From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 1997 06:15:39 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: effective GACK fighting (fwd)
Message-ID: <199711022210.XAA19506@basement.replay.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Blanc wrote:
>Jim Choate wrote:
>>But, why do we need a lawyer? We have the right to represent ourselves, why
>>let somebody who has a intimate stake in the status quo represent us?
>
>Well, first of all I was being facetious, because of how people are always
>saying we need Leadership (tm) and need to elect another President in order
>to have a more Perfect Union.   But I said we need a "good" lawyer - a
>libertarian lawyer - because I expect that it would take someone who had
>studied the legal system and made it their project to be well-educated and
>articulate on these matters, to be able to successfully represent the
>Consitutional values which we subscribe to.
[snip]

Fortunately some of these "good" lawyers already exist at the Institute for 
Justice.  Basically, they are a libertarian version of the ACLU.  They've 
accomplished some good things and deserve the support (read $$$) of 
freedom-minded individuals everywhere.  (note: I'm not connected with them
in any way; just letting the cypherpunk community know about an organization
in sync with our views)

 "If you seek a courtroom champion for individual liberty, free market
  solutions, and limited government, look only as far as the Institute
  for Justice.  When politicians pass sweepingly intrusive laws and
  bureaucrats build their empires of paperwork and power, only the
  Institute for Justice brings them to account in court."
  -- http://www.InstituteforJustice.org/

>>Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or
>>Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment
>>relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to
>>the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. 
>
>I don't know.   But this is the sort of issue I was thinking of.

Bill Benson has done some extensive research (his book is called The Law 
That Never Was) regarding the 16th Amendment (the so-called Income Tax 
Amendment) and how it was ratified.  According to the information he has 
uncovered through exhaustive research in D.C. and all of the state capitals 
of the then 48 states, the 16th Amendment was never ratified by 3/4ths of 
the states. (see http://www.trustclarks.com/theman.html for more info)

Friends of mine have spoken to Mr. Benson about this, and he says that the 
courts won't touch it with a ten foot pole.  He even sells a package (or at 
least he was selling it back in 1995) of legal information about the 
non-ratification of the 16th that can be used as a defense in an income tax 
case.  According to Mr. Benson (in 1995), each of the cases was dropped when 
the defense made it clear they were going to argue their defense based on 
this point.

I understand that folks in the "patriot" movement have tried to take this to 
the Supreme Court without success.  The Court refused to hear it.

Assuming Mr. Benson's research is accurate and legitimate, the 16th didn't 
even come close to being ratified and is truly a Law That Never Was.  Think 
about that next April 15th...the IRS's "lawful" authority is based upon a
legal fiction.  That's why it's called >voluntary< compliance.

Nerthus

- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
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=8W8j
- -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
Charset: noconv

iQEVAwUBNFzU4eFWwZe05jcJAQEuEQf/cU+8VTsG7GRbP14eMtUIs2Hb9jKmCD8v
+au46lGCy8NuuMl+3leRGT9tAARoe2+yVg6FJbwzCZvJMBNIR3YmEEm3WxEH9TZQ
ghVk1nrCtZg0eLdKSHYIV8q061kcrNmgtn/J8zP4SH39NtcHBfTaqpqt6wwky0jd
7A096utO4p3ip870ss4V5P2LiW71riJh3L/pqCJnUMbQleLT5OK/+el7tnUZYX2g
8mNNA5qydHIleyoDB72Aj3u15Z1TLmCKXGt+Uj3fwzytjYDtwfs9d+7AI7Kk1kBQ
RLw07pNou03Fr3M8SSeSiSkUGea4Hv0j8wJtSjIQoJ9on03zOsJAlw==
=+v+X
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----