How, When and Who: the LostHorizons Forums going dark?

[Thule]

In light of recent events (i.e. Pete locking posting of the forum), I would say that "Pete will delete the forum later" (it has been almost a year since this August 2008 poll) wins...

Nah, wait until it actually gets deleted before you announce the results.

[Famspear]

The BlowhardMeister has expanded his comments:

Folks, this forum is going to be locked for awhile, until I can figure out a way of keeping it from being more a source of confusion and misunderstanding than the source of inspiration and organized, productive effort toward spreading the truth about the tax and the law that it is intended to be. Updates on this will be posted at http://www.losthorizons.com/Newsletter.htm .

As an example of what prompts this temporary interruption in forum activity, consider the phrase "social security number". In the collection of posts that had been active prior to the current locking of the forum, the term "social security number" (in one form or another) appeared more than 900 times. Almost all of those appearances involved efforts to relate the numbers (either their existence or their being furnished) to the operation of the "income" tax in regard to actually non-federally-connected activities! This despite the fact that social security numbers-- whether having had one assigned, or furnishing one to someone else-- have nothing whatsoever to do with the actual misapplication of the tax. See 'A Few Words About Social Security And The Income Tax' ( http://www.losthorizons.com/SSNs.pdf ) for more on this.

Other misunderstandings also chronically erupt like pimples on the forum, distracting readers from attending to virtuous pursuits such as directing each other to sections of CtC and losthorizons.com where particular topics of interest are addressed, and organizing the spreading of the word to those outside the CtC-educated community. (Some of these are not misunderstandings, of course, but are instead deliberate mis-directions. I have no way of definitively preventing enemies of the truth about the tax and the law from slipping onto the forum, other than by confining participation to only those who have shared their victories with me for posting-- which I may, in fact, adopt as a policy...)

This becomes a serious problem because many folks have an unfortunate, inaccurate notion that CtC forums are educational venues. This isn't the case, and never has been. CtC forums exist for the purposes mentioned above.

The following should always be kept in mind:

Those who wish to keep the truth spinning its wheels and making as little forward progress as possible routinely and systematically exploit two basic human foibles:

***1. The natural tendency of those whose education is incomplete to mistake sporadic, creative (and carefully indirect)-- but well publicized-- tax agency resistance to a few educated filings as meaning that there is some piece of the puzzle missing (imagining that otherwise, the generations-old scam that even now continues to successfully bamboozle 180 million Americans 24/7 would have just thrown in the towel and abandoned the field, rather than continue to cast about for some silver-bullet of its own that will frighten or confuse students of the truth into retreat or disarray); and

***2. The equally natural tendency of everyone to be attracted to notions that are presented as, or appear to be, resistance-risk-reducing tricks or short-cuts.

Thus, there is a constant effort to seed the "tax honesty" community (and CtC forums directly) with notions designed to invoke both of these unfortunate tendencies in order to distract forum participants from their primary purposes of:

***3. The perfecting of each other's accurate educations-- not by promoting "alternative" or "supplemental" educations, but by referring the ignorant or misled to relevant material in CtC or on losthorizons.com (exclusive of forum pages);

***2. Mutual encouragement in standing up and acting; and, most importantly,

***1. Planning and executing effective measures for spreading the liberating truth about the tax revealed in CtC.

-Pete

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 9295#19295

(as of 8:15 pm central time, Sunday, July 19, 2009)

[Gregg]

maybe he should have released the book in Latin and then only let hand picked priests try to explain it to the stupid masses.

[The Observer]

I have no way of definitively preventing enemies of the truth about the tax and the law from slipping onto the forum, other than by confining participation to only those who have shared their victories with me for posting-- which I may, in fact, adopt as a policy...)

Does this mean that, after he loses in the Supreme Court, Hendrickson will have to ban himself from the Lost Horizons site?

[wserra]

Any day now, every thread on that board will conclude with a post by Hendrickson: "But it would be wrong."

[Demosthenes]

I'm not sure why Pete bothered to shut down the forum. The faithful will probably all just flock over to http://www.losthorizons2.com.

[Nikki]

Does this mean that, after he loses in the Supreme Court, Hendrickson will have to ban himself from the Lost Horizons site?

Never happen. Pete, in the current newsletter has already determined that he has won:

The Supreme Court Kicks The Can Down The Road

On June 15, the US Supreme Court shamefully declined to hear the petition filed for its review of a blatantly unlawful series of acts by both a district and an appellate court as described in detail <in the SC Petition> … A petition for re-hearing has been filed. I hope that all of you and your uncles, cousins and sainted grandmas will get involved in flooding the justices with letters urging them to not slink away from this hot-potato a second time.
Many good folks participated in a multi-signature letter effort organized by the virtuous Tim Whitney over the last couple of weeks prior to the initial consideration of the petition, and a number of others acted independently, as well. These efforts were great, but clearly not enough. Hundreds of citizens expressing concern about this affair apparently don't mean much to the court-- perhaps thousands will.
That said, it's important to recognize the significance of the court's decision to avoid this case. …

In ANY other case in which these issues arose, the court would unquestionably just overrule or remand the case with appropriate instructions, as a matter of course and without a second thought. That it did not do so emphasizes the fact that the spread of the information revealed in CtC is understood at all levels of the state as the catalyst for the transformational shift of power away from those in whose hands it is now concentrated (amongst whom are those on the federal benches, and those to whom they are beholden) and back to the hands of the people, to whom it really belongs.
Indeed, these issues NEVER HAVE arisen before, and thus the court's effort to dodge them is all the more telling. That is, the lower courts' behavior is not in keeping with "settled law", such that the high court could be expected to take no special interest-- it is exactly the contrary. The lower courts' behavior is directly in violation of numerous Constitutional and statutory provisions and well-settled doctrine pursuant to those provisions, including many Supreme Court precedential rulings. Thus, the case is a prime one for the high court's consideration-- and yet the court declines to take it up. This can only be out of recognition of the significance of the outcome if the issues should actually get the hearing that they merit.
Of course, the Supremes may also be engaging in a little gamesmanship in this evasion of its responsibilities in order to protect the PR value of these bogus "rulings" to the ignorance-tax schemers (which, you will recall, were rendered as "not for citation as precedent"-- even after a specific DoJ request to the contrary) . For instance, the court may be silently invoking some legal gimmickry concerning "standing" or "ripeness" as a pretext for passing on the case at this point, since no effort has actually ever been made to enforce the "rulings".
Or, the court may be taking one step further back, and its declining to take the case may be in silent recognition of the fact that these rulings are simply and plainly void on their face:

But this is a distinction without a difference, because again, in any other case in which the same bad behavior had taken place in the lower courts-- but in which the continuity of the "ignorance tax" scheme was not at risk--, the court would certainly have accepted the petition just on the basis of the due process and other procedural violations alone.
Make no mistake. You CtC warriors are the force that stands on the verge of restoring the Constitutional republic designed by the Founders. Those who oppose that design understand this, and you must understand it, too.

[Imalawman]

That my friends, is denial.

[ASITStands]

In light of recent events (i.e. Pete locking posting of the forum), I would say that "Pete will delete the forum later" (it has been almost a year since this August 2008 poll) wins...

Nah, wait until it actually gets deleted before you announce the results.

A bigger question might be, "How does he re-open the forum?"

How does he announce PalTalk sessions? If he fails to re-open the forum or sponsor a PalTalk session, he stands the risk of losing what little (300+) support he has across the country.

EDIT: No wait! The biggest question is, "What will 'Famspear' do with his time?"

[notorial dissent]

And shockingly enough there seems to be a bit of common sense rearing its unloved head at LH2, certainly wouldn’t last long on the original.

[Bud Dickman]

Forum is back up, none of the old threads are there.

Folks, this forum is unlocked again, and will remains so unless it once again becomes more a source of confusion and misunderstanding than the source of inspiration and organized, productive effort toward spreading the truth about the tax and the law that it is intended to be.

As an example of what prompted the recent temporary interruption in forum activity, consider the phrase "social security number". In the collection of posts that had been active prior to the recent locking of the forum, the term "social security number" (in one form or another) appeared more than 900 times. Almost all of those appearances involved efforts to relate the numbers (either their existence or their being furnished) to the operation of the "income" tax in regard to actually non-federally-connected activities! This despite the fact that social security numbers-- whether having had one assigned, or furnishing one to someone else-- have nothing whatsoever to do with the actual misapplication of the tax. See 'A Few Words About Social Security And The Income Tax' ( http://www.losthorizons.com/SSNs.pdf ) for more on this.

Other misunderstandings have also chronically erupted here, distracting readers from attending to virtuous pursuits such as directing each other to sections of CtC and losthorizons.com where particular topics of interest are addressed, and organizing the spreading of the word to those outside the CtC-educated community. (Some of these are not misunderstandings, of course, but are instead deliberate mis-directions. I have no way of definitively preventing enemies of the truth about the tax and the law from slipping onto the forum, other than by confining participation to only those who have shared their victories with me for posting-- which I may, in fact, adopt as a policy...)

This becomes a serious problem because many folks have an unfortunate, inaccurate notion that CtC forums are educational venues. This isn't the case, and never has been. CtC forums exist for the purposes mentioned above.

The following should always be kept in mind:

Those who wish to keep the truth spinning its wheels and making as little forward progress as possible routinely and systematically exploit two basic human foibles:

***1. The natural tendency of those whose education is incomplete to mistake sporadic, creative (and carefully indirect)-- but well publicized-- tax agency resistance to a few educated filings as meaning that there is some piece of the puzzle missing (imagining that otherwise, the generations-old scam that even now continues to successfully bamboozle 180 million Americans 24/7 would have just thrown in the towel and abandoned the field, rather than continue to cast about for some silver-bullet of its own that will frighten or confuse students of the truth into retreat or disarray); and

***2. The equally natural tendency of everyone to be attracted to notions that are presented as, or appear to be, resistance-risk-reducing tricks or short-cuts.

Thus, there is a constant effort to seed the "tax honesty" community (and CtC forums directly) with notions designed to invoke both of these unfortunate tendencies in order to distract forum participants from their primary purposes of:

***3. The perfecting of each other's accurate educations-- not by promoting "alternative" or "supplemental" educations, but by referring the ignorant or misled to relevant material in CtC or on losthorizons.com (exclusive of forum pages);

***2. Mutual encouragement in standing up and acting; and, most importantly,

***1. Planning and executing effective measures for spreading the liberating truth about the tax revealed in CtC.

I ask each of you enjoying the privilege of posting here to do everything you can to keep the activity here on mission.

-Pete

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... b64f0ed334

[LPC]

On June 15, the US Supreme Court shamefully declined to hear the petition filed for its review of a blatantly unlawful series of acts by both a district and an appellate court ....

I know I'm too logical most of the time, and perhaps that's why I can't help but be fascinated by the Hendrickson train wreck, which is the legal, jurisprudential, moral, ethical, emotional, and logical equivalent of a carnival freak show.

Critical thinking 101: Is it in any way rational to believe that a District Court judge and three judges of a federal Circuit Court of Appeals could engage in a "blatantly unlawful series of acts" and the other judges of the Circuit Court, as well as the Supreme Court, would not notice?

Yes, judges make mistakes, and laws change. But "blatantly unlawful"?

The rhetoric crumbles on the page under the weight of its own absurdity.

[LPC]

Forum is back up, none of the old threads are there.

Yes, every totalitarian regime needs a good purge every once in awhile.

War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; Ignorance is Strength.

Lost Horizons is getting more peaceful, more free, and stronger all the time.

[wserra]

I also hope that you (forum admin) make this a closed site by subscription only.

"By the power of Pete I command thee!"

[Famspear]

Losthorizons user Pablo Rodriguez is daring to critique the PeterEricBlowhardMeister:

Dear Forum Admin [Peter Eric Hendrickson] and Fellow CtC Warriors:

I don't know about you, but I referenced a LOT of my current research material from the site without copying and saving posts, as some other members were apt to do.

We were under the impression that the CtC method was really as simple as filling out the correct form(s) with the correct information (or correcting a form) and it would work. While there has been great success at the beginning, this has trickled to a mild success over the years. Nearly every one of us on the forum has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund.

What has NOT been presented is how to fight an angry gorilla [i.e., the Internal Revenue Service] who uses every means in the book and sometimes not in the book to confuse, confound, upset, demoralize, bankrupt, and destroy peoples' lives.

Now that the baby has been thrown out with the bath water, can't you [Hendrickson] create a Read-only thread that has all the prior postings in it?

That was some very valuable, hard-learned, hard-earned, well thought, insightful research on nearly every area of the IRS, the SSA, among others. I admit it included forays into areas of less known and less certain research. We HAVE been searching for answers and frankly, Every Which Way But Loose, "read the book," "read the newsletter," and "read the supplemental materials CD" aren't cutting it - THEY DON'T ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS! THEY DON'T PROVIDE AN ASSURANCE ABOUT AREAS WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! We have entered an area where few if any of us are competent to fight (learning laws, reading regulations, learning the federal rules of evidence, federal rules of civil procedure, and our own state's laws, regulations, etc.) And when we see brave warriors like Rusty [referring to T. Russell Ragan, a CtCer who recently was pummeled with penalties in court and more or less threw in the towel] go down in flames following the CtC method, we can't help but question what's going on and what can we do about it. We see other brave warriors in the midst of the fight and few of us can provide assistance because we don't have the background and understanding to provide the assistance required. Most of us feel like the water boy on a college team that is going against the pros.

Look what Kensei (among many others) has been through as a perfect example. Most people would have given up by now. I am certainly amazed, impressed, and honored by Kensei's stick-to-it attitude. He wrote incredibly valuable information about what he was learning. And now? It's completely gone.

Perhaps you put a "filter" on the drain before you dumped the old information? Make that information available again, please!

Thank you.

A veteran without his research notes

--bolding added

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2024

[Famspear]

Pablo wrote:

What has NOT been presented is how to fight an angry gorilla [i.e., the Internal Revenue Service] who uses every means in the book and sometimes not in the book to confuse, confound, upset, demoralize, bankrupt, and destroy peoples' lives.

Obviously, Peter Hendrickson's wonderful truth and message has still not sunk in with Pablo.

Pablo, can't you understand that every time that one of Hendrickson's followers' lives is confused, confounded, upset, demoralized, bankrupted, and destroyed, that defeat represents a TOTAL VICTORY for the liberating truth found in Hendrickson's Cracking the Code tax evasion scam? Haven't you been reading anything that Hendrickson and dweebs like Patrick Michael Mooney have written?

[Famspear]

More dissension among Hendrickson's Heroes, this from user "prometheus":

pete,

I have great respect for you and this work, but I think you are making a big mistake by deleting the archives here. You are basically undercutting us at a time when we need each other's sharing and input more than ever . Most of us do not have the $100,000s of dollars or the time to fight the irs as you are doing. You say your case is the exception, but on what basis can you say that when many, many others are saying they are facing similar irs attacks? So we are searching for a way to do it on a budget, and you and your staff are not helping in this effort by curtailing our free speech, our research, and our thoughts while at the same time offering us nothing better to help in our defense short of following in your own footsteps which few can afford or even fathom without the legal help to which you have been afforded. Do you think that amputating us below the knee here is going to help us to walk better??
Do you think that throwing the baby out with the bathwater is going to help the baby?
I think Richard614 had some great thoughts to share, and I think your argument about the ssn having nothing to do with the misapplication of the income tax is mistaken logic on its face, my good friend.
And I would be happy to share how that is so, if you or anyone cares to ask.

(bolding added).

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... e15a#19319

[wserra]

More dissension among Hendrickson's Heroes, this from user "prometheus":

Most of us do not have the $100,000s of dollars or the time to fight the irs as you are doing.... few can afford or even fathom without the legal help to which you have been afforded.

Allow me to suggest Hendrickson's response.

Dear Prometheus:

You should know that both of my lawyers have asked the judge to relieve them, since I basically don't have a pot to piss in. I'm going to either have to defend myself, or be assigned a lawyer who (since I'm not paying the bill) won't hesitate to tell me how full of it I am. In all likelihood, I'm going someplace without internet access for the next few years.

Hope this makes you feel better.

Good luck,
Pete

[Lambkin]

But that means Pete is right, right? Victory?

[Famspear]

But that means Pete is right, right? Victory?

Yep. A long jail term for the PeterEricBlowhardMeister will just prove that His Pontificating Peteness is right.