[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Jan 8 2009, 06:37 AM:

And while this unprecedented ocean of artificial liquidity will surely lessen the effects of the recession… the unintended consequences could finish off the savings of millions of Americans… and they're just days away.

On an annualized basis, the “run rate” – the increase of dollars in circulation – is soaring by 369.92% per year! Unprecedented in our history!

Isn't this is how you spell H-Y-P-E-R-I-N-F-L-A-T-I-O-N? :ph34r:

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Jan 7 2009, 08:11 AM:

How come so few Americans spoke up when Congress bailed out the wealthy Federal Reserve Banks, and left the American People poorer in the process?

The lead post is quite a thought piece.

Nevertheless I feel that I should add a comment. It is a fact that many Americans spoke out against the bailout, three hundred to 1 against! Remember, the House turned the proposal down, cold! However, it is clear that the Senate, and the USG, in general do not care about what the people want.

Quote:

The financial bailout was only passed after members of Congress were warned that failure to act would threaten civil unrest & the imposition of martial law.

It is becoming clear that the bailout measures of late 2008 may have consequences at least as grave for an open society as the response to 9/11 in 2001. Many members of Congress felt coerced into voting against their inclinations, and the normal procedures for orderly consideration of a bill were dispensed with.

The excuse for bypassing normal legislative procedures was the existence of an emergency. But one of the most reprehensible features of the legislation, that it allowed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to permit bailed-out institutions to use public money for exorbitant salaries and bonuses, was inserted by Paulson after the immediate crisis had passed.

According to Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vermont) the bailout bill originally called for a cap on executive salaries, but Paulson changed the requirement at the last minute. Welch and other members of Congress were enraged by “news that banks getting taxpayer-funded bailouts are still paying exorbitant salaries, bonuses, and other benefits.”1 In addition, as AP reported in October, “Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. questioned allowing banks that accept bailout bucks to continue paying dividends on their common stock. `There are far better uses of taxpayer dollars than continuing dividend payments to shareholders,’ he said….

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con…a&aid=11681

Additionally, the talking heads, Big Media, do not report on the opposition to the bailouts much, certainly not in positive terms (more mind control, I guess). You are talking, and a good number of people listen. However, many assume that these measures are okay with the people, when this is not actually the case, as evident in your post, for instance.

Quote:

“Every act [contrary to] a delegated authority…is void. To deny this would affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize but what they forbid.” -Hamilton, Federalist No. 78

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Dec 31 2008, 01:06 PM:

See:

http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editoria…/2008/1230.html

Quote:

B. Murphy:

There is NO way gold production will even remain even the same in the years ahead. And the way The Gold Cartel has forced down the price of late, makes it even less likely production will increase for MANY years. Substantial production increases are five years off, or more.

C. Powell:

Yes, production is likely to keep declining for a while even if the gold price rises substantially soon, since bringing new mines to production takes years and returning mothballed mines to production may take many months.

silberinfo:

Because of the financial crisis, the governments attempt to rescue the financial industry with a lot of money worldwide. Is this good or bad for the future performance of gold?

B. Murphy:

Short term a deflationary spiral has been negative for all commodities. However, common sense dictates that so much new printed money will be extremely inflationary down the road — when the staggering new amounts and the velocity of money turnover kicks in. Right now everyone is hoarding money and conserving cash.

Emphasis added.

This news seem to be on the money.

Quote:

Beginning of Hyperinflation

Florian Godovits

The Epoch Times

October 29, 2008

GERMANY—Hard-Cash investor Walter K. Eichelburg, predicted the mortgage bubble bust and insolvency of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the United States in an early 2007 Epoch Times interview. He made himself available for another interview with The Epoch Times.

Epoch Times (ET): Mr. Eichelburg, what can we learn from today’s crisis?

Walter K. Eichelburg (WKE): This [crisis] is a progression of the entire economic system. Everything repeats itself. My thinking is that for every investment there is a specific time frame within a cycle, which one must recognize. If one acts at about the right time, one can make a good living. But, I must tell you that I’m not here to save the world. What I’m doing here is educating the investor.

I discovered that the true problem is not the business, but the information. There is a pent-up demand for correct information and that is what I want to satisfy [First Amendment].

ET: Would you share which area of information we need to address?

WKE: You must ask for different information than from today’s “Bubble-Media.” I have studied the history from the Dutch ‘Tulip Crash’ (1624-1636), and it always repeats itself over and over again. The values are artificially pushed up by easy borrowing, which brings investors running – the money comes in for a time and then the insiders [Now the taxpayer Bailout the insiders] quickly exit shortly thereafter, the bubble bursts. It is always the same scenario.

There is something else, called a Kondratiev cycle [1]. A Kondratiev cycle lasts from 50 to 70 years and is present in any national economy where credit (borrowing) is available.

If one invested 5 cents one-hundred years ago, during the time of Franz Josef [2], one would have a shilling today [3]. But, after about 1,460 years, one would have a globe of gold – which in truth is not possible.

Common sense says that at some point in time, there must be at a bottoming out. This is cyclical and was discovered by the Russian scientist Kondratieff. So, [according to his theory] we are in the spiraling downward phase. This is generally called the Kondratieff Winter.

These cycles expand and contract slowly. Therefore very few people notice it. But, a seasoned investor must be able to recognize these contractions. A man in Canada arranged these cyclical movements by the four seasons. A different investment ideal governs during each of these business seasons. Such a phase generally lasts between 10 and 20 years. If one does not change ones investment strategy one will suffer enormous losses.

ET: Can you explain about today’s Kondratiev cycle?

WKE: The present German Kondratiev cycle began in 1948 with the monetary reform. In the beginning, credit is granted prudently. Therefore, there is little inflation. The “growth cycle” began in 1966. Borrowing activities were on the rise, but it was still on the positive side. That continued until 1980. Then, we saw the Kondratieff-maturity cycle. This is the ideal time for trading with paper money, such as stock and bond issues, as well as property types of transactions. Their price depends on credit availability.

ET: Can you explain please? Perhaps using Iceland’s growth as an example?

WKE: For us, there was only one creditworthy entity—that was the state. And now the state was also fully tapped. That means, when the state loses its creditworthiness and their guarantees are worthless, it will crash.

There is something that Robert Rubin, the former U.S. treasury secretary said, when he was asked what he wanted to be in his next life. He responded, “The bond market.” Why? “The bond market controls everything.”

ET: Why is this the case?

WKE: Because interest and credit terms control everything. The reason for an economy to crash is because the bond market collapses. This is the reason.

ET: What do you think about the situation in other countries?

WKE: It was rumored in Austria that the SPO [Social Democratic Party of Austria] politician Hannes Swoboda said the following, “If the 100 billion Euro used for guarantees granted by the State were called, the Austrian State would be bankrupt. This is what could happen and that would be a catastrophe. And the Americans are running out of money. That means they monetize government bonds like crazy.

ET: What do you mean by monetize [4]?

WKE: What is the United States doing? The government sells bonds to the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank, and the bank then has money. A bond is not the same as money. One has to be careful about this point. This is called monetizing. It is not important if it is through borrowing activities or through time debentures. The importance lies in the fact that the central bank generates the money.

ET: Do central banks print the money?

WKE: In the past they printed money, now it is done electronically.

ET: Is it known which bank will fail and which will not?

WKE: Today, no one can predict which institution is safe and which is not. One does not know which bank will collapse first; perhaps Raiffeisen [Raiffeisen International Bank Holding AG] is going to be the first one, or perhaps Constantia Privatbank [5]. No one can predict it.

ET: What about the bank managers? Don’t they know?

WKE: No, they themselves have no clue. I couldn’t believe my eyes and thought that it was completely irrational when Raiffeisen International assumed the Russian Oligarchs Oleg Deripaska debt, held by the Deutschen Bank AG. Banks are just like small investors.

ET: In the past, the currency was backed by gold. Does it mean that this increases the risk of bankruptcy?

WKE: As I mentioned earlier, the last solvent creditor – the State — was drawn into the crisis. If the banks go under and need to call on the guarantees, then the state will collapse. That can be seen in Iceland, Hungary, the Ukraine and other countries. Then, they sell-off the government bonds for currency, which is now worthless. If that happens then all has reached the end.

ET: What does this mean for the public?

WKE: The collapse happens because all the money is worthless. There will be hyperinflation at the supermarket. Then hunger will begin.

ET: What do you suggest an investor should do?

WKE: Don’t keep paper money. The Euro has become toilet paper, and the Franc is not better off. I suggest that people have sufficient food, buy an acre of arable land and invest in gold. Gold is still cheap at US$3,000 an ounce.

Notes

[1] The Kondratiev wave/cycle theory was discovered by Nikolai Dmitriyeivich Kondratiev (1892-1938), a Russian economist. Proponents of the Kondratiev wave theory note it successfully predicted the 1929 stock market crash based on the 1870 crash. The Kondratiev wave is also referred to as the Kondratiev cycle.”

[2] Franz Josef was the oldest son of Archduke Franc Karl and crowned Emperor of Austria in 1848 at the age of 18.

[3] A shilling is a coin formerly used in the United Kingdom.

[4] When one monetizes, one converts government debt from bonds to currency. The [inflated-BOBT] currency is then used to buy products or services.

[5] Constantia Privatebank was taken over by five Austrian banks. The Austrian Central Bank has told Reuters that “the bank was relevant to Austria’s financial health because it had a fund subsidiary managing 10 billion Euros (US$13.5 billion) in client assets.”

Emphasis added

http://www.infowars.com/?p=5630

[BOBT12]

Admin wrote on Dec 30 2008, 08:13 PM:

Update:

Since being arrested, Joe shut down his website:

http://freedomcommittee.com

This was a condition of his release.

Thanks for the update.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Dec 26 2008, 10:46 AM:

The Associated Press has apparently obtained an obviously watered down version of a Top Secret Study conducted by and at the behest of the USA National Command Authorities, on what types of terrorist threats loom on the horizon over the next 5 years and whether America is likely to be a target.

I am writing to say point blank, that I believe that something is amiss and something else is going on here, when a National Threat Assessment is made public.

What I find to be most troubling, is the fact that the USG itself felt it was in their best interest to leak the Threat Assessment to the general public. Why expose to our sworn enemies, the threats and threat topics that we Americans are MOST concerned about?

One must ask themselves: What purpose did it serve to make public America's Threat ASSESSMENTS? Well, let me try and explain.

It has been said that “in war, the first casualty is TRUTH.”

And when it comes to the field of Intelligence and the Strategic Arts, there is often a Meta-game going on at all times. That is to say there are multiple levels of “games” occurring within the same “game”. So, if you are in the “game”, you may perceive and have been instructed that the “game” is about one thing or one purpose, but in reality, you have been purposefully kept in a secure cell or USG Agency department, such that your perspective is constrained because you are someone who has been intentionally compartmentalized.

A good analogy is your local Supermarket.

One can work in the Produce Dept, the Meat Dept; the dairy Dept, the Baked Goods Dept, etc. But because you are on the ground floor in one of the Depts., your awareness of what is going on in the other departments is limited and constrained. However, by contrast, High above the floor, in the front of the market above the cash registers, there is a huge glass window or two – way mirror that permits Management (in this case the USG) to “see” what is going on in all of the other Departments.

Let us step back for a moment and critically evaluate what has just occurred here with the leaking of what should have been a TOP SECRET Threat Assessment.

Generally speaking, in the Military Arts and in the Intelligence field, strategic and tactical threat assessments are usually conducted by trusted, high level analysts who possess uncanny intuition and who have ready access to highly classified INTELL on a daily basis. Usually, but not always, their security classifications/clearances are ABOVE TOP SECRET .

This being the case, when these trusted analysts conduct a Study and issue a report, their comments and assessments are such that only a closely held number of folks in the National Command have sufficient security clearance to access and read the darn thing. And this is how it should be.

Yes?

The nature of any Threat Assessment is to identify a series of vulnerabilities, to rank order same based upon various criterion, and in some cases to assign probabilities of potential threats reaching fruition within a predetermined time horizon.

Now, because Threat Assessments, by their very nature, identify the weakest aspects of one's defense structure, it follows from this fact that any and all such Threat Assessments should and must have very limited distribution, and in any case, assigned a classification ABOVE TOP SECRET, and even then, only shared with those folks within the National Command Authority on a need – to – know basis.

However, over the Christmas Holiday, when folks are even more easily distracted and less likely to give a (censored) about anything other than dealing with Christmas obligations, travel plans and the like, someone within the US Government purposefully leaked America's Threat Assessment to the Associated Press.

Why?

Why would the USg purposefully leak a National threat Assessment at Christmas time?

Why leak it at all? Who and what organization gains from such a leak?

And if this leak of the Threat Assessment, which reveals the issues and topics which the US National Command is MOST concerned about, was not pre-approved far in advance, and done so at the highest levels, then where is the public outcry from US Government Officials denouncing the leak and the leaker?

Of course one could argue that if the USG protested the leak, a/k/a the Plame Affair, it will merely draw more attention to it which could make it even more likely that America's enemies would read it.

However, I suspect that the leak was done on purpose.

Is the US Government planting the seed in the minds of Americans, so that if and when the USG orchestrates another Sept 11 attack against American soil, like it did with the controlled demolition of WTC Tower 1, 2, and 7, and the alleged 757 plane crashing into the Pentagon, the USG can then appear prescient and say “WE TOLD YOU SO” — as it embarks on further attempts to weaken the Constitution and limit personal liberty in the guise of protecting “national security”?

Folks, any which way you slice it, America is in a world of deep doo-doo.

We not only have 2+billion Arab Muslims abroad who hate us, but we have a USG that for 90+ years, has steadfastly lied to and stolen from generations of unsuspecting Americans. And this same USG has lied to get us into WW II, Vietnam, and Gulf War II, to say nothing of the 9.11.01 attacks and the overwhelming evidence of an official USG cover-up.

Indeed, it is no secret that our very own FBI has published a pamphlet stating that American Citizens who quote the USA Constitution to Law Enforcement, are considered dangerous and are likely terrorists!!! This tells me that the USG itself views the American People as the Enemy of the Federal State. And this is exactly the situation America was in when the Trading With the Enemy Law went into effect around 1915 or 1916.

I believe that the intentional leak over Christmas, of the National Threat Assessments, which should have been a document that was closely guarded, is a signal and a tell-tale sign that America is on the Road to destruction and the ensuing Martial Law that will result.

Social and financial chaos, provided by USG cut-outs and the like, is coming to a neighborhood near you and it will occur a lot sooner than you might think.

Yes, I think the numerous unconstitutional wars were intended to set the stage for what we are witnessing today. The monster that the U.S. has set upon the world is now returning to its point of origin.

Quote:

For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of “national security.” It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.

If Hurricane Katrina is the template that our federal government is using as a model for future events, Heaven help us! Do readers remember how National Guard troops were used to confiscate the personal firearms of isolated and vulnerable civilians shortly after that hurricane devastated the New Orleans area? Do you remember how representatives of the federal government were calling upon pastors and ministers to act as spokesmen for gun confiscation? Is this what the new Army brigade is preparing for? And do President Bush and his military planners envision an even broader role for military troops on American soil?

Add to the above rumors of thousands of plastic caskets–along with thousands of portable prison cells–being shipped and stored across the country, and one is left to ask, Exactly what is it that our federal government is planning?

I think there is an even bigger question, What exactly will members of our armed forces do if and when they are commanded to seize Americans' firearms, arrest them at gun point, or even fire upon them? How many soldiers and Marines love liberty and constitutional government enough to resist such orders, should they be given? And how many officers would resist issuing such orders?

Remember, it is the job of the armed forces to kill people and blow up things, not to do police work. Then again, Presidential administrations from both major parties have been using the U.S. military as U.N. “peacekeepers” for decades now. So, was all of this preparation for what is yet to take place in the United States? –Chuck Baldwin, “U.S. Army Troops To Serve As U.S. Policemen?” (10/1/2008)

So, it appears that the USG is moving to a higher level. This may be why?

Quote:

“The main point is that the US economy has been converted into a credit and debt scam aimed against the rest of the world, and backed up by military force. But the scheme is falling apart as the rest of the world is losing the ability and willingness to pay.” –Stan Goff, writer, former U.S. Army sergeant. Interview, Truthout (7/16/2003)

As the people become less willing to pay for the war games, more force may be needed to keep the sheep in the coral.

Quote:

“I have faith that the Constitution will be saved…. But it will not be saved in Washington. It will be saved by citizens of this nation who love and cherish freedom. It will be saved by enlightened…men and women who will subscribe to and abide the principles of the Constitution.” ( The Constitution: A Heavenly Banner , 1986, p. 30-31)

Quote:

Arizona police say they are prepared as War College warns military must prep for unrest; IMF warns of economic riots

new report by the U.S. Army War College talks about the possibility of Pentagon resources and troops being used should the economic crisis lead to civil unrest, such as protests against businesses and government or runs on beleaguered banks.

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” said the War College report.

The study says economic collapse, terrorism and loss of legal order are among possible domestic shocks that might require military action within the U.S.

International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn warned Wednesday of economy-related riots and unrest in various global markets if the financial crisis is not addressed and lower-income households are hurt by credit constraints and rising unemployment.

U.S. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., both said U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson brought up a worst-case scenario as he pushed for the Wall Street bailout in September. Paulson, former Goldman Sachs CEO, said that might even require a declaration of martial law, the two noted.

[end excerpt]

http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/19179/U_S_Mili…Domestic_Revolt

U.S. Army Ready If Downturn Gets Out Of Hand

http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/19178/U_S_Army…ets_Out_Of_Hand

Govt. claims militants use blogs to plot terrorism

http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/19185/Feds_con…terrorism_blogs

[BOBT12]

Timbawulf wrote on Dec 9 2008, 01:04 PM:

From the work of Dr. Eugene Schroeder, it's obvious we must demand our president repeal the state of national emergency under which this country has been since declared by FDR in his 1933 banking emergency and been renewed every year under various pretexts by every president since. An example of Congress flailing helplessly is Senate Report 93-549, issued 1973, which states, “Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.” and “These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes.” http://www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep1.html

House Joint Resolution 192, June 5, 1933, explains how, because the gold standard has been suspended, it is no longer possible to pay debt [with substantial, lawful money], but only to discharge obligations [with Federal Reserve Notes].

The United States (federal government) has been incorporated since 1871:

CHAPTER 62, 1871 / 16 United States Statutes at Large 419 / FORTY FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III. / CHAPTER 62, 1871 CHAP. LXII. — An act to provide a Government for the District of Columbia.

“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby, created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.”

http://freedom-school.com/jurisdiction/index.htm

Since 1871 the federal de jure government has been dormant because it is suspended and the de facto corporate government has replaced it. Because the various corporate municipalities rely on contracts (licenses) for their jurisdiction, it is impossible for them to be of, by, or for the people. From Black's Law Dictionary, Third Edition, the definition of “license” is, “The permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission, would be illegal.” This implies the government licensees, which includes most of us, are not competent. We, the People, have always proven competent of living at liberty.

Thanks for the information, and welcome to the forum.

[BOBT12]

lambskin wrote on Dec 2 2008, 05:00 PM:

Hey Admin,

[…]

And lastly:

Quote:

Lambskin, who is a suspected government mole.

Do you have any evidence to substantiate that or are ya just in the habit of casting aspersions upon unfounded beliefs? I recall reading somewhere at FG that just such a thing is a huge problem with the present judicial system. Ya'll wouldn't be hypocrites would ya? Ya know… 'cause two wrongs don't make a right.

G&P,

Lambskin

P.S. Excellent job on the redesign.

I must concur, that I have never seen any direct evidence that lambskin is a mole, thus, it seems that it would be a good idea to refrain from making such positive statements as “Lambskin, who is a government mole.” It may be a reasonable idea to treat him, or her, as we would want to be treated. At a bear minimum, given the seriousness of the situation, perhaps one might consider using qualifiers, like “suspected” or “possible”. Even then wouldn't be a good idea to link to some sort of supporting evidence, so that fellow members can make a reasonable judgment for themselves? Isn't this something that Family Guardian's rules state is a standard that every member should follow?

By the way, I like the website upgrade.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Dec 3 2008, 10:12 AM:

Gov Arnold, like each of the other 48 state Governors, have been sucking up to President – elect Obama in an effort to get the USG government to give money to the 50 states so the states can balance their respective budgets.

But here is the real kicker, apparently the Terminator, who was born in Austria, is clueless about the sovereignty of of the Union states and he actually thinks that the 50 states are laboratories for the federal government.

yep.

here is an excerpt from http://www.news.tradingcharts.com/forex/8/7/117338578.html

“. . .The meeting drew 48 of the 59 invited governors and governors-elect, including those from territories. California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, was among those present, along with rising GOP stars such as Govs. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota.

Several governors praised Obama for being willing to listen to them at the meeting. Easley said the president-elect frequently used the word “partner.” Schwarzenegger said Obama's “intellectual curiosity” was evident.

“He was interested … to see how the federal government and the states can learn together and also to learn from the states,” Schwarzenegger said, “because the states are the laboratories for the federal government.”

More proof that Gov Arnold is a sycophant to the corrupted US Government.

Now we see how fiction is becoming fact (not lawfully, however); the Terminator is now the Govenator. “A New World Order coming into view” (Bush, Sr.).

[BOBT12]

resource wrote on Nov 28 2008, 05:15 PM:

On July 26, 2008 I sent to the SSA (and per green card they recvd on 7-28-8) the Resignation of Compelled Social Security Trustee document (SEDM form 06.002).? Then, no response until November 24, 2008 when I received a form letter response dated 11-17-8 that said in part: “…Under Federal law, the payment of Social Security taxes is mandatory, regardless of the citizenship or place of residence of either the employer or the employee. … Social Security taxes paid by employees and employers are not placed in individual accounts but are used to pay benefits to workers and their families today.? To be paid these benefits, a person must voluntarily file an application. … The Supreme Court has upheld the consititutionality of the Social Security system, as established by the Social Security Act, and mandatory individual participation.”? No where in their response are there any supporting cites (no reference to IRC, USC, U.S. Supreme Court… nothing) for their position.

Yes, it may be that the above is true on the condition that the terms 'citizenship', 'residence', 'employee', 'employer', 'person', and 'individual' are as definde in the IRC.? Otherwise, since I am not that man ('person', 'individual', etc) who is the target of the IRC, those terms do not describe me.? It appears obvious that the SSA did not read and or understand the content of the Resignation document.?

If the Admin is interested in receiving a copy of the mentioned form letter then please know that I will willingly fax or pdf a copy upon request.? I am very grateful for the information available from SEDM.? Thank you.

[post=”5690″][/post]

Thank you for sharing you experience. Talk about an oxymoron, ?a person must voluntarily file an application?, how is it voluntary if you must do the act? These vague answers seem to be all that deceptive (incompetent or lying, perhaps both) government employees will provide.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Nov 21 2008, 02:23 PM:

THAT”S IT!!!

Effective immediately I am rescinding my invitation to Bill and Hillary Clinton to come to my crib and chow down on some yummy milk and cookies!! 😮

The last thing I want is an Excedrin headache!! 😮

At least Monica “Can YOU get this stain out” Lewinsky, is safe and sound at University of London School of Business. 😮

Boy, all these folks close to Clinton supposedly committed suicide??? :ph34r: Statistically it seems highly unlikely that so many people could perish in such a manner in such a short period of time.

Vince Foster's ahem, 'suicide' the gun shot wound was on the side of his head that was the opposite of the hand the he wrote with.? Thus, Vince? used his non-dominent hand to pull the trigger.? Who does THAT???

I do not recall if they found a gun at the scene but I know they never found the bullet.

[post=”5661″][/post]

Yes, Mr. Foster was supposed to have died in the middle of a park, where he had to walk 150 feet to get to the area where the “suicide” happened. However, there was no evidence of dirt or grass on the soles of his shoes. After this was pointed out to the FBI, which performed the investigation, they were allowed to perform a reinvestigation, where a smudge of dirt was magically found one shoe. Of course, the Clinton?s were busy removing many of Foster?s personal files, I believe Foster?s brief case magically turned up in Hillary?s room, after investigators were looking for it for sometime. And on it goes.

I WONDER what happened to the military medical staff that came forward with the reports and photo (the photo was unofficially put online for a time) of Ron Brown?s gunshot wound to the head (likely caused by a .45 caliber shell).

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote:

You are correct, Pete will be buried in the Black Hole of Presumption.

I never quite understood why he would brag and keep posting IRS refund checks on his web page. Was he merely trying to sell more books and T-shirts??

So, to make a few $$$, it looks like Pete may get 7+ years in Club Fed. Not wise.

I believe that Pete felt that he had found a remedy to the fraudulent tax system, and wanted to exercise his First Amendment rights. There were disclaimers associated with his work (just like there are at this website), thus, everyone who posted information was involved on a voluntary, fully informed, basis.

Pete hasn't committed any crime, there is no “mens rea”. Nevertheless, if a juror shows awareness of this fact, he or she may be subject to replacement, or harassment.

Quote:

“The villagers hold the officials and the castle in the highest regard, justifying, quite elaborately at times, the actions of the officials, even though they do not appear to know what or why the officials do what they do. The villagers simply defend it.” –The Castle (novel – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

We all run this risk when we speak our sentiments. Yet, it is our right, if not our duty.

Quote:

“If we wish to not use reason, we must keep our mouths shut, our pens still and our minds blank.” –Durant, vii – x.

[BOBT12]

rattler14 wrote on Nov 14 2008, 01:27 PM:

Dear all,

Long time, no see.? I'm so glad to see such wonderful research and education progressing.?

As for the shortcomings of Pete.? I think it's best to summarize it as mainly a lack of open mindedness versus some of the other specific grievances.? For instance, point number 7 about the 4582 form.? Even just a few short years ago, the authors of the FG mentioned this (to themselves and clearly not as legal advice to anyone else) as a possible way of correcting their (private) employers from erroneous claims on a W2 form.?

Such statements can still be found on some sections of famguardian? Although this is CLEARLY not a complaint, as the authors themselves are human and have put together a mammoth amount of material while under the constant duress of those wishing to shut it down.? It's merely to point out that we are all still learning as much as we can in a game that is constantly shifting due to the deceit of sociopaths.?

So while I completely agree that the bulleted list of items is a valid critique of his shortcomings, I would hope that others give SEDM and famguardian some leniency in not being 100% perfect.? After all, I still learn a tremendous amount from the admins, the authors, and the other posters.? The rabbit trail runs so deep that no one (except for the All-Mighty) knows it all.

[post=”5611″][/post]

You are on target.

I will add, I think Pete was doing the best that he could. I am grateful that he has been a resistor to the evils of the tax tyrants.

Quote:

“To act justly or unjustly is within one's power; to be treated so is not.” –Aristotle, N.E., V, 9

It is clear that these are not taxes based upon consent (Fraud=Consent to the those in government), just representation ($700 Billion the people said NO!), or the Constitution (i.e., $700+ Bailout is not for the support of government in anyway, shape, or form). Therefore, they are unjust and should be resisted.

Quote:

“To a tyrant, the whole riches of a great nation will be no more than sufficient wages for cheating and oppressing it.[L] Cato's Letters, #130, p.901.

Of course, I am sure that we all wish him well in his persecution at the hand of the tax oppressors.

Quote:

“To a reflecting mind it must appear very strange that the statesman should always be considering how he can dominate and tyrannize over others, whether they will or not.” [L] Aristotle, Politics, VII, 2, 1324b, 23.

[BOBT12]

dmiladin wrote on Oct 24 2008, 11:53 AM:

While I don't like taxes anymore than you fine gentlemen do, I wouldn't mind if my money actually went to what I feel is good use, ie UHC.

Call me a socialist, but I'd much rather pay for other people's healthcare and wellbeing than throw my money away on a debt to the private bankers who exploit me and debase my worth every year.

[post=”5499″][/post]

Then you should give your money away, as you see fit.

Quote:

“Some people seem to think that God has handed money to the federal government, and the money will be unavailable if the government doesn't use it — that if government doesn't spend money on school lunches, children will starve; that if government doesn't subsidize single mothers, they'll die in the streets; that if government doesn't spend money on research, progress will stop. In truth, all the money the government spends was taken from the people who earned it — who are perfectly able to spend it on anything they think is important. When we repeal the income tax, these people will have a trillion dollars a year to spend on whatever they want and need.” –Harry Browne, 1996 and 2000 Libetarian Party Presidential candidate, bestselling author

Quote:

?The Law and Morals

You say: “Here are persons who are lacking in morality or religion,” and you turn to the law. But law is force. And need I point out what a violent and futile effort it is to use force in the matters of morality and religion?

It would seem that socialists, however self-complacent, could not avoid seeing this monstrous legal plunder that results from such systems and such efforts. But what do the socialists do? They cleverly disguise this legal plunder from others – and even from themselves – under the seductive names of fraternity, unity, organization, and association. Because we ask so little from the law – only justice – the socialists thereby assume that we reject fraternity, unity, organization, and association. The socialists brand us with the name individualist.

But we assure the socialists that we repudiate only forced organization, not natural organization. We repudiate the forms of association that are forced upon us, not free association. We repudiate forced fraternity, not true fraternity. We repudiate the artificial unity that does nothing more than deprive persons of individual responsibility. We do not repudiate the natural unity of mankind under Providence.? — Fredric Bastiat (1801 to 1850)

Emphasis added.

[BOBT12]

franklin wrote on Oct 20 2008, 11:33 AM:

BobT

🙂 The other website just called a few minutes ago.  They spoke with their payment processor who explained the difficulty.  Followed instructions that were not initially clear and was able to download the 950 response letter. 

Just wanted to let you know that I'm away from the water cooler and reading this response letter.

But I'll be reading it with that persistent idea in the back of my mind that I shouldn't do anything to revive my position as trustee.

Thanks again.

[post=”5470″][/post]

Thanks for the update, good luck. 😎

[BOBT12]

franklin wrote on Oct 19 2008, 07:10 PM:

Another site has response letters to federal and state tax correspondence. Have tried over two days to become a member of the site and donate for certain documents using 2 credit cards (borrowed from friends) and one debit card.? Their server will not accept any of them.? It's a lose/lose situation for a would be member and for the ministry.? The site says it cannot do anything and the card companies say it's the site's problem.? No Win all the way round.?? 🙁

So in this post I'm not asking for legal advice or hand holding…just friendly First Amendment comment on my thinking.

The problem is a 950 letter?? :mad:? telling of proposed changes for several years and it's tricky.? It suggests that SFRs have been filed and that the figures in the 4549-A form are what IRS is seeking agreement to.?

If I don't respond timely, they will assume that I've agreed their outrageous proposals.? I see this as another way for them to acquire jurisdiction because…

The letter says if I disagree with their proposed figures I may engage with them (i.e. enter their jurisdiction) to argue the amounts proposed.? I think this is definitely a wrong move because…like going to tax court…it presumes taxpayer status and that some amount is owed.? I definitely want to stay out of their jurisdiction? 😛 .

They have refused to address or answer all other correspondence (requests for returns…legality of summons for books and records, etc.)

Lacking access to the response letters available on the other site…here's what I'm wondering…would a simple response be adequate to the effect that I would comply with the suggestions in their 950 letter under the condition that they cure their defaults in previous correspondence within a certain time period to demonstrate their delegated authority…acting within a lawful internal revenue district etc.

Or send them a copy of resignation as compelled trustee plus a wrong party notice.? Or both.

Inasmuch as they have not met any demands for their legitimacy…this 950 letter and forms 4549-A cannot be presumed to be either lawful or truthful.?

My goal is 1.) to offer a legitimate response and 2.) stay well out of their jurisdiction.

Any caveats about down drafts, up drafts, going too close to the sun, and cloud-covered mountains would be welcome as I fly by the seat of my pants.

Thanks

Franklin

[post=”5466″][/post]

Consider filling the form 12153, you can include your issues and concerns of jurisdiction, and constitution. You are seeking to preserve your rights with this action, and avoid losing by default.

INSTRUCTIONS:? 4.21.? Challenge All Liens and Levies

http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Instruct…geAllLevies.htm