Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

The_Dunedan · 02-13-2007, 10:41 PM

The Feds went after Koresh because of an honest paperwork error concerning a Class-III weapon. The BATFE thought that Koresh was in posession of an NFA weapon upon which a $200 tax was owed. The Feds had screwed up some paperwork, lost some forms, and thought Koresh was still in posession of a weapon which he no longer owned.

Where things went bad was when the BATFE decided to turn the entire affair into a publicity stunt. The Clinton DoJ was seriously considering the idea of folding the BATFE into the FBI at the time, and the BATFE brass wanted a high-profile bust in order to justify their continued existance. Worse, the Clinton DoJ in general and the BATFE in particular were/are intensely hostile to gun-ownership. That fact, combined with the hugely over-the-top raid, have caused some people to suggest that the Mt. Carmel Massacre was a "bitch slap" for the militia movement, which at the time was growing rapidly in response to the killings at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. After the huge build-up, all the press coverage, all the bluster, the Feds simply couldn't bring themselves to admit that they'd made a mistake, and their inability to simply admit their error, go home, and conduct a proper investigation ended up killing over 80 people.

Now Ed Brown is a different story. I don't believe in Income Taxation. Furthermore, I believe that a lot of the arguements put for by the Tax Protest movement have some weight. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Feds are lying, cheating, thieving, murderous pricks, and LCTMP's cheat. If Mr. Brown seriously thought that his arguements, however factual or well-considered, were going to work...I admire his courage, his optimism, and his tenacity. I have a less-than-stellar opinion, however, of his common sense. If he's been around long enough to pick up the arguements that he's using, he's been around long enough to know that they weren't going to work, if for no other reason than that the Judge could simply instruct the Jury to ignore his entire defense, as is becoming more common. When you try to use Constitutional arguements in an Admiralty Court, you lose.

02-13-2007, 10:41 PM	#37 (permalink)
The_Dunedan Junkie	The Feds went after Koresh because of an honest paperwork error concerning a Class-III weapon. The BATFE thought that Koresh was in posession of an NFA weapon upon which a $200 tax was owed. The Feds had screwed up some paperwork, lost some forms, and thought Koresh was still in posession of a weapon which he no longer owned. Where things went bad was when the BATFE decided to turn the entire affair into a publicity stunt. The Clinton DoJ was seriously considering the idea of folding the BATFE into the FBI at the time, and the BATFE brass wanted a high-profile bust in order to justify their continued existance. Worse, the Clinton DoJ in general and the BATFE in particular were/are intensely hostile to gun-ownership. That fact, combined with the hugely over-the-top raid, have caused some people to suggest that the Mt. Carmel Massacre was a "bitch slap" for the militia movement, which at the time was growing rapidly in response to the killings at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. After the huge build-up, all the press coverage, all the bluster, the Feds simply couldn't bring themselves to admit that they'd made a mistake, and their inability to simply admit their error, go home, and conduct a proper investigation ended up killing over 80 people. Now Ed Brown is a different story. I don't believe in Income Taxation. Furthermore, I believe that a lot of the arguements put for by the Tax Protest movement have some weight. However, that doesn't change the fact that the Feds are lying, cheating, thieving, murderous pricks, and LCTMP's cheat. If Mr. Brown seriously thought that his arguements, however factual or well-considered, were going to work...I admire his courage, his optimism, and his tenacity. I have a less-than-stellar opinion, however, of his common sense. If he's been around long enough to pick up the arguements that he's using, he's been around long enough to know that they weren't going to work, if for no other reason than that the Judge could simply instruct the Jury to ignore his entire defense, as is becoming more common. When you try to use Constitutional arguements in an Admiralty Court, you lose.