LB Bork

[The Jurist]

Someone please tell me why this shouldn't go into the pissing contest trashbin.

Because amongst the pissing is a clear case that "LB Bork" is a scammer, something which merits a better fate than auto-pruning. It merits search-engine indexing, in fact. I do agree with Pottapaug that "Jurist" should be mooted out, but I also intend to look further into Bork.

Again, prove your claim. I am sure that tons of people would disagree with you. Maybe you could put some of them together to add to a case?

Oh, and for whatever reason, wserra, it was noted that you found this post but failed to post it here on the forum http://www.notmygovernment.us/forum/NMG ... 1285779668

Quatloos makes the PAC list of "Facts Deniers".

Below is the general list of criteria that Quatloo's lists, that they appear to not follow:

Tax Protestors, Pure Trusts, and Other Stupid De-Tax Schemes & Scams
Have a stupid theory why you shouldn't have to pay taxes? 861? Non-Filer? Sovereign Citizen? Believe that the federal courts are actually admiralty courts or that the only real citizens of the USA live in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the District of Columbia, then this forum is for you. Also considers Pure Trusts in all of its scam forms, including Constitutional Trusts, Patriot Trusts, Unincorporated Business Organizations, COLATOS, as well as the Corporation Sole scam, and "Make Yourself into a Church" in all variants.
• More here : http://www.quatloos.com/general/backgrnd.htm

For the record, I nor PAC have ever advocated any of the above listed subjects.

Well, PAC has been a long time advocate of Quatloos weeding-out the bad people in the movement who fail to follow the law; but now it appears something new has been added... They appear to now fail to look at the facts and are running on the principle of Pavlov's dog, i.e. they see some word and instead of researching or reasoning further, they just bite. And these people claim to know law and fail to use the rules of evidence.

Although PAC has been around longer then these "people" of Quatloos (most of them hiding behind monikers, i.e. real brave souls. LOL), they have gone outside the original scope of the intent of the site and gone into the political realm of listing "Sovereign Citizens" as a target of scrutiny. Off-point, but nonetheless, they (Tony the Wonder Llama, a.k.a. Jay D. Adkisson) are listing "LB Bork" under a general list of "sovereign citizen" positions.

Oh yes, Quatloos is under "Insurgency Agents" due to the fact it (they are) is practicing "Gate Keeper" * methods by ignoring the facts and law on several grounds. Denial of due process appears to be the flavor of the day for not only agencies of the governments, but the "monikers" of Quatloos too. Stay tuned as we will be listing the law breakers (deceivers) of the Quatloos team of gang-bangers (as in ganging up like rapists) by name in this thread. We know how they operate by side-stepping questions and issues so this will be fun, guaranteed.

Moreover, they will get a slot in the Island Makers Project also for herding de facto citizens into the corral.


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

* Gate Keeper. This is a person or organization that is put in place to keep people pacified with a certain level of information. Such is of purpose to guard the whole truth of what the real problem may be.

[The Jurist]

Actually, the good doctor does know quite a bit about both constitutional and international law, as a quick perusal of his previous posts will show. It is YOU, "Jurist", who knows nothing about either. Of course, you can prove me wrong; and a quick citation of appellate court cases buttressing your points will accomplish that quite nicely.

You can also directly answer his questions, instead of ducking them like you did.

Strictly speaking, there is no federal common law... To use court cases in support is a violation of Due Process. But of course, you people are into violating the rights of people just like not answering questions and advancing ad hominem attacks, right?

Your cowardice and slipperiness is truly breathtaking. You respond to my post without addressing ANYTHING of what I said. You quote from the Erie case -- which is irrelevant here; you make an assertion about citing court cases which is so colossally ignorant and wrong I have to consider it as possibly the stupidest thing I've ever seen on Quatloos; and you end with a bunch of gibberish.

You really ought to stop using the computer when there are no grownups around.

Very droll... haha

Pottapaug1938, why do you not explain to us if there is no God, why are you here (and I am not referencing Quatloos)? It appears that you have everything else figured out.

Also, I have a rule of how to study law: Do not read case law. Now, as it is simple to address why using case law (especially of federal nature) is a violation of due process, please explain why it is stupid when fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Someone please tell me why this shouldn't go into the pissing contest trashbin.

Because amongst the pissing is a clear case that "LB Bork" is a scammer, something which merits a better fate than auto-pruning. It merits search-engine indexing, in fact. I do agree with Pottapaug that "Jurist" should be mooted out, but I also intend to look further into Bork.

Jurist is simply a shill for the TP/Sovrun B.S. scam marketers and not a very good one but exposing them serves a useful purpose.

[Judge Roy Bean]

...
Also, I have a rule of how to study law: Do not read case law. Now, as it is simple to address why using case law (especially of federal nature) is a violation of due process, please explain why it is stupid when fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.

My cat has a better understanding of the law than that drivel represents.

[Famspear]

Your cowardice and slipperiness is truly breathtaking. You respond to my post without addressing ANYTHING of what I said. You quote from the Erie case -- which is irrelevant here....

And, at the risk of appearing to be a hair-splitter, Jurist got it wrong. There is, strictly speaking, some federal common law -- and the Court in Erie did not say that there is no federal common law. The Court stated that there is no federal general common law.

...Also, I have a rule of how to study law: Do not read case law.....

Yeah, well why are we not surprised?

Oh, and Buster -- get a clue: Your name isn't "Jurist," either -- and you're no jurist.

[LPC]

And the regulations clearly state that the federal income tax applies to citizens and residents of the United States. 26 CFR § 1.1-1(a).

All right, what is a resident?

What do you mean by "is"?

I mean, really. Is that the best you can do? Ask for a definition of "resident"?

Why not ask for definitions of "is" or "what" or regulations or "state"?

Doesn't it ever bother you that you are a dysfunctional illiterate moron?

[The Jurist]

You guys are mean. Why can you not play nice?

I have a radio interview tomorrow... You want I should mention how childish you people are?

[The Jurist]

And the regulations clearly state that the federal income tax applies to citizens and residents of the United States. 26 CFR § 1.1-1(a).

All right, what is a resident?

What do you mean by "is"?

I mean, really. Is that the best you can do? Ask for a definition of "resident"?

Why not ask for definitions of "is" or "what" or regulations or "state"?

Doesn't it ever bother you that you are a dysfunctional illiterate moron?

In the context "resident" was used that you has an issue with. I have to explain this to you?

*see my last post about you "people" (used loosely) being children*

[LPC]

I have an radio interview tomorrow... You want I should mention how childish you people are?

Please.

Please talk about what idiots we are, and how we can't cite any provisions of the Constitution, or any statutes, or any court decisions that agree with what we say.

And please talk about how what we say is illogical and lacks any reason.

That way, if anyone comes here, and reads what we write, they will realize that what you have said and written is complete nonsense and you are an idiot.

Please say whatever you want about us. It can only help us.

[Famspear]

....I have an radio interview tomorrow... You want I should mention how childish you people are?

You have a radio interview tomorrow?

Based on your "performance" here so far, the best thing you can do for yourself once you're on the air is to say nothing.

[The Jurist]

I have an radio interview tomorrow... You want I should mention how childish you people are?

Please.

Please talk about what idiots we are, and how we can't cite any provisions of the Constitution, or any statutes, or any court decisions that agree with what we say.

And please talk about how what we say is illogical and lacks any reason.

That way, if anyone comes here, and reads what we write, they will realize that what you have said and written is complete nonsense and you are an idiot.

Please say whatever you want about us. It can only help us.

I am still waiting for you to address specifics in the article you posted. Using the word "idiot" and saying it is "complete nonsense" fails miserably to do that. Further, you must be stumped on the "resident" matter, as I see you have side-stepped that like many attorneys do. Bravo!

As for helping you guys get some kind of glamour off this thread, that ain't gonna happen; people will see how you have evaded questions, name called, etc., not to mention that the original subject matter of "LB Bork" being on "the list" being unfounded.

Daniel, I can tell you fail to understand context of what you read... As you have proven it in your statements. In the nature of these foe paws, one of the qualities of an idiot is for one to speak without knowledge. The evidence shows that it would be you Quatloo guys.

Oh, and it seems the courts do the talking for you... Ever wonder why case law is case law? It is great to rehash the errors of others, right Daniel?

[The Jurist]

....I have an radio interview tomorrow... You want I should mention how childish you people are?

You have a radio interview tomorrow?

Based on your "performance" here so far, the best thing you can do for yourself once you're on the air is to say nothing.

Man, you guys are so funny.... I wish I had a million dollars for every time I have laughed today addressing you people.... I would be broke.

[Famspear]

I wrote:

A blithering blowhard called Bork,
Writes a lot like a Sovereign Dork.
Yes, he’s cooked his own goose
With nonsensical juice,
And he’s done – you can stick in the fork!

Dan responded with:

Perfect.

How do you do that?

My deep dark secret is that I've been writing limericks full time since I was twelve. This legal, tax, and accounting stuff, the prior career in broadcasting, and so forth -- all that has always been just a part-time hobby.

[The Jurist]

...
Also, I have a rule of how to study law: Do not read case law. Now, as it is simple to address why using case law (especially of federal nature) is a violation of due process, please explain why it is stupid when fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.

My cat has a better understanding of the law than that drivel represents.

Lucky I did not use the Latin verbiage, huh Judge?

You and your cat would have been really confused.

[The Jurist]

What Jurist doesn't realize is that he is essentially asking the sovereign citizen equivalent of "May I mambo banana face in the dogpatch?" Sure each word individual is an English word, but together it is the linguistic equivalent of a human centipede - nonsensical.

He also does not realize is that many people before him have tried to argue in the manner he is and have even done so in court and to a person the results have always been bad for the "sovereign citizen," as if their sad, little, unhinged little life didn't already suck hot sulfur fumes.

You people really like the apples and oranges concept, and also blathering of what you think to be clever statements. You have not figured out the case law thing either, have you?

Again--in case you missed it CaptainKickback (are you some kind of a narc?)--one of the qualities of an idiot is for one to speak without knowledge (see below comment). Learn it, know it, live it.

**You must be in the club that you mention in your sig statement**

[Famspear]

....Lucky I did not use the Latin verbiage, huh Judge?

Yes, "Buster"/"Jurist"/"Epic Fail," if your knowledge of Latin is no better than your knowledge of law, it's lucky for you that you didn't try to use Latin.

AVE TROGLODYTA!

[Geoff J]

The stats on the forum speak for themselves

99% OF THE THREADS have maybe 10 or slightly more posts with wide posting intervals spanning many months while this thread has generated 100 or more non stop posts in 48hrs.

Such stats really show how bored,psychotic, and sadistic the Quatloos community really is.

The People's Awareness Coalition is happy to have been a bright spot on your "D.C. darkened" day !

I am Geoff J, and post as Geoff J @ notmygovernment.us

smell ya later !

[The Jurist]

....Lucky I did not use the Latin verbiage, huh Judge?

Yes, "Buster"/"Jurist"/"Epic Fail," if your knowledge of Latin is no better than your knowledge of law, it's lucky for you that you didn't try to use Latin.

AVE TROGLODYTA!

Cute... Please give examples of where I may be in error of any law references.

[Arthur Rubin]

Neither "Geoff J " nor the "Jurist" has said anything that has enough basis in law or reality to require refutation.

That being said, it's time to bring this thread to a close, as it's over 100 posts. As far as I'm concerned, you can start a "LB Bork 2" thread, but other mods may differ.

It appears I'm not a mod any more. Oh, well. Some mod should bring this to a close.