| Welcome to Our Site |
Our names are William and Karen Greene and the first
question we would ask you to consider is "Do You Have To
File A Federal Tax Return or Pay An Income Tax?" We dared
to ask this kind of question and the IRS responded by putting
us out of work back in January 2008. Moreover, on October
29, 2009 the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit
issued its MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS.
If you clicked the link above you would have seen one example
of the kinds of materials that we had become familiarized with
during the late 90s and early 2000s; Other good examples are
offered if you click here and click here, and, of course, we also
took part in the 2002 Drive Across America and have been
signed on to all of the Petitions put forth by WTP.
We (the Greene's) were also plaintiffs in WTP’s historic suit
based upon our First Amendment Right to Petition for a
Redress of Grievances where the right to withhold money as
the remedy involving silence in the face of the People who act
to peaceably procure relief was defined long ago in the Act
passed unanimously by the Continental Congress and
expounded upon by Thomas Jefferson as the People’s
Right of “…intercession for redress of grievances and
reestablishment of rights…”
Of course those of you who are familiar with the subject know
that the case was dismissed and the decision upon appeal was
to “not resolve this debate” We the People Found. v. United
States, 485 F.3d 140 (D.C. Cir. 2007), with rehearing en banc
denied (Aug. 3, 2007), certiorari denied (January 7, 2008),
and certiorari denied without comment on February 25, 2008
as well.
After SCOTUS ducked its responsibility, and in response to the
IRS having retaliated against us (the Greene's) by putting us
out of work, we had developed our own suit in the spirit and
intent that there is nothing so wrong with our government that
what is right with our government can’t correct and we filed our
suit as a "public interest suit" further submitting that the United
States of America was created as a "Christian nation".
On March 12, 2008 we submitted to the United States District
Court, Northern District of New York, our written instrument as
a "public interest suit" styled as a Qui Tam (i.e., Latin for "he
who sues in this matter for the king as for himself") Action.
This, of course, was accompanied by our Disclosure
Statement, which was submitted on April 16, 2008.
As a public interest lawsuit, it was filed under seal for 60 days
to allow the U.S. Attorney and the Justice Department to review
the case to investigate charges against the Government
Contractor (IRS) and decide whether or not to intervene in the
case because we (the Greenes) believed it to be an opportune
time for the U.S. Attorneys and Justice Department to
intervene on behalf of We, The People.
The "public interest suit" itself involved many Constitutional
Rights Violations including Peonage, Major Fraud, Mail and
Bank Fraud, and set forth thirty-eight pages of Causes of
Action, listing fifty-eight separate Causes of Action which had
been developed against the IRS as a Government Contractor
rather than the United States. Causes of Action included that
IRS Officials were involved in the suppression of evidence
submitted to the Senate Finance Committee (Exhibit 3),
following which IRS Officials publicly announced that WTP
Petitions were being responded to with enforcement actions
(Exhibit 4). All of this, of course, had been followed by many
other enforcement actions essentially meant to overthrow the
Constitution and had even been perpetrated upon the District
Court in which falsified damages/and IRS falsification of
damages (False Claims) included Fraud upon the Court in a §
6700 suit against our participating organization (United States
of America v. Robert L. Schulz, We the People Foundation for
Constitutional Education, Inc., and We the People Congress
(Case No. 1:07-cv-0352)), in violation of our Rights of Privacy
and Free Association.
That is, in violation of the spirit and intent of the First, Ninth
and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States of America wherein-by the Executive and Legislative
Branches of the Government failed to respond to the various
Petitions for Redress of Grievances involving Constitutional
torts pending litigation as to their responsibility in these
matters, and particularly with respect to the Petition for a
Redress of Grievances involving the tax clauses (by the direct
un-apportioned tax on labor), the Government Contractor (the
IRS), with knowledge and forethought, “actually not potentially”
committed acts of retaliation against the People, thereby
violating the federal constitutional rights of both of us (William
M. and Karen M. Greene) as Americans and Christians, and it
is in this spirit and intent that this Internet Site had been
developed to expound upon our efforts to move forwards as
Americans and Christians towards a restoration of our rights.
Of course, in retrospect, it should not really be surprising that
both the USDC and the USCA2 ultimately came out in support
of the actions of the IRS, and I suppose we have to admit that
we were fooling ourselves to think that We The People could
actually STOP the IRS from violating our rights under the US
Constitution. For example, on March 12, 2008 (Dkt. 3) and
May 16, 2008 (Dkt. 5) the United States District Court for the
Northern District of New York denied our motions for
preliminary injunctive relief. The preliminary injunctive relief
was so that we could return to work, to keep our jobs to make
our truck payments (to keep a roof over our heads so that we
would not be at risk of being homeless), begin to pay our bills
again, and be able to feed ourselves and our son as the case
proceeds. Moreover, in this same respect, on May 30, 2008
we filed our third Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief (Dkt.
10) which again was simply for injunctive relief so that we could
return to work; a right which was never restored by either the
District Court nor Court of Appeals (see the United States
Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit October 29, 2009
MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS).
Ultimately I guess we were fools to think we could make a
difference by filing our "Public Interest Lawsuit", where we (the
Greene's) had shown proof that the IRS admitted twice in
public form to a policy of having engaged in retaliatory
administrative actions taken against us under the Color of Law
without regard for our guaranteed First Amendment Right to
Petition for a Redress of Grievances to hold the Government
accountable to the Constitution, and as evidenced by the
falsification of damages, as required by Article III of the
Constitution, in the related § 6700 Suit (United States of
America v. Robert L. Schulz, We the People Foundation for
Constitutional Education, Inc., and We the People Congress,
(Case No. 1:07-cv-0352)) against the Greene's participating
organization, WTP Organization, where the statement of the
Government assigned Counsel reveled that "it's not clear to
me how either the Defendants or the Government could
know whether those individuals used the materials …
the IRS obviously can't investigate whether those
individuals have been failing to pay tax returns until it
has the list of individuals" a substantial part of the events
or omissions giving rise to the complaint filed by the Greene's
in the Federal District Court of Northern New York (1:08-cv-
0280) even occurred within the same District Court in the
attempt to create a false presumption involving fraud to
escape the Constitutional restriction against a direct un-
apportioned tax.
Throughout the Case battle we had been in a battle over the
fact that the United States can NOT be both Plaintiff and
Defendant at the same time, and on July 25th 2008 we filed
our Notice of Interlocutory Appeal in the District Court and on
August 4th the Notice of Appeal was also filed at the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to certify the
disputed question for the United States cannot be both plaintiff
and defendant at the same time. However, on September 29th
2008 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals Remanded the case
back to the District Court wherein the District Court was to
have construed our Application for an Interlocutory Appeal as
an objection to the magistrate judge's first order and address
such objection, but then the District Court failed to even
address the US Court of Appeals MANDATE and in
conjunction with its VIOLATION of even the Superior Court's
MANDATE the District Court sought to Dismiss our case on
December 23rd 2008, and again, we sought to move again
before the 2nd Circuit with Case No. 08-06284-cv, where we
had asked the USCA to Vacate the District Court’s most recent
Order And Remand Case Back to the District Court For
Northern New York, in Albany New York. However, that did not
happen, as shown by the October 29, 2009 MANDATE in
support of the actions of the IRS.,
All of this took place because we as Qui Tam Plaintiffs had
argued that the United States is not a proper party as a
Defendant where the IRS is being represented as an Agency
of our Government in which it is stated that “Jurisdiction is
conferred upon District courts by 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 1001,
1341, 1344(2), 1346, 1621, 1622, & 2113 in terms of the
major fraud upon the Plaintiffs as well as all other Americans
and by 18 U.S.C. § 1031 upon the United States …[more]” and
further (Dockets No 1 & 6 , par. 13) it is stated that “It would
also be preferable to Plaintiffs if the U.S. Attorney and the
Justice Department intervened in this Qui Tam Action, but in
the event they should not, Plaintiffs point to the fact that the
Supreme Court held that, “…This and other federal courts
have repeatedly held that individual litigants, acting as private
attorneys-general, may have standing as "representatives of
the public interest." Scripps-Howard Radio v. Comm'n, 316 U.
S. 4, 14. See also Commission v. Sanders Radio Station, 309
U.S. 470, 477; Associated Industries v. Ickes, 134 F.2d 694;
Reade v. Ewing, 205 F.2d 630; Scenic Hudson Preservation
Conf. v. FPC, 354 F.2d 608; Office of Communication of
United Church of Christ v. FCC, 123 U.S. App. D.C. 328, 359 F.
2d 994. Compare Oklahoma v. Civil Service Comm'n, 330 U.S.
127, 137 -139. And see, on actions qui tam, Marvin v. Trout,
199 U.S. 212, 225; United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.
S. 537, 546. The various lines of authority are by no means
free of difficulty, and certain of the cases may be explicable as
involving a personal, if remote, economic interest…” See Flast
v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 120 (1968).
As such, we attempted to argue that substantial grounds exist
for disagreeing with the District Court’s Orders on these
issues, but the long and the short of it, of course, is that the
battle over the fact that the United States can NOT be both
Plaintiff and Defendant at the same time ended with the United
States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit October 6, 2009
SUMMARY ORDER which was further solidified by its October
29, 2009 MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS.
But we go on. References for further study includes www.
greenes.us/index.html, as well as www.greenes.us/aboutus.
html, www.greenes.us/notanagency.html, www.greenes.
us/truckdrivers.html, www.greenes.us/karenspage.html, www.
greenes.us/karensmessage.html, www.greenes.us/Billspage.
html, www.greenes.us/services.html, www.greenes.
us/contactus.html, www.greenes.us/truth_attack.html, www.
greenes.us/civildocket.html, www.greenes.us/Donate.html.
question we would ask you to consider is "Do You Have To
File A Federal Tax Return or Pay An Income Tax?" We dared
to ask this kind of question and the IRS responded by putting
us out of work back in January 2008. Moreover, on October
29, 2009 the United States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit
issued its MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS.
If you clicked the link above you would have seen one example
of the kinds of materials that we had become familiarized with
during the late 90s and early 2000s; Other good examples are
offered if you click here and click here, and, of course, we also
took part in the 2002 Drive Across America and have been
signed on to all of the Petitions put forth by WTP.
We (the Greene's) were also plaintiffs in WTP’s historic suit
based upon our First Amendment Right to Petition for a
Redress of Grievances where the right to withhold money as
the remedy involving silence in the face of the People who act
to peaceably procure relief was defined long ago in the Act
passed unanimously by the Continental Congress and
expounded upon by Thomas Jefferson as the People’s
Right of “…intercession for redress of grievances and
reestablishment of rights…”
Of course those of you who are familiar with the subject know
that the case was dismissed and the decision upon appeal was
to “not resolve this debate” We the People Found. v. United
States, 485 F.3d 140 (D.C. Cir. 2007), with rehearing en banc
denied (Aug. 3, 2007), certiorari denied (January 7, 2008),
and certiorari denied without comment on February 25, 2008
as well.
After SCOTUS ducked its responsibility, and in response to the
IRS having retaliated against us (the Greene's) by putting us
out of work, we had developed our own suit in the spirit and
intent that there is nothing so wrong with our government that
what is right with our government can’t correct and we filed our
suit as a "public interest suit" further submitting that the United
States of America was created as a "Christian nation".
On March 12, 2008 we submitted to the United States District
Court, Northern District of New York, our written instrument as
a "public interest suit" styled as a Qui Tam (i.e., Latin for "he
who sues in this matter for the king as for himself") Action.
This, of course, was accompanied by our Disclosure
Statement, which was submitted on April 16, 2008.
As a public interest lawsuit, it was filed under seal for 60 days
to allow the U.S. Attorney and the Justice Department to review
the case to investigate charges against the Government
Contractor (IRS) and decide whether or not to intervene in the
case because we (the Greenes) believed it to be an opportune
time for the U.S. Attorneys and Justice Department to
intervene on behalf of We, The People.
The "public interest suit" itself involved many Constitutional
Rights Violations including Peonage, Major Fraud, Mail and
Bank Fraud, and set forth thirty-eight pages of Causes of
Action, listing fifty-eight separate Causes of Action which had
been developed against the IRS as a Government Contractor
rather than the United States. Causes of Action included that
IRS Officials were involved in the suppression of evidence
submitted to the Senate Finance Committee (Exhibit 3),
following which IRS Officials publicly announced that WTP
Petitions were being responded to with enforcement actions
(Exhibit 4). All of this, of course, had been followed by many
other enforcement actions essentially meant to overthrow the
Constitution and had even been perpetrated upon the District
Court in which falsified damages/and IRS falsification of
damages (False Claims) included Fraud upon the Court in a §
6700 suit against our participating organization (United States
of America v. Robert L. Schulz, We the People Foundation for
Constitutional Education, Inc., and We the People Congress
(Case No. 1:07-cv-0352)), in violation of our Rights of Privacy
and Free Association.
That is, in violation of the spirit and intent of the First, Ninth
and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States of America wherein-by the Executive and Legislative
Branches of the Government failed to respond to the various
Petitions for Redress of Grievances involving Constitutional
torts pending litigation as to their responsibility in these
matters, and particularly with respect to the Petition for a
Redress of Grievances involving the tax clauses (by the direct
un-apportioned tax on labor), the Government Contractor (the
IRS), with knowledge and forethought, “actually not potentially”
committed acts of retaliation against the People, thereby
violating the federal constitutional rights of both of us (William
M. and Karen M. Greene) as Americans and Christians, and it
is in this spirit and intent that this Internet Site had been
developed to expound upon our efforts to move forwards as
Americans and Christians towards a restoration of our rights.
Of course, in retrospect, it should not really be surprising that
both the USDC and the USCA2 ultimately came out in support
of the actions of the IRS, and I suppose we have to admit that
we were fooling ourselves to think that We The People could
actually STOP the IRS from violating our rights under the US
Constitution. For example, on March 12, 2008 (Dkt. 3) and
May 16, 2008 (Dkt. 5) the United States District Court for the
Northern District of New York denied our motions for
preliminary injunctive relief. The preliminary injunctive relief
was so that we could return to work, to keep our jobs to make
our truck payments (to keep a roof over our heads so that we
would not be at risk of being homeless), begin to pay our bills
again, and be able to feed ourselves and our son as the case
proceeds. Moreover, in this same respect, on May 30, 2008
we filed our third Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief (Dkt.
10) which again was simply for injunctive relief so that we could
return to work; a right which was never restored by either the
District Court nor Court of Appeals (see the United States
Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit October 29, 2009
MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS).
Ultimately I guess we were fools to think we could make a
difference by filing our "Public Interest Lawsuit", where we (the
Greene's) had shown proof that the IRS admitted twice in
public form to a policy of having engaged in retaliatory
administrative actions taken against us under the Color of Law
without regard for our guaranteed First Amendment Right to
Petition for a Redress of Grievances to hold the Government
accountable to the Constitution, and as evidenced by the
falsification of damages, as required by Article III of the
Constitution, in the related § 6700 Suit (United States of
America v. Robert L. Schulz, We the People Foundation for
Constitutional Education, Inc., and We the People Congress,
(Case No. 1:07-cv-0352)) against the Greene's participating
organization, WTP Organization, where the statement of the
Government assigned Counsel reveled that "it's not clear to
me how either the Defendants or the Government could
know whether those individuals used the materials …
the IRS obviously can't investigate whether those
individuals have been failing to pay tax returns until it
has the list of individuals" a substantial part of the events
or omissions giving rise to the complaint filed by the Greene's
in the Federal District Court of Northern New York (1:08-cv-
0280) even occurred within the same District Court in the
attempt to create a false presumption involving fraud to
escape the Constitutional restriction against a direct un-
apportioned tax.
Throughout the Case battle we had been in a battle over the
fact that the United States can NOT be both Plaintiff and
Defendant at the same time, and on July 25th 2008 we filed
our Notice of Interlocutory Appeal in the District Court and on
August 4th the Notice of Appeal was also filed at the United
States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to certify the
disputed question for the United States cannot be both plaintiff
and defendant at the same time. However, on September 29th
2008 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals Remanded the case
back to the District Court wherein the District Court was to
have construed our Application for an Interlocutory Appeal as
an objection to the magistrate judge's first order and address
such objection, but then the District Court failed to even
address the US Court of Appeals MANDATE and in
conjunction with its VIOLATION of even the Superior Court's
MANDATE the District Court sought to Dismiss our case on
December 23rd 2008, and again, we sought to move again
before the 2nd Circuit with Case No. 08-06284-cv, where we
had asked the USCA to Vacate the District Court’s most recent
Order And Remand Case Back to the District Court For
Northern New York, in Albany New York. However, that did not
happen, as shown by the October 29, 2009 MANDATE in
support of the actions of the IRS.,
All of this took place because we as Qui Tam Plaintiffs had
argued that the United States is not a proper party as a
Defendant where the IRS is being represented as an Agency
of our Government in which it is stated that “Jurisdiction is
conferred upon District courts by 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 1001,
1341, 1344(2), 1346, 1621, 1622, & 2113 in terms of the
major fraud upon the Plaintiffs as well as all other Americans
and by 18 U.S.C. § 1031 upon the United States …[more]” and
further (Dockets No 1 & 6 , par. 13) it is stated that “It would
also be preferable to Plaintiffs if the U.S. Attorney and the
Justice Department intervened in this Qui Tam Action, but in
the event they should not, Plaintiffs point to the fact that the
Supreme Court held that, “…This and other federal courts
have repeatedly held that individual litigants, acting as private
attorneys-general, may have standing as "representatives of
the public interest." Scripps-Howard Radio v. Comm'n, 316 U.
S. 4, 14. See also Commission v. Sanders Radio Station, 309
U.S. 470, 477; Associated Industries v. Ickes, 134 F.2d 694;
Reade v. Ewing, 205 F.2d 630; Scenic Hudson Preservation
Conf. v. FPC, 354 F.2d 608; Office of Communication of
United Church of Christ v. FCC, 123 U.S. App. D.C. 328, 359 F.
2d 994. Compare Oklahoma v. Civil Service Comm'n, 330 U.S.
127, 137 -139. And see, on actions qui tam, Marvin v. Trout,
199 U.S. 212, 225; United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.
S. 537, 546. The various lines of authority are by no means
free of difficulty, and certain of the cases may be explicable as
involving a personal, if remote, economic interest…” See Flast
v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 120 (1968).
As such, we attempted to argue that substantial grounds exist
for disagreeing with the District Court’s Orders on these
issues, but the long and the short of it, of course, is that the
battle over the fact that the United States can NOT be both
Plaintiff and Defendant at the same time ended with the United
States Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit October 6, 2009
SUMMARY ORDER which was further solidified by its October
29, 2009 MANDATE in support of the actions of the IRS.
But we go on. References for further study includes www.
greenes.us/index.html, as well as www.greenes.us/aboutus.
html, www.greenes.us/notanagency.html, www.greenes.
us/truckdrivers.html, www.greenes.us/karenspage.html, www.
greenes.us/karensmessage.html, www.greenes.us/Billspage.
html, www.greenes.us/services.html, www.greenes.
us/contactus.html, www.greenes.us/truth_attack.html, www.
greenes.us/civildocket.html, www.greenes.us/Donate.html.
| America: Freedom to Fascism Trailer (4 min) Entire movie (1:49) |
| “If money is wanted by Rulers who have in any manner oppressed the People, they may retain it until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility.” 1774, Journals of the Continental Congress, 1:105- 113 Read the Founder's Resolution to the Inhabitants of Quebec |
| “The right to sue and defend in the courts is the alternative of force. In an organized society it is the right conservative of all other rights, and lies at the foundation of orderly government.” Chambers v. Baltimore vs. Ohio Railroad, 207 U.S. 148 |
Study Jurisdictionary Free Lawman Downloads Join the Lawmen Group Contact Bob Hurt http://bobhurt.com 2460 Persian Drive #70 Clearwater, FL 33763 +1 (727) 669-5511, FAX +1 (206) 600-5958 |
| "Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." —John F. Kennedy— |
| While you are reviewing our site, perhaps you would also consider making a tax-deductible donation to the organization (WTP Foundation) which has continually offered it's services to all of us. Please review the document entitled the "STATEMENT OF FACTS AND BELIEFS REGARDING THE RIGHT TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES" and while your at it perhaps you too might consider the opportunity to become a part of the ongoing efforts of the WTP organization to hold Government accountable to the Constitution through judicial confrontation and constitutional activism by Joining the WTP Congress. |
| SEE THE EVIDENCE NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 1 NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 2 NO INCOME TAX LAW FORMER "IRS" AGENT JOE BANNISTER PART 3 |
| Proclaiming Liberty Throughout the Land! The Liberty Works Radio Network (LWRN) Fellowship, Post Office Box 91 Westminster, MD 21158, 410-857-5444, is a group of Liberty-loving and principled patriots from all over America, operating under the First Amendment Liberty Works Radio Network is a division of the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship (www.save-a-patriot.org), and is an unincorporated association designed to broadcast programming over the public airwaves to: (1) ALERT Americans to the dangers to their culture posed by the seditious acts (Constitutional violations) regularly committed by agents of both the Federal and State governments, whether knowingly or ignorantly, (2) CORRECT the damage inflicted through public schools by re-educating Americans on the nature of their Constitutional republic, lawful money, and limited government, and (3) INFORM Americans about the real solutions and alternatives they can implement to stop the corruption of our culture and heritage, and return America to Liberty and Prosperity. Show Hosts include: Attorney Larry Becraft, Constitutional Law Dave Buhlman, Former Representative, New Hampshire Legislature David Alan Carmichael, founder of Educational Christian MinistriesFreedom Ministries, and host of the Faith & Freedom talk radio show on WPMH 670 AM Attorney Tom Cryer, Co-founder of TruthAttack.org Sab Cupelli Pastor/Dr. Greg Dixon, Chairman, American Coalition of Unregistered Churches "The Patriot Pastor" Garrett Lear Bryan MalatestaChairman, Constitution Party of Texas |
Also Check Out LegalBear's Webpages: www.academy4nonattorneys. com www.cantheydothat.com www.irs-armory.com www.irslevythumper.com www.irslienrelease.com www.irslienthumper.com www.judgeonaleash.com www.freedivorceforms.net www.legalbears.com www.legal-research-video.com Visit Bear’s new blog at www.legalbearsblog.com And Don't Forget to Check Out LegalBear's Free Yahoo Group: Tips & Tricks for Court legalbear @ legalbears . com Phones: 970-692-2324 (1st) 720-203-5142 c. (2nd) |
Also Check Out Irwin Schiff News Subscribe Here: Irwin-Schiff- News-subscribe @ yahoogroups. com Chuck Conces National Lawman Group Subscribe Here: national_ lawman- subscribe@ yahoogroups. com Rick Stanley's The RevCo Subscribe Here: The Revolutionary Coalition-subscribe @yahoogroups. com POW List: http://irwinschiff.homestead. com/POWaddresses.html Their actions took great courage and commitment, and we salute them all. “God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.” -Daniel Webster NOTE: Each person should educate himself or herself about the particulars of the law, and make his or her own determination in this regard, but many have recommended Lost Horizons as a good way to get started. See what readers have to say about 'Cracking the Code- The Fascinating Truth About Taxation In America' The First Complete "Income" Tax-Related Refund (Social Security, Medicare And All) Ever Received An "Income" Tax Subject Site Map A Few Words About Tax "Reform" Click Here to Crack the Code |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |