(RJT: I wonder whatever happened with this?)

From: "Bob Schulz" 
To: 
Subject: Dear Government, why won't you answer?
Date: Monday, June 11, 2001 9:26 PM

One man hungers. A nation prays.

As America watches.

On July 1, 2001, Bob Schulz, Chairman of the We The People Foundation for
Constitutional Education, will begin a fast which will continue until he
dies or until IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti delivers to him a list
of the government's experts who will meet on September 18, 2001, in a
public forum, at the National Press Club in Washington DC, with tax law
researchers from the tax honesty movement, to argue against the conclusions
of those researchers.

This comes as a result of the government's continued evasion of
opportunities the Foundation and others have provided to the government
over the past two years to discuss the allegations of fraud and illegal
operations of the income tax system. The allegations include the following:
1) in 1913, the 16th Amendment (the "income tax" Amendment) was
fraudulently and illegally declared to be ratified by a lame-duck Secretary
of State just days before leaving office; 2) there is NO LAW requiring most
Americans to file a tax return, pay the federal income tax nor have the tax
withheld from their earnings; 3)
people who file a Form 1040 "voluntarily" waive their 5th
Amendment right not to bear witness against themselves; 4) the IRS
routinely violates citizens' 4th Amendment rights against illegal search
and seizure, without a warrant issued by a court upon probable cause and
supported by oath and affirmation; and 5) the IRS, as standard operating
procedure, routinely violates citizens' due process rights in its
administrative procedures and operates far outside the law.

On February 10, 1999, Joseph Banister, a Special Agent of the Criminal
Investigation Division of the IRS submitted his 95-page research report to
his superiors in the San Jose office of the IRS. The report contained these
allegations and supporting evidence and respectfully requested some
answers. Mr. Banister was concerned that he was enforcing the Internal
Revenue Code as though payment was compulsory, when his research showed it
to be voluntary. Instead of answers, Mr. Banister was asked to resign!

This Foundation respectfully, and properly, invited the leaders of the
Executive and Legislative branches to have their most knowledgeable experts
on the subject participate in academic symposiums and conferences the
Foundation sponsored at the National Press Club in July and November of
1999 and in April and June of 2000. We received no response, not even an
acknowledgement of the receipt of the invitations!

On April 13, 2000, while a delegation of people representing all 50 states
waited outside, Mr. Banister and Mr. Schulz, and a videographer, met in the
White House with Jason Furman, the Executive Director of the National
Economic Council. He accepted, for President Clinton, a Remonstrance on the
subject, he promised to have the staff of the NEC and White House lawyers
and historians review the evidence, and he expressed his agreement to have
the government's experts participate with Mr. Banister and other tax law
researchers in the
June 29, 2000 conference the Foundation was arranging for that purpose. Mr.
Banister and Mr. Schulz then proceeded to a meeting in the capitol with Dr.
William Koetzle, representing Speaker Hastert's policy office, and then to
a meeting with Keith Hennessey, Senator Lott's policy director. They
accepted the Remonstrance for Mr. Hastert and Mr. Lott, promised to have
the experts at the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance
Committee review the evidence, and expressed their agreement to have those
experts participate in the upcoming June 29th conference. However, on June
2nd, Mr. Furman told Mr. Schulz, "The legality of the income tax is
not a high priority item at the White House and we will not be
participating in any conference on the subject." A similar response
was received from Dr. Koetzle and Mr. Hennessey.

At a cost of $252,000, the Foundation then published full-page educational
messages in USA TODAY on July 7, 2000, February 16, 2001, March 2, 2001 and
March 23, 2001, featuring the photographs and names of three of the
principal tax law researchers and their allegations, three former IRS
agents who have come to believe the researchers are correct, and five
employers who have stopped withholding the income tax from the paychecks of
their employees because they also have come to believe the researchers'
allegations are correct.

On April 5, 2001, the Senate Finance Committee held a hearing featuring
large blow-ups of the Foundation's USA TODAY messages, mounted on easels.
THE FOUNDATION WAS NOT ALLOWED TO TESTIFY AT THE HEARING. Two days prior to
the hearing, Senator Grassley was quoted in the Saint Petersburg Times
saying," We will not allow the We The People Foundation to testify at
the hearing because their message will detract from the message we are
trying to convey." The message the Committee conveyed was that those
people who question the validity of the income tax laws are "tax
cheats, schemers, scammers and cons. They must be kept off the Internet,
and will be dealt with harshly!"

On April 9, 2001, hundreds of citizens from across the country gathered
outside the main entrance of the IRS headquarters building. Three weeks
earlier, on March 19th, a letter was delivered to IRS Commissioner
Rossotti, letting him know that the citizens would be there and
respectfully requesting that he address the group at 11:30 a.m., to let
them know when his experts would be available to meet with the tax law
researchers in a public forum to discuss the allegations. On April 9th, he
refused to address the citizens, choosing instead to schedule an interview
with a reporter from The New York Times at 11:30 that day. The Times'
article ran on April 16th. In its first paragraph it said, "As a few
protestors gathered in front of the Internal Revenue Service building on a
warm April day, Charles O. Rossotti was cool and relaxed in his third-floor
office, reflecting on his three and a half years running the agency."

On April 11, 2001 USA TODAY informed the Foundation of its decision to stop
publishing the Foundation's full-page educational messages about these
issues, and the government's failure to address them, because "the ads
could be misleading." The Foundation offered to meet with USA TODAY's
legal department to discuss the veracity of the Foundation's messages. They
refused!

On May 2, 2001, the home and business of one of the employers who has
stopped withholding was raided by scores of government agents, at gunpoint.
As of this day, those agents have not provided a list of the charges. Nor
have they specified the probable cause for the search warrant. They have,
however, asked the judge who signed the warrant for 45 days to analyze the
computer hard drives, papers and effects that were seized during the raid
before they specify the charges and probable cause. The judge granted the
request!

The tax law research provides a substantial amount of very credible
evidence that since 1913 the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches
have been cooperating to deprive the People of a large percentage of the
fruits of their labor by enforcing laws and regulations that are prohibited
by the Constitution and which do not exist under the Internal Revenue Code.
The evidence shows that the Code and regulations have intentionally been
written in such a deceptive way as to obscure and obfuscate so as to give
citizens the
false impression that they are required to pay.

As a result of the Foundation's four messages in USA TODAY, and its other
educational efforts, a growing number of people are becoming familiar with
the facts of this research and now realize that Congress is prohibited by
the Constitution from requiring individual citizens of the fifty states to
file and pay the income tax or a social security tax as they currently
operate. More and more citizens now believe that it is precisely because of
the absence of proper constitutional authority that Congress has not passed
any law requiring most Americans to file and pay an income tax.

So far, the IRS has responded with armed raids and with increased threats
and saber rattling, but with no attempts to discuss in a rational way the
allegations about the laws and regulations.

Journalists from the dominant media, including David Cay Johnston of The
New York Times, have responded as apologists for the IRS by portraying
individuals and employers who question the legality of the federal income
tax laws as "tax cheats," even though those individuals often
have a history of intelligent, rational and professional attempts to get
their federal representatives and IRS officials to answer legitimate
questions about the legal authority of the IRS to force the collection of
the federal income tax.

Obviously, the current situation must not continue.

The question is: What can a free People do when faced with a government
that has apparently stepped outside the boundary drawn around its taxing
power by the Constitution and by its own laws, and refuses to justify its
behavior, evades all requests by citizens to answer legitimate questions,
and uses a heavy handed, steel-fisted approach to enforcing the income tax
-- as though its payment by most Americans was compulsory when, in fact,
most citizens apparently are not liable -- and when the dominant media will
not allow the people to purchase space to tell their story?

Answer: We the People must educate one another about the discrepancies
between the way the Constitution and the tax law are written and the
operations of the IRS. Knowledge is power. Only a well-informed citizenry
will bring the federal tax policies and programs back under the control of
the People and their Constitution.

Education can take many forms.

Bob Schulz prays that his stand in defense of the Constitution and the rule
of law, and his death, should it come to that, will help to educate
citizens about the apparent discrepancy between the government's behavior
in enforcing the federal tax laws and the legality of those laws, the
government's recalcitrance and refusal to reconcile the discrepancy, and
the importance of keeping the government within the boundaries the people
have drawn around its
power. His act should not be seen as one of frustration or despair, but as
a measure of his devotion to our sacred constitutional principles for which
so many others have laid down their lives.

On June 11, 2001, a letter will be delivered to President Bush, to the
leaders of the Congress and to Commissioner Rossotti to inform them of Mr.
Schulz's decision to do this. A copy of the letter can be viewed on the
Foundation's web site at http://www.GiveMeLiberty.org/. Also on the web
site are the Foundation's educational messages as published in USA TODAY
and other educational materials on the subject.

Bob's motto is ACTA NON VERBA. His deed is part of an overall action plan
put together by the Foundation under the heading of PROJECT TOTO, the goal
of which is to develop a critical mass of citizens demanding answers to the
questions of the tax law researchers, regarding the fraudulent and illegal
operations of the federal income tax system.

For a discussion of PROJECT TOTO and what you can do to help, please visit
the Foundation's web site at http://www.GiveMeLiberty.org/.
 
Bob Schulz
Chairman
We The People Foundation for Constitutional Education, Inc.
2458 Ridge Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
(518) 656-3578 Phone
(518) 656-9724 Fax


* * * * * * * * * * *

From: "JACK JEROME" 
To: "John Taylor" 
Subject: Private property...perception or reality?
Date: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 8:32 PM

Howdy J. C.,

Thought I'd relate an insight that may be of interest to you and the Vox
Populi that enjoy your production.

An old saying states "good fences make good neighbors", and this
train of thought starts with a fence building project my wife and I are
undertaking. We purchased a "fixer-upper" home and property just
outside of Fredericksburg (affectionately called "parrallaxburg"
by myself and some shooting friends), and are fencing in several acres of
the property to better manage it. As part of my land crosses a power line
right-of-way, it is already cleared and is ideal for livestock (i.e. my
horse). Power lines are a magnet for birds, deer, and (regrettably) four
wheel drive enthusiasts.

I have been, for several years, waging a losing battle (no shots having
been fired), to keep 4wd'ers off the lines, as I harvest and bale the hay
to feed my animal. If driven over repeatedly, I have found that the hay is
unsuitable for consumption. Finally marshaling my funds, I have now
undertaken fencing this area off. I felt that this was my right as a
property owner, and I couldn't have been more mistaken.

During the pole dropping process, I had occasion to speak with a large
number of my neighbors as they stopped on the private road that runs past
my modest parcel. Although there were some positive comments about my fence
(6 foot, 3 board type), the majority wondered why I was doing it! One
gentleman stated that he was unaware that anyone owned the property at all!
Others seemed to indicate (politely) that closing access to the power line
was selfish. How could their children use their ATV's if they couldn't ride
the lines?

Needless to say, I was taken a bit aback. I didn't feel selfish, I give of
my time to various causes, I'm a responsible outdoorsman (I feel), so why
the bad rap? So I did a little reading and research.

It turns out that this is a HOT BUTTON issue I was totally oblivious to.
There's a major flap about private use of private lands all over the
country.

A recent issue of Sky and Telescope ran a tongue-in-cheek letter from a
gentleman who purchased wooded property just to cut all the trees down so
he could observe the night sky un-obstructed. This brought about a wave of
letters, people furious that someone could be so selfish. The letters pined
on about displaced and dead wildlife, erosion problems, and affects on the
local water table. Calling it chainsaw astronomy (a new one to me) letter
after letter lambasted this guy. The editors stepped in and told the
readership, heh heh only kidding. But so what if he wasn't?

Can we all soon expect citizens banding together to determine use of the
land we all have sweated blood to own? Heck, it's bad enough that I have to
apply for a permit just to build a decent sized barn on my own property.
Any Libertarian would have a problem with that. Magazines and broadcast
media have clocked in on the subject of "private property" too.

Fox News has attacked the subject of eminent domain statutes that allow the
government to acquire fee simple ownership of lands. Regular readers of TLE
have read Vin's articles on same. Outdoor Life magazine has given some
shrift to shrinking private ownership of open lands. Local county
governments have taxed farmers and landowners into becoming condo owners.
Four Wheel and Off-road magazine has documented quarrels between landowners
and ATV'ers (I don't belive for a minute that a horse destroys property
quicker than an ATV).

If there's a point to this rant, it's the following. Will we let our
property be subject to laws AND majority rule? How much land is too much
open space? Can landowners expect to petition to government and local
neighbors on how he-she will use their own property? I hope not, but I feel
a rip-tide coming.

Peace out, Jack

---