LETTER OF LARRY BECRAFT TO ERIC JON PHELPS

His quote: "groundless allegations"
His quote: "I have no interest in getting into a shouting match with another guru".
His
quote: "I was castigated as a govt agent, which is utterly false. This
is the reason that I view many in the movement as nasty people".
His quote: "You owe Tom Cryer an apology".

He observed the same observations about Eric thanI personally did….

— On Mon, 4/20/09, Larry Becraft wrote:

From: Larry Becraft
Subject: Tom Cryer
To: eric@vaticanassassins.org
Cc: "Fred Allnutt" , mariemartine1966@yahoo.com, "Tommy Cryer"
Date: Monday, April 20, 2009, 4:43 PM

Eric,

Having
spent 30 years in the organized freedom movement and especially that
faction that abhors the fed income tax, I speak from experience. Often,
people get involved with the tax issue and reach all sorts of
conclusions, sometimes right, but many times wrong. I have also seen
many people like yourself who study this issue and reach conclusions
based on limited research. Thereafter, from this heady study
experience, they loudly proclaim their findings, and anybody else who
disagrees with them is wrong. Often, this degenerates into a “hate
match” and vile, hateful words start flying. This movement has plenty
of “know-it-all gurus” and too many are just plain nasty people. I have
gotten extremely tired of this and avoid contact as much as possible
with the nasty people.

I read your recent note where you take to
task a man you do not know: Tom Cryer. I, however, know him far better
than you and I am offended at your groundless allegations. I am more
than confident that Tom has read far more cases than you and is more
knowledgeable than you about both tax law specifically, and law,
generally. He was a scholar in law school and is a legal scholar now.

Let
me briefly address your tax argument. Basically, you contend that this
tax is, constitutionally, an excise. The problem with this assertion is
that the truth of the matter is that American courts are split over the
fundamental question of the nature of this tax: direct, or an excise. I
address this matter here with cites to lots more than 20 cases:

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/UNCERTAIN.html

I
also disagree with your contention that the “first [nexis] is the
government-granted privilege to do business as an artificial person
such as a statutory trust, corporation or partnership.” This is nothing
but groundless patriot mythology, as is your assertion that the feds
(IRS) get jurisdiction over people thru their use of IRS forms like
Form W4. However, I have no interest in getting into a shouting match
with another guru.

It is obvious to me that your knowledge of
the tax laws arises solely from reading cases, to the exclusion of
study of the actual tax laws and regs themselves. Not only has Mr.
Cryer read many more cases than you (as have I), we both have
extensively studied the relevant laws and regs. Years ago, I converted
all of the old tax acts to searchable text PDF images as well as doing
the same for the old tax regs. You may find my work posted here:

http://whatistaxed.servehttp.com/OldRegs/TaxRegsIndex.html

I
suggest that you download the materials posted here. Better yet, you
can obtain more information by getting from Mr. Cryer’s organization,
Truth Attack, a CD with this info and more on it.

I also suggest
that you engage in a study of the entire US Statutes at Large. Years
ago, I converted TIF images of the single pages of the Stats to PDF
images; I then strung them together and created PDF files of each
volume of the Stats. Then, I converted the final product to searchable
text. Now for the first time, anybody can do text searches of the
entire US Statutes at Large. A friend of mine, Jon Roland, has posted
this work here:

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/sal/sal.htm

I
have spent countless hours compiling lots of legal research based on
the Stats and believe you would benefit by doing the same.

Let
me end this note with an observation. I have noticed that many people
think that when they start studying the tax laws and discover something
they did not know, they think, erroneously, that they are the first to
discover what they just found. The truth of the matter is otherwise.
Lawyers and students have poured over cases and laws for years; every
case and law has been read by somebody else years ago, in fact many
people have done so. Just because you read a case for the first time
never means that nobody else has ever read it. Several years ago, tax
patriots started talking about the 1939 IR Code and reaching
conclusions. These people acted as if nobody had ever noted that there
was a 1939 Code, even tho it was in effect for 15 years and used by
millions of people. When I provided a PDF image of the entire 1939 Code
(searchable I might add), I was castigated as a govt agent, which is
utterly false. This is the reason that I view many in the movement as
nasty people.

You owe Tom Cryer an apology.

Larry Becraft

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s