
BOBT12
Forum Replies Created
Wow, I love this post. Keep spreading the great news! 😆
iscovedel, welcome to the Family Guardian
I don't know that much about the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), however, Family Guardian has some very interesting information on the subject:
- Quote:Originally posted by Bing:The IRS Commissioner gets a ton of mail and can more easily plausibly deny having read or received letters/affidavits from American Citizens. In fact, he has his own Dept. set up to handle these Issue letters, it is called the “Commissioner's Complaint & Processing Group.” And most of the stuff sent to the IRS Commish gets farmed out to the IRS's Ogden, Utah Campus. That is where the dude Dennis Parizek has his Office.
So, I think, writing to the IRS Commish is a waste of time. Far better to make you points with IRS attorneys who do the Commish's bidding. Imagine if 10,000 or 100,000 American Citizens wrote to the IRS's lawyers every single month!!!
I agree with Bing’s strategy 98%! However, the key, in my humble opinion (IMHO), is IRS RESTRUCTURING ACT 1998 (RA1998):
Quote:Approval Process for Liens, Levies and SeizuresThe Act direcs the Commissioner to determine situations in which an employee's decision to levy or seize a taxpayer's property should be reviewed by a supervisor. The Commissioner is also directed to adopt procedures which provide for disciplinary action in the event the review process is not followed. Act section 3421. The section is effective on the date of enactment, July 22, 1998, except for actions under an automated collection system, where the section is applicale to actions initiated after December 31, 2000.? Act section 3421 ( c) (2).
This Act holds the office of the Commissioner responsible for investigating problems stemming from the IRS, is there a similar provision for the IRS attorneys? Should I feel that it is impolite to state the law to those who would take that which is mine (Rights granted by the Creator: Life, Liberty, Property (LLP))?
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?t=2840&page=7&pp=10
I think that it is worth a stamp to notify the Commissioner, as well as the attorneys, and make the office accountable for the actions of the IRS, isn't that part of the job anyway?
As I have stated previously, each of us must decide which course of action works best for ourselves.
Dear Riverway,
Please keep in mind that we each must decide how we wish to fight tyranny, such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Each of us must decide which course of action works best for ourselves, based on the information at our disposal. It is my intent to provide as much useful information as possible, then you must make the final determination.
Please keep in mind that the IRS is currently a two trillion dollar a year beast, and those who are running the operation, as well as all others who may be benefiting from this scam that is today's IRS, may not be willing to stop stealing from the people (you and me) without a great deal of persuasion (maybe 70-80 million active resistors?). However,
Quote:A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.-unknownQuote:Originally posted by Bing: Riverway, you might want to consider writing to:Donald L. Korb, IRS Chief Counsel
Nicholas J. DeNovio, IRS Deputy Chief Counsel, Technical
Jonathan R. Zelnik, IRS Senior Counsel
John Klotsche, Senior Advisor to IRS Commissioner
Their address is:
IRS
1111 Constitution Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20224
One might write to one of the four IRS lawyers, and then also send notarized original triplicates to the other three.
Spread the love around.?
Bing
I agree with Bing?s strategy ONE HUNDRED 100%! Thanks for the IRS attorney name list. 😀 I want to add name(s) to the list however. Show Mr. Mark W. Everson, Commissioner, some love. Under IRS RESTRUCTURING ACT 1998 (RA1998) the IRS employees must give their full name, employee ID number, direct telephone number, under Act section 3503 (a). This is another reason to sue.
Quote:Approval Process for Liens, Levies and SeizuresThe Act direcs the Commissioner to determine situations in which an employee's decision to levy or seize a taxpayer's property should be reviewed by a supervisor. The Commissioner is also directed to adopt procedures which provide for disciplinary action in the event the review process is not followed. Act section 3421. The section is effective on the date of enactment, July 22, 1998, except for actions under an automated collection system, where the section is applicale to actions initiated after December 31, 2000.? Act section 3421 ( c) (2).
Here is a sample letter:
Quote:Certified number: [XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX]Mr. Mark W. Everson, Commissioner
Internal Revenue Service
1111 Constitution Ave. Room 3000
Washington, D.C. 20024
July 7, 2005
Re: Dispute of ?tax? obligation owed
Dear Mr. Everson:
I am again in receipt of a number of suspicious demands. Since many of these papers do not bear a signature and are not accompanied by validating documentation, I have no means to evaluate their integrity. I object to those under your direct supervision sending me threatening letters without clear identification of who sent the letter and their authority to do so. To enable me to determine whether the threatening letters are frauds, I request that you send me an assessment, signed under penalty of perjury, for each of the following years:, 20xx, and 20xx. If I do not hear from you within thirty (30) days of the verifiable receipt of this letter disputing a tax obligation for the years in question, I will reasonably conclude that there are no assessments for the years referenced and shall expect your internal investigation to determine who violated laws by sending the threatening letters and, I am also requesting a refund from the treasurer.
Kindly, release any and all Federal Tax Lien(s), Levy(s), and Notice of Levy(s).
Pursuant to Title 28, USC ?1746(1) and executed “without the United States,” I affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united states of America that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my belief and informed knowledge. I now affix my signature to all of the above affirmations with EXPLICIT RESERVATION OF ALL OF MY UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, WITHOUT PREJUDICE to any of those rights pursuant to U.C.C. 1-207 and U.C.C. 1-103.6
Thanking you in advance for respecting my right to DISPUTE A TAX OBLIGATION,
Citizen/Principal, by Special Appearance, in Propria Persona, proceeding Sui Juris
_______________________? ? ? ? ? ?
WITNESSES
_______________________
WITNESSES
John W. Snow
U.S. Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220
Dennis L. Parizek, Manager, Examination Operations
Internal Revenue Service
Ogden, UT 84404
OGDEN SERVICE CENTER
TAXPAYER ADVOCATE
P.O. BOX 9941, STOP 1005
OGDEN, UT 84409
Director, Payment Compliance
Internal Revenue Service
1001 LIBERTY AVE
SUITE 1300
PITTSBURGH, PA 15222
The key, in my humble opinion (IMHO), is JURISDICTION! Filing for a Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing indicates that you are a taxpayer, and thus, enters you into the IRS's jurisdiction. You are granting the IRS/Tax Court jurisdiction, you thereby lose a very powerful position as a non-taxpayer. Then the battle becomes how much you should pay/owe, and somehow you then must prove that you don't owe the taxes that the IRS allege that you owe in their corrupt Tax Court. Also, I believe that this so-called court (more like an administrative hearing that forces you to give up all your rights in exchange for some hopeful privileges) bars (this may no longer be true under RA1998) you from taking your issue to any other (constitutional) court for appeals. I would rather be in the stronger position, and demand that the IRS prove that I owe anything in the first place, wouldn?t you?
Quote:Prohibition on Requests to TaxpayersThe [RC1998]Act prohibits any U.S. officer or employee from requesting that a taxpayer waive the right to bring a civil action against the United States or any officer or employee thereof for any action taken in commection with the internal revenue laws. Act section 3468 ( a). This prohibition does not apply where the taxpayer knowingly and voluntarily waives such right or where the request is make either in the presence of the taxpayer's attorney (or other federally authorized tax practitioner) or in writing to the taxpayer's attorney or other representative. Act section 3468 {b}.
Slight changes to section 3468 “b”, and “a” due to code error. And sections are written out due to lack of symbols.
http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…st=0&#entry1238
The IRS has scam after scam waiting for the unwwary!
After 30 days you may wish to consider writing to John W. Snow, U.S. Treasury:
Quote:Certified number: [XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX]John W. Snow
U.S. Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220
July 7, 2005
Re: Request for Refund
Dear Mr. Snow:
I request that you refund all sums taken from me for ?taxes.?? Since agents purporting to represent the treasury have repeatedly refused to document and verify that I am a taxpayer owing a tax, I am without a means to know how much of my money your agency has taken, for what alleged years or anything else. Since I am deprived of a means to know what your representatives want, I am simply asking that you refund all sums taken from me.
Pursuant to Title 28, USC ?1746(1) and executed “without the United States,” I affirm under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united states of America that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my belief and informed knowledge. I now affix my signature to all of the above affirmations with EXPLICIT RESERVATION OF ALL OF MY UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, WITHOUT PREJUDICE to any of those rights pursuant to U.C.C. 1-207 and U.C.C. 1-103.6
Thanking you in advance for respecting my right to DISPUTE A TAX OBLIGATION,
Citizen/Principal, by Special Appearance, in Propria Persona, proceeding Sui Juris
_______________________? ? ? ? ? ?
WITNESSES
_______________________
WITNESSES
Thanking you in advance for respecting my rights, respectfully,
Citizen/Principal, by Special Appearance, in Propria Persona, proceeding Sui Juris
Attn: Mr. Mark Everson, IRS Commissioner
Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service
Atlanta, GA 39901-0010
For more information:
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?p=29912#post29912
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?t…&highlight=CDPH
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?p=7847#post7847
http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…st=0&#entry1049
http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…st=0&#entry1510
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?t=2840&page=7&pp=10
http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…=227&hl=parizek
BOBT12 😉
- JWR wrote on Jul 5 2005, 05:15 PM:Thanks Guys,
BOBT12, have you seen this case? HERE Found this about two or so weeks ago. Kinda interesting. I guess it still applies to an employer.
[post=”1590″][/post]Thank you, this infomation is very useful. 😀
- JWR wrote on Jul 1 2005, 07:28 PM:Thanks for that link BOBT12. It's about 14 hours late for me, though. I couldn't find that amended CDPH form so had to use my black Sharpy on it to make it more presentable (I don't have internet at home right now). I just sent off my request for another CDPH but don't expect too much. I just want to hold them back a while until I can get this lawsuit against my “employer” off the ground. When I get the chance, hopefully this weekend, I'll do some more studying on it. I still need to get more FOIA/PA requests out the door.
JWR
[post=”1583″][/post]You are welcome JWR. I wish you well in your above endeavor. 🙄
Of course you are aware that I am the Plantiff in a suit (state court) against my former bank. Recently, the judge in the case has sustained some and overruled some of the Preliminary Objections by the Defendants' (the Bank). So, as you can see, I have my work cut out for me.
I am actually pretty happy with the progress so far. Usually the judge will just dismiss the case, period. Sometimes using the Defendants attorney's draft order! Thus, I feel that I am making good advancement in a system that is not geared to support non (BAR admitted) attorneys, and is often, itself, involved with some form of corruption (usually stealing taxes, property, etc., from the commonwealth – the people).
- Riverway wrote on Jul 1 2005, 05:31 PM:Just received letter 1058 Final Notice. Any suggestions about how to get my ducks in a row in case this Lien goes before a judge to get perfected? Will they usually take it to a judge?[post=”1581″][/post]
Usually the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will not go before any judge, often they will not even sign the forms outright. Or they often attempt to mislead you, such as signing for someone else, i.e., CSherewood [signing] for P S LANE. How can CSherewood sign for P S LANE. If CSherewood has authority to do the deed then he or she should sign for themselves. Why can't P S LANE sign the document? In short the goons at the IRS do not want to take any risk for their unlawful actions.
What the IRS will often do is suggest that you file for a Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing (CDPH) by using Form 12153. Then you will be deceived into becoming a Plaintiff, and then must prove that you don't owe the taxes that the IRS allege that you owe in their corrupt Tax Court.
The IRS has scam after scam waiting for the unwwary!
Before you do anything, please review the enormous work Family Guardian has done on this matter:
http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/Instruct…geAllLevies.htm
BOBT 😉
- Quote:Originally posted by Bing:Bobt12, sir, you are mistaken in your assessment that any legislative act by Congress can supersede the 4th Amendment. It cann't.
It is not my assessment that any legislative act by Congress can supersede the 4th Amendment, or any other part of the uSA Constitution. However, I do feel that this, and many other congressional acts, executive orders, supreme court descisions, etc., are enforced as though these actions supersede the Constitution, whether they are in agreement with the Constitution or not! Thus, I think that it is in our best interest to fight these acts by every means that we can muster, that is the only point I am trying to make.
http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?p=27755#post27755
Quote:An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties;affords no protection; it creates no office;it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…=361&hl=real+id
Dear Bing, I agree with you in principal, however, in practice I feel that as these acts are passed it is getting more difficult to defend ones rights. The passage of this dangerous legislation is tyranny in action, it seems to me. Although, I think that you and I are in pretty close agreement, I just want to clarify my intention.
Example: There's ample evidence that citizens have a right to travel freely, however, if one tries to travel without state documents (drivers license, tags, etc.) one is often harrassed to the point of physical danger.
http://famguardian.org/forums/index.php?sh…t=15&#entry1521
If one refuse to do whatever the American Gestapo commands, whether or not he or she has probable cause, one runs the real risk of being tasered, etc., like a wild animal!
I think this serves Souter right. This artical states, “Developer wants 'Lost Liberty Hotel' built upon property of David Souter”:
Quote:A private developer contacted the local government in Supreme Court Justice David Souter's hometown in New Hampshire yesterday asking that the property of the judge ? who voted in favor of a controversial decision allowing a city to take residents' homes for private development ? be seized to make room for a new hotel.Logan Darrow Clements faxed a request to Chip Meany, the code enforcement officer of the town of Weare, N.H., seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road, the present location of Souter's home.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article….RTICLE_ID=45029
Are we are on our way to (Censored) in a handbasket, and if so, these will likely be our boarding passes? Please see this artical PATRIOT ACT AND REAL ID: FAREWELL TO LIBERTY by Nancy Levant:
Quote:The Patriot Act, which should be called The Communists? Act, gives our government the power to search without warrants or court orders. It gives our government the right to use ?administrative subpoenas,? which allow for the seizure of personal information, including, but not limited to, educational records, medical records, credit and banking records, Internet records, library records, on and on. Farewell, 4th Amendment.This seizure of information can be used upon individual people, groups of people, or any associations, clubs, or organizations that disagree with the activities of the government. The Patriot Act allows for a DNA Bank to collect physical information about anyone who is ?suspected? of being a ?terrorist.? Unfortunately for us, the Act also permits American citizens to be classified as ?foreign powers,? which, thanks to the Real ID, allows for our electronic tracking and surveillance…
emphasis added.
Here is an interesting articial, No Child Left Un-drugged:
Quote:Parents must do everything possible to retain responsibility and control over their children's well-being. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to rule every aspect of our lives, including how we raise our children. Forced mental health screening is just the latest of many state usurpations of parental authority: compulsory education laws, politically-correct school curricula, mandatory vaccines, and interference with discipline through phony ?social services? agencies all represent assaults on families. The political right has now joined the political left in seeking the de facto nationalization of children, and only informed resistance by parents can stop it. The federal government is slowly but surely destroying real families, but it is hardly a benevolent surrogate parent.Quote:As one of your constituents, I urge you to please add your name to the Parental Consent Act of 2005. This bill prohibits the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program and protects the rights of parents. Sponsors are needed in the U.S. Senate and co-sponsors are needed to join Congressmen Ron Paul and Tom Feeney.emphasis added.
- Bing wrote on Jun 24 2005, 06:15 AM:Swweeeeeet! 😀
Absolutely perfect!!!
Another GREAT V-i-c-t-o-r-y for the Tax Honesty Movement.
It should come as no surprise that when Banister's attorney asked the IRS Employee with 30 years of IRS experience, to cite the law that required American Citizens to pay income taxes to the IRS, the IRS Employee said he COULD NOT CITE ANY SUCH LAW.
BECAUSE THERE IS NO LAW!!!!
Ahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!! 😛 😛 😛
Bing
[post=”1558″][/post]I could not have said it any better than this!!! 😉
Here is some interesting New World Order (NWO) information, The Bilderberg Group by Paul Vigay:
Quote:Conspiracy or not, the Bilderberg Group is a fascinating example ofbehind-the-scenes 'invisible' influence-peddling in action.
Bilderbergers represent the elite and wealthy establishment of every Western
nation. They include bankers, industrialists, politicians and leaders of
giant multinational corporations. Their annual meetings, which take place at
a different location each year, go unannounced, their debates unreported,
their decisions unknown.
The group certainly fits C.Wright Mills's definition of a Power Elite: 'A
group of men, similar in interest and outlook, shaping events from
invulnerable positions behind the scenes.'
The New World Order
I began my investigation of Bilderberg while in Washington, D.C. in the
autumn of 1975. I had read bits and pieces on Bilderberg in right-wing
literature and so I went directly to its source, the Liberty Lobby, an
ultra-conservative political pressure group located a stone's throw from
Capitol Hill. There I interviewed one E.Stanley Rittenhouse, Liberty Lobby's
legislative aide. Rittenhouse solemnly explained the existence of a
Jewish-communist conspiracy to rule the world by way of a 'New World Order',
whose eventual goal is one world government. To prove this point Rittenhouse
incessantly recited passages from his handy pocket Bible and explained the
evolution of this great conspiracy.
emphasis added…
For a little background, here is an article from hushmoney.org, regarding Burney Brushears:
Quote:Burney Brushears, Gamaliel MinistriesThe following search result is the government registration for a corporation sole sales company by the name of “Gamaliel Ministries” run by Burney Brushears. Gamaliel Ministries will charge you $5,000.00 if you want to buy a corporation sole from them. Yet they are government-registered as a “nonprofit corporation.”