Uncle Cheeto

[NYGman]

Unfortunately, the Bible is not law in the US, or Canada, so is completely irrelevant. Laws need to apply regardless of someone's belief in a god or not. If someone has no belief in god, why should they accept any laws derived from said god. Further, whose interpretations do you use, the King James, Old Testimate, Koran, etc. Which gods do you follow, God (Jewish, christian, muslim, ets.) Indian (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva), hell, let's include Satan, the dark lord while we are at it. How about gods of antiquity, Apollo, Zeus, Ra, etc. I think those views are still relevant. Opening up a can of worms by doing this, aren't we?

As for Q, seems like you are saying someone is contacting you all trough secret coded messages, that only you and Q deciples can understand. Sounds like a new god to me. When Q ramblings can actually accurately predict a future event, then maybe it will have value. But to me, interpreting Q in light of past events is a bit like interpreting Nostradamus Quatrains and saying he predicted events. Perhaps we should take something from the fact that Quatrain starts with Q, and that Q is just a modern day Nostradamus, someone who was revered by some for their knowledge of the future, but he actually didn't predict a damn thing anyone could really rely on. It is easy to fit things into a narrative after the fact, but to predict with accuracy, before, I have yet to see.

[Burnaby49]

Nationality is not an ingredient for the purpose of the act. (income tax act) Residents are taxed, NOT Canadians but RESIDENTS within the meaning of the Act.

Finally, I thought, a correct and understandable statement. But . . . . . .

While he's correct that residents of Canada are subject to Canadian income tax, including non-citizens, neither 'resident, 'residents' or even 'RESIDENTS' are defined in the Income Tax Act so "within the meaning of the Act" is not applicable. When it is necessary to determine whether or not an individual is resident in Canada for income tax purposes it becomes an analysis of the individual's lifestyle based on the general definition of 'resident' rather than the analysis of a term defined in the Act. It's similar to common law in that past jurisprudence plays a critical role in this.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Unfortunately, the Bible is not law in the US, or Canada, so is completely irrelevant.

Even if it were, his knowledge of it is suspect to say the least. A failure to render unto Caesar is the smallest of his problems.

[Burnaby49]

If the bible was law in Canada Paraclete Belanger would be our supreme ruler.

[Pottapaug1938]

Property Taxes
When you buy a house you hire an enemy combatant = [lawyer] who works for the crown NOT you. At the deed office where they register it the municipality steals it from you. FRAUD. They divide the ownership into 2 parts. 1 is the lot # primary
2 is the mailing address secondary. The municipality steals the primary & you get the secondary. Look down the first page of your registration. You are listed as joint tenants. What is a tenant? That's right. The municipality charges you rent [property taxes] ..you see where this I think ties into the census = mailing address.

Your posts of today, as with all of your others, are devoid of anything supported by the law; and I'd make better use of my time, going outside to watch the grass grow, than try to counteract all of your blatherings with facts (again, Wnuck and Crain); but I'll give you an example of how your fantasies can be torn to shreds.

Lawyers do NOT "work for the Crown" (or the government, down here), unless they have an actual job with the government. They are involved in real estate closings to 1) make sure that the documents conform to the law, 2) that the title is clear for at least 50 years, and 3) to see to the recording of the relevant documents. They actually work for the mortgage lender; but buyers can always hire their own lawyer, who works for THEM.

If a deed refers to a lot number, that is for identification on a plan filed with the entity where real estate documents are recorded or registered. It's the definitive way of making sure that the land being sold is the same land which is being bought. The street address is a secondary means of identification.

As for the "registration" -- or the names of the owners, the owners are listed ONLY as joint tenants if that's how they own the property. Let's say that I, Thomas Pottapaug, buy a parcel of land in Dana, Massachusetts. The deed describes it as "Lot #2 on a plan of land of Samuel H. Doubleday, filed August 7, 1898", and sets forth the boundaries in greater detail; and the deed also says that this parcel is "known and numbered as 25 Petersham Road, Dana." When I notify people of my new address, I won't say that I live on "Lot #2, etc."; I'll say that I live at 25 Petersham Road in Dana.

As to my ownership... if I buy it all by myself, I am listed, on the deed, as "Thomas Pottapaug". If I buy the land together with my son David, and I want us both to have an undivided, 100% interest in the land, we are listed as "David Pottapaug and Thomas Pottapaug, joint tenants". If one of us dies, the other one owns the land outright.

If I buy the land with my daughter Linda, but I put up 80% of the money and she puts up 20%, we can be "tenants in common", and neither one of us succeeds to the interest of the other if they die. If I buy it with my wife Gail, and want the tax advantages of owning property as married people, we will be "Gail Pottapaug and Thomas Pottapaug, tenants by the entirety.

In no case is anyone a "tenant", as in the case of a non-owner of the land. Your property taxes go to maintain your police, fire, and other municipal services, such as schools.

Easy when you know the facts, isn't it?

[Uncle Leo]

I'm so glad your watching the grass grow. Nothing but good times for you.
You must have forgot the so called government makes trillions on the NY stock market from our bonds.
Since the currency is fiat they can print all the currency they want if they need currency for rent.
Use your head ..maybe you don't have one. Police? They like lawyers are enemy combatants too. They swear an oath to the queen. NOT the people ..kinda like you you. I notice the $100 bills are in short supply. Maybe it's being changed over now?
Do you need a lawn mower yet? You guys are like a broken record. Same crap different day.
Basketball is played on a court, same with tennis, same with law games..with uniforms too. And it's all fixed & rigged.
Have you ever tried watching paint dry? I think you might like that. Ever heard of military tribunals? Ever heard of uranium 1?
CP rail? Didn't your boss give the media millions 4 good coverage lately? I think he did. Is that the tax money your talking about? You guys are going down & that's why you are here in the first place. I wonder if black paint dries faster than white?
There's something for you to investigate. Didn't your boss's dad give the bank of canada to the roths? Fly roths fly= Q term
Have you notice you haven't made any sense yet? Just nonsense. How's the spelling ? I'm pretty good lately.
I know, maybe you know this. I'll ask you. why is the sky blue?

[eric]

Let me give you a little bit of advice Uncle. I realize that in your universe success is measured by how many people read your posts and even better if you can drop bread crumbs along the way that cause people to investigate further it's better than a kinky sexual fantasy. In the real world that most of us inhabit we could gain equivalent knowledge from listening to the meaningless ramblings of those hopeless folks who hang around detox centers and homeless shelters - all they want is someone to listen to them. You haven't posted a thing yet that poses a meaningful argument, or in fact an argument at all. As I've mentioned before, by following a simple procedure, I could become a rock star in your world, but some of us have some sense of dignity and decency. Enough said, you're not worth my time.

[Pottapaug1938]

Uncle Leo said, among other things:

"I'm so glad your [sic] watching the grass grow. Nothing but good times for you."

That's not what I said, although you're clearly too dense to know the difference. What I said was:

"I'd make better use of my time, going outside to watch the grass grow, than try to counteract all of your blatherings with facts (again, Wnuck and Crain)..."

You probably don't catch the references, so I'll spell them out for you, and try to avoid big words.

The Crain case includes one of the best lines about not responding to tax-denier fantasies like yours:

"We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit." Yours have none.

The Wnuck case set forth several reasons, all applicable to your pathetic word-salad postings here, as to why it's a waste of time to try to refute what you say:

A. The number of potential frivolous anti-tax arguments is unlimited.
B. A frivolous anti-tax argument may be unimportant even to its proponent.
C. Many frivolous anti-tax arguments have already been answered.
D. The litigant who presses the frivolous anti-tax argument often fails to hear its refutation.

We could counter your arguments with ease; but you, like Mr. Wnuck, would not get the message. My remark about watching the grass grow was meant to convey the message that, as dull and wasteful of my time as such an action would be, it would still be a better use of my time than if I tried to take your fantasies seriously.

[Pottapaug1938]

Oh -- by the way. I practiced law in Massachusetts; and these are the oaths which I had to repeat:

Chapter 221, Section 38. Whoever is admitted as an attorney shall in open court take and subscribe the oaths to support the constitution of the United States and of the commonwealth; and the following oath of office shall be administered to and subscribed by him:

I (repeat the name) solemnly swear that I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any false, groundless or unlawful suit, nor give aid or consent to the same; I will delay no man for lucre or malice; but I will conduct myself in the office of an attorney within the courts according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, and with all good fidelity as well to the courts as my clients. So help me God.

I could also bore you with the canons of ethics, which essentially say that I must be a zealous advocate for the interests of my clients, as long as I don't break any laws.

Of course, you'll find an excuse to explain all of this away.

[notorial dissent]

Unfortunately Fortunately,FIFU the Bible is not law in the US, or Canada, so is completely irrelevant. Laws need to apply regardless of someone's belief in a god or not. If someone has no belief in god, why should they accept any laws derived from said god. Further, whose interpretations do you use, the King James, Old Testimate, Koran, etc. Which gods do you follow, God (Jewish, christian, muslim, ets.) Indian (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva), hell, let's include Satan, the dark lord while we are at it. How about gods of antiquity, Apollo, Zeus, Ra, etc. I think those views are still relevant. Opening up a can of worms by doing this, aren't we?

As for Q, seems like you are saying someone is contacting you all trough secret coded messages, that only you and Q deciples can understand. Sounds like a new god to me. When Q ramblings can actually accurately predict a future event, then maybe it will have value. But to me, interpreting Q in light of past events is a bit like interpreting Nostradamus Quatrains and saying he predicted events. Perhaps we should take something from the fact that Quatrain starts with Q, and that Q is just a modern day Nostradamus, someone who was revered by some for their knowledge of the future, but he actually didn't predict a damn thing anyone could really rely on. It is easy to fit things into a narrative after the fact, but to predict with accuracy, before, I have yet to see.

NY, that would in fact be my idea of hell on earth. Just as a nod to Pottapaug, they tried that little stunt in Salem, and look how well that turned out. Or we can point to Iran, Pakistan, among a number of states where you can be executed just for stating an opinion that is contrary to the prevailing religion. We had similar issues here in early days, which is exactly and precisely why we have the 1st Amendment. Which is precisely why, as you so rightly point out, the whole Skyfather argument is largely and thankfully irrelevant in US, CN, and UK.

The "resident" issue becomes another case of the word meaning exactly what its common definition is, at least to thinking, functioning individual, which Unc isn't.

Pottapaug, I think your quote very thoroughly and aptly sums up Uncle Bunkum.

"We perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some colorable merit."

Unc's contribution to this conversation is wholly fact, source, and reality free and therefore the above applies in total. The irony of the Skyfather argument is that many of the ones who make the most noise about it would actually come out the worst under that sort of system.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

You must have forgot the so called government makes trillions on the NY stock market from our bonds.

Remind me how that argument worked out for Touchy-Giraffe and the Bean?

[Uncle Leo]

Bob Dylan ......... you got to serve somebody

[NYGman]

Can you point to one bond with value based on the so called birth of it's citizens trading in New York? I can't seem to find any on my Bloomberg terminal.

[notorial dissent]

Can you point to one bond with value based on the so called birth of it's citizens trading in New York? I can't seem to find any on my Bloomberg terminal.

I suspect that is going to be a difficult task, since 1) it's pure bollocks to begin with, and 2) I doubt if he even understands what if he is looking up if he actually is and not just regurgitating something from some other equally bad source. At any rate, if it doesn't have his name on it, it isn't his/him.

[NYGman]

I suspect that is going to be a difficult task, since 1) it's pure bollocks to begin with, and 2) I doubt if he even understands what if he is looking up if he actually is and not just regurgitating something from some other equally bad source. At any rate, if it doesn't have his name on it, it isn't his/him.

Well I looked under John Doe, Jane Doe, Matt Smith, Peter Jones, and a few other random common names, and Nada. Checked my name, again no such luck, but then not being born in the US I also searched UK issuance but again, nothing. It's as if they really don't exist. Please help me find them. ISIN, CUSIP, or anything identifiable that would help. I want to pull the prospectus, it should clearly spell all this out, as required by regulation/law.

[Frater I*I]

Anyone else get the feeling that with the layout of his post Uncle Bad Touch here is just copy/pasting from some other SovCit wargrabble site....

I have to readjust my previous troll score to -3 out of 10....

Negative value due to copyright infringement....

[notorial dissent]

Anyone else get the feeling that with the layout of his post Uncle Bad Touch here is just copy/pasting from some other SovCit wargrabble site....

I have to readjust my previous troll score to -3 out of 10....

Negative value due to copyright infringement....

Ya think!!???? He's not smart enough to have come up with it on his own or to actually pseudo sourced it himself.

[AndyK]

Anyone else get the feeling that with the layout of his post Uncle Bad Touch here is just copy/pasting from some other SovCit wargrabble site....

I have to readjust my previous troll score to -3 out of 10....

Negative value due to copyright infringement....

If so, it has to be the sloppiest cut/paste job I've ever seen.

[Pottapaug1938]

Anyone else get the feeling that with the layout of his post Uncle Bad Touch here is just copy/pasting from some other SovCit wargrabble site....

I have to readjust my previous troll score to -3 out of 10....

Negative value due to copyright infringement....

Ya think!!???? He's not smart enough to have come up with it on his own or to actually pseudo sourced it himself.

I think that this bit from Wnuck has him nicely pegged:

B. A frivolous anti-tax argument may be unimportant even to its proponent.

[Pottapaug1938]

Bob Dylan ......... you got to serve somebody

If Uncle Leo wants to toss this Bob Dylan quote at us, I have one to toss back at him:

Idiot wind
Blowing every time you move your mouth
Blowing down the backroads heading south
Idiot wind
Blowing every time you move your teeth
You’re an idiot, babe
It’s a wonder that you still know how to breathe