Richard Calls Upon You!

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.
agent86x

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by agent86x »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:To all you "hot-rods":
Like I said, the weaseling has begun. But I'll play another round.

1) Define "US citizen".

"8 USC § 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States."

And obviously, there are laws for gaining citizenship after immigration.

2) Define "US resident".

There are more than one definition of resident in the US Code, but for purposes of the tax code as stated in 26 CFR 1-6012 and in regard to non-citizens:

26 USC 7701(b) Definition of resident alien and nonresident alien
(1) In general
For purposes of this title (other than subtitle B)—
(A) Resident alien
An alien individual shall be treated as a resident of the United States with respect to any calendar year if (and only if) such individual meets the requirements of clause (i), (ii), or (iii):
(i) Lawfully admitted for permanent residence Such individual is a lawful permanent resident of the United States at any time during such calendar year.
(ii) Substantial presence test Such individual meets the substantial presence test of paragraph (3).
(iii) First year election Such individual makes the election provided in paragraph (4).

...

(3) Substantial presence test
(A) In general
Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, an individual meets the substantial presence test of this paragraph with respect to any calendar year (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the “current year”) if—
(i) such individual was present in the United States on at least 31 days during the calendar year, and
(ii) the sum of the number of days on which such individual was present in the United States during the current year and the 2 preceding calendar years (when multiplied by the applicable multiplier determined under the following table) equals or exceeds 183 days:
The applicable In the case of days in: multiplier is: Current year 1 1st preceding year 1/3 2nd preceding year 1/6
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by notorial dissent »

Congratulations whining beagle, you, along with countless others, have discovered the mystical magic and super secret hidden “8 USC § 1401" and “26 USC § 1" and in all likelihood comprehend only about 1 word in 10, is absolutely truly amazing, or it might be if you had clue one about what it means.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Lambkin »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:Now I have Aspergers Syndrome so my English, spelling, and grammar isn't always the best.
But (with all due respect) your perseveration is showing. I have a friend with Asperger's syndrome, and he likes to play the same little non-song on a guitar over and over. He is a sweet harmless guy who will need parenting for his whole life. I'm afraid you are doing more or less the same but in a way that will get you in trouble. Your ideas about the legality of the income tax won't be resolved through this discussion because you are asking a question but you aren't willing to hear the answer. You will just find another reason to pretend it wasn't answered and then ask the question again. I hope you don't end up with the state making life decisions for you but that appears to be where you are headed.
GoldandSilverEagles

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by GoldandSilverEagles »

agent86x wrote:
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:To all you "hot-rods":
Like I said, the weaseling has begun. But I'll play another round.

1) Define "US citizen".

"8 USC § 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
(b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;
(c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;
(d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;
(e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;
(f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and
(h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States."

And obviously, there are laws for gaining citizenship after immigration.

2) Define "US resident".

There are more than one definition of resident in the US Code, but for purposes of the tax code as stated in 26 CFR 1-6012 and in regard to non-citizens:

26 USC 7701(b) Definition of resident alien and nonresident alien
(1) In general
For purposes of this title (other than subtitle B)—
(A) Resident alien
An alien individual shall be treated as a resident of the United States with respect to any calendar year if (and only if) such individual meets the requirements of clause (i), (ii), or (iii):
(i) Lawfully admitted for permanent residence Such individual is a lawful permanent resident of the United States at any time during such calendar year.
(ii) Substantial presence test Such individual meets the substantial presence test of paragraph (3).
(iii) First year election Such individual makes the election provided in paragraph (4).

...

(3) Substantial presence test
(A) In general
Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, an individual meets the substantial presence test of this paragraph with respect to any calendar year (hereinafter in this subsection referred to as the “current year”) if—
(i) such individual was present in the United States on at least 31 days during the calendar year, and
(ii) the sum of the number of days on which such individual was present in the United States during the current year and the 2 preceding calendar years (when multiplied by the applicable multiplier determined under the following table) equals or exceeds 183 days:
The applicable In the case of days in: multiplier is: Current year 1 1st preceding year 1/3 2nd preceding year 1/6
The term "United States" has more than one legal definition. Is your answer referring to the federal "United States" (aka Federal territories) or are you referring to the fifty union (united) States?
Nikki

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Nikki »

Please don't feed the troll.

Remember: The pig will never learn to whistle and will just get surlier.
GoldandSilverEagles

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by GoldandSilverEagles »

Lambkin wrote:Now I have Aspergers Syndrome so my English, spelling, and grammar isn't always the best.
But (with all due respect) your perseveration is showing.
Thank you for your concern but you are not necessarily correct.
I have a friend with Asperger's syndrome, and he likes to play the same little non-song on a guitar over and over. He is a sweet harmless guy who will need parenting for his whole life. I'm afraid you are doing more or less the same but in a way that will get you in trouble. Your ideas about the legality of the income tax won't be resolved through this discussion because you are asking a question but you aren't willing to hear the answer. You will just find another reason to pretend it wasn't answered and then ask the question again. I hope you don't end up with the state making life decisions for you but that appears to be where you are headed.
My rebuttals to their question have an agenda, to show where their weakness lies. As long as my questions will continued to be answered, I will expose the weakness of their arguments.

I have a strong advantage these people behaving as children don't have, their childish labels and criticisms don't bother me at all, I simply consider the source. GoldandSilverEagles is merely a user name, it isnt me. As long as "they" want to continue "grandstanding" their stupidity through their arrogance of childish name calling, they confirm what I've already suspected for a week or so, the various levels of immaturity in this forum. Actually the more "they" insult me, the more I laugh at lack of gray matter.

They dont possess the power of upsetting me thru name calling. I don;t know these people, they have no importance in my life, how can they possibly possess any **power** over me?

So if ya want to insult me more....bring it on! Go for it! Your simply demonstrating how naive in life you are, and it gives us all a good laugh, at your expense.
Imalawman
Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:23 pm
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Imalawman »

Its Gold Beagles serious? he's a little over the top, I have a hard time thinking someone's really that stupid. On the chance, that like DMVP, he is suffering from mental illness, he's on my ignore list...sometimes its just sad....
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
Prof
El Pontificator de Porceline Precepts
Posts: 1209
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 9:27 pm
Location: East of the Pecos

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Prof »

Nikki wrote:Please don't feed the troll.

Remember: The pig will never learn to whistle and will just get surlier.
Remember, trying to teach a pig to sing just irritates the pig. In this guy's favor, however, I'm thinking that he has replace Stevsy's photo on the T-shirt with the legend:

"Your village called; their idiot is missing."
"My Health is Better in November."
The Operative
Fourth Shogun of Quatloosia
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:04 pm
Location: Here, I used to be there, but I moved.

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by The Operative »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:To all you "hot-rods":

1) Define "US citizen".

2) Define "US resident".
Under the Constitution and the federal tax laws, a U.S. citizen is a person who was born in one of the 50 states or territories. There are a few exceptions to this rule, i.e. children born in one of the 50 states of a foreign diplomat. If you were born in any of the states, then you are a U.S. citizen.

U.S. residents are similar. Any person, who is not a citizen or a foreign diplomat, is a resident of the state or territory within which they live.

You may not agree with the above, but the argument has been tried before. The way the system of law works in the U.S. is the legislature writes the laws and the courts interpret the laws. If there is a disagreement about what a law says or means, the courts will determine the correct interpretation. That decision by the courts will, in general terms, be binding upon everyone in any of the 50 states and territories. There are some limitations, but that is an extremely simplified description. If the legislature disagrees with the court's interpretation, then the law is rewritten or modified to clarify the legislature's intent.

Keeping the above explanation in mind, read http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#federalareas and http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#US-USA and http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#sovereigncitizens

To put it simply, if you were born in any of the fifty states or any territories of the U.S., then you are a U.S. citizen and the federal tax laws apply to you. If you were naturalized as a citizen by the U.S. government, then you are a U.S. citizen and the federal tax laws apply to you. If you are not a citizen, but your permanent residence is located in one of the fifty states, you are a resident and the federal tax laws apply to you.
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak.
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 13806
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:17 pm

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by notorial dissent »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:The term "United States" has more than one legal definition. Is your answer referring to the federal "United States" (aka Federal territories) or are you referring to the fifty union (united) States?
To which the resounding response is, SO WHAT!!!!! The ONLY definition that counts is the one used in the title in question.
GoldandSilverEagles wrote:My rebuttals to their question have an agenda, to show where their weakness lies. As long as my questions will continued to be answered, I will expose the weakness of their arguments.
Your unintended comedy you mean. You have yet to rebut anything, or say anything of substance or value, but have managed to display your range of ignorance, which it seems is vast.
I have a strong advantage these people behaving as children don't have, their childish labels and criticisms don't bother me at all, I simply consider the source. GoldandSilverEagles is merely a user name, it isnt me. As long as "they" want to continue "grandstanding" their stupidity through their arrogance of childish name calling, they confirm what I've already suspected for a week or so, the various levels of immaturity in this forum. Actually the more "they" insult me, the more I laugh at lack of gray matter.
And yet, you have yet to produce anything of substance, and have exhibited an appalling lack of awareness of reality. I’m sure you find the truth insulting, it doesn’t agree with your delusions, ah well.
They dont possess the power of upsetting me thru name calling. I don;t know these people, they have no importance in my life, how can they possibly possess any **power** over me?
And yet you keep coming back for more and continue to display your total obliviousness.
So if ya want to insult me more....bring it on! Go for it! Your simply demonstrating how naive in life you are, and it gives us all a good laugh, at your expense.
I take it that in whining beagles land that disagreeing with you is insulting you? You must get that an awful lot then, since you are so terribly incredibly wrong about everything you say.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Nikki

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Nikki »

Please stop feeding the troll.

If, at some time in the unlikely, remote future, he shows some potential to pass the Turing test, then it will be appropriate to engage him again.

However, it is a serious waste of electrons to attempt to rebut baseless excerpts from an ignorant Internet site.

No matter what is answered to any of his questions, he will come up with another equally inane question or assertion to buttress the prior ones.

And, when he determines that his latest challenge hasn't been adequately answered, he will declare retroactive victory all the way back up the thread.
Doktor Avalanche
Asst Secretary, the Dept of Jesters
Posts: 1767
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Yuba City, CA

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Doktor Avalanche »

Image
The laissez-faire argument relies on the same tacit appeal to perfection as does communism. - George Soros
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by webhick »

Doktor Avalanche wrote:Image
Nonsense. The only way to remove trolls is by the Odor Eater Goldfish Brigade. Yeah, it's sad that the economy has forced them to accept corporate sponsorship. I mean, they asked for the bailout but then some guy name "Robby" waterboarded them 188 times in an effort to figure out which Coi pond they were going to launch an attack on. Not that it did anything. Who waterboards a goldfish? "Robby," that's who. He also once tried to snort a Snicker's bar and now he sounds like that guy in the Breathe Right commercials. But the strips don't help. THE STRIPS DON'T HELP. And now his boyfriend isn't getting any sleep, which you know is probably the worst thing ever because he owns a bait shop and he's already drugging the worms, which is wreaking havoc on the goldfish's sinuses. And THE STRIPS WON'T HELP THEM.

But at least Robby can take a deep breath and have "substantial satisfaction."
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 5631
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Gregg »

webhick wrote:
Doktor Avalanche wrote:Image
Nonsense. The only way to remove trolls is by the Odor Eater Goldfish Brigade. Yeah, it's sad that the economy has forced them to accept corporate sponsorship. I mean, they asked for the bailout but then some guy name "Robby" waterboarded them 188 times in an effort to figure out which Coi pond they were going to launch an attack on. Not that it did anything. Who waterboards a goldfish? "Robby," that's who. He also once tried to snort a Snicker's bar and now he sounds like that guy in the Breathe Right commercials. But the strips don't help. THE STRIPS DON'T HELP. And now his boyfriend isn't getting any sleep, which you know is probably the worst thing ever because he owns a bait shop and he's already drugging the worms, which is wreaking havoc on the goldfish's sinuses. And THE STRIPS WON'T HELP THEM.

But at least Robby can take a deep breath and have "substantial satisfaction."
Why don't you pour one of those for me, sweetie
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.
GoldandSilverEagles

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by GoldandSilverEagles »

I'm formulating my next information release and judging from the responses so far, ya all need some serious therapy. I'm mean I'd hate to see you campers in your real life, your attitudes remind me of closet serial killers. This is serious shit, ya'all get bent out of joint over someone *with the brains, and sense* not to bow down to your crap. I don't agree with ya'all, but unlike many of you, I cling to Eastern philosophies and so I don't get all whipped out over it.

Outside of Operative and the dude who commented on my Asperger's, I feel sorry for the intimate people in your lives who don't agree with you folks. You all got to be a real bitch to be around in a face-to-face disagreement. Judging from how nasty some of the above posts have been, some of you folks just ***CAN'T BE WRONG**** and hate being questioned. I'd wager that many of you have had past relationships end because of that very weakness.

A week ago I was forewarned by another member in here to be ***very careful*** regarding what I printed. That individual portrayed you folks as 'lions in a lions den'. I disagree. You folks are more like a swarm of mosquitoes.

Operative, I'll have a rebuttal to your claims 2day or 2morrow. Namaskar!
GoldandSilverEagles

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by GoldandSilverEagles »

The Operative wrote:
Under the Constitution and the federal tax laws, a U.S. citizen is a person who was born in one of the 50 states or territories.

I have not read the Federal Constitution lately. Please tell me exactly where this is stated, though I suspect your claiming the 14th Amendment.

If that be the case, what legal proof can you present (Holy Moly i'm starting to sound like this forum...lol) proving that the "United States" that the amendment refers to is the same geographical area as presently occupied by our present 50 united States?
The Operative
Fourth Shogun of Quatloosia
Posts: 885
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 3:04 pm
Location: Here, I used to be there, but I moved.

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by The Operative »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:
The Operative wrote:
Under the Constitution and the federal tax laws, a U.S. citizen is a person who was born in one of the 50 states or territories.

I have not read the Federal Constitution lately. Please tell me exactly where this is stated, though I suspect your claiming the 14th Amendment.

If that be the case, what legal proof can you present (Holy Moly i'm starting to sound like this forum...lol) proving that the "United States" that the amendment refers to is the same geographical area as presently occupied by our present 50 united States?
I have already provided the answer in my previous post. All you had to do was read one of the links to the Tax Protester FAQ. Here it is again...http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#sovereigncitizens

Arguments that a person born in one of the fifty states is not a citizen of the United States or that there is a difference between United States and united States will quickly have you labeled as 'dumber than a box of rocks' and placed on ignore.

EDIT: The posters here are willing to answer questions and correct misconceptions. However, if you continue to present arguments from a sovereign citizen website that have been thoroughly discredited and you do not accept the fact those arguments are wrong, you will quickly exhaust our patience.
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright, until you hear them speak.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by LPC »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:The term "United States" has more than one legal definition. Is your answer referring to the federal "United States" (aka Federal territories) or are you referring to the fifty union (united) States?
In all my years of research, I've never seen any definition of "United States" that included the territories of the United States while excluding the states of the United States. If you have an example of such a definition, I'd like to see it.
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.
Red Cedar PM
Burnished Vanquisher of the Kooloohs
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Red Cedar PM »

I still haven't received a reply from Mr. Eagles on how he would expect the federal government to raise the revenue it needs to function if his proposed "zero" flat tax were enacted.
"Pride cometh before thy fall."

--Dantonio 11:03:07
Grixit wrote:Hey Diller: forget terms like "wages", "income", "derived from", "received", etc. If you did something, and got paid for it, you owe tax.
Red Cedar PM
Burnished Vanquisher of the Kooloohs
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: Richard Calls Upon You!

Post by Red Cedar PM »

GoldandSilverEagles wrote:I'm formulating my next information release and judging from the responses so far, ya all need some serious therapy. I'm mean I'd hate to see you campers in your real life, your attitudes remind me of closet serial killers. This is serious sh*t, ya'all get bent out of joint over someone *with the brains, and sense* not to bow down to your crap. I don't agree with ya'all, but unlike many of you, I cling to Eastern philosophies and so I don't get all whipped out over it.

Outside of Operative and the dude who commented on my Asperger's, I feel sorry for the intimate people in your lives who don't agree with you folks. You all got to be a real bitch to be around in a face-to-face disagreement. Judging from how nasty some of the above posts have been, some of you folks just ***CAN'T BE WRONG**** and hate being questioned. I'd wager that many of you have had past relationships end because of that very weakness.

A week ago I was forewarned by another member in here to be ***very careful*** regarding what I printed. That individual portrayed you folks as 'lions in a lions den'. I disagree. You folks are more like a swarm of mosquitoes.

Operative, I'll have a rebuttal to your claims 2day or 2morrow. Namaskar!
I love the claiming of victory and the trash talking after his ass has already been handed to him on a silver platter multiple times by now. Apparently providing evidence and citations to prove someone wrong, and ridiculing them for making outlandish claims illustrates a mentality akin to a serial killer. Mr. Eagles must have gotten his psychology degree from the same place he learned about tax law.
"Pride cometh before thy fall."

--Dantonio 11:03:07
Grixit wrote:Hey Diller: forget terms like "wages", "income", "derived from", "received", etc. If you did something, and got paid for it, you owe tax.