"Great thinking" at LostHorizons

[Famspear]

This stupid, ignorant, half-witted piece of garbage from LostHorizons is absolutely sure that he (an uneducated moronic buffoon) is absolutely correct about the law and the Constitution, while a law professor at George Washington university, is somehow completely wrong. Oldhawaiiscot is nothing more than a gas-bag idiot of the first water whose mere act of living besmirches old, hawaii and scots.

Time and time again I am asked by tax protester/deniers in this or other places on the internet -- "Famspear, why do you spend so much time with this stuff?" Sadly, those people have no idea how much comedy and joy they bring to us.

Example: My daily reading of the losthorizons forum.....

So many gas-bag idiots to enjoy..... so little time......

[Gregg]

won't last long, they're already calling each other heretics and getting ready to burn each other at the stake...see hang em high and skankbeat, and the mcp2012 guy etc.....

[grixit]

If Oldhawaiiscot continues this way, he'll end up with barely enough of his plaid grass skirt to cover his knobby knees. And he certainly won't be able to afford anymore haggis luaus.

As for the professor, i don't blame him for refusing to continue the conversation. After all, he has paying students to attend to.

[notorial dissent]

Who might actually pay attention and learn something as opposed to someone trying to convince him he was wrong because he didn't provide the answers they wanted.

[Joe Dirt]

Here's another new CTC "edumicated" filer. Maybe this guy will get de-programmed and file the corrected return within the 30 days, avoiding the frivpen....

Message
robkevetter



Joined: 24 Mar 2010
Posts: 1
Location: texas
Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 4:44 am Post subject: First time filer hit with frivolous letter right off the bat

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to serious study of CtC I was mentally prepared for the frivolous letter but I didn't think it would happen to me. Incidentally, in my letter they stated that they would not respond to further correspondence. However, I do have to submit a corrected return in 30 days.

The biggest question is which way to respond. I have read of the:
1. Let them have it and list all the codes etc.
2. Respond neutrally and ask them to explain the frivolous
3. Respond by telling them to stop sending junk mail because I
already sent a correct tax return.
4. Send in a SOS Status of the company I work for proving they are not
tied in with the government and therefore could not pay wages, etc.

It looks like the 4 above are the answers I have seen in all the post, but does anyone really know which works best. I would hate to spend the next 2 years responding to the time delay tactics that other people have expressed that have happened to them. It seems that #4 would be the best way as Pablo had in his threads about the 3 elements necessary to satisfy the courts.

I would appreciate all of your help and insight as I am new to this but am willing to fight for freedom.

[LPC]

This stupid, ignorant, half-witted piece of garbage from LostHorizons is absolutely sure that he (an uneducated moronic buffoon) is absolutely correct about the law and the Constitution, while a law professor at George Washington university, is somehow completely wrong.

It's actually worse than that.

I had already quoted the last paragraph in another thread, but it's worth repeating.

So, my attempt to think of how to correct this, is we need someone to find the SCOTUS decision that definitely states that private party money received for their labor is not taxable, that doing so is an invasion of their rights of property, liberty, and whatever else. I thought I read it on this forum, back before the forum was cleaned... Then if it can be prepared with other incontrovertible evidence of the fallacies that the IRS, (and the DOJ, lately) have been conducting..

So, OHS *knows* he is right and Prof. Siegel is wrong, and he *knows* he read a Supreme Court decision (or something) somewhere that is "incontrovertible evidence" that he's right and the professor is wrong, and could someone please help him find that mythical decision?

OHS is "absolutely sure" and now just needs some evidence to back up his certainty, which evidence must exist because he's absolutely sure it exists. And he's asking for help in looking for that evidence from the other followers of a con artist who was just recently convicted because there is no evidence.

I've said it before and I'll say it again (and again). Unbelievable.

[LPC]

The biggest question is which way to respond [to the frivolous return letter]. I have read of the:
1. Let them have it and list all the codes etc.

Oh yeah, that's right let them have it! Send them a letter, on real paper, with actual citations to statutes and things. Boy, will *that* hit them hard!

They will be so intimidated and confused that all they will be able to do is assess the $5,000 penalty, send you a notice of intent to levy, seize the $5,000 from any bank accounts they can find, file a notice of federal tax lien if they can't find enough money in your bank accounts, and perhaps someday sell your home and evict you.

Yeah, go ahead and let them have it! They'll be helpless.

2. Respond neutrally and ask them to explain the frivolous
3. Respond by telling them to stop sending junk mail because I
already sent a correct tax return.
4. Send in a SOS Status of the company I work for proving they are not
tied in with the government and therefore could not pay wages, etc.

It looks like the 4 above are the answers I have seen in all the post, but does anyone really know which works best.

This is like asking if you should use your turn signal when driving off the edge of a cliff.

I would hate to spend the next 2 years responding to the time delay tactics that other people have expressed that have happened to them.

Tell the IRS that, and I'm sure that they'll be willing to expedite the assessment and collection process to suit your schedule.

[Joe Dirt]

The advisors at LH are speaking up. Hang 'em High suggests that Rob should do #4:

Hang'Em High



Joined: 01 May 2009
Posts: 112

Posted: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:09 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not telling you what to do, but #4 might be worth a shot. I have heard of presenting SOS certificate of status in court, but I haven't heard of anyone sending this in response to a frivolous letter. Many have tried #1, #2, and/or #3 without much success, so trying #4 would at least be a somewhat new approach.

Maybe send in the cert. of status and ask them "are you saying this company is a federal employer capable of paying wages? (or performs the functions of a public office)? Ultimately it is your decision but this might be the way to go.

I know what a "Number 1" is, also a "Number 2"... A "Number 3" is a sharting mess. Number 4? Does that involve jumping off of an overpass into high speed traffic???

[bmielke]

#5 Submit correct returns, pay my fines, and dedicate my life to destroying the Gospel of Peter Eric "blowhardmiester" Hendrickson.

I would go with #5 personally, but I have been told I have a problem with holding grudges.

[Randall]

#4. SOS Status.
Replying with Same Old S**t.

Of course the answer is SOR.
Same Old Result.

[webhick]

#6 Whine on the internet about your situation and spin your wheels on solutions that don't work.
#7 Switch to another guru and pretend that his or her magical incantations are more effective than the ones you're presently using.
#8 Make sweet, sweet love to a unicorn.
#9 Make up your own theories, sell them, get incarcerated, and then declare yourself a political prisoner.
#10 Put a smoke bomb in a mailbox and then, when the postman is injured by the bomb, blame him for his injuries because he was trying to put out what looked like a fire. Don't forget to sell out the co-conspirators who didn't bear your children.

[Imalawman]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway). Are they too stupid to even select the right guy to harass?

[bmielke]

#6 Whine on the internet about your situation and spin your wheels on solutions that don't work.

I think we can all agree that this seems like the most likely course of action.

#7 Switch to another guru and pretend that his or her magical incantations are more effective than the ones you're presently using.

But Pete is right, and if Pete isn't right then lots of people have lost millions of dollars to the IRS over nothing. Another Guru can't be right too!

#8 Make sweet, sweet love to a unicorn.

I think that breaks the law, or at least a law of nature.

#9 Make up your own theories, sell them, get incarcerated, and then declare yourself a political prisoner.

That was so 2009.

#10 Put a smoke bomb in a mailbox and then, when the postman is injured by the bomb, blame him for his injuries because he was trying to put out what looked like a fire. Don't forget to sell out the co-conspirators who didn't bear your children.

It seems like this might have been tried before, I am pretty sure it didn't work out very well... If I could only remember who tried it? Was his name Blowhardmeister? Not important it's probably a bad idea.

[bmielke]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway). Are they too stupid to even select the right guy to harass?

Specialties/Areas of Expertise:

Federalism; Supreme Court; federal/state government relations; state sovereign immunity; lawsuits against governments; federal government agencies; the presidency; civil procedure

Found at:GW Law Media Guide

I would guess either they don't know what sovereign immunity is, or they think the lawsuits against governments and Federal Government Agencies expertise will give them the edge they need to beat the ebil goobermint once and for all.

[Thule]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway). Are they too stupid to even select the right guy to harass?

Easy. Because a tax law guy has a vested interest in preserving the status quo, and can never be trusted.

[Gregg]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway). Are they too stupid to even select the right guy to harass?

Specialties/Areas of Expertise:

Federalism; Supreme Court; federal/state government relations; state sovereign immunity; lawsuits against governments; federal government agencies; the presidency; civil procedure

Found at:GW Law Media Guide

I would guess either they don't know what sovereign immunity is, or they think the lawsuits against governments and Federal Government Agencies expertise will give them the edge they need to beat the ebil goobermint once and for all.

I'm morally certain you're on to them on that, he's an expert on sovereign immunity, and they think that means what, well, it all depnds on what the definition of "is" (or includes) is...

[Dezcad]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway). Are they too stupid to even select the right guy to harass?

Probably because of his site here - http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/ ... omeTax.htm

[darling]

I wonder why Jonathan Siegel? He's a smart cookie, but he's not a tax law guy (that I'm aware of anyway).

http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/jsiegel/ ... omeTax.htm

[Demosthenes]

He came to our last DC Quatloos gathering...

[webhick]

He came to our last DC Quatloos gathering...

Was he the one in the wife-beater that said "Summary Judgments make me hot" and the bedazzled thong?