Ed and Elaine Brown takedown?

[Demosthenes]

The odds of John getting anywhere near the center of negotiations are exactly nil.

[webhick]

The odds of John getting anywhere near the center of negotiations are exactly nil.

Unless he makes such a nuisance of himself he "accidentally" gets shot.

[David Merrill]

It is helpful to understand Paul ... purchased an expensive Roman citizenship with alms intended for the widows of the missionaries Paul had sent into Asia Minor (Turkey) .... If one has adopted Paul's docrine of faith - and abandoned the Laws of Moses for the Seven Noachide Laws or natural law/religion, then one has no business upholding a court of competent jurisdiction .... Therefore his doctrine also agrees with the Babylonian Talmud - if a Jew comes into a city without courts of justice, he must either establish them or move on.

Help me out here, David. Didn't he testify in court that he was born a citizen rather than naturalized one? So his heresy was more against Rabbinic Judaism than anything else? (And I'm very clumsy about names, should I use Paul or "Sha'ul"?) Also, while I can certainly join you in upholding the Seven Noachide Laws, wasn't the last of those Laws "establish courts of justice"? Or do you mean to allude to a key difference between justice and competent jurisdiction? I appreciate your clarification of these important points, as understanding them might help me when I go to NH to facilitate resolution between these two camps.

Paul's return voyage to Israel would almost certainly have stopped in Cyprus. Yet Paul said otherwise. James the Just was interviewing with Paul for several reasons. Understanding Jewry one must also understand the natural law/religion incorporated into the Seven Noachide Laws - and understand that is the perspective Paul was coming from. Rather than to convert the pagans of Asia Minor to Jewry, Paul was building a weapon against Roman occupation of Israel based in passive resistance. That would have been one accusation the Jews had against Paul; that he was teaching the doctrine of Jesus - a Jew, that excluded the Laws of Moses and the Temple Rituals.

The encryptions of King James are subtle and one should really begin with the Epistle Dedicatory - where early Zionism is revealed.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvpref.htm

For whereas it was the expectation of many, who wished not well unto our Sion, that upon the setting of that bright Occidental Star...

For instance a good KJV will disclose that Paul went into Jerusalem out of a spirit of guilt about Stephen, whom Paul had probably stoned but toned down to helping hold coats for the occasion. It was the spirit (general noun) not the (Holy) Spirit that led Paul into Jerusalem.

Act 17:16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.

Act 19:21 After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome.

Act 20:22 And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

Act 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

Act 21:11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.

The key for cracking the code is in the thinly veiled variation on Masonry and inference to The Lodge:

Act 21:16 There went with us also certain of the disciples of Caesarea, and brought with them one Mnason of Cyprus, an old disciple, with whom we should lodge.

Mnason was from Cyprus, and it was only a matter of investigation, which may have taken the better part of a week or two back then, to find out that the ship had indeed stopped at Cyprus, where Paul spent most or all his purse on an expensive Roman citizenship document.

This required some research into the history of Paul's (Shaul's) homeland. Celicia was only recently a Roman province and had been hard-earned for the Roman legions. That region had rebelled and citizens in Celicia fought on Rome's side in the revolt. Caesar rewarded Celicia with an eligibility, not an entitlement. For an expensive fee, citizens of Celicia could get dual citizenship with Rome. Listening to a man from Celicia who made the purchase, even though he enrolled in the Roman army, still had to pay dearly for his Roman citizenship:

Act 22:26 When the centurion heard that, he went and told the chief captain, saying, Take heed what thou doest: for this man is a Roman.
Act 22:27 Then the chief captain came, and said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea.
Act 22:28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born.

Paul was supporting the lie he had told to James the Just, that he had passed by Cyprus. James bought the story but was severely disappointed after the news Paul was avoiding floggings with a citizenship/get out of floggings card. One must ask themselves why Paul teaching the Seven Noachide Laws and maybe even ministering a looser form of Jewry to the pagans in Asia Minor would upset 40 Jews to a death-fast by oath to kill him?

Paul had to run for cover with the Roman marshal Felix. And eventually ended up at his own remand in Rome where under house arrest most of the New Covenant was written, simply because Paul was no longer allowed to tour.

Some insight into the Pauline Heresy may be gleaned from an old article:

http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... ticles.zip

And The Nazarene Gospel Restored by Robert Graves and Joshua Podro.

The fact is that Jesus was Jewish and therefore the religion that developed, free of the Law through faith is referring to the Seven Noachide Laws. You are quite correct about establishing courts of justice being among them.

Paul was not abandoning Jewry.

Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

At least there is no good reason to assume he had ever abandoned Jewry, given his lies to James would justify the anger in Jerusalem. The doctrine of Romans 13 is prevalent in the courtrooms today; in the courtrooms of a Christian society. The custodian of the law is a trained attorney in the rules of evidence, governed by a strict separation between church and state. The jury is limited to deciding fact. Why?

Consider this question during voir dire:

How many of you are Christians?

[At least half raise their hands.]

Your honor, we must disqualify all these Christians. They have taken it on faith that this fellow Jesus Christ was stone cold dead for three days and then was supernaturally resurrected back to life by Almighty God...

This would be where the attorney in the black robe assures the defendant that he will be deciding what the jury sees as evidence, decided by doctrine of separation of church and state, and according to his training about Rules of Evidence in order to pass the Bar Exam and get his bench in that courtroom.


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S.

SUNDAY SCHOOL

Nine year old Joey, was asked by his mother what he had learned in Sunday school.

"Well, Mom, our teacher told us how God sent Moses behind enemy lines on a rescue mission to lead the Israelites out of Egypt. When he got to the Red Sea, he had his engineers build a pontoon bridge and all the people walked across safely. Then, he used his walkie-talkie to radio headquarters for reinforcements. They sent bombers to blow up the bridge and all the Israelites were saved."

"Now, Joey, is that really what your teacher taught you?" his mother asked. "Well, no, Mom. But, if I told it the way the teacher did, you'd never believe it!"

[Doktor Avalanche]

I appreciate your clarification of these important points, as understanding them might help me when I go to NH to facilitate resolution between these two camps.

When are you heading to NH, John?

John's going to NH to facilitate a dispute resolution?

Oh dear God...Ed's as good as dead!

[John J. Bulten]

Wonderful, David, that makes perfect sense! So you're saying Sha'ul was a perjurer and embezzler as well as a murderer, and that James (House of Stuart) was complicit in Sha'ul remolding the Jew's Jew, Yagaqov the Just, into his own image. But of course in the movie "Harvey", James Stuart was the one hearing voices, so that suggests the Nazarene Gospel would be an interesting research project.

Folks, let me translate David's subtle code and provide the true Key to the Tale of a Tub. The evils he ascribes to Paul and the House of James (the Greek, i.e., Iacobus or Giacomo) are a depiction of the tactics of the House of James Alexander, Lebanon Police Chief, viz., the arm of government. He is warning that the House of Edward Two-Door must beware the ascendant House of James, and is broadcasting the former's needs and the latter's strategies in great detail, including the drive to Unite the Kingdoms (e.g., NAFTA, Canadian content, hmm, that might be worth a land patent search). Edward 6 was well-schooled and just, but was managed by others and came to his crisis too early in life; similarly Jane Grey, Elaine Brown, Lebanon (White, alabaster): so David is fully supporting Edward's need to extricate from governance and the Lady's need for her sworn sovereignty not to be overturned by whim. This well prepares me for my arrival in New Hampshire: I think the proper Parliamentary Oath might be the whole Crux.

Yah, thank you again, David.

[David Merrill]

Wonderful, David, that makes perfect sense! So you're saying Sha'ul was a perjurer and embezzler as well as a murderer, and that James (House of Stuart) was complicit in Sha'ul remolding the Jew's Jew, Yagaqov the Just, into his own image. But of course in the movie "Harvey", James Stuart was the one hearing voices, so that suggests the Nazarene Gospel would be an interesting research project.

Folks, let me translate David's subtle code and provide the true Key to the Tale of a Tub. The evils he ascribes to Paul and the House of James (the Greek, i.e., Iacobus or Giacomo) are a depiction of the tactics of the House of James Alexander, Lebanon Police Chief, viz., the arm of government. He is warning that the House of Edward Two-Door must beware the ascendant House of James, and is broadcasting the former's needs and the latter's strategies in great detail, including the drive to Unite the Kingdoms (e.g., NAFTA, Canadian content, hmm, that might be worth a land patent search). Edward 6 was well-schooled and just, but was managed by others and came to his crisis too early in life; similarly Jane Grey, Elaine Brown, Lebanon (White, alabaster): so David is fully supporting Edward's need to extricate from governance and the Lady's need for her sworn sovereignty not to be overturned by whim. This well prepares me for my arrival in New Hampshire: I think the proper Parliamentary Oath might be the whole Crux.

Yah, thank you again, David.

You are welcome.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[David Merrill]

I am not certain in what capacity you intend to sit at any negotiating table John J-----. [What is it? John Joseph?] Jo Hindeman is mentioned heavily in this treatise about the Protocols and Zionism;

http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... apter1.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... apter2.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/F ... apter3.pdf
American’s Bulletin 1995 METRO 1313 article

So pay attention John;

Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

And the Sanhedrin said in 1997:

This Court, therefore, urges the Attorney General of the United States of America, Janet Reno, currently under the Political Leadership of President Bill Clinton to answer to the charge of failure to hear a grievance that is brought before its duly appointed Courts, and it has 90 working days in which to show cause as to why this case should not be heard before this Court and to submit documents showing that it has conformed with all treaties, conventions and wishes of the native peoples and with states accepted or annexed under the Constitutional principles and Noahide law, which was adopted as Law in the United States by Congress.

I have a feeling your sarcasm will fly real well with the Browns as well as the Feds John J-----. So when you go through the trouble to form a string of nonsense to put anybody down John, just remember it was David Merrill who came back with additional useful information.

I bet you will get it on your plane ride back; if you ever get to the airport in one piece.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Doktor Avalanche]

This is interesting - we have John J. Bulten and David Merrill giving each other tips.

Talk about the blind leading the blind!

[David Merrill]

This is interesting - we have John J. Bulten and David Merrill giving each other tips.

Talk about the blind leading the blind!

Glad you find it interesting Doktor;


Next you just got to wonder why we would be doing it here?

[.]

why we would be doing it here?

Because it's one of the few places which don't banish people who are obviously utterly irrational and/or insane?

[wserra]

Next you just got to wonder why we would be doing it here?

The reason dogs piss on fireplugs.

Or the Everest reason: "Because it is there."

Or the attention-whore motto: "There's no such thing as bad publicity."

[gezco]

Just for the entertainment value of it, I looked up the appraised value of 27 Glen Road and found it was $833,500. The owner of record is:

A T T TRUST
401 CENTER OF TOWN ROAD
PLAINFIELD, NH 03781

Assuming it sells for $800,000, is that going to be enough to cover the tax liability?

The ownership history is kind of interesting too. When they bought it in 95, they put it in a living trust and then a couple of years later transferred it to different tursts.

Owner Name Book/Page Sale Date Sale Price
A T T TRUST 02285/0677 12/1/1997 0
APPLETREE TRUST 02263/0010 7/29/1997 0
BROWN LIVING TRUST, EDWARD & E 02167/0244 11/3/1995 250,000
SIMONDS PROPERTIES, INC 01952/0966 2/20/1992 200,000

[Demosthenes]

The later trusts were pure trusts.

http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/contrusts.htm

[ASITStands]

Listening to yesterday's radio show, Ed wants two things: a ham radio transceiver and a thermal-imaging scope for his weapon.

Several days ago, I heard someone offer a ham radio, and my first thought was whether Ed or anyone at the house were amateur radio operators. You cannot operate a ham station without licensing.

Of course, to those who flaunt the law, what's a little licensing between friends? However, the person who loans a ham station could also be charged variously, as far as I can see.

Ed and Elaine do not want people joining them at the house, and I heard Ed explain they had already made arrangements if the government should take them by force. And, in that explanation, it seems clear they have made provision for people like the judge, attorney and marshal to be killed if something happens to Ed and Elaine.

I know that's old news, but it represents the continuing threat.

Elaine wants people to read and understand the truth. She also states, "One of the marshals said to me, 'He knew there was no law making him pay his taxes, but he's gonna do it anyway, because he's just doing his job.'"

That's a whole other thread, but I'd really like to see that question put to rest.

[webhick]

Did anyone else find it funny that with 110-acres, Ed has to have his dog taken off his property to "do his business"? His neighbors must love him.

[ASITStands]

By the way, I was reading Dan's FAQ:

An attorney named Thomas J. Carley argued before the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit that “[n]owhere in any of the Statutes of the United States is there any section of law making any individual liable to pay a tax or excise on ‘taxable income.’” The Second Circuit responded that “Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (26 U.S.C.) (hereinafter the Code) provides in plain, clear and precise language that ‘[t]here is hereby imposed the taxable income of every individual ... a tax determined in accordance with’ tables set-out later in the statute. ... Despite the appellant’s attempted contorted construction of the statutory scheme, we find that it coherently and forthrightly imposed upon the appellant tax upon his income for the year 1980.” Ficalora v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 751 F.2d 85, 88 (2d Cir. 1984), cert. den. 105 S.Ct. 1869 (1985).

And, I am aware of a tax being "imposed" at IRC 1 and the person made "liable" at 26 CFR 1.1-1.

The person representing the Erwin Rommel School of Law [John Simpson] just told the listeners, "There is a law, but if they show Ed the law, the Federal Reserve will be destroyed before the IRS."

TPs don't want to hear, "There is a law!" and they certainly don't want to acknowledge anything the courts have said. It's so irrational, and I find it difficult to understand how people can be so obstinate as to ignore the plain reading of law.

[The Observer]

So when you go through the trouble to form a string of nonsense...

Kettle, meet Pot. Pot, meet Kettle.

[webhick]

TPs don't want to hear, "There is a law!" and they certainly don't want to acknowledge anything the courts have said. It's so irrational, and I find it difficult to understand how people can be so obstinate as to ignore the plain reading of law.

Funny. If you recall back when our own sooltauq tried to take up Ed's "Show Me the Law" challenge (which didn't happen since Ed never faxed him the terms and conditions, despite numerous request), Ed stated in a radio show: "Show me the law but you can’t use the 16th Amendment or Title 26."

So, the TPs don't mind hearing "There is a law!" so long as you don't use the applicable laws.

[ASITStands]

Ed stated in a radio show: "Show me the law but you can’t use the 16th Amendment or Title 26."

Title 26 can certainly be traced to Statutes at Large [including the 1939 version which was Stat. at Large and positive law].

More irrationality.

[ElfNinosMom]

Some idiot over on the NHFree.com forum has even pledged to kill himself if anything happens to Ed.

Cleaning up the gene pool: two for the price of one.

Only if it's Gene Chapman........

Lord I apologize for the cheap Gene/gene pun, please forgive me and please help out the starvin' pygmies in Africa. Thank you Lord.

Too late, CK. You are now going to a special place in hell reserved for people who make fun of "Minister Of Christ" Gene Chapman. On the bright side, there are so many people in front of you that it may take millenia before you get in.

Speaking of Gene (and not intending to change the subject at all, but I didn't think this deserved its own thread) I got a chance to make a few cheap shots about him over at Last Free Voice, in a piece I called "Imperato and Chapman: Wacky LP Candidates Separated At Birth?"

Yeah, I know, that's not very nice. http://www.lastfreevoice.com/2007/06/08 ... -at-birth/