Time: Sat Nov 09 05:15:17 1996
To: mleeiv@u.washington.edu
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: Esquires
Cc: 
Bcc: 

>Date: Fri, 08 Nov 1996 13:03:04
>From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>Subject: Esquires
>
>[This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
>
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                             August 28, 1996
>
>
>          Congresswoman Suspected of Income Tax Evasion
>
>
>Payson, Arizona.   Paul  Mitchell, a Counselor at Law and Citizen
>of Arizona  state, today  challenged U.S.  Representative Barbara
>Kennelly to  stop evading  the big  question about federal income
>taxes:   Does the  term "State"  at Internal Revenue Code 3121(e)
>include only the named federal territories and possessions of the
>District of  Columbia, Puerto  Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and
>American Samoa?  Can this be income tax evasion?  Read on.
>
>     In a  letter to  Mr. John  Randall of San Diego last January
>24, Kennelly  responded to  a written request from Randall asking
>her if  the word  "State" in  26 U.S.  Code 3121(e)  and in other
>pending legislation  were the  same.   Rep. Kennelly,  a Democrat
>from Connecticut,  first checked with the Legislative Counsel and
>with the  Congressional Research  Service about  the  definition.
>"According to  these  legal  experts,"  answered  Kennelly,  "the
>definitions are  not the  same.   The term  state in 26 U.S. Code
>3121 (e)  specifically includes  only the  named U.S. territories
>and possessions."   Her  letter to  Randall, on official House of
>Representatives stationery, was dated January 24, 1996.
>
>     This admission is earth-shaking, according to Paul Mitchell,
>who has  conducted an  in-depth investigation of federal laws and
>the U.S.  Constitution for  seven years  now.   If  the  Internal
>Revenue Code  was deliberately  written to  confuse the  American
>people  into   believing  that   "State"   means   "Arizona"   or
>"California," when  it does  not, then  the Congress has a lot of
>explaining to  do.   Mitchell has  since challenged  Kennelly  to
>produce copies  of  the  correspondence  she  received  from  the
>Legislative Counsel  and Congressional  Research Service, but she
>has now  fallen  silent  and  refuses  to  answer  any  follow-up
>letters.   Congress, incidentally,  exempted themselves  from the
>disclosure requirements of the Freedom of Information Act.
>
>     Writing under  several pen  names, Paul  Mitchell's work has
>reached all  the way  into the  U.S. Supreme Court, which adopted
>"the federal  zone" as  a household  word in  their sweeping 1995
>decision in  U.S. v.  Lopez.  His book entitled The Federal Zone:
>Cracking the  Code of  Internal Revenue,  was first  published in
>1992, and  became an  instant underground  success for  its lucid
>language  and   indisputable  legal  authority.    The  book  was
>originally written  in electronic  form, which  made it  easy  to
>disseminate through  the Internet.   The  fourth edition  can  be
>viewed with  the Alta  Vista search  engine, developed by Digital
>Equipment Corporation.   The  Internet version  does not preserve
>any bold,  underline, or  italics, however.   Mitchell  has  used
>special  character  formats  to  highlight  important  words  and
>phrases in  federal statutes  and case  laws, easing the reader's
>burden of deciphering an otherwise unintelligible code.
>
>
>  Mitchell Challenges U.S. Rep. Barbara Kennelly:  Page 1 of 2
>
>     It is  clear, there  is a  huge difference  between the area
>covered by  the federal  zone, and  the area  covered by  the  50
>States.   "Money is  a powerful motivation for all of us," writes
>Mitchell in  a chapter  from the  book.   "Congress had literally
>trillions of  dollars to  gain by  convincing most Americans they
>were inside  its revenue  base when, in fact, most Americans were
>outside its revenue base, and remain outside even today.  This is
>deception on  a grand  scale, and  the proof of this deception is
>found in  the statute  itself."  Indeed, the proof is now leaking
>out on official Congressional stationery.
>
>     Mitchell goes  on to  argue, it  is  no  wonder  why  public
>relations "officials"  of the  IRS cringe  in fear when dedicated
>Patriots admit,  out loud  and in person, that they have read the
>law.   It is quite stunning how the carefully crafted definitions
>of "United States" do appear to unlock a statute that is horribly
>complex and  deliberately so.   As  fate  would  have  it,  these
>carefully crafted  definitions also  expose perhaps  the greatest
>fiscal fraud  that has  ever been  perpetrated upon any people at
>any time in the history of the world.  It is now time for a shift
>in  the   wind.    That  shift  is  being  driven  by  a  growing
>understanding of  personal status  and its relation to government
>territorial jurisdiction.
>
>     The vivid  pattern that  has now  painfully emerged  is that
>"citizens of  the United  States", as defined in federal tax law,
>are the  intended victims  of a modern statutory slavery that was
>predicted by  the infamous  Hazard Circular  soon after the Civil
>War began.   This  circular admitted  that  chattel  slavery  was
>doomed, so  the bankers  needed to  invent a  new kind of slaves.
>These "statutory"  slaves are  now burdened  with a bogus federal
>debt which  is spiralling out of control.  The White House budget
>office recently  invented a new kind of "generational accounting"
>so as  to project  a tax  load of  seventy-one percent  on future
>generations of  these "citizens of the United States".  The final
>version of  that report  upped the  projection to eighty percent.
>"It is  our duty  to ensure  that this  statutory slavery is soon
>gone  with   the  wind,   just  like  its  grisly  and  ill-fated
>predecessor," concludes Paul Mitchell.
>
>     The fifth  anniversary edition  of The  Federal Zone will be
>available before  the end  of the  year.   Copies  of  Mitchell's
>correspondence with  U.S. Representative Kennelly can be obtained
>by sending email to pmitch@primenet.com, Mitchell's email address
>on the Internet.
>
>
>                             #  #  #
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  Mitchell Challenges U.S. Rep. Barbara Kennelly:  Page 2 of 2
>
      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail