Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Follow the links

Expand Messages
  • William Moral Greene
    The following is paragraphs numbers 4 and 5 of Docket #21. Unlike the Official Copy available in Adobe from the Court site, this was from my copy where one can
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 17, 2008
    • 0 Attachment

      The following is paragraphs numbers 4 and 5 of Docket #21. Unlike the Official Copy available in Adobe from the Court site, this was from my copy where one can follow the link in paragraph #4 to the Official Senate Finance Committee Meeting Records to see for yourself the fact that the Exhibits which had been submitted were suppressed.  You can also follow the link in paragraph #5 to see the public announcement by the IRS to war against the constitution by responding to the petitions of WTP with enforcement procedures.

       

      Blessings,

      Bill

       

      4.  To explain, among the Exhibits which were not entered in connection with Docket No. 1 and Docket No. 6 was Exhibit 3, which is a copy of a letter from Senator Inouye's office, dated June 26, 1989, stating that "Based on the research performed by the Congressional Research Service, there is no provision which specifically and unequivocally requires an individual to pay income taxes."  This Exhibit was originally submitted by Robert L. Schulz, Chairman, We The People Foundation For Constitutional Education, Inc., to the United States Senate Finance Committee, "Taxpayer Beware: Schemes, Scams and Fraud." April 5, 2001 , along with nineteen other exhibits attached to the official record of the Committee on Finance, United States Senate, One Hundred Seventh Congress, first session on IRS oversight, April 5, 2001. Y 4.F 49:S.HRG. 107-77, Item Number: 1038-A, as pages 117-124, and is an exhibit which qui tam Plaintiffs have put forth in terms of 18 U.S.C. § 1505 (i.e., Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees), and have outlined, for example, in the First Cause of Action in terms of the violation of the spirit and intent of the First, Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution in the context of 18 U.S.C. § 1581 and 42 U.S.C. § 1994, and in the context of 18 U.S.C. § 241 involving the major fraud upon the Plaintiffs as well as all other Americans and by 18 U.S.C. § 1031 upon the United States, as outlined in paragraph #20 of their complaint and the first Cause of Action the suppression of evidence, as evidenced by its omission from the official record of the April 5, 2001 Senate Finance Committee hearing, the Government Contractor (the IRS), with knowledge and forethought, "actually not potentially" committed acts of retaliation against the People, thereby violating the federal constitutional rights of Plaintiffs as Americans and Christians, and as evidenced by the falsification of damages (which itself appears to constitute a crime in terms of 18 U.S.C. § 245  (i.e., whistleblowers against corruption in government)) to qualify for a complaint under Article III in the related § 6700 Suit against the Plaintiffs' participating organization (as indicated in paragraph #4 of their complaint) a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to this claim even occurred within this District Court in the attempt to create a false presumption involving fraud to escape answering honest questions put forth regarding the Constitutional restriction against a direct un-apportioned tax on labor (which is definable in terms of slavery and/or peonage, and therefore, criminal  in the context of 18 U.S.C. § 1581 and 42 U.S.C. § 1994) in which the Government Contractor (IRS) has retaliated against Plaintiffs to deprive us of our natural Rights of Association, Privacy, Property, and our Right to Trial by Jury.

       

      5.  Among the Exhibits which were not entered in connection with Docket No. 1 and Docket No. 6 was Exhibit 4, which is a copy of David Cay Johnston's September 17, 2003 The New York Times article in which the IRS has admitted to in public form, not once but twice (as indicated in paragraphs #28 through #30 of their complaint), of engaging in retaliatory administrative actions taken against Plaintiffs under the Color of Law without regard for the Plaintiffs guaranteed First Amendment Right to Petition for a Redress of Grievances to hold the Government and the Named Accused Government Contractor (IRS) accountable to the Constitution.

       

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.