of various terms, etc., etc. I'm not going to be your puppet on a string.

(That's why I said that you guys are shade tree lawyers. Having begun with a seriously flawed view of how our system of government works, you then spend endless hours debating the meanings of terms like "citizen" and "labor" and so on.)

Instead of providing fodder for another cut-and-paste diatribe, I'll just say this: even if you're right (and you're not), refusing to pay tax isn't the way to do it.

If you'd crawled out of your hole a few years ago and had looked around, you'd have seen that (a) a lot of people agreed that the IRS should be reined in -- and it was; (b) a lot of people thought taxes should be cut -- and they were; and (c) a lot of people are now talking about fundamentally changing the tax system entirely with something like a flat tax or national sales tax. That may very well happen -- IF we work for it.

(That "we" includes you.)

People like us should work THROUGH the system to change it. I would only refuse to obey a court decision with which I disagreed if it directly touched on one of my fundamental, core beliefs (for example: if the Supreme Court ever ruled that all churches should be closed, something like that).

But in that extreme case, though, I would accept the martyr's price for my actions: I would protest and refuse to obey, fully knowing that I could go suffer penalties (including jail) for my decision.

The leaders of the Tax Protest movement generally hide behind a sales organization and encourage YOU to take the risks.

So, to start with, in my opinion, people like Register and Schiff are rank COWARDS. Pure-pee-blooded CHICKENS. You may call them "heroes" if you like, but in my view, that's an insult to every soldier who has fought for this country. They're COWARDS.

They compound their guilt, in my opinion, by telling you that you WON'T be penalized (which is a flat LIE; have you even bothered to look at the links at Evans' site? These poor people are following their advice and are getting HAMMERED!).

The final straw is that they insist that you represent yourself in court ("pro-bono," ie, without a lawyer). Now, why would they do that if their arguments are so logical, so good, so right and so legal?

They do this because they KNOW that any lawyer worth his bar membership would carefully explain to you beforehand that you were wasting your time and, in fact, placing yourself in serious legal jeapardy merely by attempting a TP lawsuit.

(Besides, they don't want you to talk to a lawyer about it any event, because you might stop buying their books, newsletters and tapes.[g])

Further, it intrigues me that TPs never worry about other court decisions which, in my opinion, have threatened state's rights, the separation of powers, you name it -- consider the recent decisions that permit cops to search your car on the merest suspicion that you MIGHT be carrying something illegal.

I disagree with that strongly. But the answer isn't to refuse to drive, or to refuse to license my car, or (particularly) to blow through a roadblock while shooting a finger at the cops.

The answer is to work through the system to cause the Bill of Rights to be interpreted as the Founders intended them to be.

Of course, there's no money in that. No one would buy a book about that. :)

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), January 03, 2001.

"Dear Congressperson,

Could you please introduce legislation abolishing the income tax. You should see my electric bill! My car is really old too, and if I didn't have to pay income tax, I could pay outgo on a new car. See? The auto industry wins! Auto industry workers win! And you win the next election! Isn't that marvelous?

Thank you for your kind attention."

-- helen (b@r.f), January 03, 2001.

We aint on the same team, poole. My team don't need you on it. You would sell out the team. But, go on; you are making my case for me.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 03, 2001.

Stephen:

I disagree. There are plenty of books about how the system works, how it can be changed, how to develop strategies for change. In fact, the market for reasonable books dwarfs the market KoFE represents, the idiots ripe for the con men. But as KoFE illustrates, there is a cult of tax protesters for whom reason is inapplicable and useless, facts irrelevant, legal precedent meaningless.

I sometimes wish the TP crowd would suggest something useful, like how taxes should be assessed, and what they should be used for, and what a reasonable taxation level should be given the proper role of government as they see it. Hard to develop a strategy without any goal to accomplish. And I don't see jamming your fingers in your ears, scrunching your eyes tight shut and screaming, as much of a goal.

People like KoFE are comic relief. Unlike Creationists, they present no danger to anyone but themselves. And I believe they should be allowed to follow through on their fixation and get jailed of their own free will. That's their right.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 03, 2001.

KoFE,

We aint on the same team, poole.

A light dawns.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), January 04, 2001.

Flint; blah, blah, blah, as usual. The dumb ass poole admits the misapplied income tax is illegal, still defends it, and you chime right in. (In 10 times as many words needed of course)

-- KoFE (Your@town.USA), January 04, 2001.

KoFE, you need Poole and Flint and moi and a whole bunch of other citizens in order to effect real change in the tax laws. Group hug time.

-- helen (b@r.f), January 04, 2001.

Helen,

Now THAT is a true statement.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), January 04, 2001.

Okay, but I think that we have to agree that we have a problem, first. Lying and creating disinformation,and using labels to disrespect and dismiss your opposition isn't what I would call coalition building.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 04, 2001.

Flint, I just re read the dumb shit you posted, where you imply that I represent some kind of organisation. You came to that conclusion all on your own, jackass. Try reading with a little more comprehension, instead of listening to the voices in your head.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 04, 2001.

KoFE,

Thank you for proving how tax protesters think.

You read my diatribes -- in which I did everything but call people like you abject morons -- and concluded that I agreed with you. :)

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), January 04, 2001.

KoFE:

I implied that you belonged to the class of the mentally challenged, but I didn't imply these fools were organized in any way. On the contrary, those who deny reality tend to be pretty disorganized, by and large.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 04, 2001.

So, now you deny what you you said? Typical. But that's what I expected.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA), January 04, 2001.

So...I guess there's no hope for peace in the Middle East?

Disagreement zones: Which services should the government provide and which should it stay out of? How should money for government services be collected? How should money collected by the government be budgeted?

KoFE, my coffee comes pre-ground in a can, but you're welcome to it. :)

-- helen (b@r.f), January 04, 2001.

Flint, I just re read the dumb shit you posted, where you imply that I represent some kind of organisation. You came to that conclusion all on your own, jackass. Try reading with a little more comprehension, instead of listening to the voices in your head.

-- KoFE (your@town.USA),

^^^10 points KoFE, now I liked that response.....tooo funny.

sumer, who ALWAYS listens to the voices in Flints head. :-)

-- sumer (shh@aol.con), January 06, 2001.