| LEGAL
DISCLAIMER I am not a Tax Lawyer, Nor do I play Dan Evans on the internet. I am not a Certified Public Accountant, Nor do I play Paul Thomas on the internet. I am not an Enrolled Agent, Nor do I play Richard Macdonald on the internet. DO NOT TAKE MY WORD FOR ANYTHING ON THIS PAGE. Go look it up for yourself. |
Dear government Agent Perspective, It does not matter if you actually are a government agent or not, because your posts are the posts of a defacto governmnet agent. You speak for the purpose of maligning myself, and my posts of the WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS. While your hit pieces posted in this blog are quite artful, your attempt to spin the uninitiated away from the truth contained in those STATUTES and REGULATIONS is going to fail. For those uninitiated, let us examine your last two hit pieces. Dale Eastman As noted by Dr. Hayes, Schiff’s conduct was a result of extremely rigid, fixed, inflexible doggedly determined opinions and beliefs that cannot be changed by others’ reasoning.” "Because I said so, and we will hurt you if you don't comply with our commands" is NOT "reasoning". He is “impervious to any suggestions.” He has read the WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS, as have I. The WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS state X, Y, and Z You are suggesting that I should forget what I read and believe the STATUTES and REGULATIONS state BS Guess what Agent Perspective: You can stick your BS right back up your bovine's ass where it came from. Your hit pieces for the last several months have been for the sole purpose of keeping the unititated from reading what the WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS state. You and your ILK in Washington, District of Criminals simply can NOT afford for the average Joe to learn what those WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS actually are. While Joe presently believes those rules state BS, Joe, like myself, is going to change his mind and reject your BS when he actually reads X, Y, and Z WRITTEN in the STATUTES and REGULATIONS. His mental illness makes it “almost impossible… to persuade him he is wrong.” His reading of the actual WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS that you and your DC handlers don't want average Joe to read makes it “almost impossible… to persuade him he is wrong.” His opinions and thus his conduct is “driven by his mental illness.” His opinions and thus his conduct is "driven by his knowledge or X, Y, and Z WRITTEN in the STATUTES and REGULATIONS." My kindest word to you is stop misleading people with your limited knowledge of law. Naked Assertion. I am NOT misleading anybody by showing them where in the WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS they can read X, Y, and Z WRITTEN in the STATUTES and REGULATIONS... Including links to the government servers wherein these WORDS of the WRITTEN STATUTES and REGULATIONS can be found. Irwin will never understand the damage he has caused thousands of people with his bad tax advice, Another NAKED ASSERTION. Always without proof are your posts. nor does it appear you will either. I don't give "tax advice". And I am VERY CLEAR on the DANGER of the knowledge on my web site as evidenced here: http://www.synapticsparks.info/t.../tax/ index.html So that makes you a LIAR. (again) Hiding behind your disclaimer won’t do either any more then it did Irwin. I post by my real name. Do you? So you tell me who's hiding. Me... or You? Your smug remarks and false analysis is your only way to protect yourself from what I see as very insecure ego. Hidden in this funny statement is a testable assertion: "false analysis". Or I should say it would be testable if Doesn't_post_under_his_real_name would answer questions. But that is just more of government disinfo technique. It becomes quite transparent after awhile. Go back playing Chess by yourself you’d be much better for it, and less damaging to the freedom movement. Some more NAKED ASSERTIONS. Let's see if he posted anything of substance in this next post. It is sure obvious he didn't in the last post. "[A]n administrative agency is a creature of statute, having only those powers expressly granted to it by Congress or included by necessary implication from the Congressional grant," (Cite omitted) Context omitted posts by Agent perspective may often times be disregarded as just another Agent perspective misstatement and lie. This one is worth pursuing... That is, if chicken perspective is willing to engage and prove the testable assertion of "false analysis" he made above. And one of those statues is for the collection of tax—now Dale where’s your argument? Which tax? Which statute? Be clear. Be specific. Jump right in there, at any time and stop those so-called corrupt trails you keep bitching about. You are attempting to put the cart before the horse. FIRST show me that statute and answer my questions about it. Go get Irwin out of jail with your off point “law knowledge”? You know the truth?!? Box those lying government agents and courts ears with your brilliant augments. NO EXCUSES? NO ISSUES? NO DIRECTION. So, you've finally dropped the "I'm one of you" facade? You are now going to agressively malign, insult, and obfuscate in the manner of your true identity. The only accounting you’ll be doing is wiping egg off your face some day from being so delusional. Irwin knows no better, he’s permanently deluded, are you? Did my statement "At some point there will be an accounting, and their posts are going to hang them. Figuratively, and maybe even literally" give you concern over getting your neck stretched? It should, seeing as you are just another lying government disinformation troll. It is quite obvious from the pattern of your posts, your sole purpose is to push "the court have ruled" so you don't need to look at what the WRITTEN WORDS of the STATUTES and REGULATIONS say. Time for Agent perspective to prove his assertions regarding my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law". You stated: [A]n administrative agency is a creature of statute, having only those powers expressly granted to it by Congress or included by necessary implication from the Congressional grant," (Cite omitted) What is the US Income tax computed or calculated upon? Cite the statute/regulation by number and text. You've spent so much time posting crap, you should be able to dispatch my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law" in no time what so ever. I don't want you to miss the important question, so I'm repeating it: You stated: [A]n administrative agency is a creature of statute, having only those powers expressly granted to it by Congress or included by necessary implication from the Congressional grant, (Cite omitted) What is the US Income tax computed or calculated upon? Cite the statute/regulation by number and text. You've spent so much time posting crap, you should be able to dispatch my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law" in no time what so ever. I find it interesting when haloscan chooses to mess up during my postings. Dale, Ignore, deny, disclaim, bitch and mown all you want, the courts are correct; your ego has nothing better to do. You can’t help the movement; you can’t help Irwin, you just can’t help. I’ve given you insights that quite frankly are over your head, and you still remain stuck in your rut. You think one-dimensionally when the real legal issues are 3 dimensional. I deal with research not wasting issues of debate with delusional patriot gurus, with closed minds, in this out of touch (blog) forum. Your legal positions might as well be on the other side of the Moon, for all the good they will do for anyone. If you weren’t such a closed system like most patriots gurus I could have taken you much farther. But then again most patriots’ gurus have a tendency to steal or screw up the issues to a point of unrecognizable gibberish. That’s after they’ve sold the packages of crap $$$ to the uninformed. In your case your reward is your martyrdom masochist like the pain more than money—I’ve know others in the movement that have this poor me victim syndrome. Stretching necks???? — Dale your only understanding of law seems to be lynch law, not someone I’d consider worth taking seriously. As I’ve suggested: go play a quiet game of chess by yourself. Checkmate in two, black!! Fools mate. No time to debate, but plenty of time to assert, insult, and attempt charactor assassination. You are a liar. You stated: [A]n administrative agency is a creature of statute, having only those powers expressly granted to it by Congress or included by necessary implication from the Congressional grant, (Cite omitted) Second time: What is the US Income tax computed or calculated upon? Cite the statute/regulation by number and text. You've spent so much time posting crap, you should be able to dispatch my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law" in no time what so ever. So come on Agent perspective. Now's the time to put my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law" away once and for all. Dale Eastman | Homepage | 03.28.06 - 5:58 pm Yawn! Yawn! Perspective's failure to put my "false analysis" and "limited knowledge of law" away once and for all is noted. Also noted is that The Law and Yktyl are tired of reading perspective and rg related posts. And I am tired of responding to their lies myself. I guess it's time for Mr. Jahn to block some more IP addresses. You have no issues Dale. I made statements regarding Bob L today you are the one with nose trouble. troll? Irwin may have been delusional, but he wasn't boring, you are. Hugs. |