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

[Pottapaug1938]

I wonder if, some day, I'll be in some downtown somewhere, and see Petey-Boy standing on something (no more wooden soapboxes, y'see), ranting about the criminal IRS, etc. etc. etc., while only the hardcore street people pay him any attention (but are too addled to understand what he is saying); and all because the LoserHeads all caught on to the fact that they have been had, big-time, by Petey and CtC....

[ASITStands]

Pete has answered Pablo

Pablo Rodriguez, this is a perfect example of the problem that exists if this forum left free to spin away from the three purposes plainly laid out at http://losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2020 .

For instance, "Rusty" did not "go down in flames following the CtC method" as you blithely declare. Leaving aside the fact that there IS no "CtC method", Rusty's petition in Tax Court was an attempt to force the processing of his return for 2005 (something for which Tax Court is not the proper venue), and in challenge of a pretense of a claim upon his [non-existent] state tax refund, in regard to which no Notice of Deficiency had ever been issued. (That pretense of a claim was based on an asserted "frivolous" penalty, but in regard to the filing for a year for which the "service" has abandoned any pretense of a claim of any liability on Rusty's part for an actual tax on his earnings...). As he has acknowledged to me by email, "No, I have not had any property taken away. I have supposedly had a lien placed on my State Tax refund (but I don't get a state tax refund...)"

And yet, without my having posted this, your post would have given who-knows-how-many readers a completely inaccurate, discouraging and dis-informational impression, which all the rest of us-- and no one more than me-- would then have had to struggle to rectify, at the expense of who-knows-how-much productive activity. Indeed, I am losing an hour of productive time right now.

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

What many here HAVE experienced is one or more of a series of increasingly desperate, increasingly creative efforts to EVADE THEIR FILINGS. This is a million miles from the same thing as a NO!-- indeed, it is as close to the precise opposite as it could be without being the simple YES! that the vast majority of CtC-educated filers continue to experience (in regard to which it should strike no one as a surprise that the minority facing some kind of evasion are dramatically over-represented here and on the state forums, both as to percentage of participants, and as to volume of posts per participant). The difference is critically important, and you'd best come to understand it. When you do, you'll also understand why it is so important that complete irrelevancies like the SSA stay OFF everyone's radar screen, so that there is room for what actually IS relevant.

You say, "There has been great success at the beginning, this has trickled to mild success over the years." As courteously as I can put this: What the heck do you know of such matters? You haven't the faintest notion of "what went on in the past," nor of "what's going on now," in the sense your words suggest. In regard to the latter, however, do you not read the newsletters at all? Do you somehow miss the victories posted each and every edition? Do you actually read the 'Every Which Way But Loose' posts, and see what actually happens-- TODAY, and over and over-- when all that is done is the filing of an accurate, knowledgeable return, followed by the unfortunate target chosen for one of the occasional abuse sessions standing his or her ground?

The fact is, the book, the newsletter, and the other materials I have voluminously posted on losthorizons.com over the years ARE all that you need to study-- and you must study them all. That doesn't mean glance them over looking for some nugget that you think you need to know, but read them all word-for-word, in order to discover what you need to know.

All that said, many of your previous posts, and the material you assembled and shared, WAS and IS very virtuous, particularly the studied parsing and debunking of IRS publications and the inapposite cases the agency likes to use to suggest what it actually cannot say or substantiate. But they were and are NOT virtuous because of their value in fighting things out with the agency. These things were valuable for their utility in making clear to doubters that when up against the truth revealed in CtC, the agency's got no game, and is trying to save its long-running scam through the use of misdirection and outright BS, and reliance on its correspondent's failure to know how to read or understand such materials. And for that application, your efforts were very valuable indeed. Please continue to do this work, but with the best use for your work, and a commitment to vigorously use it in that way, firmly in mind.

By the way, the old forum material WAS all archived. However, there is so much chaff with the wheat that I am unlikely to re-post it as is.

For the future, I encourage everyone wanting to post research material (and especially you, Pablo Rodriguez, since you HAD done a VERY good job with this sort of thing, much of which I saved off the forum, even if you did not) to simply see to it that it is formatted coherently (in the form of a legal brief, or essay), and then send it to me for posting in an appropriate location on losthorizons.com. Do these in a compartmentalized fashion-- single subject, complete data, introduction, body and conclusion. For instance, "The IRS cites XXX v. XXX for the proposition that ___. However, this case DOES NOT go to that proposition, particularly not in the context of a CtC-educated action, because..."

Wonder how long before Pablo (and others) bolt for the door?

As far as I can tell, there's been nothing from 'Richard614' and little from 'Kensei.'

[The Operative]

As I thought, Pete's logic is if anyone but him loses in court regarding their filing CtC returns, he will have some excuse stating they were not really following CtC. However, if Pete loses in court regarding using CtC on returns, it is because the government is trying to suppress the truth. Of course, none of the deluded will be able to see this.

[Thule]

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

Silly little warrior fails to realize that if Pete closes the forum, it might hurt booksales.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Uncle Petey's impending incarceration and enjoinment will take care of that.

[Famspear]

User "jubilee7" writes:

Well, it is good to see there is the beginning of accumulating input, response and ideas again. I have not posted much but regularly was doing reading of posts (old and new) to gain perspective on how others were dealing with responses to their Ctc filed returns.

Must say I am dismayed that all the posts with suggestions on how to respond, things to emphasize, etc are gone. I was using many of those items and sample letters often to draft my own specific responses.

[ . . . . ]IRS has been pursuing me up to latest CP504 Notice of Levy.

[ . . . .]

I will so miss all the document help found here [in Hendrickson's losthorizons internet forum] that I wish now I had saved a bit more onto my computer.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2021

Helpful hint for "jubilee7": Possible sources of archives of losthorizons materials might be the Criminal Investigation division of the Internal Revenue Service and the Tax Division of the Department of Justice.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Helpful hint for "jubilee7": Possible sources of archives of losthorizons materials might be the Criminal Investigation division of the Internal Revenue Service and the Tax Division of the Department of Justice.

Obviously jubilee hasn't caught up with that new-fangled thing called "caching".

[Famspear]

Over in another forum, I have been having an ongoing "discussion" (if you want to call it that) with someone using the name "Nasty MacNabby" -- the user name obviously having been selected as a rude and unjustified reference to Demo. I believe the user is probably Weston White. (Nasty or Weston, by the way, has convinced himself that I must somehow be Jay Adkisson, the creator of Quatloos, but that's another story.) Anyway, Weston ("Nasty") White comments on Peter Hendrickson's latest actions in locking and re-opening the losthorizons forum:

Wow, now this is classy, Pete appears to be ignoring all the uprising and contention taking place on his fresh new forum and instead makes a post asking for people to either make new 11th edition (as it just so happens) book purchases, either for themselves or their friends, or for helpful donations.

My fellow CtCers I [Peter Hendrickson] know I have just yesterday shown no regard for any of you by deleting all of your hard work and long hours of research and without any warning, consideration, or forethought on my part; and I know I have been failing to keep you updated about the status of my pending trials, but could you spare a bit of money to further aid me. Thank you [heh, you suckers!].

(bracketed language is by Weston/Nasty).

More from Weston/Nasty:

Oh he [Hendrickson] posted a reply now (this bit stuck out at me):
"Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund. [only because I just deleted all such evidence, so technically I am speaking the truth.]"

(bracketed language by Weston).

More from Weston (Nasty) White:

Wow, and it just gets better from there:

[quoting Hendrickson] “As courteously as I can put this: What the heck do you know of such matters? You haven't the faintest notion of "what went on in the past," nor of "what's going on now," in the sense your words suggest. In regard to the latter, however, do you not read the newsletters at all? Do you somehow miss the victories posted each and every edition? Do you actually read the 'Every Which Way But Loose' posts, and see what actually happens-- TODAY, and over and over—”

And I [Nasty/Weston] say to you Mr. Henrickson [sic], do you even bother reading the posts on your own forum? I mean WTF do you think all those posts were about you jackass?!?! THE IRS was giving the majority of all of your forum members a resounding NO!

[Nasty quoting Hendrickson] “your efforts were very valuable indeed. Please continue to do this work [so that I can go ahead and delete it all again in the near future]”

[Nasty quoting Hendrickson] “I encourage everyone wanting to post research material (and especially you, Pablo Rodriguez, since you HAD done a VERY good job with this sort of thing, much of which I saved off the forum, even if you did not) to simply see to it that it is formatted coherently (in the form of a legal brief, or essay), and then send it to me for posting in an appropriate location on losthorizons.com. Do these in a compartmentalized fashion-- single subject, complete data, introduction, body and conclusion. For instance, "The IRS cites XXX v. XXX for the proposition that ___. However, this case DOES NOT go to that proposition, particularly not in the context of a CtC-educated action, because..." [Now to answer your original question Pablo, yes I still have your all of your online research material, now stored offline, but even though you said you did not keep the information on your own PC, could you just go ahead and repost it all again for me, except this time post it in my following structured query format… that would be wonderful, thanks Pab!]”

Glad I [Nasty/Weston White] am not Pablo or for that matter Kensei, because after reading that crap I would probably have kicked the monitor off my desk.

(bracketed language by Nasty/Weston).

[Doktor Avalanche]

Oddly enough, I find myself agreeing with Nasty.

[Imalawman]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

Wow, now he's either laughing as he writes that or he is full-blown, bat-shit crazy. I vote for the latter. I'm impressed, Petey has really developed some very serious mental health issues. The question will be whether a jury of his peers will find that Petey actually believed this crap. Well, Pete, let me just tell you that I have conveyed a resounding "NO!" to about 4 of your followers and then had a court follow-up with that same, short message.

[cynicalflyer]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

Wow, now he's either laughing as he writes that or he is full-blown, bat-sh*t crazy.

It is the sentence that follows the above from Hendrickson that settles the matter...

What many here HAVE experienced is one or more of a series of increasingly desperate, increasingly creative efforts to EVADE THEIR FILINGS. This is a million miles from the same thing as a NO!-- indeed, it is as close to the precise opposite as it could be without being the simple YES! that the vast majority of CtC-educated filers continue to experience (in regard to which it should strike no one as a surprise that the minority facing some kind of evasion are dramatically over-represented here and on the state forums, both as to percentage of participants, and as to volume of posts per participant).

So, you see, Pete's selective cherry picking of posting only victories and failing to post subsequent defeats in the same cases/refunds is ok. But when those same or similar filers start to post, they are an "over-represent[ation]".

Defeat is Victory!
War is Peace!
Ignorance is Strength!

[Imalawman]

Defeat is Victory!
War is Peace!
Ignorance is Strength!

[Pottapaug1938]

Petey reminds me of some of the old-style Stalinist Soviet ideologues. Just as they did, he indulges in Procrustean efforts to distort facts so that they fit in with his delusions, and discards as invalid any facts which cannot withstand the distortions.

[buck09]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

He just said that there was "no CTC method"... In the absence of a method, how would one be able to properly identify a "CTC-educated" filing?

What a moron.

[Pottapaug1938]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

He just said that there was "no CTC method"... In the absence of a method, how would one be able to properly identify a "CTC-educated" filing?

What a moron.

I wonder if this is another Hendrickson word game -- as if the fact that the IRS and the courts have not used the specific words "resounding NO!", and thus his assertion is technically correct. Of course, he still ducks the issue of whether any of his sheep have ever prevailed, using CtC as their guide, in ANY appellate court....

[mutter]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

He just said that there was "no CTC method"... In the absence of a method, how would one be able to properly identify a "CTC-educated" filing?

What a moron.

Obviously hes trying to remove anything that the DOJ can claim was advice on filing. "Theres no method" is his CYA attempt

[Imalawman]

Further, you say, "Nearly every one of us has experienced a resounding NO! to our legal claims for refund." On the contrary, I dare say that NO ONE on this forum has experienced a resounding NO! to any timely, accurate, CtC-educated claim for refund.

He just said that there was "no CTC method"... In the absence of a method, how would one be able to properly identify a "CTC-educated" filing?

What a moron.

Obviously hes trying to remove anything that the DOJ can claim was advice on filing. "Theres no method" is his CYA attempt

Well, he's a day late and a dollar short on that effort. They have everything on the site archived already. (so I've been told...)