Sorry Charlie! Wages are taxable; your argument frivolous

[Judge Roy Bean]

These threads have become a lot easier to follow and make a lot more sense ever since I put Harvester on ignore.

That only works when you're logged in.

I think Harv is a plant. No one can be that stupid without getting paid for it. In order to re-re-re-re-re-re-re argue the same nonsense ad nauseum with such fervor requires professional intellectual dishonesty.

Harv - you should apply for work on K-street. You'd be a great talking head on Sunday morning "news" shows.

[LOBO]

We're not your parents, cornball. Go see a shrink.

Harvey: "Doctor, am I crazy?"

Shrink: "No"

Harvey: "delusional?"

Shrink: "No"

Harvey: "Stupid?"

Shrink: "That's the one"


You'd think with all his bravado, Harvey would provide a cite that one of his fellow "warriors" used to win their appeal, CDPH, tax court case or even thier criminal trial in support of his and Pete's theory.



Wait....

[Famspear]

I think Harv is a plant. No one can be that stupid without getting paid for it.

Harvester certainly could be a plant. Based on the level of intelligence I detect in his posts, I would say possibly a rutabaga or other kind of turnip. Definitely a plant.

[.]

Brendan Sullivan would probably take exception to this pottering around about plants.

[Famspear]

Brendan Sullivan would probably take exception to this pottering around about plants.

There once was a lawyer named Brendan
Who said "There's no use in pretendin';
I am no potted plant,
So belay all that rant."
('Twas for Oliver North he was fendin'.)

[LPC]

I think Harv is a plant. No one can be that stupid without getting paid for it.

Harvester certainly could be a plant. Based on the level of intelligence I detect in his posts, I would say possibly a rutabaga or other kind of turnip. Definitely a plant.

A rutabaga or a turnip would be too complex, and too high in the evolutionary chain. I would say algae.

[Nikki]

Red algae. Blue-green are smart enough to have developed photosynthesis.

[Cathulhu]

Red algae causes those horrid cases of paralytic shellfish poisoning, which is extremely nasty and frequently fatal. Harv's more pathetic, crouching over the dial-up in his doublewide. What's annoying is that he hasn't a clue what a real warrior is; I have known real warriors all my life (see memorial day post) and he's as far from a warrior as it's possible for a intellectually dishonest coward to be.

Stand tall, Rutabaga! Or is it time to drag out the pacifist hat? Coward.

[notorial dissent]

Let's be more specific, and accurate, POND SCUM, in a very shallow pond. Anything else is just too much credit.

[jg]

Red algae causes those horrid cases of paralytic shellfish poisoning, which is extremely nasty and frequently fatal. ...

Having taught high school Marine Biology I must mention that red tides are actually caused by algae-like creatures actually related to protozoans from the phylum Dinoflagellata, and not by red algae from phylum Rhodophyta.

For more details see, for example, http://www.angelfire.com/ri/skibizniz/p ... algae.html

Nothing but the facts, ma'am

[Cathulhu]

Red algae causes those horrid cases of paralytic shellfish poisoning, which is extremely nasty and frequently fatal. ...

Having taught high school Marine Biology I must mention that red tides are actually caused by algae-like creatures actually related to protozoans from the phylum Dinoflagellata, and not by red algae from phylum Rhodophyta.

For more details see, for example, http://www.angelfire.com/ri/skibizniz/p ... algae.html

Nothing but the facts, ma'am

Thanks for the correction; I'd hate to perpetuate bad science. Hadn't actually researched it; just knew from living here that you don't dig clams when there's a red tide.

[Harvester]

HA! bring on the goddamned cat!

You'd think with all his bravado, Harvey would provide a cite that one of his fellow "warriors" used to win their appeal, CDPH, tax court case or even thier criminal trial in support of his and Pete's theory.

Warriors win when they receive full refunds, escape from the 'withholding' scam, don't file, & are then left alone by the beast's collection agency (IRS). Like me. I have won.
In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!). Other wins have been later overturned ("what! you can't rule that modern banking is a fraud, we've a got a trillion dollar scam to protect here, you bumpkin of a judge! c'mon!").

And, for someone as stupid and ignorant as myself, y'all sure do give me lotsa attention! 'smatter, aintcha never someone wit no teeth. Oh one more thing. I know "Sooey"= http://www.suijurisclub.net (lotsa great folks there - gotta love those "case dismissed" stories), but what is "crackden?"

[Nikki]

Warrior

You have an incredible nerve to use that term for yourself.

Come up to Walter Reed and see what a real warrior is. Men and women missing arms or legs, skin burnt off them down to the bones, shrapnel in their brains and bodies.

You and your ilk aren't warriors. You are leeches taking a free ride on what others have paid and sacrificed for.

You are an insignificant worm who just doesn't want to pay taxes and will use any excuse possible to evade them.

You aren't fit to lick the dust off the boots of true warriors.

[Pottapaug1938]

Warriors win when they receive full refunds, escape from the 'withholding' scam, don't file, & are then left alone by the beast's collection agency (IRS). Like me. I have won. In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!).

Gee -- what a mystery indeed it is that, of all the court cases in our judicial system, the only ones that are sealed are these tax cases of yours. What a great way to hide the fact that these cases don't exist; and what a fantastic excuse to offer when challenged for proof that these cases actually exist.

I have to echo what Nikki said. You have an astounding level of chutzpah to claim that you are a "warrior". You're just a litle p*ssant loser who lives in a fantasy world; and you're a coward who ducks, weaves, dazzles and evades when challenged for proof of his assertions. You have yet to say one worthwhile thing in the time in which you've infected this forum. You're not worth any more of my time, Coward.

[LPC]

You'd think with all his bravado, Harvey would provide a cite that one of his fellow "warriors" used to win their appeal, CDPH, tax court case or even thier criminal trial in support of his and Pete's theory.

Warriors win when they receive full refunds, escape from the 'withholding' scam, don't file, & are then left alone by the beast's collection agency (IRS). Like me. I have won.
In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!). Other wins have been later overturned ("what! you can't rule that modern banking is a fraud, we've a got a trillion dollar scam to protect here, you bumpkin of a judge! c'mon!").

Which confirms what LOBO said.

You have pinned all your faith, and all your futures, on the results of low-level IRS workers who are processing returns and, without any review or published reason, approved the refunds requested by fraudulent tax returns filed by "CtC educated" filers. These same IRS workers have also approved tax refunds of millions of dollars to federal prisoners who have no incomes and have paid nothing in taxes but have presented totally fraudulent and fabricated tax returns.

But when federal judges appointed by the President and confirmed by Congress have reviewed all of the facts, applied the law, disapproved the refunds, and publicly explained the reasons for their decisions, you have decided to ignore their decisions and instead rely on the decisions of the low-level, clerical, return processors who have repeatedly demonstrated that they cannot tell the difference between an honest tax return and a fraudulent return.

It's like you've decided to ignore everything that the doctors and researchers at Johns Hopkins and the Mayo Clinic have found because the checkout girl at RiteAid approved your credit card purchase of apricot pits.

And, for someone as stupid and ignorant as myself, y'all sure do give me lotsa attention!

You have some amusement value.

So do birds.

I've also been giving "lotsa attention" to some Chipping Sparrows that have appeared at my birdfeeder this week. I'm sure that they're smarter than you are, and I suspect that they are cuter as well.

I give the same weight to their legal opinions as I give to yours.

[Famspear]

In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!).

On that note, I am going to call you what you are, Harvester. You are a liar. You know very well that there are no "warrior courtroom victories." None. Zero. Zilch. Not even one.

Other wins have been later overturned ("what! you can't rule that modern banking is a fraud, we've a got a trillion dollar scam to protect here, you bumpkin of a judge! c'mon!").

Again, I am going to call you what you are, Harvester. You are a liar. You know very well that there are no warrior "wins" that have been "later overturned."

[LPC]

In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!).

On that note, I am going to call you what you are, Harvester. You are a liar.

Thanks for the "plain speech" (as Quakers would say).

[notorial dissent]

I'd say that pretty clearly and simply sums up the matter.

[Famspear]

Here's an example of the tactic used by other followers of Hendrickson's Cracking the Code. This is a post from user XJCherokee, who is having a disagreement with "SkankBeat":

.......Also if you have read United States Supreme Court cases you would see that the right to "Personal Employment" is guaranteed in their opinion's [sic] and in the U.S.Constitution see 10th and 14th Amendments, which the Supreme court as late as 1960 refers to. "You have the right to a common occupation in your community." "The right to personal employment will not be infringed and therefore can not be subject to the income tax." Look it up in the Supreme Court and State Supreme cases, as a matter of fact cTc references a Tennessee Supreme Court case, if [sic] you read cTc?

(bolding added).

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/viewt ... 5116#25116

Of course, the "quote" highlighted in bold font is a fake. User XJCherokee throws this fakery into the mix to give the false impression that this verbiage is an actual quote -- perhaps from the United States Supreme Court, or perhaps from the Tennessee Supreme Court or some other court (it's hard to tell, as XJCherokee conveniently provides no actual citation). This is just as much an example of intellectual dishonesty as is Harvester's statement above.

[Imalawman]

In most warrior courtroom victories, those records cannot be cited as the records have been sealed (can't let the cat outta the bag now!).

Numerous courts have said that I can come to your house and take whatever I want. Of course, those cases have all been sealed (can't let other people know that this is possible). I'll be around later this afternoon. I'm sure you'll simply take my word for it.