Letter to Monica Langley, from Larken Rose
Concerning 12/10/04 Wall Street Journal Article
----------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Ms. Langley,

I read with interest your article which ran in yesterday's Wall Street
Journal concerning the IRS' private spy, J.J. MacNab. The article (at
First, I was described by Ms. MacNab as an "antitax guru," which is
inaccurate for several reasons (I'm no "guru," and my web site has
to do with objecting to any tax), but that's not what made my jaw drop.

First of all, my e-mail list is a one-way "notice" list, to which only
I can post. It's not a discussion list, and nothing could be posted
"Ms. MacNab alerted Ms. [Pam] Olson, then a Treasury assistant
secretary, who was being lambasted online for speaking out against tax

and scams. At a breakfast quickly arranged by Ms. Olson, Ms. MacNab showed
the Treasury official e-mails prodding the tax protesters to harass and
stalk her. Ms. Olson says she immediately arranged to receive Secret

So according to Ms. MacNab, on MY list the following occurred:
1) Veiled threats of violence were made against tax officials.
2) Ms. Olson was lambasted for speaking out against tax shelters and
scams. 3) I prodded "tax protestors" to harass and stalk Ms. Olson.

least questioned by the Secret Service? Because Ms. MacNab (and
possibly

crime, I sincerely hope you will take a few minutes to carefully review
income" for federal income tax purposes. Here is the actual letter
response at all from Ms. Olson, we sent ANOTHER few hundred letters,
asking the same questions again, a bit more vigorously. Here is the
second letter:
Not exactly a call to arms, or a threat of a violent overthrow, is it?
Then I suggested that people try using phone calls, to ask when we
might
get some ANSWERS to our perfectly reasonable questions. I will proudly
admit to advocating that us mere peasants pester our public servants
into
doing the right thing, when they won't do it on their own (and the
First
Amendment guarantees our right to do so). Does the following amount to
me
suggesting that people "harass" Ms. Olson? Better yet, do you see
anything in here about me telling people to "STALK" her??

http://www.3rdear.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000076
http://www.3rdear.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000077

Does that match Ms. MacNab's characterizing of me and my "followers"?
(Notice how when people disagree with the government, they're never a
bunch of independent thinkers; it's always a "guru" and his "followers"
or
"adherents"). And what part of that looks like we were "lambasting"
Ms.
Olson for "speaking out" against "tax shelters"? We wanted reasonable
questions answered, and she refused to do it.

Now, are you ready for the punchline? Want to see where I threaten to
smash Ms. Olson's kneecaps? As far as I can tell, the bizarre
accusation
of a "veiled threat of violence" must be based on my post to my list
dated
4/22/03, which can be seen here:

http://www.3rdear.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000086

I highly suggest reading the whole thing, so you see the context, but I
suspect that this is the "naughty" part:

"[The IRS and Ms. Olson] do not DESERVE our respect, or our obedience,
because they either CANNOT or WILL NOT explain why their OWN
REGULATIONS
directly contradict "conventional wisdom." They are not law
administrators; they are terrorists. When they cannot explain why the
LAW
doesn't support their claims about what is taxable, they resort to
threats
and intimidation tactics. Apparently Ms. Olson has never read about
what
happened to King George's rule over the colonies when he used such
tactics."

That was it. As far as I can tell, that was the "veiled threat of
violence" which Ms. MacNab, influenced by a large dose of delusion and
paranoia, found. Pointing out that King George (who of course was not
personally harmed at all in the revolution) lost control of the
colonies
because he responded to reasonable petitions with insults and violence
seems to be what Ms. MacNab thinks constitutes a "veiled threat of
VIOLENCE" against federal tax officials. (Can you say "Thought
Crime"?)

So my question is simple: do you believe that what was printed in your
article yesterday (quoting Ms. MacNab) was an accurate description of
what
I have done? If not, I hope you will print a retraction or
"clarification" at some point. Even more, I hope you will watch, and
then
publicly MENTION the presentation found on the http://www.861.info web
site. (It also mentions Pam Olson.) For those who have seen it
already,
the government's attempt to malign those interested in this issue as
radical, violent scofflaws is patently absurd.
copies of my "Theft By Deception" video (among other things), which
at the DOJ even ADMITTED that the Department of "Justice" (what a
video. They also raided the home of the person who financed the making
of > the video (Tom Clayton, M.D.), and stole another 100 copies of the
from him. Another DOJ official admitted that Dr. Clayton had his home
raided because he FUNDED the perfectly legal video. First Amendment?
What First Amendment? So who is the violent intimidator here? (If you
want a copy of that video, so you can see for yourself that there is
nothing even remotely illegal about it, just let me know where to send
government, on the other hand, believes in silencing dissent by any
means > necessary. Whatever you think about my conclusions regarding the

laws > (if you've even heard of them before), I hope you don't approve of
if you learn that someone has lied to YOU, and you have printed that lie
for all to see, I hope you are willing to publicly correct it.

Sincerely,
Larken Rose
larken@taxableincome.net.tax.scams
http://www.861.info.tax.scams
http://www.theft-by-deception.com.tax.scams