Scott Haley, Founder of "Individual Sovereignty" Comments On Danny Riley's 8/6 Statement
What is a peaceful solution to the Brown’s situation in Plainfield, New Hampshire? The Marshals say “turn yourself in and you won’t be harmed”, The Browns reply with “turn myself in for what? We have not broken any laws”. The Marshals are just doing their job they exclaim, in their minds a person has been convicted and they been order to apprehend by the court. The Marshals are not concerned with the moral issues and questions of corruption and a non-law conviction that arises from this case. For the most part the Marshals are probably good Americans, willing to defend the country, but the Marshals probably have not researched and investigated the greater issues involved here, such as the federal reserve fraud, the IRS fraud of not being able to produce a liability clause in the law, and the lawlessness of the federal courts, not allowing due process. Read the rest of Danny's statement here.
Scott Haley responded:
Well done...a thought-provoking article.
There are a number of extremely unfortunate and frustrating aspects to this whole situation. Here are a few---
1. Marshals (or other law enforcement folks) are not going to show Ed & Elaine the Law in question...because they don't have the desire to do so, much less the expertise to even attempt it. The misapplied 26 USC, Subtitle A, Chapter 1 is so lengthy, convoluted and confusing that most BARflies (attorneys) have a tough time trying to explain it.
2. Non-Peace Officer Govt representatives are not going to "show the Law" because it is not in their best interests to do so...and they don't care about the controversy.
3. On April 15 of this year, every "taxpayer" in this nation should have refused (in the name of Ed & Elaine) to submit a 1040...but they didn't refuse. Had they done so, someone in the Govt would have been forced to come forward & "show us the Law".
4. Whoever represents Ed & Elaine in the U.S. House of Representatives should have come to their home...to find out first-hand (not by hearsay) what their complaint is about. That person should be thoroughly ashamed of himself/herself. [I realize full well that Reps cannot visit every individual in their Districts, but this is a unique and dire situation.]
THERE ARE A NUMBER of possible (but, admittedly, NOT probable) peaceful solutions to this scenario. [Remember, I said "possible", not probable.] Here are a few---
1. Someone from Treasury could be dispatched to Plainfield to "show the Law". [Highly unlikely, but if the Govt was of a mind to do so, it is possible.]
2. More likely, Ed & Elaine's Congressional Rep could come to Plainfield and do the same. This would require a lot of pressure being put on him/her. [Has anyone explored this possibility? I say that despite what I said in # 2 above.]
3. Ed & Elaine could surrender peaceably based on this reasoning: perhaps it is better to live and work for restoration of the Republic (even in prison) than it is to die. [Frankly, I would probably do exactly as Ed & Elaine are doing now, but we're talking "what is possible" here. No matter what the Browns say, surrender is "possible"; but, of course, it takes the will to do it.]
4. The Marshals could come to their senses and recognize that they're making war on a peaceful couple who only are saying that they will defend themselves...and then the Marshals could quit. [Unfortunately, even if that possibility came about, they would be replaced with different Marshals.]
5. The People of this country could stop fearing their SERVANT Govt and boycott it AT EVERY LEVEL in the name of Ed & Elaine. [Highly unlikely, but "possible".]
So, what are we left with? Except for food for thought, it seems that we're back to square one.
perhaps we should find out who Ed & Elaine's Congressional Rep is and inundate that person with emails, phone calls, letters, videos (posted on the web), etc. DEMANDING that he/she "show Ed & Elaine the Law", and show it in detail, with all the exclusions, exceptions, and gobbledeegook phrases ["Except as provided for in section 61...", "Except as otherwise provided...(where???)] etc. EXPLAINED.
perhaps we should attempt to convince Ed & Elaine (I know this would be tough) that it is better to be a live martyr than a dead one. Consider Ghandi, Mandela, and others who spent time in prison---look what they accomplished. [I have a tough time with this one because, as I said, I would probably do exactly as the Browns are doing. Nevertheless, unless you are terminally ill or being tortured, living makes more sense than dying.]
Obviously, there are no easy answers to this problem.
My main disappointment is with the adult American public in general. We could force the Govt's hand if only we would boycott on a massive scale.