CTC questions answered

[Gregg]

Guess what you just made my foe list

is there an appropriate uniform decoration for that honor?

[Dezcad]

Guess what you just made my foe list.

Will you be sending in the Tyrannical Response Team?

[Nikki]

Can moderators edit members' foe lists?

Is it possible to put every single member (including himself) onto a person's foe list?

[Famspear]

Oh, boo-hoo.... Tax Protester doesn't want to read my posts........

An overly touchy Protester
Let his anger develop and fester.
But when questions were posed
He was quickly exposed
As a flaccid, incompetent tester.

[mutter]

You quoted cases out of context. Learn what this term means: stare decisis. Look for the decision, the precedent. You are doing what legal commentator Daniel B. Evans refers to as "chaining" -- an almost universal error made by tax protesters. You are chaining this quote from this case and that quote from that case and then falsely arguing that those quotes mean something that the courts did not rule in those cases -- something that the federal courts have actually rejected, over and over and over and over.

You sir are an outright liar. Guess what you just made my foe list. Goodbye you piece of trash.

DONE

EDIT: Public notice, that is what I am going to do, for every person that pulls the crap that Famspear just pulled, that person will be added to my foe list... until that are only a few people left, at which time I will bail. Peace out.

cos that fallacy was the crux of his beliefs about the income tax and it got speared. its a normal reaction when someone challenges your belief system.
Hey i musta been paying attention that day in psychology class.

I'm sure it's obvious, and I'm just too dense to understand, but ....

Why such an angry reaction to 'Famspear's' description of 'chaining?' I don't understand how this makes 'Famspear' a liar or why it upsets you so very much. Care to explain?

[Tax Protester]

...And still not a single post made showing specific which portions of my citations were "chained" as it were. Now why is that? Don't bother answering, I already know what the answer is.

Well, it seems that somebody gave Famspear Moderator access, which then scrubbed him from my foe list so I am forced to view his posts now, (because Admin and Mods cannot be foe's as members have to be able to see their posts as they are in charge of running the forum). I then decided to check out "The Team" and to my shock every single person that posts on this form preaching IRS propaganda is either an Administrator or Moderator.

So after thinking about my own moral values and the fact that I will not associate with known liars, thieves, and the like. Sadly, I have to say it has been fun and bid you adieu. For this forum is entrenched in hypocrisy and I am now beyond reserve. I feel sorry for you all truly I do. All of you made you beds; however, it is for you to lie in them, not me.

ONE FINAL FATAL FLAW OBSERVATION:

In the IRS issuing their penalties and not performing any assessment, which you all claim (in violation of that which is prescribed for within statute and Regulation) is not required and not needed, the individuals claim for refunded is never part of the penalty equation. Meaning say if a single 'taxpayer' had filed status quo and found they were due a 'legitimate' refund of $5,000.00, however in reality they filed CtC and found they were due a refund of $25,500.00. The IRS in return issues a 6702 penalty for $5,000.00 and thereafter accumulates a monthly penalty interest of $30.00. Never does the IRS deduct what would have been due as a refund if filed correctly form the determined penalty and interest. What would have been correctly due as a refund, is simply forgotten, and remains within the IRS' possession, presumably forever and ever and ever and ever. Ergo, the final fatal flaw in your assertions. This shows the system is an utter scam. Dependent not only upon 'taxpayer' ignorance, but 'tax profession' ignorance or complicity as well.

In a final word of closing (as this thread comes to a 100-post closing), you have all seriously avoided many of the issues I posed to you, instead you have all chosen to focus upon only a very small and identical portion of the many issues I had posed to you. All the while offering nothing substantive to support your own assertions. Much of your replies are consistent with stating only "no" and "wrong" and other such snappy sounding "catch phrases" with some other various filler words which in reality offer nothing tangible for any serious person to actually consider. Many of your replies are not worthy of a reply, do not qualify a response (for myriad of reasons), and echo in their identity to past replies. Hence, a circular pattern is thus contrived... utterly pointless.

PS. Did I miss it or has there not been one single person here that has posted what a 'Capitation Tax' means if not what Adam Smith indented for it to mean? (let me guess a 'Capitation Tax' is simply a synonym for a 'Poll Tax') ROFLX2

PPS. It has been much fun using your own court quotes against you all. I have determined that many of you have never actually read thoroughly through the cases you had yourselves sited. Oh well back to the drawling board for a second run, I suppose.

[Tax Protester]

I do have to admit the we have at least one thing in common, I enjoy writing poetry myself. In thinking of you all I found two that remind me of you sad folks, I could not choose which one to post as they are both equally as good in describing my feelings towards those corrupt and demented. So here they are:

~ The Ever-resting Night ~

Consolidating their fears, they pass their
harvests unto ever-nearing corrals,
amongst coral-mountings ascending nearest
those Maltese forged tiers; serving as
posts guiding their bearings outwards and
along their way, furthest from their
mounting triumphs, even higher then
their horns and cornets dare to speak;
where their harvests are finally left to
languidly lay, beneath the oblique glow
of an ever-resting night

Alas there they pass, pitching their hell-bent
steeds ardently faster then even their
deviant saddles do quoth; soaping their
mounts they tread steady and true, riding
bare, riding hard, and knotting they do

Their aegis clinking and clanking, their
bellicose meshing left onto chafing,
wicked stares go on defiantly glaring,
transfixed brows glow without nor worry
or care; concealed, fore and from within,
their deep immortal sleight, bared
willingly and nth, as thus each does
ruling service for all those worthy yet
untrue

Hark, as of hath they do not desist, nor dare
serene their blades; conceding them as
fervent with all of the mighty-fullest
stars wrath, as of yet dare they not
soften their tread, nor lessen their
iron-shoes pith; only shall they
seamlessly steady onwards hailing,
passing their trepidations unto the
ever-resting night

Serving as their own cast-on-judge and carry
all jury, forevermore enroute to a
beseeched destination; henceforth, from
whence a self-loathing crimsoned ocean of
that eternally laying below, prevailing a
battle without yield, throughout the
ever-resting night

Ordained as yet, they etude each of their
solely fears, consolidating unto their
ever-resting night

- Edgar Allan Poe inspired

~ Fleeting Commandants ~

Centuries of oppression
Through tyrants of aggression
Designing calloused mending's
Unto their sycophantic obsession
Thy passing of realization hath depicted
A quandary to be met with thou chaotic sneer
Wary upon those of elite, tidy, and long past obsolete
To those within my shadows, surrounding abound thy core
Vapid whence ye came, such a bile lingering
Blackened throughout your axis, singed
Usurpers cometh wreathed
We hear thine causes approaching
Usurp ravished and tapped
We perceive truth of intention
Throughout our searching
Hearken lastly, Hearken strongly!
Upon us one, Upon us all
We are awake, We are alive, We are of divinity
Fore, our standing ground not even thee shall quake
We are adjoined in numbers of faith
Larger then those within your darkness
A fleeting thee shalt take

[Nikki]

Babble, babble, babble ...

In a final word of closing (as this thread comes to a 100-post closing), you have all seriously avoided many of the issues I posed to you, instead you have all chosen to focus upon only a very small and identical portion of the many issues I had posed to you. All the while offering nothing substantive to support your own assertions. Much of your replies are consistent with stating only "no" and "wrong" and other such snappy sounding "catch phrases" with some other various filler words which in reality offer nothing tangible for any serious person to actually consider. Many of your replies are not worthy of a reply, do not qualify a response (for myriad of reasons), and echo in their identity to past replies. Hence, a circular pattern is thus contrived... utterly pointless.

...

This from someone who, several times, avoided a few simple questions about either CtC or blatant misstatements in his posts.

Koolaid does strange things to the thought processes -- assuming there were any to begin with.

[Tax Protester]

This from someone who, several times, avoided a few simple questions about either CtC or blatant misstatements in his posts.

Koolaid does strange things to the thought processes -- assuming there were any to begin with.

See this is exactly what I mean. Now I had specifically and by way of an in-depth reply, answered you three of your questions, which thereafter you go and run off with an entirely new and unrelated totally off the wall question. Now I will leave you on your own to figure out the rest yourself. I have more than done my part. I shall not demean myself to answering silly inquires (oh and BTW, shall means will).

[Tax Protester]

All right, everybody thank you for your responses, it has been a good session for me, (with a few exceptions of course). I have gained some really good insight about the folks here and how they operate. Lots of things to consider in taking my knowledge and realization of the truth to that next level. So for that I am thankful for my time here. Peace out, everybody. Goodbye.

P.S. I doubt seriously that I will be back, might reconsider in a year or so from now, who knows.

[The Operative]

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...

PS. Did I miss it or has there not been one single person here that has posted what a 'Capitation Tax' means if not what Adam Smith indented for it to mean? (let me guess a 'Capitation Tax' is simply a synonym for a 'Poll Tax') ROFLX2

PPS. It has been much fun using your own court quotes against you all. I have determined that many of you have never actually read thoroughly through the cases you had yourselves sited. Oh well back to the drawling board for a second run, I suppose.

I have explained capitation taxes in my posts. You misinterpret and do not understand the writings of Adam Smith. Myself and others have also pointed out that you are not interpreting the court cases correctly.

The courts have made it clear that Pete Hendrickson is wrong. HE LOST HIS OWN TAX CASE. The fact that you continue to use his theories is akin to jumping off a cliff and proclaiming, "I AM NOT FALLING!" until you eventually hit the rocks below.

[Judge Roy Bean]

All right, everybody thank you for your responses, it has been a good session for me, (with a few exceptions of course). I have gained some really good insight about the folks here and how they operate. Lots of things to consider in taking my knowledge and realization of the truth to that next level. So for that I am thankful for my time here. Peace out, everybody. Goodbye.

P.S. I doubt seriously that I will be back, might reconsider in a year or so from now, who knows.

Your personal "realization of the truth" really should be taken to the next level. Maybe you'd actually develop a set of cajones that would carry you to the real next level of doing something other than hoodwinking others.

Bye.

[LPC]

...And still not a single post made showing specific which portions of my citations were "chained" as it were.

Wrong. Think "Butchers Union."

Now why is that? Don't bother answering, I already know what the answer is.

Wrong.

Well, it seems that somebody gave Famspear Moderator access, which then scrubbed him from my foe list so I am forced to view his posts now,

Wrong.

(because Admin and Mods cannot be foe's as members have to be able to see their posts as they are in charge of running the forum). I then decided to check out "The Team" and to my shock every single person that posts on this form preaching IRS propaganda is either an Administrator or Moderator.

Wrong.

So after thinking about my own moral values

Wrong. Null set.

and the fact that I will not associate with known liars, thieves, and the like.

Wrong. You associate with Henderson, a convicted felon.

Sadly, I have to say it has been fun and bid you adieu.

Wrong. At least four more posts to follow.

For this forum is entrenched in hypocrisy and I am now beyond reserve.

Wrong. You are the embodiment of hypocrisy.

I feel sorry for you all truly I do.

Wrong. You feel superior to us, not feel sorry for us. (Feeling superior to us is also wrong, of course.)

All of you made you beds; however, it is for you to lie in them, not me.

Veiled threat? How tax-protester-like.

ONE FINAL FATAL FLAW OBSERVATION:

In the IRS issuing their penalties and not performing any assessment, which you all claim (in violation of that which is prescribed for within statute and Regulation) is not required and not needed, the individuals claim for refunded is never part of the penalty equation.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong.

The IRS assess the penalty, we all never claimed any such thing, it's not in violation of what is proscribed by statute, it's not in violation of what is proscribed by regulation, it is required, it is needed, and the claim for refund is actually part of the penalty equation.

I may have overlooked some errors, but that's close enough.

Meaning say if a single 'taxpayer' had filed status quo and found they were due a 'legitimate' refund of $5,000.00, however in reality they filed CtC and found they were due a refund of $25,500.00. The IRS in return issues a 6702 penalty for $5,000.00 and thereafter accumulates a monthly penalty interest of $30.00. Never does the IRS deduct what would have been due as a refund if filed correctly form the determined penalty and interest. What would have been correctly due as a refund, is simply forgotten, and remains within the IRS' possession, presumably forever and ever and ever and ever. Ergo, the final fatal flaw in your assertions. This shows the system is an utter scam. Dependent not only upon 'taxpayer' ignorance, but 'tax profession' ignorance or complicity as well.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...

You get the picture.

Everything you "know" is wrong.

In a final word of closing (as this thread comes to a 100-post closing), you have all seriously avoided many of the issues I posed to you,

Wrong.

instead you have all chosen to focus upon only a very small and identical portion of the many issues I had posed to you.

Wrong.

All the while offering nothing substantive to support your own assertions.

Wrong squared.

Much of your replies are consistent with stating only "no" and "wrong" and other such snappy sounding "catch phrases" with some other various filler words which in reality offer nothing tangible for any serious person to actually consider.

Right. Because offering more that "wrong" has been proven to be a waste of time.

Many of your replies are not worthy of a reply, do not qualify a response (for myriad of reasons), and echo in their identity to past replies.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong.

Hence, a circular pattern is thus contrived... utterly pointless.

Wrong, and wrong.

PS. Did I miss it or has there not been one single person here that has posted what a 'Capitation Tax' means if not what Adam Smith indented for it to mean?

Yes, you missed it.

I, and several others, pointed out that American jurisprudence considered a "capitation" to be equivalent to a "poll tax," which was a fixed amount imposed on each person regardless of their occupation or status.

But don't let facts or reality get in the way of your delusions.

(let me guess a 'Capitation Tax' is simply a synonym for a 'Poll Tax') ROFLX2

Oh, then you didn't "miss" it, you just chose to ignore it.

How typical.

PPS. It has been much fun using your own court quotes against you all.

And it's been fun watching you flop around like a dying fish in a boat.

I have determined that many of you have never actually read thoroughly through the cases you had yourselves sited.

The word is "cited." And when you figure out what the Pollock opinions were about, you be sure to come back and lecture us about them.

Oh well back to the drawling board for a second run, I suppose.

There was a first?

[LPC]

This from someone who, several times, avoided a few simple questions about either CtC or blatant misstatements in his posts.

Koolaid does strange things to the thought processes -- assuming there were any to begin with.

See this is exactly what I mean. Now I had specifically and by way of an in-depth reply, answered you three of your questions, which thereafter you go and run off with an entirely new and unrelated totally off the wall question. Now I will leave you on your own to figure out the rest yourself. I have more than done my part. I shall not demean myself to answering silly inquires (oh and BTW, shall means will).

So remind me. Why is it that the 16th Amendment doesn't mean what it says?

That's the question that never seems to be answered.

[Nikki]

This from someone who, several times, avoided a few simple questions about either CtC or blatant misstatements in his posts.

Koolaid does strange things to the thought processes -- assuming there were any to begin with.

See this is exactly what I mean. Now I had specifically and by way of an in-depth reply, answered you three of your questions, which thereafter you go and run off with an entirely new and unrelated totally off the wall question. Now I will leave you on your own to figure out the rest yourself. I have more than done my part. I shall not demean myself to answering silly inquires (oh and BTW, shall means will).

Liar.

I asked a few simple questions. You never gave a direct answer to any of them.

Instead, you posted rambling essays of inaccurate or inapposite statements which allowed you to dance around the questions without answering any of them.

Why don't you give it one more try. Post a single law or court decision which supports your allegation of a necessary federal nexus for taxation of income.

But you won't for two reasons. First, no such support exists. Second, you are a deluded, ignorant liar incapable of thinking beyond cut-and-paste of boring, worn-out, illegal tax protester theories and are sitting in your double-wide dreading the day that you and all of your possessions end on the sidewalk.

[Famspear]

...And still not a single post made showing specific which portions of my citations were "chained" as it were.

Wrong. See LPC's comments above. And in case you're trying to avoid facing the music, let me spell it out for you: Citing a case (Butchers' Union) to support a frivolous argument about taxation where the court in the case not only did not rule on taxation but did not even mention the word "tax" is the essence of chaining.

Stupid. Dumb as dirt.

Well, it seems that somebody gave Famspear Moderator access, which then scrubbed him from my foe list so I am forced to view his posts now [ . . . . ]

How terrible for you.

I then decided to check out "The Team" and to my shock every single person that posts on this form preaching IRS propaganda is either an Administrator or Moderator.

No. The texts of the Constitution and statutes and the holdings of courts of law are not "IRS propaganda."

So after thinking about my own moral values and the fact that I will not associate with known liars, thieves, and the like. Sadly, I have to say it has been fun and bid you adieu.

No, it has not been fun for you.

I feel sorry for you all truly I do.

No, you do not feel sorry for us. You are lying. What you are feeling is humiliation.

All of you made you beds; however, it is for you to lie in them, not me.

No. Wrong. For example: The Internal Revenue Service is not after me for tax evasion or filing false returns or any other tax crimes. I report my income according to law, and I pay my taxes (although I do, admittedly, grumble about it from time to time).

If you follow the crapola put out by Peter Hendrickson or any other scammer, you are the one who is making your own bed. In that case, I hope for your sake that you don't get caught. Cheer up: The odds are in your favor, as only two to three thousand people or so are prosecuted each year for federal tax crimes.

You humiliated yourself, Tax Protester, by trying to teach dolphins to swim.

[LPC]

Stupid. Dumb as dirt.

"Dirt"? You mispelt "s**t."

[The Operative]

One more thing, if you are going to quote the writings of Adam Smith, you should at least put the sentences in the correct order.

Tax Protester, quoting Pete Hendrickson, who is supposedly quoting Adam Smith,

"The taxes which, it is intended, should fall indifferently upon every different species of revenue, are capitation taxes.”… “Capitation taxes, if it is attempted to proportion them to the fortune or revenue of each contributor, become altogether arbitrary. The state of a man’s fortune varies from day to day, and without an inquisition more intolerable than any tax, and renewed at least once every year, can only be guessed at.”… “Capitation taxes, so far as they are levied upon the lower ranks of people, are direct taxes upon the wages of labour, and are attended with all the inconveniences of such taxes.”…

“In the capitation which has been levied in France without any interruption since the beginning of the present century, the highest orders of people are rated according to their rank by an invariable tariff; the lower orders of people, according to what is supposed to be their fortune, by an assessment which varies from year to year.”
Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book V. CH. II, Art. IV;"

The above sentences from An Inquiry Into The Nature And Causes Of The Wealth Of Nations are out of order. Also, you should pay attention to the title of that article.

[LPC]

We are indeed at the 100+ post mark, and I'm locking this thread.