Bing
Forum Replies Created
-
P.S.
One of the most foolish things I have ever seen in my life, was Larken's exceedingly arrogant, very public taunting of senior US Government officials, and his pleading with them to please prosecute me!!
And Larken got his wish soon enough, and they did prosecute him.
There is something to be said for someone who conducts his business with quiet self-confidence, and forsakes the press and publicity that Larken appeared to crave so much.
But Larken was not alone. Alot of smart, honest people fell for Larken's cult of personality, such as Sherry Peel Jackson.
may God protect and watch over all 861 adherents
-
Great post, Franklin. Bravo, sir!! 🙂
Thanks for sharing your insights and I hope to read more posts from you in the coming months, as your busy schedule and time permits.
Larken Rose, bless his heart, which was always in the right place, for some odd reason, never seemed to understand and grasp the critical fact that in 861, the term “United States” did not mean the USA, but only meant the federal United States, as defined at 26 USC 7701 ( a ) ( 9 ) and ( a ) ( 10 ).
About 7 years ago, when I knew far, far less than I know now, I thought there was merit to 861. And I studied and studied and realized it was a trap.
Here is the deal.
A nontaxpayer who is not subject to the Internal Revenue Code, should not need to cite anything in the code itself, except those provisions that prove that the non-taxpayers activities are excluded from taxation.
Now, advocates such as Dave Champion, who I have great deal of respect for, would go further and argue do not cite the code for anything, but I don't agree.
The reason I don't agree is because even though non taxpayers are not subject to the tax code and do not have to abide by it, ALL IRS employees are supposed to obey the Code at all times.
Ergo, since the IRS folks must obey the Code, I think it is beneficial to use the Code against them, to prove one's non liability.
But getting back to ole' Larkin Rose, although his heart was in the right place, in retrospect, time has proven that his head was in the wrong place. That is to say he had his head up his a_ss, while serious tax researchers advanced the ball down the field and discovered new insights into the fraud that is the IRS and the IRC. :ph34r:
Bing
-
It has been said that when the U.S.Government's public intentions appear most beneficent, it is precisely then, that one must be on their guard to protect their personal liberty.
I have been examining the U.S. Government activities, and the illegal activities of the corrupted IRS, for many years now, and one thing that I have learned is that the U.S. Government never does anything, or takes any action, unless said action expands their power and influence.
The fraud surrounding these so called special tax refunds, is really a trick and a snare of sorts, to try and identify and pull some of the 50+million nontaxpayers and nonfilers, back into the IRS' fold.
If someone files and obtains a refund, they are going to have an exceedingly difficult time 1, 2 and 3 years from now, trying to convince some corrupt federal pseudo-judge, f they are non-taxpayers and therefore, lawfully are also nonfilers.
You see, when you take benefits from the US Government, it always comes with a thick rope (not strings), but really thick rope, attached.
Always!
And it is this “very thick rope”, when combined with the ignorance and sloth of the Citizen, that ties and binds the noose so tightly around the unsuspecting neck of an uninformed Citizen.
This 2008 bogus refund program is geared principally to do one thing. To act as a stop-loss on the droves of Citizens who drop out of the tax filing system each year.
The corrupt IRS is appealing to folks' sense of greed, in a concerted effort to get them to file a 1040, claim a refund benefit. Then they got you.
A couple of years from now, tax cases will begin to appear on the dockets, and I will bet that the IRS and DOJ will present evidence that so and so received a special refund in 2008, so therefore, that person KNOWS and freely admits that they are taxpayers, with an obligation to file 1040s.
Liberty is never free.
-
Back in the 1960s, when he was far more honest than he is today, Alan Greenspan was all for the Gold Standard and for backing the US dollar with gold bullion, as a preventive measure to ward off inflation.
But then the powers that be took him out to the proverbial woodshed and convinced him that it could be very lucrative for him, if he stopped publicly advocating for the Gold Standard, but instead, joined the privately owned Federal Reserve Board.
Which Alan gladly did. He is a disciple of Paul Volcker.
Alan Greenspan did an 180 degree philosophical about face, and sold out the American People.
-
Sonik Fury wrote on Mar 17 2008, 05:40 PM:. . .
In the end, innocent citizens then blindfully rely upon stuff that never was.
[post=”4596″][/post]Yeah, I know what you mean. truly I do.
Just because “stuff never was” does not mean that one can not learn from a non-event. Hypothetically speaking, of course. 😆
When a corrupt federal judge decides to NOT publish his reasoned opinion in a tax trial and FINAL Order, and makes the opinion non-precedential, he helps his equally corrupt federal judges better pretend that, to use your phrase “stuff never was.”
And Sonik, I feel your pain but your request to delete the above post, is inappropriate and no such deletion is gonna happen anytime soon, because too many of us can learn from the well written post, even if you cann't.
The 120+ million folks in America who blindly rely upon intentionally false and misleading IRS publications, as well as false info from CCH, Prentice Hall. Matthew Bender publishers, etc, as well as disinformation from tax attorneys and CPAs, to pay a purported income tax even though no public law makes them liable to pay any alleged income tax.
Is that the kind of citizen blindness to which you refer? I think it is.
These same 120+ million folks are coerced by the corrupt IRS and private industry, to give away their unalienable and Constitutional Rights, simply because they are too lazy to critically examine the mountain of evidence from the US Government itself, and freely available at http://www.famguardian.org and http://www.sedm.org, which proves that most Americans are actually nonresident aliens under 26 USC 7701 ( b ) (1 ) ( B ), and that they don't owe any income tax to the corrupt IRS unless they have either:
a ) U.S. source income (income from District of Columbia or US possessions)
or
b ) income that is effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business inside the federal United States
Sonik, I think you are missing the larger point and the lessons contained in Tom's post. Whether the case was dismissed or not, is actually irrelevant as far as I am concerned.
Bing
-
If Tom Hyland is so smart, how come he did not put his ZIP Code next to his city, and State, listed above? 😆
Sonik, your request to delete the forgoing post is dismissed with prejudice.
Bing
-
For those interested in reading what has turned out to be a boon-doogle and the Mother of all FUBARS, please read the latest GAO Report on the IRS Business System Modernization (BSM), written in reply to the IRS request to demand $240 million be released in BSM funds for the current fiscal year.
I have to laugh. The corrupt IRS wasted about $5 billion in a Computer Systems upgrade that began in the mid 1980s and lasted until early to mid 1990s. Finally, the IRS and its subcontractors threw up their hands and threw in the towel. Thereby forcing the US Congress to write off the $5billion wasted up to that point.
They went back to the drawing board and presto, came up with BSM.
So, Congress passed a law that basically forces the IRS to petition Congress every time they want a disbursement from the BSM monies allocated for the upgrade. Ya gots to love seeing the IRS grovel before Congress so often. 😆 😆
See http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08420.pdf
for the GAO Report that was just released last week.
It appears they are toning down their criticisms of the IRS. Hmmm.
Bing
-
Richard, I have to agree with my cyber cohort, Sfury.
I do not see the nexus between Social Security which, when the law was originally written, was applicable ONLY inside the federal zone.
Any clarification you can provide would be good.
Bing
-
Here! Here!
All we must to do is take back our respective state governments and elect state politicians who will honor their oath of office, protect the state's Citizens, and not comply with federal codes or regulations that have no jurisdiction inside the 50 states.
The main job of state governments is to protect the liberty and security of state Citizens. And this is a job that they perform miserably, due to lack of knowledge of Constitutional Principles and republican ideals.
Case in point.
Look what happened when the states ( 17 at last count) basically told the U.S. Congress to (censored) off when it came to implementing a national ID card via the 2005 REAL ID Act.
What was the result?
The Department of Homeland Security has said it will postpone, by 5 years, the implementation of the REAL ID ACT.
Hmmm.
Since when does an Executive Branch department posses the lawful authority to delay implementing and enforcing a law, that the US Government insists is applicable to each of the 50 states. The REAL ID Act contains a specific, drop dead implementation date. I think it was May 2008.
What is interesting here, and further proves the limited territorial nature of the REAL ID Act, is that if the REAL ID Act actually was legally applicable inside the 50 Union states, as opposed to being legally enforceable inside the Federal Zone only, then the U.S. Department of Homeland Security would not have had the legal authority to inform the US Congress that they are going to delay the implementation of the REAL ID Act.
It is as simple as this folks.
However, since it is a fact that the REAL ID Act is merely Executive Branch territorial legislation only applicable within the federal zone, where the US President is in effect, a king.
One merely has to read the 8 page REAL ID Act and you can easily see that the Act specifically limits the jurisdiction of the US Government, by defining the “States” as only the named federal “States”.
Plus, the Act asserts that the national ID card must be used to gain entrance to federal buildings or airplanes. But you can use a USA Passport to gain entrance as well, thus negating the need for a national ID card. State government officials know this.
The corrupt US print and broadcast Media failed to report the Truth to Americans, and tell them that the law was only for federal States, and not for the Union of 50 states. But lawyers employed in the 50 state legislatures knew this, and thus were able to advise state officials that they could disregard the REAL ID Act and not be in violation of federal law.
Finally, the 2005 REAL ID Act is an example of a public law that is codified in the U.S. Statutes at Large, but which is NOT applicable inside the 50 Union states for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the Act itself, which spells out its limited applicability and limited jurisdiction.
Bing
-
Hey man, great to *see* you. 🙂
No worries about criticisms. You know that.
You are correct 100% oh wise one. Astute observation all around.
I am inconsistent.
But I have long known that too, so you are not revealing anything new to me in that regard.
And I have been inconsistent ever since reading the evidence contained in the seminal legal treatise titled What Happened To Justice, which is readily available from http://www.sedm.org.
I am pretty sure that it is the only document that I ever read in my life, that actually made me depressed. I was bummed off and on, for a long time. It made want to leave the USA for good. It was like drinking castor oil, 'cept worse.
The US Supreme Court, as presently configured, with “Justices” and not Judges as required by the Constitution, is merely an administrative tribunal, more or less.
The reason I cite and rely on U.S. Supreme Court cases, is that it is the best thing we have and it is the highest of the corrupt tribunals available to us.
All that said, I am sure you will agree that there are some great quotes from prior US Supreme Court cases.
Finally, I cite the Supremes because most everyone in America does not know that the currently configured US Supreme court is a sham, so they abide by and honor US Supreme Court decisions.
And I cite the Supremes to draw a contrast with the corrupted IRS, it is helpful to cite the Supremes so as to better expose the IRS' illegal activities.
If you think of a way to cite the Supremes and NOT be inconsistent, please let us know.
-
As many present already know, the principal reason for the HUGE decline in IRS enforcement efforts, is due to the efforts of the late Senator William Roth, former Chair of the US Senate Finance Committee.
Roth, who spear headed the Senate investigations and Senate Hearings of the criminal activities of the IRS, back in 1997 and 1998, was a thorn in the side of the corrupted IRS, and he helped expose many of the IRS criminal activities against American nationals.
Props are due also to former Rep. James Traficant, who also fought the good fight against the corrupt IRS for years, and he also exposed many of the IRS' criminal activities.
Bing
-
Glad he was released.
I do want to comment and clarify one point.
Although I agree with you that we should not be preparing tax returns for others, not every return that is filed by a nontaxpayer, constitutes an “income tax return.”
An income tax return is a return in which the person self assesses themselves, or otherwise has an income tax liability.
A Nonresident alien (NRA), who is not engaged in a trade or business, and who does not have any “U.S.** source income”, is a person who does not have any income tax liability and thus, does not owe any income taxes.
In those cases where, for whatever reason, the NRA had money wrongfully withheld from their remuneration by a corrupt private industry firm who is ignorant of the tax code, said NRA does not file an income tax return per se, but merely is filing a claim for refund.
A claim for refund is not the same as a income tax return. An income tax return is used by taxpayers. Nontaxpayers file claim for refunds, they do not file income tax returns.
The above discussion is copyrighted by me. All rights reserved. 😎
Bing
-
Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! 😆 😆
Awesome! Thanks.
Bing
-
Yes Riverway, I created that phrase myself. (chuckle) 😆
In fact, plethora of presumption? 2008, is now copyrighted by me. Yep.
Also, the phrase plethora of presumption? is also a registered trademark. also owned by me. Yep.
That said, I hereby grant famguardian.org, the family guardian fellowship, its assigns, Riverway, famguardian heirs, sisters, brothers, Mothers-In-Laws, brother-in-laws, first cousins, and Marty “Shoe-shine” Shoemaker, free use of the aformentioned phrase, in perpetuity, throughout the Milky Way Galaxy only, (but not in the Andromeda Galaxy), so long as I receive proper credit and attribution.
Unauthorized use of the phrase plethora of presumption is punishable by being compelled to listen to 5 hours of political speeches by Hillary “I am a Liar Too” Clinton.
peace.
Bing
-
Well, if we had a REAL supreme Court, and not the Administrative tribunal that masquerades as a Constitutional supreme Court, maybe then we might have a chance.
Maybe.
Ever since I read http://www.sedm's legal Treatise titled What Happened To Justice, I have lost all confidence in the U.S. Supreme Court, specifically, and the federal judiciary in general.
The Federal Courts ain't nuthin' but a cabal of liars and thieves who hide behind their lawyer credentials, to steal and plunder the wealth and property of honest Non U.S. citizen nationals living inside the 50 Union states, by burying unsuspecting folks under a plethora of presumption.
Not sure what exactly Bob Schulz' cause du jour is today, Saturday, but apparently he is tapping into Ron Paul supporters, which I presume easily cross-over to the THM.
What happened to the WTP Election Lawsuit?
Bing