Considering the source, that's good.Number Six wrote:By the way Larry referred to this site as run by AHs.
Better to be an AH in hell, than to serve in tax protester heaven.
Considering the source, that's good.Number Six wrote:By the way Larry referred to this site as run by AHs.
Pottapaug1938 wrote:... as in "do as I say, not as I do".
LPC wrote:He has legal opinions that I would have to call eccentric at best, but he seems to do a fairly respectable just in the courtroom, taking into account that most of his clients are pretty hopeless to start with.
The linked sited all proclaim that their owners have overcome hundreds of years of bad science and have discovered ways to extract energy from nothing at no cost. They also claim that they are all victims of massive conspiracies by the <take your choice> oil companies, power utilities, various branches of the government, foreign agents, jealous rivals, etc </choice> to suppress their brilliant work.Greatly needed:
FREE ENERGY
This is the new site of a friend of mine, Tom Bearden, from here in Huntsville. Please read Tom's recent letter about the energy crisis sent to the National Science Foundation.
Genesis World Energy
Here is a site for "free energy" links.
Because he believed it with his.......soul?Pottapaug1938 wrote:I recall that, back when I was practicing law, my signature on a complaint or court pleading was my certification that, to the best of my knowledge, and allegation or statement in it was true. Why, I wonder, has Becraft not fallen afoul of a rule like this?
Mr. Becraft quotes from Robert Marlatt on how the Patriot movement failed through lack of legal competance:wserra wrote:Way back when, I read a good part of the Lloyd Long trial transcript. I was impressed despite myself. Becraft tried a good case, and earned the acquittal. Nothing I saw even bordered on the unethical.
I do think his shtick goes over better with a non-urban jury.
Becraft wrote: "How To Destroy Your Nation
How the Patriot Movement has been Self-Defeating
In order to find a means by which to correct the problems within our Nation, I had to spend many, many hours studying what had gone wrong for those who had already tried to accomplish the same goals. What I found was perhaps more disconcerting than what I expected to find. I expected to find that the political failures were due entirely to the media bias against us – what I found was that media coverage of poorly managed campaigns would probably have done more harm than good. I expected to find that corruption in the judicial system was the cause for all of the legal losses we've suffered – but what I found was piles of legal filings based upon erroneous theories, poorly framed arguments, and philosophy instead of law. I expected to find that the socialist agenda taught to our kids in public schools was responsible for the total lack of understanding they have about proper government, but what I found was that parents simply aren't teaching their children about it at home. So I ask you – who is responsible for the impotence of the Patriot Movement? We are.
He very correctly identifies the main tenants of the “Paytriot” movement failures, following it up with a very correct and succinct analysis of their hallmark legal filings, that they are in fact junk and nonsense, and properly identifies the cause, the filers.
How can we lay blame to the Court if we failed to raise the proper arguments, or follow the Court's procedures? How can we blame the Court if we raised no argument based solidly in law, but tried instead to get a Court of law to make a ruling based upon philosophy? How can we claim the Court is in error when we failed to properly research the law and frame an argument based upon it? Far more importantly, How dare we allow a legal precedent to be established which will help defeat all other Patriots who follow after us, simply because we failed to properly proceed with our case."
And then goes off deep into the weeds with the “we didn’t use the right magic words” excuse, when the simple fact is that if the information/facts/law/argument had been correct/valid in the first place then the words wouldn’t have mattered. The reason it failed, and continues to fail is not because it wasn’t dressed up properly or spoken properly, it is that it failed because it was based on nonsense, flawed theory, and just plain old fashioned wishful thinking. You can want to and really really believe a pig is a cow, but unless you can prove it, then it isn’t, and that is what Becraft and his ilk refuse to acknowledge, and why they continue to fail.
And he quotes from an earlier "Cracking the Code" author:
“Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary – having neither actuality nor substance – is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. therefor can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.”
Followed up with pure nonsense for justification.
While I can and do subscribe to the believing several impossible things before breakfast scenario, I do think he tends to take it to extremes.
Right you are if you think you are.
Exactly - only there can a defense attorney be accused of prosecuting his clients.. wrote:On planet Van Pelt up remains down.
Nikki, you mean that Becraft has successfully DEFENDED cases brought against his clients, who are/were alleged to be tax evaders. The cases were filed by the US government.Nikki wrote:David with little reading comprehension:
The case being discussed was already lost.
As to your allegations regarding Becraft; he still has a better court record than you do. He has actually won several criminal cases avainst tax evaders.
If we're comparing loss records, sure. Your losses are quite staggering - you should retire now while you're at the height of your powers and on top of your game.David Merrill wrote:Actually I have a far better record than BECRAFT.
Demosthenes wrote:Becraft kicks up just enough "tax honesty" dirt to ensure that those few tax deniers with money will hire him when the inevitable indictments hit.
For example, Becraft's research is the driving force behind Joe Haas' "the RSA will free Ed and Elaine" drivel.
He's also a proponent of "the 16th amendment was never ratified" garbage.