fg_admin
Forum Replies Created
-
Bing,
Fixed. Thanks.
-
IRM 11.3.6.2 still says certification is required when it is asked for properly using Form 4506. See:
http://www.irs.gov/irm/part11/ch03s06.html
The pertinent text STILL says:
Quote:11.3.6.2? (06-22-2005)Requesting Certifications
Any member of the public may request certification of a document. However, neither the Freedom of Information Act, 5 USC 552, nor the Privacy Act 5 USC 552a, requires that certifications be provided to a requester. Requests for certification should ordinarily be sent to the office which has custody of the records (i.e., Headquarters, area, territory or campus). The Form 4506, Request for Copy of Tax Return, provides for the certification option when returns are provided pursuant to that process.
We don't know what the heck you are talking about. The fact that the Privacy Act or Freedom of Information Act isn't the origin of the authority to certify records doesn't mean the IRS doesn't have to provide a response. IRS still must follow its own internal precedures, which nowhere say that they aren't obligated to provide a response or to certify documents provided when properly requested in strict accordance with IRM 11.3.6.2.
-
Here's another update from Eddie Kahn released 9/6/2007:
_____________________________________________________
September 2007
Dear Family, Friends, Former ARL Members and/or GLGM Patrons,
How are you all? I hope all is well with you.
I am writing to give you an update on my current situation. For those new to this list that don?t know, after the FBI kidnapped me from Panama on November 1, 2006 (with the invaluable help of a probably bribed Panamanian Immigration official), I was taken to Ocala, Florida and put in jail with no bond. I have been incarcerated for over 10 months.
It has been a tough go. I have seen first hand that the real criminals in America are the one?s called ?judges? and ?prosecutors?. Those people will lie at the drop of a hat. Indeed, they are very arrogant about it. They know you are playing in their ball park?without knowing all the rules of the game. It is tough to win, but it can be done.
Over the last 24 months, I have seen two wins in court over the IRS, and a number of cases dismissed because they (IRS) were afraid of one of two things: 1) The Defendant might win, or 2) The Defendant might introduce evidence into the case the IRS doesn?t want people seeing, as it might blow their scam. I?ve seen more dismissals than in any 24 month period in the last 25 years. A lot of good people sharing their research are really making a difference along with some courageous people that are willing to put it all on the line to try and take our country back from the ?Public Servants? who want to be ?Public Masters?.
My wife, Kookie, has been pressed into service as my fulltime ?legal secretary?. Not her forte, I can assure you. But, she?s a trooper. She does what I feel needs to be done to get my case dismissed. That?s our goal.
Which brings me to the purpose of this email. Being on the ?inside? of the Beast, if you will, for the last ten months has enabled me to get a real look at how they are trying to prosecute federal cases. I have also discovered ?chinks in their armor?.
Because of this insight, I am going to put out a monthly email newsletter. I will cover two subjects each month:
1) What is happening to me personally
2) Describing the ?chinks in their armor? and how we are using that
knowledge to try and get my case dismissed.
I will be explaining the How and Why we are doing what we do.
I will be showing actual court documents. You will also be able to see the U.S. Attorney?s responses.
Since Kookie is working fulltime to help me, she has not been able to work to make the money necessary for her living expenses. So, I am asking for a $50 suggested donation for the year sent to Kookie Kahn @ PO Box 969, Tavares, Florida 32778. However, if you don?t have it or don?t want to give it, or have already donated to our cause in some way, just email and say ?Please put me on the newsletter list? and you will get the newsletter anyway. Caveat: If I get the case dismissed, obviously, I will stop doing research. But, I will give you a step by step detailed letter showing you exactly how we did it.
I already have enough material for five or six newsletters. If the case is dismissed (as it should be) once I run out of material the newsletter will cease. If they don?t dismiss the case, we will continue as long as necessary.
This letter has the first newsletter attached as a complimentary copy. It will give you an idea of what the newsletters will be like. It will be a compilation of mine and others research that is being used in a real, live case. I hope you enjoy it.
Important Note: Many of you have already donated money, products and services to Kookie in the last 10 months while I have been incarcerated. We both appreciate that so much as it has enabled her to be my ?fulltime legal secretary? and devote her time and energy toward getting me released from jail.
Please do not feel that you need to donate $50 for the newsletter. We are happy to send it to you as we appreciate what you have already done. But, so Kookie does not have to go through the list and sort out names, everyone must request to be on this list if you care to receive the Inside the Beast Newsletter. Because I keep Kookie so busy helping me, I am trying to help her by consolidating the Friends and Family Updates written from FreeEddieKahn@yahoo.com with this ?Inside the Beast? Newsletter. You will get updates on our situation by receiving the newsletter, which will give you updates more often not to mention a real insight as to what it is like to be ?Inside the Beast.?
That way Kookie will not have to take the time and effort it takes to put out a separate email which is irregular and not as informative. Thank you for understanding. Drum Roll Please??..
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THE ?INSIDE THE BEAST? REPORT #1
This month we are going to reveal one of the ?weak links? in a federal prosecution. It is the U.S. District Court, as well as the Magistrate and Judge assigned to the Court.
According to a lot of good research by Dr. Ed Rivera, a patriotic, Harvard trained lawyer, there are two types of federal courts in the USA today. One is the District Court of the United States (DCUS) and the other is the United States District Court (USDC). What is the difference? The DCUS is a court ordained and established under Art. III of the Constitution of the United States of America (CUSA). Article III Sec. 1: ?The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.” As you can see, Art. III established the Judicial branch of government and it?s courts.
So what are the U.S. District Courts? United States Supreme Court Chief Justice William Howard Taft stated in the opinion in Balzac v. People of Porto Rico, 258 U.S. 298, 312 (1922) that:
?The United States District Court is not a true United States court established under article 3 of the Constitution to administer the judicial power of the United States therein conveyed. It is created by virtue of the sovereign congressional faculty, granted under article 4, 3, of that instrument, of making all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory belonging to the United States. The resemblance of its jurisdiction to that of true United States courts, in offering an opportunity to nonresidents of resorting to a tribunal not subject to local influence, does not change its character as a mere territorial court.? (Emphasis added)
The U.S. Supreme Court identified the proper court very well: Mookini v. U.S. 303 U.S. 201:
?The term ?District Courts of the United States?, as used in the rules, without an addition expressing a wider connotation, has its historic significance. It describes the constitutional courts created under article 3 of the Constitution. Courts of the Territories are legislative courts, properly speaking, and are not
District Courts of the United States. We have often held that
vesting a territorial court with jurisdiction similar to that vested in
the District Court of the United States does not make it a District
Court of the United States?.? (Emphasis added)
When you read Art. IV sec. 3 it states: ?The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States;?. You see that the U.S. government has land in each of the 50 states that has been ceded to the Federal government and the state no longer has a claim to it. Any violation of the ?Rules or Regulations? of the District, either civilly or criminally, on that property, will be adjudicated in the Territorial court for the Federal district where it occurred. Key Point: Dr. Rivera states the Federal district is not the counties that comprise the District, but rather the Federal land in the counties that comprise the Federal District.
Why is that important? If you are charged with a Federal crime, all or at least part of the act must have occurred on Federal land in that District for that particular USDC to have Territorial jurisdiction to hear the case. Pursuant to U.S. v. Luton 486 F. 2nd 1021, cert. den. 417 U.S. 920:
?Territorial jurisdiction of Federal District Court in criminal cases depends on some part of criminal activity having occurred within its territory.?
This case is found in 18 USCS sec. 3231 n.17. When I found this case, I looked in the Indictment to see if it alleged that all or part of the alleged offenses took place on Federal land. It states ?From in or about 1999 through the date of this Indictment, in Lake and Orange Counties, in the Middle District of Florida, and elsewhere,?. What?s wrong with this picture? Lake and Orange Counties are supposedly in the Middle District of Florida! So why are they listed as though they are outside of the District? Dr. Rivera says it is because the counties don?t comprise the District; the Federal land in the counties comprise the District. I believe this is the Department of Justice?s sneaky way of trying to comply with the law?s requirement that at least part of the act took place on Federal land for the Agency and the Court to have Territorial jurisdiction.
I put in a request for a Bill of Particulars asking the U.S. Attorney to specifically identify the Federal land the acts took place on. (see attachment) Importance of this: If the U.S. Attorney can?t allege and prove that at least part of the alleged acts took place on Federal land in the Middle District of Florida, the Court would have no Subject Matter or Territorial jurisdiction. The case would have to be dismissed. The Bill of Particulars was denied. Are you surprised?
The Judges: Judge Wm. Terrell Hodges is the only ?judge? in the U.S. District Court in Ocala, Florida. Magistrate Gary Jones is the only Magistrate. The question is: Are their offices ordained and established under Art. III or Art. I or IV? In looking at Hodges? Oath of Office, you will notice two things:
1) His Oath of Office is not an Art. III Judge?s Oath of Office. In the First Judiciary Act of 1789 we find the Art. III Oath of Office.
2) Underneath his Oath, it clearly specifies that he is a ?Territorial officer?, which is a civil servant who works for the Executive branch of government in an administrative capacity.
Don?t believe it? I specifically asked Hodges to identify the Article of the CUSA that established his and the Magistrate?s office. I also asked him what Article of the Constitution the USDC in Ocala was established under. His answer since Feb. 5, 2007? Silence! What do you think that means? For details see attachment.
Dr. Rivera states there are only two Art. III Courts in America; one in Washington D.C. and one in Hawaii. All the rest are Art. IV Courts. Problem: Only Art. III Courts have ?judicial power?. Art. IV Courts are Administrative Courts. They have no judicial power. If I have violated a ?National? law and not a ?Local? Rule or Regulation, it can?t be tried in this Court by this judge without my consent?and I am not consenting!
At Dr. Rivera?s suggestion, we subpoenaed the Clerk of the Court for these two documents:
1) Document identifying the Article of the Constitution under which the USDC was established.
2) Document describing territory that comprises the Court?s judicial district.
The Clerk of the Court said she did not have them. We have written her asking who does have them? The importance of these two documents? The first document would prove that the USDC is established under Art. IV, not Art. III. That means it is an Administrative Court, not a Judicial Court. That also means the Court could not hear my case as it has no judicial power. The second document would prove that the Federal District includes only Federal land in the Counties that comprise the District. The US Attorney has never actually alleged that the acts took place on Federal land, therefore, the Court would have no Territorial jurisdiction.
Bottom Line: I believe that the Department of Justice would rather dismiss your case than give you those two documents. I will keep you posted as I will keep pressing for them.
Final Note: Neither the Magistrate or the Judge have any ?judicial power? if their offices are not created under Art. III. They are pretending to be Art. III Judicial officers, violating 18 USC 241 & 242. Next month, I will go into more detail on the Magistrate as he routinely operates outside the bounds of his authority, violating even the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Summary
Remember: He who asks the questions, wins.
The following questions should always be asked in a Federal Court case:
1) Is your office ordained and established under Art. III of the CUSA?
2) Is this court established under Art. III of the CUSA?
3) What document identifies the Art. of the CUSA under which this Court was established?
4) What document describes the Art. of the CUSA under which the Judge and Magistrate?s offices were established?
5) What document describes the territory that comprises this Court?s judicial district?
Until next month,
Eddie
-
Richard 9151,
Perhaps some caselaw on changes in the capitalization of the constitution proving your premise to Mr. Sonik? Why don't you enlighten him? That is what he wants. Until you produce the caselaw or citation proving your premise, which is that a change in capitalization requires an official amendment, then he will continue to question your conclusions, which is:
Quote:THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CAN NOT CHANGE THE original CONSTITUTION WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE STATES IN UNION. -
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/80fa0a2c-49ef-11dc…00779fd2ac.html
Learn from the fall of Rome, US warned By Jeremy Grant in Washington
Published: August 14 2007 00:06 | Last updated: August 14 2007 00:06
The US government is on a 'burning platform' of unsustainable policies and practices with fiscal deficits, chronic healthcare underfunding, immigration and overseas military commitments threatening a crisis if action is not taken soon, the country's top government inspector has warned.
David Walker, comptroller general of the US, issued the unusually downbeat assessment of his country's future in a report that lays out what he called “chilling long-term simulations”.
These include “dramatic” tax rises, slashed government services and the large-scale dumping by foreign governments of holdings of US debt.
Drawing parallels with the end of the Roman empire, Mr Walker warned there were “striking similarities” between America's current situation and the factors that brought down Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government”.
“Sound familiar?” Mr Walker said. “In my view, it's time to learn from history and take steps to ensure the American Republic is the first to stand the test of time.”
Mr Walker's views carry weight because he is a non-partisan figure in charge of the Government Accountability Office, often described as the investigative arm of the US Congress.
While most of its studies are commissioned by legislators, about 10 per cent
– such as the one containing his latest warnings – are initiated by the comptroller general himself.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Walker said he had mentioned some of the issues before but now wanted to “turn up the volume”. Some of them were too sensitive for others in government to “have their name associated with”.
“I'm trying to sound an alarm and issue a wake-up call,” he said. “As comptroller general I've got an ability to look longer-range and take on issues that others may be hesitant, and in many cases may not be in a position, to take on.
“One of the concerns is obviously we are a great country but we face major sustainability challenges that we are not taking seriously enough,” said Mr Walker, who was appointed during the Clinton administration to the post, which carries a 15-year term.
The fiscal imbalance meant the US was “on a path toward an explosion of debt”.
“With the looming retirement of baby boomers, spiralling healthcare costs, plummeting savings rates and increasing reliance on foreign lenders, we face unprecedented fiscal risks,” said Mr Walker, a former senior executive at PwC auditing firm.
Current US policy on education, energy, the environment, immigration and Iraq also was on an “unsustainable path”.
“Our very prosperity is placing greater demands on our physical infrastructure. Billions of dollars will be needed to modernise everything from highways and airports to water and sewage systems. The recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis was a sobering wake-up call.”
Mr Walker said he would offer to brief the would-be presidential candidates next spring.
“They need to make fiscal responsibility and inter-generational equity one of their top priorities. If they do, I think we have a chance to turn this around but if they don't, I think the risk of a serious crisis rises considerably”.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
-
jmartinezclark,
The links are fixed. Thanks for the feedback. In the future, please post this kind of thing in the Errata section.
-
Guy,
Fixed. Thanks for the feedback.
-
Seraph,
That works too. There are lots of ways to skin the cat when you do your homework. Glad you're thinking out of the box, because you'll need to do a lot of it in order to stay free.
We have also added your question to the frequently asked questions section of the passport article for all to read:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Citi…orAPassport.htm
SEDM
-
Seraph,
Thanks for sharing your concerns. The approach we have found that seems to work the best is to:
1. Use Google Earth or an internet phone book to locate a business or individual in a foreign country.
http://earth.google….load-earth.html
2. Call the person up inexpensively on voice over IP.
3. Negotiate to have them send their license place, vehicle registration, and insurance information to you scanned in high resolution image for a fee. Assure them that it is only being used as a template and will be changed so it doesn't have their personal information on it.
4. Make your own foreign vehicle license plate, registration, and insurance. The policeman won't be able to verify it, especially if it is from a country far away.
5. When you get stopped, present the manufactured information. As long as it LOOKS official, that's all that is required. We know of at least one person who has tried this and it has kept him out of trouble for several years now.
Admin
-
1. “domicile”:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Arti…ForTaxation.htm
2. “Trade or business”:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Arti…usinessScam.htm
3. Citizenship
http://famguardian.org/Publications/WhyANational/WhyANational.pdf
-
Mnicholas,
That's not evidence. We're not interested in opinions here, but facts relayed from reliable sources about whether the government is actually doing what you “presume” they are doing. Where is the proof that the U.S. government invaded Iraq over poppy fields? You're practicing a political religion that is irrelevant to whether your friend's enlistment contract is a valid contract. Stay on point, or I”m going to exit this ridiculous interchange. I'm not here to entertain your presumptuous behavior.
Did he relay to you that they have him protecting poppy fields? Where is the proof that the government is dealing the drugs?
-
Mnicholas
Please provide evidence of what was not disclosed that was material to the enlistment contract of your friend.
I'm sure every marriage contract on the planet is void because NO ONE knows everything there is to know about their spouse BEFORE they say “I DO”. That's what an enlistment contract is: you're marrying the government.
-
That's just propaganda posted by government employees at the IRS. Pete Hendrickson has a lot of moles in his forum whose only purpose is to plant doubts in people without adding any evidence upon which to base the doubts. This forum, on the other hand, demands that people post evidence to support their conclusions and discourages political opinions and propaganda from being posted. Anyone who abuses the forum for political purposes and cannot prove their assertions with evidence posted to the forum has their posts deleted, although infrequently.
-
mnichnolas,
How sad and confused you must be. Mighty presumptuous. Why don't you:
1. Provide the evidence proving why the organization you reference is based on a fraudulent contract.
2. Explain for us how two wrongs make a right. Your friend wants to make HIS enlistment contract fraudulent, and use an an excuse that he was not fully informed of his rights at the time he signed it and that he wouldn't have signed it if he had known then what he knows now. Whose fault is that?
You're right that much of what our government does is fraudulent, but this consequence springs not from the contract and corporate charter that founded it, which is the Constitution, but the weak, sinful, corrupt, covetous lawyers who administer the trust contract. The problem is the DE FACTO government, not the DE JURE government.
In many cases we Americans and previous generations are to blame for refusing to take responsibility to oversee the activities of our public SERVANTS and learn enough about law to do that job effectively. The servants can't become corrupt unless and until the Master, which is us, becomes corrupt, complaisant, or fails to properly oversee his servants.
My two cents.
-
You are absolutely correct. On the subject of who the “Kings” are when the scriptures say “Lord and Lords and King of Kings”, the bible says:
Quote:“You [Jesus] are worthy to take the scroll,And to open its seals;
For You were slain,
And have redeemed us to God by Your blood
Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,
And have made us kings and priests to our God;
And we shall reign on the earth.?
[Rev. 5:9-10, Bible, NKJV]
“To Him [Jesus] who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. “
[Rev. 1:5-6, Bible, NKJV]
It is the above which is the reason why the sign on Jesus' cross was inscribed by the Roman guards to say “King of the Jews”, which wasn't quite the truth. The Jews were the ones invited to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, but the parable of the Marriage suffer explains that they rejected that calling and the Lord then turned to the Gentiles and invited them instead to the marriage supper, which is all of us. See Matt. 22 and Rev. 19 for the story of the marriage supper.
Jesus instead was King of His Father's children and family, which is all those who believe in His name and are thereby “adopted” into His family, Jew or Gentile.
Quote:?For whoever DOES the will of God [described in? His Laws] is My brother and My sister and mother.?? [Jesus, in Mark 3:35, NKJV]The people in His family are all those who are OBEDIENT to the Father's will as His fiduciaries, agents, stewards, and foreign ambassadors during their brief time on earth.
Basic
Instructions
Before
Leaving
Earth
BIBLE
Faith without obedience may produce salvation, but those WITHOUT CONSCIENTIOUS OBEDIENCE to God's Laws will get the broom closet instead of the LUXURY SUITE within the “house of many mansions” that Jesus talks about. In that sense, our rewards will be unequal because our effort will be unequal, and Heaven, like most of our modern day government, is a “franchise”.