Author #2
Forum Replies Created
See the link below to read about Chad Prater:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Case…Who/WhosWho.htm
😀
Hacel,
I am mentioned on their web page, but only peripherally. See:
http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/cam-detax/hatemai4.htm
The only reason he printed that email I sent him is because it contains flattery. I've tried to reason with the man and emailed him several times trying to get him to debate, but he refuses. The Great IRS Hoax book and everything else on the Family Guardian my website obviously must be too close to the truth for comfort!
😀
Timcos,
I believe you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. First of all, there is absolutely no way that anyone can “have” a number:
Quote:“have😕 1 a: to hold or maintain as a possession, privilege, or entitlement; b: to hold in one's use, service, regard, or at one's disposal; “? [Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1983]A number is knowledge. It is not a physical thing. You can “know” knowledge but you can't “have” it. If someone asks you whether you “have” a Slave Surveillance Number, the answer depends on whether you are claiming a “privilege” or “entitlement “in the context in which it is used. If the Social Security system is going bankrupt as the vast majority of people believe, then it's highly unlikely that you will ever be able to claim any real “benefit”, “privilege” or “entitlement” by “having” a number. Consequently, it's impossible to “have” a number since accepting one from the government will not produce a real, tangible “entitlement” based simply on pure logic. In that case, the government “has” the number and you don't, and you can truthfully say that you don't “have” a number whenever anyone asks you for one.
Likewise, there is absolutely no “benefit” derived by using an SSN in the context of anything BUT the collection of Socialist Security Benefits. If you use it in the context of opening a financial account or if you give it to your private employer (who is technically not an “employer” under 26 USC 3401(c )), for instance, it becomes nothing but a liability, in which case you don't “have” a number because there is absolutely no “benefit” to using it. Federal law also makes it a crime under 42 USC 408(a)(8) to deny a person a right based on their failure to disclose a Slave Surveillance Number, so receipt of a financial account cannot be treated as a “privilege” upon which to base the use of an SSN. It is not a “privilege” to open a bank account or to work to support yourself: it is a right, and the government cannot turn the exercise of rights into taxable “privileges”, because this is an abuse of their authority to make law delegated to them by the Constitution.
Quote:?It would be a palpable incongruity to strike down an act of state legislation which, by words of express divestment, seeks to strip the citizen of rights guaranteed by the federal Constitution, but to uphold an act by which the same result is accomplished under the guise of a surrender of a right in exchange for a valuable privilege which the state threatens otherwise to withhold. It is not necessary to challenge the proposition that, as a general rule, the state, having power to deny a privilege altogether, may grant it upon such conditions as it sees fit to impose. But the power of the state in that respect is not unlimited, and one of the limitations is that it may not impose conditions which require the relinquishment of Constitutional rights. If the state may compel the surrender of one constitutional right as a condition of its favor, it may, in like manner, compel a surrender of all. It is inconceivable that guaranties embedded in the Constitution of the United States may thus be manipulated out or existence.? [Frost v. Railroad Commission, 271 U.S. 583; 46 S.Ct. 605 (1926)]The SSN that you “think” is yours actually isn't anyway, because after you die the government will reuse it and reassign it to someone else. It is only “yours” if you and only you control its use, so technically it belongs to the Beast and not you, but it is used as a means of political and economic control over you.
Let's not forget Otto Skinner of northern California:
Otto Skinner: “Everyone else in the tax honesty movement is deluded. I'm the only one who knows the REAL scoop. Irwin Shiff and Larken Rose are psychos! Buy my three books and I'll prove it to you, but don't ask me why one book isn't enough and why I have to keep writing another book to correct myself.”
And finally…the drum roll please. Let's cover the biggest scam artist bar none of the tax dishonesty movement: Jay Adkisson of the Quatlooser website at:
Jay Adkisson: “Absolutely everyone who wants an accountable, law-abiding, limited government that is under the control of the people instead of special interests is crazy. It's also insane to think that anyone can read or understand the Internal Revenue Code, because only the priesthood of judges and us lawyers can do that. 'includes' means whatever the judge wants it to mean, and I worship the judge, not God. I know Thurston Bell is a crackpot and was shut down but I believe every negative thing he ever said about everyone else in the tax honesty movement.”
Why do we say this? Click here to find out.
😆
1. Ed hasn't committed any kind of crime, but the IRS was able to convince a corrupt judge and without a jury trial that he violated 26 USC 6700, abusive tax shelters. That section then relies on the definition of “person” found in 26 USC 6671(b ), which defines “person” as an officer of a corporation or partnership, which Ed is not. All the criminal provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, including 6700, are only effective inside the federal United States, which includes Puerto Rico, Guan, the Virgin Islands, the District of Columbia, and other remote and obscure places. Ed doesn't live there so the laws don't apply to him. Also, there are no implementing regulations authorizing enforcement of the criminal provisions of the internal revenue code outside of the federal United States. See our Great IRS Hoax book, sections 5.4.7 and 5.4.10 at:
http://famguardian.org/Publications/GreatI…reatIRSHoax.htm
You could say that the prosecution of Ed Rivera was “vexatious litigation” for which the government should have convicted itself in violation of several statutes, including 18 USC 1593, 18 USC 1589, 18 USC 241, etc.
2. An injunction means he can't do what they don't want him doing.
3. An abusive tax shelter under 26 USC 6700 is defined as an investment that is registered with the state and federal governments and which is intended to REDUCE the tax liability of a “taxpayer”. Ed didn't cater to “taxpayers”, nor did he offer any investments. See:
http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/CitesByT…/TaxShelter.htm
Consequently, Ed was wrongfuly prosecuted and the person who prosecuted him should have had HIS license to practice law pulled, which is exactly what Ed Rivera is trying to do at the moment. Ed's license was not involuntarily pulled, but he is getting rid of it anyway, because he thinks licenses to practice law are unethical and create a conflict of interest for those in the law profession that biases them against the citizen and in favor of the government. See:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt…tAnAttorney.htm
The only lawful way the IRS can stop a legal “person” from selling “tax shelters” is if:
1. That “person” is an officer of a corporation or partnership under 26 USC 6671(b )
2. They are selling to “taxpayers” and not “nontaxpayers”. The internal revenue code only covers “taxpayers” and not “nontaxpayers”. Long v. Rasmussen, 281 F. 236, 238 (1922); Rothensis v. Ullman, 110 F.2d. 590(1940); Raffaele v. Granger, 196 F.2d. 620 (1952); Bullock v. Latham, 306 F.2d. 45 (1962); Economy Plumbing & Heating v. United States, 470 F.2d. 585 (1972); and South Carolina v. Regan, 465 U.S. 367 (1984). etc.
3. The sale “hurts, misleads, or injurs” the buyer because it did not deliver the promised tax shelter or deducation to the “taxpayer” and was therefore fraudulent.
4. The sale involves a security registered with both the state and federal government. See 26 USC 6111(c )(1).
5. AND the crime occurred within the federal United States by an “employee” of the federal government, and therefore does not need implementing regulations to enforce under 44 U.S.C. 1505 and 26 CFR 601.702(a)(2)(ii). We call the “federal United States” the “federal zone” in our Great IRS Hoax book. See Great IRS Hoax sections 4.8 and 4.9.
You need to read at least chapters 3 through 6 of the Great IRS Hoax and then you will completely understand what I have just said. Please avoid further questions of a legal nature on this subject until you have done so.
If you want to see what Ed Rivera had on his website before it was shut down, I have downloaded most of it at:
According to the pleadings submitted by the Department of INjustice and posted on the DO INjustice website at:
http://www.ustreas.gov/irs/ci/tax_fraud/20…oj_releases.htm
Eddie was accused by the Department of INjustice of doing three unwise things that we warn people not to do. Whether he actually did these things we do not know, but their slanderous pleadings suggest that he did:
1. Using UCC “Bills of Exchange” to cancel tax debts. This approach is flawed because it doesn't challenge the underlying assessment or liability, but tries to cancel the debt out AFTER the liability has been illegally assessed by the IRS. Avoid this approach like the plague.
2. Using 2848 Power of Attorney forms to represent clients. The IRS used over 2000 of these 2848 forms submitted by Eddie to track down a few of his disgruntled clients and then gathered testimony from them to prosecute him. Chances are, they used their leverage on taxes as a bargaining tool to coerce people into becoming witnesses against Eddie.
3. Making promises he couldn't keep about the effectiveness of his methods. We warn people that we don't promise ANYTHING with any of our materials.
4. Offering services to “taxpayers” or not at least getting his clients to sign a membership agreement stating under penalty of perjury that they are “nontaxpayers”.
All of the above things we DO NOT do, and all of them are undertaken mainly because of covetousness of money. In fact, the Disclaimer statement for the Family Guardian website below addresses most of the above issues and is what has kept us out of trouble so far:
http://famguardian.org/disclaimer.htm
In addition, the SEDM Articles of Mission, section 3.6 specifically states that the ministry WILL NOT involve itself in any of the above activities:
Peter,
I'm sorry, but I don't have an immediate answer for your
question. Let me know if you find a more complete
answer to your question.
God bless,
Author #2 🙂
Thanks for your comments. Interesting perspective on the atheist position.
I'm not familiar with Neo Tech. Who is that again?
There is an aspect of selfishness that even Christian principles appear to be consistent with. That concept is that we must selfishly take personal responsibility for our self and NOT become a burden on others. Personal responsibility is the foundation of a healthy family and a healthy society as well.
As far as pride, there is good pride and bad pride. Good pride is the equivalent of enthusiasm for a righteous and just cause and it focuses on protecting others from harm. It is the fulfillment fo the second great commandment to love our neighbor, even when this requires a bold confrontation to discourage injustice. Bad pride, on the other hand, is that which centers on gaining a personal advantage at the expense and to the injury of others. It focuses on elevating self over and above the equal rights of others.
Bing,
Do you have a cite on that so I can look it up and verify it
myself?
Thanks.
Verasequor,
There is no place to enter your SSN on the form. That is done on the Users screen.
It sounds like you are not reading the manual. You can't enter data directly into the user fields of the IMF Decoding screen, such as SSN and Lastname and Firstname, because these should be read only. Earlier versions of the program allowed users to enter into these fields and now the program doesn't allow this.
You first must create a user record for yourself on the Users screen and then go back to the IMF decoding screen and locate the record you created and then enter your IMF data under your name. Enter everything EXCEPT the transaction data and then save the record by moving to the next IMF record and then back. After you enter the main IMF data, you can then enter transactions under the IMF. If you don't save the IMF record on the form FIRST by moving to the next record and back, the transaction entry process may possibly give you errors. Read the latest manual. It explains this. I'd also recommend upgrading so you don't have these problems anymore. The current version is 1.58.
Verasequor,
I need more specific information to reproduce the problem:
1. Exactly what data did you type in each field and in what sequence?
2. What button did you push that caused the error?
3. What version of the program were you running?
The Complete CFRs for Title 26 ONLY are available from:
http://www.taxtools.com/tr.php
All the CFR titles are offered online at:
You can order printed or CD-ROM or 3.5 inch CFRs at:
The International Court of Justice is at:
Jose,
FLA does NOT do IMF decoding. It is a case management database that is used to manage litigation against the government. Totally different. It has the same interface and menuing system, but totally different purpose and data.
Bill,
I found the problem. One of the IMF transaction fields was too short. The fix is in version 1.58. I'll give you a free upgrade for finding this problem. Just send me a private email so you can claim your reward using the Private Message feature of this website.
The SEDM folks posted the upgrade as version 1.58 of the program. You can also order the upgrade at:
http://www.sedm.org/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?&rn…r=HOME:Programs
I have also upgraded the manual based on your suggestions so that now it shows how to use the Record Navigation Pane. Thanks for the pointers!
