I've been reading this forum for a long time, but never posted! I was hoping one of you could explain the theory surrounding paying your bill with a bond. I'm not even sure exactly how it's supposed to work, but I think the theory is that you have an account under your social security number with the US treasury and anytime you have a debt you can offset it by this magical account.
Obviously this is a ridiculous theory, but I'm curious where it originated and how.
Any advice/help you can give me would be appreciated!
I suspect it was a combination of
"I'm too SPECIAL to pay taxes or bills" etc...
and
"This is your mind on drugs"
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Still_Smilin wrote:I think the theory is that you have an account under your social security number with the US treasury and anytime you have a debt you can offset it by this magical account.
Obviously this is a ridiculous theory, but I'm curious where it originated and how.
I was exposed to tax protester arguments about the same time I was exposed to urban legends, and the two are related.
You're probably never going to discover the origin of the idea that there are secret treasury accounts based on social security numbers for the same reason that you're never going to discover the origin of the idea that there are alligators in NY sewers, or the idea that somebody once put a cold, wet dog in a microwave oven.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
I've been reading this forum for a long time, but never posted! I was hoping one of you could explain the theory surrounding paying your bill with a bond. I'm not even sure exactly how it's supposed to work, but I think the theory is that you have an account under your social security number with the US treasury and anytime you have a debt you can offset it by this magical account.
Obviously this is a ridiculous theory, but I'm curious where it originated and how.
Any advice/help you can give me would be appreciated!
I betcha you got the point before Demosthenes deleted my posts.
I've been reading this forum for a long time, but never posted! I was hoping one of you could explain the theory surrounding paying your bill with a bond. I'm not even sure exactly how it's supposed to work, but I think the theory is that you have an account under your social security number with the US treasury and anytime you have a debt you can offset it by this magical account.
Obviously this is a ridiculous theory, but I'm curious where it originated and how.
Any advice/help you can give me would be appreciated!
I betcha you got the point before Demosthenes deleted my posts.
... namely, that nothing David says has any legal validity. He has repeatedly been proven wrong; and whenever he has been challenged to back up any of his fantasies with verifiable, unredacted proof he either changes or ducks the subject, posts redacted items which look like they were retrieved from a courthouse wastebasket, or posts excerpts from old treatises and pretends that they say something relevant.
If David was ever in my neck of the woods (God forbid) and said that it would be sunny tomorrow, I'd make sure I knew where my raincoat was.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
I appreciate the responses! I'm trying to determine how to respond to someone who is citing this stuff. I have already tried the, "Are you kidding me? Don't be dumb" approach and that hasn't worked. Unfortunately for me, the whole thing in itself is so bizarre I don't even know how to point out how it's incorrect.
For example, the wages argument I can easily debunk it and tell someone why it's wrong using the code, court cases, etc. In this case, I have nothing other than just shaking my head (which maybe is all you CAN do!)
To give people a better idea of what I'm looking at, here's an excerpt of what it might say (I apologize in advance for not having a scanner)...
(Of course it's written on an "official" looking document...
Private Registered Bond for Setoff
Non-Negotiable
Value: $100,000,000,000.00 (One Hundred Billion) US Dollars
RE: Certificate of Live Birth
Accepted for Value and Exempt from Levy
Deposited to US Treasury and Charged to xxxx
Bond Order
Please deposit this Bond to an account bearing the USPO Registered Mail xxxx for future identification purposes, and to be used as a set off account against any bills taxes or claims, and the like, against [insert name here], Debtor....
Please adjust any bills, taxes or claims and the like against [insert name here] to zero, charge, settle and close any such account and return the interest to the principal [name] at the above post location. Timothy F. Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, the united states Department of The Treasury shall have Thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of this Bond, as witnessed by the Date of Receipt affixed to the US POST OFFICE INTERNATION MAIL Receipt, to dishonor this Bond by returning this Bond to the Principal, with an explanation of all deficiencies, at the stipulated mailing address by non-domestic post... blah, blah, blah
---------
I thought maybe there would be something covering this on Dan Evans' faq page, but I didn't notice anything!
I will research those names you gave me Demo, thanks!
The DOJ's Criminal Tax Manual from 2001 has some good information on bogus financial instruments. It may be a little dated, but should be a good place to start.
David Merrill wrote:Like I showed you. These Certificates work just fine if used correctly. With this specific example the court clerk told me the fine had been waived - that I did not owe it anymore and tried to give it back. I insisted and left it on the counter.
In other words, it was not accepted and ended up in the trashcan after David left.
A victory!!!
It should be noted that David served time in prison for passing bogus paper.
MOD Note: The quoted text is part of a post moved to the DMVP Thread Hijacks thread.
Still_Smilin wrote:I appreciate the responses! I'm trying to determine how to respond to someone who is citing this stuff. I have already tried the, "Are you kidding me? Don't be dumb" approach and that hasn't worked. Unfortunately for me, the whole thing in itself is so bizarre I don't even know how to point out how it's incorrect.
If the person is not a friend, just deride the idea mercilessly then leave. The only way to stomp out this virus is to smother it in ridicule. You won't change their minds, but you might make them so embarassed they stop trying to pass on the virus.
But if they are a friend, then a different tactic is warranted. Tell them that they need to provide you with independently verified objective documentation. Until such time inform him that the topic is off limits. Don't take no for an answer, be firm. If he insists, excuse yourself from the conversation and walk away.
So what does "independently verified objective documentation" mean? Besides the obvious, the documentation must come from outside the nutter community. And it must not be dependent upon "creative interpretation", it must be in context, and it must be relevant. (The latter is included to avoid the "baffle with bullsh*t" tactic).
David Merrill wrote:Like I showed you. These Certificates work just fine if used correctly. With this specific example the court clerk told me the fine had been waived - that I did not owe it anymore and tried to give it back. I insisted and left it on the counter.
In other words, it was not accepted and ended up in the trashcan after David left.
A victory!!!
It should be noted that David served time in prison for passing bogus paper.
MOD Note: The quoted text is part of a post moved to the DMVP Thread Hijacks thread.
The instrument worked just as I said it does. The debt was waived. There is no Treasury Direct account but that opens up for discharging with coupons/remittances/certificates.
I know Larry Becraft is not one of the favored attorneys on Quatloos, but he has some very good write-ups about some of these theories on his "Destroyed Arguments" webpage.
It's at least a good place to start. I, too, lament Dan's not having written more about it.
Proponents of this scheme will claim that the U.S. Government or the Treasury Department controls bank accounts—often referred to as “U.S. Treasury Direct Accounts”—for all U.S. citizens that can be accessed by submitting paperwork with state and federal authorities. Individuals promoting this scam frequently cite various discredited legal theories and may refer to the scheme as “Redemption,” “Strawman,” or “Acceptance for Value.” Trainers and websites will often charge large fees for “kits” that teach individuals how to perpetrate this scheme. They will often imply that others have had great success in discharging debt and purchasing merchandise such as cars and homes. Failures to implement the scheme successfully are attributed to individuals not following instructions in a specific order or not filing paperwork at correct times.
This scheme predominately uses fraudulent financial documents that appear to be legitimate. These documents are frequently referred to as “Bills of Exchange,” “Promissory Bonds,” “Indemnity Bonds,” “Offset Bonds,” “Sight Drafts,” or “Comptrollers Warrants.” In addition, other official documents are used outside of their intended purpose, like IRS forms 1099, 1099-OID, and 8300. This scheme frequently intermingles legal and pseudo legal terminology in order to appear lawful. Notaries may be used in an attempt to make the fraud appear legitimate. Often, victims of the scheme are instructed to address their paperwork to the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.
Some Tips to Avoid Redemption/Strawman/Bond Fraud
Be wary of individuals or groups selling kits that they claim will inform you on to access secret bank accounts.
Be wary of individuals or groups proclaiming that paying federal and/or state income tax is not necessary.
Do not believe that the U.S. Treasury controls bank accounts for all citizens.
Be skeptical of individuals advocating that speeding tickets, summons, bills, tax notifications, or similar documents can be resolved by writing “acceptance for value” on them.
If you know of anyone advocating the use of property liens to coerce acceptance of this scheme, contact your local FBI office.
Trying to convince someone their bonds are pure fantasy is nearly impossible. I have had the unfortunate experience of dealing with a family member that is wrapped up in these fictional, preposterous Bonds, Bills of Exchange, A4V, UCC, 1099 OID, and Secret Treasury Accounts. They have been heading towards the edge of the cliff (with dear friends and other family members) and are going over the edge as the DOJ, IRS, and creditors surround what was once their assets and cushy, overspent and underfunded lifestyle. The common thread of these “believers” is they are financially desperate. Dealing in the above activities will make them destitute and imprisoned at the hands of what they believe are illegal governmental (IRS), and/or private corporations (Federal Reserve) trying to get at their people, person or strawman. I have been called ignorant, uneducated (haven't been to one of their seminars), and even stupid by this particular person for not participating in this nonsense – and I’m waiting here debt free, sleeping at night in my paid off house for their new forwarding address in prison. Bwah hahaha...
nolo contendere wrote:Trying to convince someone their bonds are pure fantasy is nearly impossible. <snip!> I have been called ignorant, uneducated (haven't been to one of their seminars), and even stupid by this particular person for not participating in this nonsense – and I’m waiting here debt free, sleeping at night in my paid off house for their new forwarding address in prison. Bwah hahaha...
That makes two of us. I'm in the same boat with a relative of mine. So far, the only massive scheme-of-stupidity I've managed to actively talk him out of is that ridiculous "Sovereign Citizen" garbage that's been making the rounds for a while. Sadly, I was too young to prevent his earlier bouts of dumbas*ery.
In my case, I did attend a couple of the "seminars" he went to, but I was thrown out of the second because the nature of my questions indicated to the presenter that I was "not ready" for the ground-breaking secrets of wealth protection that he was going to reveal to the less aggressively inquisitive (aka, "more gullible") attendees. *shakes head*
"The risk in becoming very intimate with a moldie Parvati is that she may unexpectedly become a Kali and take your head."--Rudy Rucker, Freeware
* * *
“Most men would kill the truth if truth would kill their religion.”--Lemuel K. Washburn.
One would think that the dumbest scams would be the easiest to spot.
Just as CrackHeads must live in opposite-land to believe the 'includes' is a term of exclusion, OID and Treasury account clowns who don't have two nickels to rub together must live there, too.
Only in opposite-land could a form issued only to people who own bonds earning deferred interest be a magic pile of money to people who have never owned a bond of any type. Only there could an account one must create and fund oneself to pay for U.S. Treasury securities one has purchased be a magic account created by someone else containing money for their benefit even though the mark has never purchased a Treasury bill, note or bond in their life, direct or otherwise.
I can only imagine the bizarre answers you would get if you asked one of these idiots what imputed interest is, or to distinguish between a T-bill and a T-bond.
P.T. Barnum was right.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.
Thanks so much for all the replies, I have lots more information to use now than I had before which was basically telling him he's a moron (in a nice way).
