[BOBT12]

Sovereigneer wrote on Oct 17 2006, 12:37 PM:

BOBT12 wrote on Oct 17 2006, 10:46 AM:

Sovereigneer wrote on Oct 16 2006, 11:26 PM:

I've been reading more and more of this document and the more I read…the more outraged I become.? You've done a breathtakingly superb job of stating the moral and ethical ROT we've experienced within our government and our land over the decades.? These people really MUST be stopped.

[post=”3226″][/post]

Welcome to the forum, and to the fight for freedom.

Bob

[post=”3227″][/post]

Thanks Bob! Any comment on my question about the Driver license issue in my first post in this thread?

[post=”3228″][/post]

Not at this time. I expect that Author 2 will look into the matters that you have raised, and make the needed adjustments, as time permits. As you can see Author 2 is a very busy man. 🙂

[BOBT12]

Sovereigneer wrote on Oct 16 2006, 11:26 PM:

I've been reading more and more of this document and the more I read…the more outraged I become.  You've done a breathtakingly superb job of stating the moral and ethical ROT we've experienced within our government and our land over the decades.  These people really MUST be stopped.

[post=”3226″][/post]

Welcome to the forum, and to the fight for freedom.

Bob

[BOBT12]

DrCrimwitt wrote on Oct 16 2006, 06:10 PM:

I am offered a job from a small company doing a similar job that I was doing from the big company I worked for over the summer.? I send the company certified mail the following:

Quote:

I am in receipt of your offer to work for (company name).? I have carefully read the offer and I accept.

Enclosed with this letter you will find the following documents:

? A copy of your offer

? Application to work for (company name)

? New Hire Paperwork Attachment

? Affidavit of Citizenship, Domicile, And Tax Status

? Attachments

? IRS Form W-8BEN

? Form SSN Citizen?s Assertion of Legal Right to withhold disclosure of SSN

? Form P-1 Reasonable Cause Affidavit by Payor For Not Obtaining Payee?s Identifying Number ? Waiver of penalty on company (26 USC 6724(a))

? Copy of letter from Social Security

? Federal Tax Withholding Booklet (provides legal basis for using W-8BEN)

? Tax Withholding And Reporting: What the Law Says

? IRS Publication 515 (pages 2-3)

? Supreme Court Cases

____________________________________________________________________

There was more to this letter. Well, after several days of explaining to them what a “Non-resident alien” is and what the code sections mean, the administrator and DON agree with me on this issue. Their problem?

It is their freaken Accountant. I was shown an email stating that,

Quote:

…Based on my telephone discussions today with the Procedural Department of the IRS, the Procedure for (company name) is:

1. if the individual is a subcontractor, they must complete a Form W-9, which requires either a social security number or a taxpayer identification number; proof of either number must be provided to (company name) and photocopy made for your file;

2. if the individual is an employee they must complete a Form W-4 and a Mass. Form W-4M on which the employee would provide their SS # and the number of dependents being claimed.? If the employee is a non-resident alien, they must go to the INS and obtain a social security card which would be stamped: “for work purposes only.”

If the person is an employee and chooses to opt out of the social security system, i.e. not have a social security or medicare withheld from their salary, your outside payroll service is not equipped to deal with such a departure from their standard procedures.?? Further, (company name) is also interested in conforming with standared procedures…

So, I was given a choice to file a W-9. I filled a substituted W-9 with Requesting company's Affidavit of Request and Transmittal. Now they are requesting an I-9 number.

I realize that the Accountant hasn't even read the information that I provided the administrator (the administrator made copies for him) and therefore, continues to listen to the IRS thugs.

What else can I do? I will not be getting paid until I provide them with a Number, which of course has to be my SSN# or a TIN. But I don't receive Federal Taxable wages!! So how do I get around this one?

Any suggestions?

[post=”3223″][/post]

You can establish a company with a TIN#, have the hiring company pay your company. Your company can pay you as you wish. Then you will need to rebut any tax forms that may be issued, based upon whatever positions you may decide to take for your company.

This is just food for thought, here are some idea to get you started (use at your on risk):

http://www.federalnumber.com/index.cgi?r=group1

http://www.federaltaxid.us/?AD=GOOGLE&OVRA…xIdentification

http://www.tax9er.com/tax_id_number/

http://florida-incorporations.net/federal-…CFQt7WAodtxE5tw

You may contact me via PM for greater details, if you wish.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Oct 14 2006, 03:49 PM:

And here you have it folks, it is two years later, and the propaganda is just starting to begin about how wonderful and safe it will be for pets, and then elderly and infants, to be safe, by having a chip implanted into them.

See http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15261656?GT1=8618

for this evidence

Interestingly enough, the company that produced the chip, paid to have the wayward dog flown from Texas back to California and reunited with its owners. How generous of them, eh?

What are the chances that this entire story is the result of an AVID operation? Nahhhh. They would never do THAT!

Bing

[post=”3212″][/post]

Emphasis added.

OOoohh…yes they would.

[BOBT12]

rattler14 wrote on Oct 13 2006, 05:22 PM:

Federal building or not…  blah blah blah.  The point is those 3 builidings (WTC1, 2, and 7) were blown up to dust. 

Sometimes getting caught up in all the minutia on a non-law topic is kinda pointless.  The official story is bull, the government was complicit.  How much more simple can it get?

[post=”3206″][/post]

Yeah, that about does it for me.

Thanks

[BOBT12]

Sovereigneer wrote on Oct 11 2006, 05:49 PM:

BOBT12 wrote on Oct 9 2006, 03:20 PM:

You cannot give away sometime you have no rights to. For instance, you cannot sell your neighbor's car, without his or her consent, by accident, or on purpose.

That is MY understanding of the situation as well.

Quote:

There is no true contract without understanding and agreement. However, if you don't understand this, or any of your Rights, you will not be able to raise an issue. Thus, it will be assumed that you understood the contract that may be presented (prima facie), unless someone objects. Using the above example, the neighbor will likely object as soon as he sees that you sold his automobile.

However, when the government demands that we turn our children over to them, or pay an unlawful tax, many just do not raise an objection of any sort. Often, it will be assumed that you are waiving your Rights.

Again, agreed wholeheartedly.

Quote:

This why We the People must defend our Rights. Bing has made a great post in this regard on another thread.

Thanks, where would it be located?

[post=”3201″][/post]

This would be what I was referring to:

Bing wrote on Oct 9 2006, 06:50 AM:

iCallCheckmate wrote on Oct 9 2006, 07:20 AM:

Sonik,

You make excellent points, and they do make sense. But here are a few things to honestly consider.

1. While the 16th Amendment wasn't fully/legally ratified, it's been over 80+ years and we've all be believing that paying taxes is the LAW.. but many of us beg-to-differ.

2. The so-called laws that prove that paying taxes is the law, have been disputed and many have won…… but much more are sitting in prison and not much of anything to do about it is being done. . .

3. The movements to stop this illegal taxations have worked for some,,, but for the majority of people, they are jailed, and it seems that we all still allow the government have their way.

One Man's Opinion

[post=”3187″][/post]

I beg to differ on points 2 and 3. The great Irwin Schiff fought valiently, albeit, he made a number of strategic and tactical blunders, but still, he fought very hard and showed real courage aganst the very corrupt IRS and DOJ attorneys.

Your assertion that “not much of anything to do about it is being done”, falls far from the mark. One only need to study the Hanson case file to see the untruth in your statement.

Further, many of us spend countless hours every single day, educating folks, speaking to people, researching and writing about these subjects, and then publishing our work and making it available for free.

If people are simply too lazy or too stupid to search out the Truth, then they deserve to be enslaved by the IRS and US Government. Simple as that.

One of the problems that we are up against is that Americans by and large, are docile and have very little real courage. Not all of us mind you, but far too many of “We the People” are sheep when it comes to challenging the IRS and US Government on matters of taxation. But rest assured there is a cadres of fine folks who are a-fix-in to change all that. But it is going to take time.

The docile American society got like this by design, by the propaganda war machine that is run by the IRS, in close cooperation with the corrupt federal judiciary and the equally corrupt US Dept of Justice attorneys, both of whom routinely lie in court every single day and whose unlawful and unethical actions not only shock the conscience, but go far beyond the pale.

Regarding point #3, all you need do is read the case file our own own Mr. C. Hansen, to see and hear how to properly defend yourself against the tyranny that is the corrupt IRS, corrupt DOJ, and corrupt federal judiciary.

Also, the Murphy case in the US Court of Appeals, that was decided August 22, 2006 is yet one more example where Americans are pushing back and winning. There, the Court declared a provision of the IRC unconstitutional, and they ruled that income is not everything that comes in. This was yet another huge victory for the Tax Honesty Movement. You should read their opinion.

Checkers, your defeatist attitude and tone about taxation matters is precisely what the Tax Honesty Movement does not need. We have victories all the time, and they come one person at a time. People have to get off their butt and stand up for their fundamental Rights. No one is going to swoop in and automatically hand you your Rights. You have to learn some law and fight for them!!

And one has to fight to continually preserve their Rights because all governments in America purposefully and intentionally seek to destroy the Constitutional and unalienable Rights of American Citizens. The Family Guardian Fellowship is doing everything that it can within the law, to help folks get educated.

Bing

[post=”3188″][/post]

http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…=105&#entry3200

[BOBT12]

Sovereigneer wrote on Oct 9 2006, 12:48 AM:

Thank you Author #2,

I'm trying to get my mind around the question of just how one becomes alienated from supposedly “unalienable/inalienable” rights…

I can understand encumbrances upon my rights where tort law is concerned and I understand some things about contract law.? However, I have a hard time figuring out how we can “contract” away something over which we have no inherent right to waive or transfer away

You cannot give away something you have no rights to. For instance, you cannot sell your neighbor's car, without his or her consent, by accident, or on purpose.

Quote:

…let alone under the terms of some “implied” or “hidden” contract where I had no opportunity to give informed consent or understand the terms or consequences of any such contract prior to entering.

There is no true contract without understanding and agreement. However, if you don't understand this, or any of your Rights, you will not be able to raise an issue. Thus, it will be assumed that you understood the contract that may be presented (prima facie), unless someone objects. Using the above example, the neighbor will likely object as soon as he sees that you sold his automobile.

However, when the government demands that we turn our children over to them, or pay an unlawful tax, many just do not raise an objection of any sort. Often, it will be assumed that you are waiving your Rights.

Quote:

Seems to me that our rampant federal beast government has assumed some unalienable rights of its own which need to be brought in check.?

Thanks again for the links.

This is why We the People must defend our Rights. Bing has made a great post in this regard on another thread.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Oct 2 2006, 02:51 PM:

Very, very interesting scenario. Thank you for sharing that.

Any cites you may have supporting your thesis would be greatly appreciated.

I especially agree with the fact that the USG, not the USA, mind you, has been “policing” the world without lawful authority. And this has weakened the USA by ruining alliances and adding trillions to our public debt.

The Federal Government was not established to spread liberty and freedom beyond America's borders and there is no lawful reason why America's Citizens have had to pay trillions of dollars to, ahem, spread freedom and liberty abroad. Truth be told, by the looks of things, and given the high usage of Depleted uranium munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan, it hardly looks like we are spreading anything good, that mnuch is certain.

You all should google “depleted uraniun” and see what you come up with.

None.

[post=”3136″][/post]

Very good points guys.

As anyone can see we are in a perpetual war, called war or terror, war on drugs, war on… whatever.

Transforming the World into a War-Zone

Quote:

There should be little doubt that Don Rumsfeld?s dream of a global military empire, accountable only to the league of corporate mandarins, hasn?t dimmed by his abysmal record of failure in Iraq. Left to his own devices, Rumsfeld is determined to put the US military under private control and turn the world into one massive war zone.

[Posted By ShiftShapers]

[…]By Mike Whitney

Republished from Information Clearing House

?Our enemies never stop trying to come up with new ways to harm our people, and neither do we.? ? President George W. Bush

Like everything else, Rumsfeld?s promise to ?transform? the military has been a lie. The Defense Secretary never had any intention of converting the military into ?smaller, more agile units?. From the very onset his goal has been to create a global strike-force that operates as the enforcement-arm of the multinational corporations.

Rumsfeld has done everything in his power to remove the military from congressional oversight or accountability to the people it is supposed to serve. Under his stewardship, the Pentagon has lurched from one humiliating scandal to the next. From Abu Ghraib to Falluja, from Guantanamo to Bagram; his record has been a dismal chronicle of one disgrace heaped upon another. No wonder the generals are so eager to see him get his walking papers.

An article in Sunday?s Washington Post ?Rumsfeld OKs wider anti-terror role for Military? shows that Rumsfeld?s powers are expanding rather than contracting. The article by Ann Scott Tyson outlines the Defense Secretary?s strategy for making the entire world a ?free-fire? zone for agents of the empire. The details of the plan are still classified, but the documents envision ?a significantly expanded role for the military ? and in particular a growing force of elite Special Operations troops ? in continuous operations to combat terrorism outside of war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan. Developed over about three years by the Special Operations Command (SOCOM) in Tampa, Fla., they reflect a beefing up of the Pentagon?s involvement in domains traditionally handled by the CIA and State Department.?

Just as Rumsfeld initiated Northcom and lowered the standards for using the military in domestic affairs (check the debacle in Katrina) so too, he intends to eschew the conventions restricting the use of the military in foreign countries by deploying ?small teams of Army Green Berets and other Special Operations troops to U.S. embassies ?to conduct military operations where the United States is not at war.?

This ambitious plan has been the military?s ?top priority? for over three years and is ready to be activated pending another ?terrorist attack? on American soil.

Even Rumsfeld apologists are probably shocked at the breadth and arrogance of this sinister plan. The military is being hijacked in full view of the American people and turned into the world?s most-lethal security apparatus. Under Rumsfeld?s direction, special units operating clandestinely around the globe will perform criminal renditions, assassinations, sabotage, and acts of piracy all in the name of corporate profiteering.

53,000 paramilitaries and Green Berets now operate within Special Operations Command (SOCOM) The next terrorist attack will allow the Pentagon to quickly mobilize these troops to ?disrupt and respond? to potential threats across the planet ignoring national sovereignty or the laws of war. The surprise appearance of Bin Laden in a video which aired yesterday on Al Jazeera (another Rumsfeld psy-ops?) must have been warmly received by the Pentagon warlords who would like to see their plan executed pell mell.

There should be little doubt that Don Rumsfeld?s dream of a global military empire, accountable only to the league of corporate mandarins, hasn?t dimmed by his abysmal record of failure in Iraq. Left to his own devices, Rumsfeld is determined to put the US military under private control and turn the world into one massive war zone.

Emphasis added.

http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/8763/Transform…into_a_War_Zone

We are living under a unjust, defacto government, run by evildoers. mrg is on the right path, Hitler's plan still seems to be in operation: Conquer the World!

mrg wrote:

It is not “law” at all.

It is BS.

You apparently have no idea what “law” is.

Here is a picture of your “law.”

FDR (and Churchill) was singing his praises and busily adopting his political and? economic solutions to the world wide depression (Germany was first to recover from the “bankster's holidays) until the maritime commerce started to be hampered.

Thank you sir, I will have no more.

A picture is worth one thosand words.

UN pushes for internet jurisdiction

http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…07&hl=china

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Oct 3 2006, 10:59 AM:

Well, I think you are on to something.

I have read some very disturbing stuff in the Congressional Record regarding America's gold supplies.

You should read The Creature From Jekyll Island” for additional insight into the criminal enterprise that is the Federal Reserve System.

BTW, the only thing that is propping up the American currency, is the confidence that people have in it and in our political system.

Once that confidence is shaken to the core, you will see capital flight away from US $$ and into metals and Euros and objects de art.

Bing

[post=”3143″][/post]

I agree!

Alternative Currencies

http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…ic=396&hl=china

By the way, iCallCheckmate, thanks for all of your recent information (your PM) 😀

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Sep 22 2006, 07:51 PM:

And here is the proof, contained ina an excerpt of HR418, notice how the lying and deceptive US Congress has defined the term “State of the United States”

To wit:

H.R.418

REAL ID Act of 2005 (Referred to Senate Committee after being Received from House)

[…](4) STATE– The term `State' means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States. . .

We need to begin writing letters to the Editors of our local newspapers and explain the word games and tricks relied upon by the US Congress to bully their way into our private lives, and prove to them that the phrase “State of the United States”, which is a phrase I have never before seen in any so-called legislation, means ONLY the aformentioned named U.S. territories and possessions.

****************

Note too, if you read it further, that the Feds assert that the “States” are forbidden from issuing Driver's Licenses or State ID Cards to anyone unless they first prove that they are a “citizen of the United States”.? They ignore state nationals and American nationals because the legislation means only federal States, NOT the several Union states.

Not surprisingly, the HR418 does not define the term “United States” but since we already know that the U.S. Congress, according to the US Supreme Court, has no rule making or legislative authority inside the 50 Union states, this can only mean that the term “United States”** is the federal United States as defined in Hooven & Allison v. Evatt.

[…]We need to be addressing this issue now and educating folks before they make stupid mistakes in 2008 and beyond.

Bing

[post=”3100″][/post]

Emphasis added.

Well, it appears that at least one state agrees with you.

Quote:

NEW HAMPSHIRE HOUSE REJECTS NATIONAL ID

Posted By: SCRIBE

Date: Monday, 13 March 2006, 9:30 a.m.

NEW HAMPSHIRE HOUSE REJECTS NATIONAL ID

By: SCRIBE

3-13-2006

New Hampshire House Reject Real ID

From: http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/nat_id…ouse_reject.htm

NH House | March 10, 2006

The NH House yesterday voted overwhelmingly to reject the Transportation Committee's recommendation of ITL and in a subsequent motion to pass HB 1582, forbidding any state agency from participating in any national ID requirement. The bill is succinct and to the point:

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Six

AN ACT prohibiting New Hampshire from participating in a national identification card system.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Prohibition Against Participation in National Identification System. The general court finds that the public policy established by Congress in the Real ID Act of 2005, Public Law 109-13, is contrary and repugnant to Articles 1 through 10 of the New Hampshire constitution as well as Amendments 4 though 10 of the Constitution for the United States of America. Therefore, the state of New Hampshire shall not participate in a national identification card system; nor shall the department of safety amend the procedures for applying for a driver's license under RSA 263 or an identification card under RSA 260:21.

Go to:

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/live/default.html

Click on afternoon video for March 8th, and fast forward to 4:08. Listen to the floor debate on HB 1582, paying particular attention to the speech by Rep. Kurk of Weare.

Emphasis added.

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=86381

Of course, it seems that the federal government may use discrimination against the people from New Hamshire, or any state that won't agree to the Real ID BS, if they try to fly, or enter a federal building, and make life as dificult as posible in general.

GO NEW HAMSHIRE!

BOB

[BOBT12]

Again I am in agreement with the decision to ban AndyK.

I welcome honest debate from anyone. However, as pointed out above, AndyK didn't respond to debate. Thus, he has lost whatever potential usefulness he could have served.

[BOBT12]

Bing wrote on Sep 15 2006, 03:40 PM:

AndyK has had many months to honor his word and fulfill the commitment that he made in writing and to fulfill his public promises to us.

It was unprofessional and deceptive for AndyK to intentionally mislead us by insisting that he would answer certain questions concerning the IRS' Trade or Business Scam, and then not follow-through and honor his word.

AndyK's deceptive and unethical practices may be acceptable at the IRS, but they are unacceptable in the Family Guardian BBS Forums.

Bing

[post=”3076″][/post]

Emphasis added.

I concur. Thank you Mr. Bing.

[BOBT12]

Christa Cordtz wrote on Sep 15 2006, 03:48 AM:

:huh: How do you protect your home?

Bill557766 wrote on Jul 27 2006, 08:50 AM:

A good book I just read on Asset Protection has a whole section on Offshore Banking. Offshore Banking

[post=”2906″][/post]

[post=”3072″][/post]

Welcome to the forum Christa Cordtz.

You may want to look into Limited Liability Corporations (LLC).

[BOBT12]

Not A Person wrote on Sep 12 2006, 10:18 AM:

Thanks BobT.

Let's face it — alot of things are done which are not disclosed? :ph34r:? That is why you apparently are a fan of the Matrix because it pierces the veil.? I am kinda shocked that you don't see past this idea of it being a theory. To multiply your joys, count your blessings? 😀

[post=”3046″][/post]

Emphasis added.

I want to keep things simple. If there is no disclosure, there is no agreement, HENCE, no strawman, etc. If there are threats, duress, and coercion (TDC), or FRAUD, there is no valid agreement. All contracts require free will and understanding, otherwise, the contract is void. Everything else is chaos. Yes, I will agree that we have been operating under such (TDC) conditions for sometime.

[BOBT12]

Welcome to the forum Not A Person.