Categorized | Articles, Call of Shame, Video

IRS – Lots of Evasions, Plenty of Dishonesty – Never Any Evidence

Posted on November 6th, 2015 by Marc Stevens

This is a Call of Shame with an agent of the criminal organization known as the Internal Revenue Service.  I’m posting this because while it’s not the best quality or my best work, it’s very instructive.  This agent uses some of the most common dodges used by the political criminal class.  I go through them below and discuss how I deal with them.  Once again though, the agent, instead of providing evidence to support his claim, just hangs up on me.

Because nothing says credibility like hanging up on someone.  Evidence? let me hang this phone up real quick.  Forcing people to pay you means never having to bother with petty things such as evidence and good faith.

1.  Deliberately misstating my question/position.  This dishonest tactic is a favorite with government types, probably because it doesn’t require any intelligence.  When you can’t answer the question, ignore it and answer  a question that wasn’t asked under the impression we’re so stupid we won’t notice.  I’m talking about a lack of evidence, the agent, as if I was not very clear, states,

You’re  saying that he doesn’t have to file or pay taxes, cuz what it only like corporations that are supposed to be assessed a tax or something like that?

I didn’t even use the word corporation; where is he getting this?  Probably because he knows about frivolous legal arguments and by raising this straw man he can easily knock it down.

He then confirms the claim that if you’re physically in California, then the laws apply.  We get there after he initially disagrees with my use of California, implying just being in California doesn’t mean the constitution and US code apply.

He insists that if one is physically in the United States, then the constitution and laws apply.  I don’t care about the definitions of United States, all I care about is the claim that my physical location means the constitution and laws apply.  I stick to issues of fact, not law and legal interpretations.

2.  Flipping the burden.  When the accuser lacks evidence and the honesty to admit he has no evidence, then they may try flipping the burden of proof on the one asking the questions.  While that did not actually happen here, it is very common and you should never allow it to happen.

The agent here was just being snarky in an attempt to derail the questioning.  I asked if he had evidence to support his claim and he says,

Do you [Marc]?

Though this question provided me a great opportunity to lay on some sarcasm, I resisted the urge as I didn’t want to get further from my question, so I just pointed out I was not making the argument.

Trying to shift the burden again, the agent asks if we run red lights.  Don’t fall for this, it is not relevant to whether there is evidence the laws apply because of your physical location.  [As mentioned in the video, the picture is not the agent I spoke with, it’s John Koskinen, his boss the commissioner.]

koskinen copy

3.  Call your question an argument.  After the agent talks about me having to go higher on the political pecking order, he pulls out the standard political dodge: label the question as an argument:

It’s an argument that’s never going to, an argument, I’ve been doing this a long time, and if the taxpayer is on the line, it’s an argument he’s never going to win.

Always point out you haven’t presented an argument, you’ve asked a question.  They don’t care, but we’re proving bad faith by giving them a chance to be honest.  They tend to stick with bad faith as criminals are known to do.

4.  Circular logic, begging the question.  I ask again, wanting only a yes or no if he has evidence or not, and the agent says to look in the code.  He also claims “it’s all interpretation.”  I point out he is not answering the question, mine is an issue of fact, he keeps insisting it’s an issue of law as if they are the same thing.

I ask him again for a “yes or no” only for his evidence supporting his claim.  All he can do is say,

It’s written in the code.  You have the interpretation in the code.

Because evidence the constitution is written in the code.  Even if we give him a pass on this silly answer, exactly how could a code written in 1913 prove a written instrument from 1787 applies to me?  This should demonstrate why just asking questions is so effective at discrediting these criminals.

I wrote it’s circular because they argue the law (because magic?) applies to everyone just because it is written down.

5.  I’m not going to argue with you.  Predictably, the agent, knowing he’s not going to get away with alleging magic words, shifts back to this tactic that already failed him,

I’m not going to argue with you.

Asking a question is not arguing.  Does this really need to be pointed out?  When they pull this crap on you remind them you are only asking a question.  If they insist you’re arguing, then ask them what the argument is.  This is a dishonest tactic by a criminal to avoid answering a question.  They just can’t be honest and why expect honesty and good faith from a criminal?

Don’t let them get away with this, object if in court, if not, call them on it and ask the question again.  You may have to ask them, “Are you deliberately calling my question an argument so you can avoid answering the question?”

6.  Not representing the taxpayer.  This is the authority dodge, fairly common also.  It’s completely irrelevant especially since I already had the third party authorization, the only reason he was talking to me at all.

When the dishonest get asked for their evidence, evidence they know they don’t have, then they dodge the question by questioning our “authority”.  Do not answer their question, point out it is irrelevant and ask for the evidence again.

I tell the agent if he doesn’t answer the question I’ll have my client ask him directly so he’ll be out of excuses.  He refuses claiming he doesn’t want to argue.  So instead he just dodges the question and wastes our time.  Of course when I point out what an argument really is, he hangs up.

You should be able to recognize the typical dodges to direct questions about evidence.  Don’t fall for it or give them a pass.  The only reason they do this is because they know they cannot provide a shred of evidence proving their constitution and laws apply to us because of our physical location.

They (“governments”) are just men and women forcing us to pay them.  There is no proof their “laws” apply to any of us.  If you disagree, then please present your proof either by calling a live No State Project Broadcast, posting on the forum, or posting a video.

              

132 Comments For This Post

  1. Andy Says:

    under the impression we’re so stupid we won’t notice.

    Under the false belief we’re so…

    It’s not that we give the impression. Rather, it’s their false belief, in the face of a person asking an intelligent question, they know they’ve been caught with their pants down. I asked an intelligent question, was it your intention to insult my intelligence by answering a question I didn’t ask?

  2. Incubus Says:

    Well that was entertaining. I can’t help but wonder if that guy is legitimately mentally retarded.

  3. damon Says:

    I keep trying to tell you Marc and all your listeners here. I have posted here many times explaining about the PROOF that the people THEMSELVES provide. They have VOLUNTARILY SUBMITTED themselves.

    Somehow your “client” is on their radar and they know of him/her. Your “client” has and uses a socialist insecurity number which has some things he/she has to agree too to continue use and participation in the program and plethora of benefits offered at his/her neighbors expense. To take from the benefits is to shackle his/her neighbor and therefore will trap your “client” as well. Unless he is willing to release his neighbor he will not be released.(no benefits…at all)

    It is VERY LIKELY that your “client” claims several different statuses that they write rules for. Citizens and residents both of which, mine as well be synonyms for JURISDICTION.

    It is also VERY LIKELY that your client fills out a W-4 (voluntary withholding agreement found here>>>26 C.F.R. §31.3401(a)-3 Amounts deemed wages under voluntary withholding agreements ), a 1040 or 1099 under penalties of perjury which are forms only for TAXPAYERS to begin with. If he/she fills it out under “penalties of perjury” attesting to the truthfulness and accuracy of the “tax return” it constitutes TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS. THIS IS EVIDENCE OF TAXPAYER STATUS and the witness is giving witness against him/herself.

    Then you guys go ahead and call up the IRS which has a mission statement that reads;

    The IRS Mission
    Provide America’s TAXPAYERS top quality service by helping them understand and meet their tax responsibilities and enforce the law with integrity and fairness to all.

    They only help TAXPAYERS Marc….hello? You think because of some low level and ignorant agent that cannot provide you with a reasonable answer for the existence of the jurisdiction that there is none? How many times have they told you…”We have his/her information return”…. which is evidence provided by the TAXPAYER (YOUR CLIENT) mind you…cmon man. You smarter than this.

    There should be NO difficulty in understanding this other than flat out pigheaded PRIDE and an unwillingness to admit ERROR because one may be very bitter of their bondage. I hate reproof as much as the next guy but there comes a time we just have to admit it;

    Mat_13:15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

    Bondage of Egypt again and under tribute to “Pharaoh”.
    Large print is for emphasis.

    in His Peace,
    Damon

  4. Andy Says:

    @Damon, The forum is a robust place for discussion. Much more than in this comment section, which is designed for comment, not discussion. As you’ve said, “I have posted here many times explaining …” If I start a thread on the forum will you participate in the discussion starting with what you posted here?

    You can read the forum and if you want to join the forum, you have to email Marc to create the account. This is only to stop the flood of spambots. Email Marc a username to marcstevens(at)mail(dot)com

  5. damon Says:

    Yes I am willing to discuss the issues on the forum. I will attempt to mail him now

    thank you
    Damon

  6. Billy r. Says:

    Hey I have a question,when you ask the question of facts what would they look like? Oh yea Marc I have been asking some of the questions here in Baltimore about the con-stitution/ laws applying and I get nothing, they won’t even email me back.Need more call of shames though some new ones !

  7. damon Says:

    @ Andy,

    I am on the forum Andy but do not know how to find you or this “topic”. Let me know when you are able.

    in his peace
    Damon

  8. Andy Says:

    @Damon, The thread has been posted. Here’s the link: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151.html

  9. Dale Says:

    @Billy r.
    I’m in Baltimore too. With whom are you trying to correspond? Trust me they are NOT going to reply with anything substantive. I have experienced almost exactly what this post described. I even sent a letter to my U.S. Senator complaining of abuse of power and violation of my right to equal protection, among other things.
    They sent a reply which was nothing more than a 3 document, 40 page diatribe filled with threats and discussions of “frivolous arguments”, again, none of which I have made.

    Still not sure where to go from here.

  10. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Billy, you have to go to city council meetings, thing like that. Otherwise they just ignore you.

  11. PatriotOne Says:

    “Not until shortly after Petitioner filed in the Supreme Court did Petitioner discover the obscure artifice used by the district judge to justify pretending that Petitioner is a resident of the geographic area in which the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division is authorized to exercise jurisdiction: the District of Columbia.
    You did not misunderstand the previous sentence.
    The only geographic area in which any contemporary United States District Court in America has jurisdiction is the District of Columbia.”… https://supremecourtcase.wordpress.com/

  12. PatriotOne Says:

    [adding to ^^^^^^^] it is absurd to consider that simply because a man has read a book, paper, sign – that that act of reading (or not reading) either imposes upon the reader an obligation to perform for an other man or grants the reader authority to rule/control upon another man.

    why not offer to rephrase the question “what facts do you rely upon that prove your code applies?” with…………………… “what facts do you Jimmy (IRS ACTOR) rely upon that allow you Jimmy to enforce your code upon me” – “can you Jimmy apply the King James Bible upon me?” “why not?” “so, if you Jimmy cannot apply the Bible book upon me how are you Jimmy able to apply a CODE book upon me?”

    yeah I know, the answer is, “because I have more guns than you have”…

  13. RAD Says:

    “PatriotOne Says:
    November 8th, 2015 at 10:45 am

    The only geographic area in which any contemporary United States District Court in America has jurisdiction is the District of Columbia.””

    How much jurisdiction do they have? 5 grams of jurisdiction? 10 volts of jurisdiction? How do we empirically measure these claimed “powers”?

  14. RAD Says:

    What is this “court” that supposedly has this supernatural power? A building? A lawyer in a priest robe?

  15. PatriotOne Says:

    for RAD; i posted for information purposes only; it is always best to know the methods of robbers rapist and pillagers; I am guessing the “chain of command” goes something like capacity – standing – jurisdiction…

    however; if Jimmy is claiming to somehow have a “jurisdiction” over you AND “his” “jurisdiction” is “”within the district of Columbia”” I suppose the proper question to ask Jimmy ( in addition to your above questions ) is “factually; what is the district of Columbia?”.

  16. doyle Says:

    post is not being posted.

  17. spooky2th Says:

    I was watching “The “Bastard Executioner” on TV the other week and a skilled swordsman traveled through a County (ruled by the royalty there.) The ruler of the county decided he wanted his services/skills for his own bidding, wrote on a piece of paper with his royal stamp on it, that the swordsman was to stay and work for him exclusively. If he didn’t and/or tried to leave, he would be thrown into a dungeon or worse. I had to laugh. That’s what is going on today. All backed up by violence/domestic terrorism. Forget about anybody’s consent. The revolutionary war was fought to break away from any and all ruling classes but it didn’t take long for the criminal bank of England to bastardize the American system. And George Washington, started ruining everything shortly after he became president.

  18. Dale Smith Says:

    My question is… What is the solution to this tyranny? It seems the blatant abuse of power can go on with impunity because the only ones who can stop it are the very “powers that be” who are a part of the hoax.

  19. doyle Says:

    The agent on the phone is right. Most everyone has signed up to be a taxpayer. Taxpayers are ruled by code.

  20. doyle Says:

    He just can’t tell you how it works or the game is up.

  21. doyle Says:

    You do know the difference between a man/woman and a taxpayer?

  22. damon Says:

    @ Dale Smith,

    The ONLY way is to repent and;

    Mat_6:33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

    the people , as they have done repeatedly through the generations, keep going under he yoke and bondage of men because they begin to care more about their own security more than their neighbors liberty.

  23. spooky2th Says:

    @ doyle:

    Care to prove your opinions/assumptions??? Here damon, seems to be having problems doing it in the forum thread, linked here:

    http://www.marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151.html

    Please join the conversation there.

  24. damon Says:

    I keep telling you spooky,

    you have provided all the evidence of your bondage. ones lawgiver is their god.

  25. spooky2th Says:

    damon said: “you have provided all the evidence of your bondage. ones lawgiver is their god.”

    That’s your opinion/assumption and is not proof of anything!

    You’re still telling me that you don’t have any proof! And cannot be honest about it at that.

    Go back to the forum and discuss it there where it should be discussed.

    You know the thread here:
    http://www.marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-page-2.html

    My second question of evidence to you repeated again in the thread, because you ignored the first one, is in message# 24—a direct reply to one of your posts. Won’t you go there and answer it???

    Citizen or not, prove the jurisdiction that makes the codes applicable!?!? It’s what I’ve asked of you twice in that forum thread. And if you want to at least sound rational, leave me out of the equation.

  26. doyle Says:

    spooky, yes it is my opinion that a lot of people are signing and have signed tax forms, agreeing to be taxpayers. It isn’t an assumption. There are taxpayers, just like there are drivers. By agreeing to be one or both doesn’t make one competent, it places one into a jurisdiction by agreement, even though one has no idea what has happened. That agreement is a terms and conditions ‘code’ that’s how ‘it applies to you just because you are in wherever’ as Marc says.

  27. Boxer Says:

    That was a lot of heavy breathing.

  28. Andy Says:

    @doyle, apparently you believe there can be an agreement absent a meeting of the minds. File a tax return or go to jail is not a meeting of the minds, it’s threat of violence. Nobody willfully files a tax form. People file because people calling themselves government threaten to hurt them if they don’t. It’s like a mafia protection racket on steroids. If I did as government types do and forced strangers to pay me, would you consider me a criminal?

  29. spooky2th Says:

    @ doyle,

    Violence negates any contract or agreement. The only reason I have a drivers license is because of the “threat” of violence. I might be arrested or worse for not having one. There is no agreement, no meeting of the minds or any of the other requirements of a contract/agreement.

    Why don’t you go to the forum and talk about this or anything else? This isn’t exactly about the IRS call of shame.

    Here’s the link: http://www.marcstevens.net/board/

    Most posting is being done now, in the “General Discussion” section.

  30. NonEntity Says:

    Boxer Sed: That was a lot of heavy breathing.
    ——
    Sorry. I forgot the microphone was on!

  31. PaulNZ Says:

    His mind must have melted so he hung up.

  32. doyle Says:

    spooky…..There is no ‘threat’unless you suddenly want to change the contract terms without giving notice. Did you say you knew the difference between a man and a taxpayer? Do you know how to resign a position or ask for clarification on who the code applies to? Most people don’t know how to void a contract or alter the terms to suit. Marc’s approach,is only creating angst because one is still bound by the contract because no one asked any questions in writing before they signed and have no idea what was agreed and in what capacity they were in when they agreed.

  33. Rad Says:

    So then if I hop over the imaginary line from Mexico and I’m here “illegally” then they have no jurisdiction because there’s no signature on anything? So then, following this logic:
    “There is no ‘threat’unless you suddenly want to change the contract terms”

    we arrive at the conclusion that the government “agents” never brutalize “illegal” aliens since it’s impossible for there to be a “threat” absent a “contract”[presuming for the sake of argument there is one]. Right? Does this seem consistent with the facts though? Is it factually correct that this doesn’t happen like almost every day if not literally every day?

  34. Rad Says:

    Also, who is the other party to this supposed contract?

  35. Andy Says:

    @Rad, it’s the way of the world, or so it seems. People have opinions then cherry pick facts while omitting crucial/key/pivotal facts. Like omitting the gun that has always been in the room hidden underneath paperwork. They don’t let facts lead their investigation.

    It’s laughable on its face. I know when I don’t want to interact with a person, I know when I want to be left alone. Along comes someone that tells me I agreed to something as though they know better than me when I do and don’t want to interact with a person.

    I used to think government is like a mafia. I’ve come to realize it’s a protection racket. Why else do people buy license plates than to protect themselves from the ones forcing the plates on them. Buy these psychopath deterrent plates or Guido will break your legs. Or run you off the road, drag you out of your car, stomp you, then kidnap you and put you in a cage.

    But you agreed to the rules/laws when you got a driver’s license so if you don’t get the plates you’ve violated the agreement.

    But I got the driver’s license for the same psychopath deterrent effect — protection from road mercenaries. It’s turtles/gun-threats all the way down.

    The doyles of the world are non thinking regurgitators of what they’ve been told to do. He believes the word of government authorities over his own authority while turning a blind eye to the gun in the room. I’m being generous giving doyle the benefit of the doubt that he’s merely been duped. On the other hand, if it’s not ignorance then he’s either sucking off a government tit or he is one of them.

    In a debate of ideas, the first person who pulls a gun loses the debate. “Government” loses the debate before it even gets out of the gate.

  36. RAD Says:

    Yeah, well I’m using a reductio ad absurdum. If there is no threat absent a signature how do you explain the police routinely attacking “illegal” aliens?
    The facts don’t match the hypothesis. And if a signature is a contract, who is the other party? Do you have a contract with Jerry Brown? Barrack Obama? Who is the other party? Uncle Sam? Santa Clause?

  37. spooky2th Says:

    doyle says:
    “There is no ‘threat’unless you suddenly want to change the contract terms without giving notice.”

    Me:
    So, I would not be forced into court or arrested or fined or jailed or worse if I drove without a license??? This is the gun in the room that everybody talks about. The intimidation and threat of violence all backed up by the barrel of a gun voids any contract/agreement. I have to ask permission from public servants to travel??? How oxymoronic is that? The gun in the room is in plain sight but most everybody has been deluded/indoctrinated/brainwashed into not seeing it.

  38. doyle Says:

    Amazing how distortion occurs. i still don’t know if you know the difference between a man and a taxpayer. Do you have a licence of any description and do you or have you paid tax? A gun was never mentioned.I am not judging anyone’s belief or opinion. i am attempting to explain what i believe is misunderstood and stuff is concluded from every angle. Believe what you want. Who said if you keep doing the same thing and expect a different result,one would be suffering from insanity?

  39. PaulNZ Says:

    I see the 5 year olds are posting comments again.

  40. Andy Says:

    Paul, that’s kind of insulting to five year olds, isn’t it? More here: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56220.html#pid56220

  41. damon Says:

    Doyle is right in that there is a contractual nexus that is not being observed if that is what he contends.

    There is an implied consent to the terms by the use of the benefit. the benefit is usually at the expense of your neighbor because we are not responsible enough to care for one another without attempting to force our neighbor to contribute to our welfare, no?. For this to change YOU have to change. Not the other way around. You have to be the difference. you have to make the responsible choices and show others how to do so. You have to educate your children and not sign them over to the STATE to care for them (homeschool). You have to make your own marriage contract INSTEAD of signing up with the STATE for a license inviting them in as a third and superior party an so on.

    You have to learn to be the welfare for one another so that no office of power is tempted to come in an entice you with benefits because you are bound by love of one another and not force. There is a way to do this but it takes a DILIGENT minority who are willing to sacrifice for one another. Are those people here or is it more of the same.

    People to busy complaining about their bondage that they themselves are responsible for trying to escape the taskmasters “whip”? Only concerned about saving themselves instead of the guy next to them. If this is you then you deserve your bondage and rightfully so. Your to busy caring about your own self than your neighbor who you have placed shackles on by telling others to compel him to contribute to your welfare. Is this you? Are you the guy I am writing about? Search your own souls.

    If you think a well thought out line of questioning is going to change the fact that they DO and in DEED have power over your lives because of your own sloth think again. You have been in rebellion to the perfect law of liberty since about your birth and have learned the same covetous practices as your parents which have made them and you human resources and merchandise;

    2Pe_2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

    You (whoever you are) have been promised liberty by those who themselves are the servants of corruption;

    2Pe_2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage

    the only way it works and you keep liberty is all, I repeat, ALL social welfare has to come through free will offerings/sacrifice also called a “burnt offering” in the scriptures. Socialists hate this. Do you hate what I write here? Do you hate me also because of what I write? Than examine your own self.

  42. spooky2th Says:

    Violence or the threat of violence voids any contract/agreement.

    Implied consent does not cut it either. Your philosophical theories do not hold up in court. Much less any theory or assumption or presumption.

    You all go to the forum and discuss this like it is supposed be done here. Start your own thread if you want to.

    http://www.marcstevens.net/board/

  43. damon Says:

    they are enforcing what the people have demanded of them. to compel offerings at their neighbors expense…if one takes from the offerings they are just as guilty as the ones you seek to blame spooky.

    Not void but absolutely enforceable and they DO enforce your agreements in their military courts

  44. spooky2th Says:

    What a joke!?!? The politicians rarely do what the people want. But they do continue to make more tyrannical laws, code, acts all the while stealing money & property every step of the way. Still no proof of the jurisdiction that makes codes applicable, huh damon? You were honest and right about one thing, “they are enforcing.” The whole system is based on “forcing” others to pay up or comply through terrorism, violence and the threat of violence not to mention intimidation.

    **

    We have become a nation of thieves and liars. How did we get to this state of affairs? Greed and the excessive love of money. There are people who are narcissistic sociopaths and they are preying on the rest of us. They are not inventors or creators. They are society’s leeches.

    **

    from:
    http://theworldlink.com/news/opinion/mailbag/a-nation-of-thieves-and-liars/article_240ffd0e-249d-11e4-995d-0019bb2963f4.html

  45. damon Says:

    All I have is you in denial Spooky.

    So again,

    The court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute of one who has availed himself of the benefits.

    Another way to say this is ,

    He who accepts the benefit should also bear the burden.

    If you accept benefits you give them jurisdiction. They usually get your testimony under penalties of perjury SWEARING AN OATH to the truthfulness of your statements. You have provided all the evidence…..NOT ME. Quit asking me to do what you have already done and started with your parents so long ago. You give them the evidence spooky. How can you not see it? Why ask me for “proof” when you are the one that has signed under penalties of perjury. You have agreed by the use. Don’t agree then STOP using the benefits like a social security card. Otherwise they have you and you are snared.

    How the people got into this bondage is through covetous practices. Thinking it is ok to force another to provide for their welfare. One purse of proverbs.

    Psa_69:22 Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.

    Now that which should have been for the peoples welfare is a trap and a snare. They have refused to obey God and therefore have received their just recompense and reward. There is still time to repent before a greater calamity comes for the rebellion.
    in His Peace,
    Damon

  46. spooky2th Says:

    Seems to me that you damon, are in denial. All I am doing is asking for the facts. And you never have any. Just like your post above, no facts that prove jurisdiction. Go figure.

    Babble-on, babble-on, damon.

    When ever one challenges jurisdiction in court over a victim-less crime, the prosecutor and judge start breaking the court’s rules, they start lying, they break their own laws, they collude with each other (a federal crime.) they withhold evidence, they violate their victims due process and on & on. All to not admit that they have no facts of jurisdiction and to. This usually will get a dismissal in appeals court most of the times. Every now and then a victim get’s an honest judge (if there is such a thing) and gets a dismissal right away.

    These psychopaths are more akin to chimpanzees that humans. The vast majority of people are not and nor do they want to be aggressive or controlling of others and want to live their life like they see fit, not how some psychopath tells them to do or not to do.

    Study finds lethal aggression is natural in chimpanzees

    In the 1970s, Jane Goodall’s reports of chimpanzee violence caught the attention of a global audience. Since then, many people have compared chimpanzee intergroup aggression to primitive warfare, and have argued that chimpanzee violence is an adaptive strategy that gives the perpetrators an edge.

    the rest here:
    https://asunow.asu.edu/content/study-finds-lethal-aggression-natural-chimpanzees

  47. Rad Says:

    Damon: For the third time if these government contacts are a contract, who is the other party to the contract? Why do you not address this? Don’t you think if your theory of a “contract” is to hold up to rational scrutiny, you should be able to articulate WHO ARE THE PARTIES? As a bare minimum at least? Yet why can you not responsively answer this?

  48. damon Says:

    Thank you for your reply Spooky,

    You keep on asking for facts to which I keep on telling you,

    you have been providing them for most of your life like the rest of the people that are in the same bondage you are in.

    Use of the benefit is acceptance of the terms. Very simple.

    in His Peace

  49. spooky2th Says:

    That is total assumption and factual at all. Another of your countless dodging/evading the question!?!? An immigrant crosses the border into the US from Mexico(an invisible, imaginary line) without any papers and breaks a holy code. How is there jurisdiction with the immigrant or anybody else for that matter??? The immigrant sure didn’t provide anything??? You just cannot prove jurisdiction that any code actually applies or I’m sure you would have by now.

    The title of this call of shame (Lots of Evasions, Plenty of Dishonesty – Never Any Evidence) is an accurate description of you, damon.

  50. spooky2th Says:

    Shouldn’t be trying to make this about me, damon. You already sound ridiculous enough. The question for the hundredth time, “can you prove the jurisdiction that makes any code applicable to anybody, citizen or not???”

    Can you be honest? I seriously doubt it. Bad, dishonest christians like you make the remaining 5% good christians look bad.

  51. Andy Says:

    Damon isn’t merely playing devil’s advocate. Damon IS the “devil’s”/evil people’s advocate. See the thread on the forum: Damon is the “devil’s” advocate…
    http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56237.html#pid56237

  52. damon Says:

    Joh_10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?

    It has to do with all of us. I do not need to prove anything concerning jurisdiction when you have already spent years doing it. If you use the benefits that is the equivalent to jurisdiction. regardless of how many times you keep asking me to prove it to you.

    •What I approve I do not reject. I cannot approve and reject at the same time. I cannot take the benefit of an instrument, and at the same time repudiate it.

    you cannot take the benefit then turn and ask “where is the jurisdiction”. It makes you look foolish in from of a learned judge/magistrate and probably in front of others as well….you can keep asking but it shows a lot of ignorance and pride to be honest with you which is what you asked. You cannot take out a car loan and start cruising around in the car and not expect to not pay for it. You are a member of the club in a civil socialist religion that is based on covetous practices and compelled offerings because the people will not take care of one another themselves responsibly. Are you ready to make the necessary sacrifices to really be at liberty?

    So, do you have and use a social and claim to be a citizen/resident which is a status they write rules for?

    Also…how will you care for the needy in your voluntary society? How do you intend to care for the poor the widow and the orphan? How will you and the rest of the unbelief do it? You reject god’s way. So how will you do it and not have it quickly turn back into what it is now which is EXACTLY what it does when the people rebel. How?

    Your repeated question of “prove jurisdiction” is getting old and is really beginning to show your foolishness as well there Spooky. Time to take responsibility for your actions and bite that bullet. You have and use things that have rules attached to them for their use. Sounds like you just want to use the benefit but not pay for the use…pretty unrighteous and not of a sound character. That is the type of character that cannot be trusted. How can you be trusted with the things that really matter if you are unrighteous in your dealings with the smaller things. It shows.

    How are you going to so it.

    in His Peace
    Damon

  53. damon Says:

    there would not be any jurisdiction over an immigrant passing the imaginary line.

    Unless the immigrant stole, murdered, committed fraud, or broke any of God’s laws. Now if the immigrant goes and gets a social security card application (SS-5) form I believe) and enrolls himself into their religious system of social welfare than guess what Spooky…jurisdiction is granted.

    Same if this immigrant turned resident/citizen petitions their courts. Jurisdiction granted. Matter of fact UNLESS you give them jurisdiction over the matter to be brought before the court they cannot hear it. So when Marc goes before them with motions and petitions and requests jurisdiction is granted. They are supposed to BRING YOU into their courts THEN you can challenge jurisdiction unless of course you are a resident and card carrying member of their society.

  54. spooky2th Says:

    damon? Are you illiterate?? Code, damons, code, damon!?! Breaks a code violation and get’s arrested for it or ordered to appear in court just like any body else. Plain & simple. All right after sneaking in the states. Prove the jurisdiction that makes any code applicable to anybody!

    Read that last sentence, damon. It has been asked of you so many times it’s not funny, yet you ignore it or dodge it spewing garbage like just now.

    It’s amazing how one can blatantly keep up the total dishonesty for so long, not fooling anybody…..

  55. Andy Says:

    The “government’s” argument is when a person is in the State of Ohio, for example, then the State of Ohio and constitution apply and the “government” has jurisdiction. That’s their argument. Their argument is not what the devil’s advocate (Damon) argues.

  56. Andy Says:

    correction: the State of Ohio *code* and constitution…

  57. damon Says:

    the dishonesty is on your part Spooky,

    the codes apply because you accept the benefits. You also very likely claim a status as a member in their club to further acquire such benefits that come at your neighbors expense. Keep asking how and why the code applies and I will keep telling you because you accept, have and use their benefits. If you chose NOT to use their benefits…ANY of them, then you can come talk about jurisdiction. Until then it is the same foolish questions you pose because you refuse to look at yourself as quite possibly part of the problem.

    If you were being honest you would be able to admit that you cannot take the benefits and at the same time be “free” and expect to not have to answer for the use of said benefit. just like if I had a sign in front of some fruit that said 50 cents per. If you take the fruit it is your implied consent to pay the 50 cents and we would have to say nothing to one another. Your upset because they dangled a carrot and you took the bait just like your parents before you, I get, your mad. But now it is time to forgive and repent from taking from your neighbor.

    I have continually been honest with you Spooky telling over and over again even though it seems to fall on deaf ears. If you take the benefit you must also bear the burden. Do you want to take the benefit and not be held accountable? Is that what I am hearing from you? That you would like to have your cake and eat it too like a lot of slothful folks out there? You want to be slothful and dishonest in your dealings spooky? Is that what you are saying to everyone here in a round about kind of way? You want to blame everyone else for your own apathy like Marc, Non, and the others that band together with you so you can all feel good about your wrong choices? Puff each other up but still remain in error?

    Pro_6:6 Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:

    I will tell you again…if you take benefits you will be in their snare and their you will remain.

    How are you going to care for those that have need in your voluntary society? How will you care for your elderly parents and the parents of your neighbor? How will you care for all the orphaned children? Those without parents that have been abandoned? Because right now the people you blame are the ones actually doing these things quite possibly because you wont. How will you contribute to their needs? Who will you appoint to administer the donations you plan on giving out of the goodness of your heart to care and provide for those that cannot provide for themselves now that you “owe no tax” in your voluntary society? Who will you go to when you have need because you broke your leg and cannot work for 6 weeks because it must heal? Are your “neighbors” here the good people like Andy and Non entity going to come to your side and contribute to your welfare because they love you as themselves? Or do they suffer from the same curse that their parents put them under and have continued in the covetous practices their parents showed them? What do you think Spooky? Will you go to their side because your relationship is built on a solid foundation called love, actually doing for one another? Have you guys even tried to be the welfare for one another or you really deep down do not care about one another and are just tired of the taskmasters you have appointed for yourselves out of your own selfishness and ignorance?

  58. damon Says:

    Andy ….man,

    Look I would agree it is impossible to be “in” the STATE physically. You can only ever be AT a location. What you are not realizing is that RESIDENCE IS and can be treated synonymously with being IN said STATE. they will not issue a license to one who is NOT resident in said STATE. Why? Because you have to VOLUNTARILY accept the benefit. You have to VOLUNTARILY accept their jurisdiction;

    Minimum Contacts: “A doctrine referring to the minimum due process requirement for subjecting a non-resident civil defendant to a court’s personal jurisdiction. The defendant must have sufficient contacts with the forum state.” International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington, 326 US. 310, 66 c.c. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95.

    Those benefits ARE THE SUFFICIENT CONTACTS NEEDED PLUS YOU CLAIM RESIDECE within said STATE. A drivers license i PROOF of residence which residence is PROOF of jurisdiction. Why does this elude you? You intentionally ignore it like your beyond the reach of the things I point out here. Stop claiming to be a resident then come back to the table man.

  59. dan Says:

    I think that guy is a masher, the heavy breathing was creepy as hell.

  60. Andy Says:

    Damon, again, here’s the “government’s” argument: When a person is physically located within the imaginary borders of a state, Ohio, for example, then the Ohio code and constitution apply and the “government” has jurisdiction. That’s their argument. Their argument is not what you argue Damon.

    If you step on a government paid for sidewalk or road or receive mail or use Federal Reserve Notes you’re using a government so-called benefit. How do you explain you don’t benefit from roads, FRNs, mail delivery ect etc? Of course, you’ll likely dishonestly cheery pick and say those aren’t benefits.

  61. Rad Says:

    Damon, for the fourth time, if I (or anyone else) has a “contract” which gives jurisdiction, then WHO ARE THE PARTIES TO THIS CONTRACT? Or in your theory, is it a contract with oneself without another party? Am I assuming too much to presume that you think there is another party to these “agreements”?

  62. Rad Says:

    Why do you never directly answer this.

  63. Rad Says:

    Is it because there is no rational answer? Doesn’t your theory of “contract” implicitly require at least two parties?

  64. damon Says:

    the “government” need not argue anything to their servants.

    those servants are they that apply (beg) for benefits at their neighbors expense. Benefits are given in exchange for jurisdiction. they have become the daddy because the people are not responsible for themselves. Just like when one obtains a lawyer…automatic non compos mentis and grants jurisdiction to the court. It is like a power of attorney.

    We cannot care for ourselves and refuse to care for one another. So please do it for us because we are either to slothful and apathetic, are heathen and need to be under a taskmaster , or we are just to dang selfish and just want our benefits now and do not care who you have to shackle to get them.

    Or all of the above.

    @ Rad…ones actions (implied consent) show consent and give consent. You bring up contract law quite a bit but only want to look at what seems advantageous to your case you are trying to make instead of looking at ALL the aspects I keep raising. Your OUTWARD actions show to the entire world your INWARD intent. If you use the benefits you accept the burden that accompanies the benefit. To use a social is your consent to act as federal personnel to which they can write rules for and do. This is why a “trade or business” in title 26 section 7701 is defined as “the functions of a public office”.

    Public domain and you have been given notice. Want the car? Pay the loan. Or daddy will come and correct you for “getting out of line”. Or you can simply stop taking benefits that come at your neighbors expense…taking your children out of public school is a good start.

  65. Andy Says:

    @Rad, Damon is all about liability on the non-government people’s side of the alleged contracts. Nothing about liability on the “government’s” consideration.

    ____________________________________________________________________________

    For the record:
    Why is Marc’s weekly radio broadcast called The No State Project?

    state: a political body consisting of citizens who have pledged their allegiance to a state in return for a duty of protection by the state.

    citizen: “Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other.” Luria v, U.S., 231 U.S. 9, 22. (1913)

    Every so-called Supreme Court has ruled that government has no duty to protect. (Google/search, “no duty to protect”)

    No duty to protect means government has no reciprocal obligation, thus, there’s no reciprocal duty of allegiance on the part of an individual. Thus, there are no citizens. Absent citizens, there’s no body politic. Thus, there’s no state. “Government” is a gang of men and women forcing perfect strangers to give them money.

  66. Andy Says:

    Damon, twice I’ve replied to you on the forum asking for your written input about my situation with gifting turkeys to family’s in need in my community. Please help. Here’s the link: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56249.html#pid56249

  67. damon Says:

    @ Andy,

    I have replied on the forum about your turkeys.

    Why try to blame everyone else for your own faults? Why keep blaming them for what very well may be sloth on your part. Want out? Serve God which will only set you free to serve others in His kingdom.

    I am about people taking back their responsibilities and being responsible for their own actions. Crying “It is fraud” and “I was deceived” will get you know where nor is it a solution to the problem. What about the fraud from your neighbor? He is the one compelling you to contribute to his welfare. Your neighbor is the one. Do you do the same to him? Do you compel him to contribute to your welfare?

    Do you have children Andy? Any that are under your immediate care? I still have a pending question from LOOOOONG ago that gets skirted around quite a bit. I asked it again on the forum.

    in His Peace
    Damon

  68. damon Says:

    If people actually started caring for one another like they are supposed too and the government kept making attempts to interfere then yes I would take issue with the government side.

    However they are the only ones caring for the needy because the people refuse to do their duty. Stop paying taxes…fine….but you cannot take the benefits then either or you are more covetous than the guy who does pay his “fair share”.

    All I keep hearing is people wanting to get out of paying taxes and blaming the government for “forcing ” them to contribute to their neighbors welfare. No one here is saying anything about how will you care for one another without the funds? Any plans there yet…or are we still to focused on self? your “voluntary society” will not see the light of day as long as it has that mentality and focus on self. The society that mentality breeds is what your already in. Why would you want another?

    How will you care for one another?

  69. spooky2th Says:

    damon said:
    “the codes apply because you accept the benefits. You also very likely claim a status as a member in their club to further acquire such benefits that come at your neighbors expense. Keep asking how and why the code applies and I will keep telling you because you accept, have and use their benefits.”

    Me:
    Still no evidence like the title of this call of shame and plenty of dishonesty!

    How does the code apply to anybody??? Prove a code applies in a victim-less, so-called crime. Prove your own words with some evidence. Or will you just repeat the garbage about me that is totally not true or factual, nor is it any kind of evidence. Prove it, damon. Like a persecutor would have to in court!?!? You can’t! You are seriously dishonest here like the prosecutors & judges when tasked with proving jurisdiction in court.

    Prove it, prove it, prove it!

    I bet you cannot stop dancing around the question. You are one of the most entertaining trolls that I have encountered. I just wonder what you will type next?

  70. Andy Says:

    Damon, I read your reply. Thanks for is but you didn’t address my situation. I asked for your written input on my issue of feeding needy families this Thanksgiving by gifting them turkeys. If you sincerely wanted to care for people in need you’d help me. Here is the issue I’m dealing with.

    I have only fifty dollars. I want to spend it all on turkeys that I’ll be gifting to families. Turkeys cost me five five dollars each. Thus I’m able to give ten families a turkey. I have gas in my car but no license plate. If I buy a licence plate from the “government” it will cost me twenty five dollars; that’s half my money. What are the pros and cons of buying the licence plate? What are the pros and cons of not buying the license plate?

    Here’s a link back to my most recent post asking for your input: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56260.html#pid56260

  71. spooky2th Says:

    Andy said:
    “No duty to protect means government has no reciprocal obligation, thus, there’s no reciprocal duty of allegiance on the part of an individual. Thus, there are no citizens. Absent citizens, there’s no body politic. Thus, there’s no state. “Government” is a gang of men and women forcing perfect strangers to give them money.”

    Me:
    You’re exactly right, Andy! Damon, just can’t seem to get his noodle wrapped around some simple facts. His mind is obviously engrossed in some warped imagiNATION. Too many double standards fogging up his mind…

  72. damon Says:

    So then you think you can take benefits without anything applying to you is what I hear, eh Spooky?

    You should be able to send your children to public schools and not pay for it? Or you should be able to get food stamps for free? You think you can take whatever benefit they offer that have RULES attached to them and explained in their codes which act as PUBLIC NOTICE what one will be giving up in turn for use of the benefit? Is that what I hear you saying?

    If they make rules for the use of their benefits, what makes you think you can just walk in , take the benefit, then not be liable for following what you agreed too? you are the reason alongside that mentality that they have such a police state. Because of people just like you. the ones that want to take and not fulfill their end of the deal. That deal again I remind you to which h they give PUBLIC NOTICE so you can know full well what your are getting involved in and what you are giving up in return for the benefit.

    If you do not want to keep your end of the deal then why should anyone here trust you to keep your part when making agreements with them?

    So Spooky, is that what I am hearing, you can just take benefits and you do not have to agree to the rules that are laid out for such benefit recipients? I want to make sure I hear you correctly.

    @ Andy,
    Why will you not answer my question but expect me to answer yours about turkeys which I see is an attempt on words.

    Fulfill your obligations you have made and be responsible for your actions and learn to love your neighbor as yourself.

    Here is my answer;
    Deu_16:17 Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee.

  73. Andy Says:

    Damon said to Rad: “Your OUTWARD actions show to the entire world your INWARD intent.”

    Like you proclaiming you care about people in need, yet when I repeatedly ask you for your written input/help about caring for people in need by gifting turkeys to them, your OUTWARD actions show your INWARD intent.

  74. Andy Says:

    Damon said: “Why will you not answer my question but expect me to answer yours about turkeys which I see is an attempt on words.”

    I’m asking you to “put your money where your mouth is”. In other words, actually prove that you care about people in need of help by giving me your input on my issue of gifting turkeys to families in need. Here’s a link back to my most recent post asking for your input: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56260.html#pid56260

  75. Andy Says:

    @Damon, so this is how you care for people in need, you quote scripture to me.

    Damon said: “Here is my answer;
    Deu_16:17 Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee.”

    You keep asking how other people will care for people in need in a voluntary society. You’ve shown by your actions in response to my asking for your input about me gifting turkeys to families in need, and all you care about is quoting scripture.

    Why do you keep asking how people in a voluntary society will care for the needy when you already have your answer? “Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee.”

    Does that not apply now with my situation? Does that not apply in a voluntary society? Apparently your “LORD thy God” failed to bless you with being able to help me care for needy people.

  76. Andy Says:

    @Damon, My bad, I said your “LORD thy God” failed to bless you with the ability to help me gift turkeys to families in need. My bad because it’s you who failed.

  77. damon Says:

    So how will you implement it?

    instead of trying to be crafty to trap me or attempting to anyways, how will you implement it?

    what will it look like?

    Who will administer the funds?

    Who will take in the funds?

    where will the funds be stored?

    what about the items, where will you store those?

    Who will take inventory?

    How will you know who has need?

    give to whom? to whom will you give Andy?

  78. damon Says:

    If you needed help with turkeys you would not have mentioned a license plate

  79. damon Says:

    lets not derail the train Andy,

    Stay focused

    how will we care for those that cannot care for themselves on a national scale in a voluntary society?

  80. Andy Says:

    @damon, you already have the answer and you supplied it yourself.

    damon said: “Here is my answer;
    Deu_16:17 Every man shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee.”

    The infrastructure that’s now in place, as limited as it is due to government initiation of violence, threat of violence and fraud, remove the initiation of violence from the equation and the infrastructure is still in place and can be greatly improved upon in a voluntary society. You’re asking how can the needy be cared for without “government” initiating violence, threat of violence and fraud.

    Conversely, if “government” has jurisdiction it didn’t obtain funds/money by initiating violence. Thus it has legitimate ownership and can give “benefits” to whoever it wants. That means nobody is coveting their neighbors’ goods because they legitimately gave money to government.

  81. Andy Says:

    @damon, I answered your question. It’s your turn to prove you actually care about people in need by giving me your input on gifting turkeys to people.

    Your LORD thy God is giving you, through me, a prime opportunity to show that you truly care about caring for people in need.

  82. damon Says:

    Andy you are so blinded man.

    people ask them to take from their neighbor. that is covetousness.

    you are making excuses because I am beginning to perceive you are quite possibly at the government trough. Otherwise there would be no reason to try and excuse them here and say;

    Conversely, if “government” has jurisdiction it didn’t obtain funds/money by initiating violence. Thus it has legitimate ownership and can give “benefits” to whoever it wants. That means nobody is coveting their neighbors’ goods because they legitimately gave money to government.

    Are you at the trough Andy applying (means beg) for benefits that many here claim to be stolen but are actually compelled from you by your neighbor through the agency of another? Are you?

    I know the answer. But you will not answer, hence the reason to quote the same scripture.

    So how do you “improve upon it”? This same infrastructure that is in place? You are saying similar to spooky? you want the benefits but do not want to pay into it? Is that what I am hearing from you as well? You want to take but do not want to sacrifice? Is that what I hear from you?

    You’re asking how can the needy be cared for without “government” initiating violence, threat of violence and fraud.

    I am asking you what other way will you go to get your welfare? How will you find it and care for the elderly. They are doing what many refuse to do and that is care for the orphans and widows.

    they are enforcing what the people have agreed to? Just because someone may be to ignorant to know what he agreed to does not make him less liable to his agreement. If you take benefits from authoritarian benefactors that exercise authority over your neighbor to compel the offering then you are in bondage. This will not change until YOU change.

    What benefits are you taking Andy? Be honest here. Do you take them? any that I have listed? you think the ones you claim to be thieves and liars and initiators of force and threats are offering benefits for FREE with no strings attached.. Gosh man, wake up

  83. spooky2th Says:

    damons said:
    “So then you think you can take benefits without anything applying to you is what I hear, eh Spooky?

    You should be able to send your children to public schools and not pay for it? Or you should be able to get food stamps for free? You think you can take whatever benefit they offer that have RULES attached to them and explained in their codes which act as PUBLIC NOTICE what one will be giving up in turn for use of the benefit? Is that what I hear you saying?

    If they make rules for the use of their benefits, what makes you think you can just walk in , take the benefit, then not be liable for following what you agreed too? you are the reason alongside that mentality that they have such a police state. Because of people just like you. the ones that want to take and not fulfill their end of the deal. That deal again I remind you to which h they give PUBLIC NOTICE so you can know full well what your are getting involved in and what you are giving up in return for the benefit.

    If you do not want to keep your end of the deal then why should anyone here trust you to keep your part when making agreements with them?

    So Spooky, is that what I am hearing, you can just take benefits and you do not have to agree to the rules that are laid out for such benefit recipients? I want to make sure I hear you correctly.”

    Me:

    post# 77 here:
    http://www.marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-page-6.html

  84. Andy Says:

    Damon said: “Otherwise there would be no reason to try and excuse them here and say;”

    I know for a fact there is no “government” and it’s men and women calling themselves government who don’t have jurisdiction.

    It’s you that is arguing they have jurisdiction. If you’re right and they have jurisdiction then they obtained funding legitimately and no one is coveting their neighbors’ goods for the simple fact that everyone would have legitimately agreed to it. It’s your premise/argument that “government” has jurisdiction, not mine.

    Your dishonesty knows no bounds.

  85. Andy Says:

    Damon said: “Andy you are so blinded man.”

    No. That would be you who has blinders on. See the three quotes at the bottom of my post here: http://www.marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56280.html#pid56280

  86. Rad Says:

    Damon, why can’t you give me a responsive answer? WHO ARE THE PARTIES TO YOUR CONTRACT??!!??!! I don’t need a 2 paragraph dodge, it’s a simple one sentence answer. Every time I ask you you never responsively answer. I think the obvious answer is: youO cannot identify the parties to your “contract”. Because there aren’t any. Your contract hypothesis is purely hypothetical if you can’t even state WHO ARE THE PARTIES?!?!?!

    “damon Says:
    May 31st, 2015 at 12:36 pm

    There is a contractual nature with the provisional governments. “

  87. damon Says:

    So if the “contract hypothesis” is purely hypothetical why then do you have a drivers license? Why the do you have a social security card? Who gave you those things? A hypothetical hypothesis? the rules governing the use of such things are they “hypothetical” as well? What about the benefits that one can receive because of their “hypothetical” use? If it is so hypothetical why not just burn the things and carry on? Ahhh a dilemma arises no?

    Why do you ask me to tell you who you have entered into agreements with? you carry the card of the card creators. they write rules for those who become members in turn for benefits and welfare. It is a cult mate and you agreed to the terms.

    You may hate that I bring these truths to the front lines to make you face it head on but it does not change the nature of it at all no matter how much fantasizing you would like to do in blaming others.

    You have a membership card, that is how you have chosen to care for the elderly and poor of your society (not so voluntary) through those that exercise authority over your neighbor which is really you if you take the benefits. Unless you repent and do what is commanded and begin to care for one another out of a pure heart in truth in faith in hope in love and out of charity you will slip back into the bondage you find yourself in now;

    2Pe_2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

    in His Peace,
    Damon

  88. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Damon, we’ve been through this, people get a driver’s license because it’s compulsory and not having one could result in an early death.

  89. NonEntity Says:

    In His Piece… oh WAIT! I’m not supposed to be coveting my neighbor’s conjugal partner, am I?

  90. desertspeaks Says:

    The agent here was just being snarky in an attempt to derail the questioning. I asked if he had evidence to support his claim and he says, Do you Marc?

    My answer would be, NO I CAN’T PROVE ANY OF IT APPLIES TO ME EITHER!

  91. desertspeaks Says:

    @ Damon
    Isn’t it interesting that public service corporations were given the OPTION to accept or REJECT the Arizona CONstitution “as seen below”.. Unfortunately, private men, women and children weren’t given the same option.

    Arizona Constitution Article XV
    15. Acceptance of constitutional provisions by existing corporations
    Section 15. No public service corporation in existence at the time of the admission of this state into the union shall have the benefit of any future legislation except on condition of complete acceptance of all provisions of this Constitution applicable to public service corporations.

  92. damon Says:

    The people get the license because they are under the service of Pharaoh.

    They claim residence because they are under the serve of Pharaoh

    They force their neighbor to contribute to their welfare and ask the kings of the earth to take it for them.

    The register their children with the “kings of the earth” to step in and act as the patronus like their parents before them did.

    They sell their children into bondage because of their covetous practices.

    Their government is operating in the red so the benefits taken now are taking from the future and cursing theory own children with the bondage of debt.

    Who have you contracted with? you have made covenants with the “gods” and the kings of the earth. You went into the serve of the Nimrods, Cain’s, Pharaoh’s and Caesar’s of the world because they promised you liberty and security of which you cannot have both.

    2Pe_2:19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.

    you learned from your parents the same covetous practices and have been made merchandise/human resources by the same rulers you have contracted with as it has been written fro the beginning;

    2Pe_2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

    you have entered into agreements learned from your parents covetous practices. agreements that you are told not too. Agreements that have now snared you because you thought they were for your welfare but in fact were agreements to compel your neighbor to provide for your welfare in asking men who crave authority to do it for you,

    Psa_69:22 Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.

    in all this you will not hear me. I am telling you this behavior must stop and IS consistent with love your neighbor as yourself. now you need to understand HOW to care for one another so that people do not HAVE to go to those benefactors that exercise authority over your neighbor. Andy would not need to ask me to meet the turkey obligation he would like because there would be an abundance from all of you who would be willing to make that sacrifice so that he could meet his license plate obligations or whatever story he wishes to tell.

    Going to court to ask a few well thought out questions in hope that the master doesn’t bring down the rod is not the way. Not is the mentality that it is their fault. the people asked them and demanded them to take from you. your neighbor did this and probably still does.

    P.S. the commandment is as follows Entity;

    Exo 20:17 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

    It is fulfilled in this;

    Rom 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

    those that think they “make their own rules” are foolish and ignorant and void of any real understanding. look at the ones you all hate and blame who make their “own rules” (and get you to agree to them) eating from the tree of knowledge of good an evil deciding for themselves what is right and wrong…same foolishness;

    Rom_1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    Denial

    in His Peace
    Damon

  93. desertspeaks Says:

    @ damon,
    I really enjoyed you completely ignoring the facts and replacing them with your invisible friend in the skies rantings!

  94. desertspeaks Says:

    @ damon,
    You do realize that your “book” also endorses and accepts slavery! Is you spouting scriptures your slave mentality exposing itself?

  95. damon Says:

    Out of rebellion do people go into the bondage of other men.

    you cannot force your neighbor to contribute to your welfare and expect to be free/at liberty. Whatever judgment you put on others it is rendered back to you. God wants you to be at liberty mate, but gave you the choice to choose. People choose to go under the service of rulers and become entangled and snared because of their own covetousness.

    Not facing this and attempting to shift the blame only shows an unwillingness to accept ones own responsibility for their current state. they are not the ones that need to change as the other fellow said on the forums. It starts at the “individual” level…this means YOU have to change. Your mind/spirit has to be renewed.

    And it will not happen by listening or following those that are also blind. You have to be willing to set your neighbor free. do not ask Pharaoh to take from them by taking benefits from Pharaoh. Learn how to become the welfare for one another. there is a way to do this and it is outlined in the Scriptures which you deny further damning your own self which is why your bondage will remain.

    Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

    Your duty to God is to love your fellow man. How you do this is your “religion”.

  96. desertspeaks Says:

    Any god that requires small minded bigots to speak for it, is not worth the breath it takes to regurgitate it’s dogma!

    Is your God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

    When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called religion.

    We must question the story logic of having an all knowing all powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.

    Beliefs murder reason.

    Religion like government, is notorious for conceiving an idea and trying to make it true, either by propaganda or by force

    You believe that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a woman made from a rib was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
    And you don’t understand why people have doubts!

  97. Andy Says:

    desertspeaks said: “We must question the story logic of having an all knowing all powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.”

    Sounds like the work of that other guy, Satan. 😉

  98. desertspeaks Says:

    @ andy
    presumptuous andy! or do you have evidence that satan exists??

  99. Andy Says:

    @desertspeaks, Are you serious!? Do you need a sarcasm tag?

  100. Andy Says:

    @desertspeaks, Perhaps this will help: http://marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-post-56315.html#pid56315

  101. desertspeaks Says:

    @ andy
    Apparently you somehow believe I follow threads,.. erroneous decision by the way!
    Until you linked me to that thread HOW PRECISELY was I supposed to divine your belief/disbelief?
    Unlike bill clinton, i did inhale but I’m not high enough to buy into someones invisible friend in the sky! but my damon be gone post worked momentarily! 😛

  102. Andy Says:

    @desertspeacs: Apparently you figured wrong. Had I thought you followed threads, I wouldn’t have posted the link. Duh!

    My bad, I thought you may rely on something other than your divining ability. Divinging??? facepalm

  103. damon Says:

    Actually satan is not the name of a fallen angel but references the principal of sin within. It is sin personified much like they personified wisdom in proverbs…yet people know wisdom is not a spiritual being. Satan is purely from the doctrines of men.

    Feel better that you have a “club” to bash on me with. Still does not change your bondage does it? So I tell you again;

    Out of rebellion do people go into the bondage of other men.

    you cannot force your neighbor to contribute to your welfare and expect to be free/at liberty. Whatever judgment you put on others it is rendered back to you. God wants you to be at liberty mate, but gave you the choice to choose. People choose to go under the service of rulers and become entangled and snared because of their own covetousness.

    Not facing this and attempting to shift the blame only shows an unwillingness to accept ones own responsibility for their current state. they are not the ones that need to change as the other fellow said on the forums. It starts at the “individual” level…this means YOU have to change. Your mind/spirit has to be renewed.

    And it will not happen by listening or following those that are also blind. You have to be willing to set your neighbor free. do not ask Pharaoh to take from them by taking benefits from Pharaoh. Learn how to become the welfare for one another. there is a way to do this and it is outlined in the Scriptures which you deny further damning your own self which is why your bondage will remain.

    Rom 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

    Your duty to God is to love your fellow man. How you do this is your “religion”.

  104. desertspeaks Says:

    @ Andy
    How precisely was I to interpret the quote below as your sarcasm??

    “Andy Says:
    November 14th, 2015 at 4:24 pm
    desertspeaks said: “We must question the story logic of having an all knowing all powerful God, who creates faulty humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.”

    Sounds like the work of that other guy, Satan. 😉”

  105. desertspeaks Says:

    Notice how damon is much like a government employee when faced with a question, he ignores it like it was never asked and continue on his/her merry way!

  106. doyle Says:

    Rad, you should be able to answer that question yourself if you understand. Ask yourself..Do i have a drivers licence, am i a taxpayer, am i a voter, am i a citizen. What state do you live in? If you answer that you really have no idea how you contracted.It is going to take a lot of alternate study to learn. In the meantime don’t judge without knowledge. You will be highlighting your ignorance.

  107. Rad Says:

    K so say I have a SS card, driver license, birth cert. Let’s explore this notion that those constitute contracts or a contract. Who is the other party/parties to this contract? Obama? Do I have a contract with Obama because I have an SS card? Say I have a colorado driver license. Does that mean I have a contract with John Hickenlooper? Ad homs are one way to dodge the question…

  108. Rad Says:

    “In the meantime don’t judge without knowledge.”

    And do you have this knowledge? Why not share it? It’s a basic, direct and simple enough question I would think. Am I not clear in what I’m asking?

  109. doyle Says:

    If you have all those things you have accepted an offer to contract. Now if you used a bit of knowledge/ common sense and you had some doubt about all of this, wouldn’t you write to john hickenlooper and ask him about the bit you think he is in charge of. Although it is a lot easier to sit on the thistle and whinge.

  110. damon Says:

    Doyle is right,

    Rad, you like many more before you have done this….accepted the benefit which brings a burden. One has to stop the use of the benefit THEN can one possibly raise an issue. Until then any claims of “force” are a waste.

  111. spooky2th Says:

    Rad said:
    “And do you have this knowledge? Why not share it? It’s a basic, direct and simple enough question I would think. Am I not clear in what I’m asking?”

    It’s obvious doyle & damon come from the same pit. They won’t answer questions much less answer any responsively. The only thing you will get from them is more unprovable claims and assertions.

    desertspeaks, hit it on the head above, saying: “Notice how damon is much like a government employee when faced with a question, he ignores it like it was never asked and continue on his/her merry way!”

  112. Rad Says:

    Yeah, in the Roman “State Religion” they had these mystical “contracts” as part of their prayer rituals. If a Roman made offerings to Mars or whatever deity, it was thought that the deity would be under contract to grant the prayers. I really see this as a modern version of the same sort of myth. Either you accept it on faith or the whole idea falls apart. You can’t critically examine the facts because their aren’t any. The first thing I would think in analyzing if there is a contract is who are the parties purported to be but they can’t even say. It’s just this guilt/shame tactic where it’s like if you don’t have faith in their dogma, they will insinuate you are “ignorant” or taking an irreverent, dishonest or heretical position toward their faith.

    “Now if you used a bit of knowledge/ common sense and you had some doubt about all of this, wouldn’t you write to john hickenlooper and ask him about the bit you think he is in charge of.”

    I don’t believe in the government religion. Why would I presume he’s in charge of anything? I don’t just take their dogmas on faith. I’m asking for the basis of YOUR theory or damon’s claim that there is a contractual nature to this supposed “jurisdiction” power.

  113. spooky2th Says:

    Don’t hold your breath for an answer to that, much less a responsive answer…

  114. doyle Says:

    i don’t believe what i’m reading. Are you guys stupid or just idiots when it comes to logic. i believe you won’t even look up the meaning of idiot and stupid and distinguish between the two. No-one has said they have not got a license or am not a voter or not a citizen so it follows you are one or all of these. Who is the contract with? Supposedly, the people, but i got a feeling the people have been robbed and the contract is with the crown corporation because if it was with the people you would be all getting a dividend from everyones payments. Now it goes to a private corporation. i am not the one who mentioned john whatever someone else said he was in charge of whatever.A few have absolutely no idea how to even think, let alone work out how things work.If you few have written to anyone who is in charge of anything you whinge about in the manner you write here, you would not be replied to, so you won’t learn anything, but would you care? Wakeup.

  115. NonEntity Says:

    No one has said they am not a voter? Let’s see, is that idiocy or stupidity? Hmm.

  116. damon Says:

    Rad you mention Mars. I think you are missing a key element here. The Temple of Saturn was actually their department of vital statistics.

    It is where they kept their birth registrations not much different than they do today. They keep records of who are the contributing members in their system of social welfare which is their religion, how they care for one another. the “sacrifice” was their children and the child’s future earnings as pledge in return for benefits, just like they do today.

    Other temples had other purposes.

    The Romans had their own altars and temples that were first funded by contributions, then by a sort of investment, and then finally a government tax, and that Qorban provided welfare for the people in many forms – such as “free” bread.

    The citizens of Judea did not hate Caesar. Many, including the Pharisees, loved and desired the benefits bestowed by his grace and the protection provided by Octavius so much that they, too, called him Augustus.23 Caesar was the protector of their peace, the benefactor of their welfare.24

    They applied for his benefits and pleaded for his justice. The price of his peace would be a portion of their freedom. What should have been for the welfare of the people included a social scheme that snared them under the growing Roman authority. The power of his benevolence brought subjection. (Gregory Williams)

    Name calling never ends well and takes away from the focal point. One might want to seek to avoid that form of communication to further the discussion.

    in His Peace
    Damon

  117. damon Says:

    1589.
    A voluntary acceptance of the benefit of a transaction is equivalent to a consent to all the obligations arising from it, so far as the facts are known, or ought to be known, to the person accepting.

    http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&division=3.&title=1.&part=2.&chapter=3.&article=

    This is another way to say;

    • He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage.
    •He who derives a benefit from a thing, ought to feel the disadvantages attending it.
    • He who enjoys the benefit, ought also to bear the burden.
    • He who enjoys the advantage of a right takes the accompanying disadvantage.

    and again echoed here;

    “Allegiance is a duty owing by citizens to their government, of which, so long as they enjoy its benefits, they can not divest themselves.” Military Government and Martial Law, William E. Birkhimer, Major, General Staff, U.S. Army, 1914, page 64).

    “The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.”

    Known as the Ashwander rules, the learned Supreme Court justice says here in the above.

  118. spooky2th Says:

    Talk about logic??? Nothing you guys type passes logical muster. Courts cannot prove applicability of laws, codes, acts or whatever you want to call them.

    Basing an argument on a general’s opinion is laughable at best.

    Rad, show a link to the contract that you talk about, please? Can’t do. All you all talk about is imaginary and/or implied contracts/agreements. How could there be a meeting of the minds much less full disclosure??? If either is missing any contract is void. Rad & damon are pr-control freaks all the way.

  119. spooky2th Says:

    And what did I tell ya, Rad? There’s not a responsive answer in the lot. Just more irrelevant posts.

  120. damon Says:

    it is logic that eludes you Spooky,

    if you take the benefit you agree to the burden.

    your argument is relying on being able to take the benefit without anything applying. this is not the case and never will be. You think thieves, liars, and psychopaths give benefits for free?

    you say it is a code because the maxim is “codified” in the link I posted. Which is why I told you it is another way to say the maxims I posted above.

    That is;

    •What I approve I do not reject. I cannot approve and reject at the same time. I cannot take the benefit of an instrument, and at the same time repudiate it.

    Sound isn’t it? It is like saying “citizens do not exist” and then turn and claim to be one. Wont hold water just like your repeated statements that “codes do not apply”.

    They offered and you accepted. Implied consent. There is a way out. But I am not seeing it offered here.
    in His Peace
    Damon

  121. spooky2th Says:

    @damon,
    I never agreed to anything as everything from and of government is by force. That is the simple logic of it all and it sure debunks your baseless, unprovable, irrelevant and imaginary claims/arguments. And I carefully read everything that I sign and if I were to see anything that made me less a human like what you assert/claim all the time, I sure would not sign.

    Prove your arguments for a change!?!?

    Asking for the 100th plus time, show or prove the jurisdiction that makes any victimless crime applicable to any one, citizen or not!?!?

    damons said: “your argument is relying on”

    Huh, what???

    I don’t have an argument here and you know it! I am merely asking for the facts that you rely on to prove your many arguments, claims and assertions.

    I repeat what I said in Post# 128 linked here:
    http://www.marcstevens.net/board/thread-8151-page-9.html

    (Trolls who repeatedly post irrelevant comments, bait others, rely on Christianspeak or any other religious speak, or regularly violate the rules of argument should be banned. I am kind of surprised that you are still allowed to post here.)

    Tashidele

  122. damon Says:

    There are “victims” if you take from the pool of loot you claim they “stole”. You become one of the thieves. these benefits include but are not limited too;

    Social security payments
    unemployment insurance
    public schools for your children
    government grants or loans
    food stamps
    Cell phones
    heat
    FDIC
    etc.

    If you take these it is the same as asking them to take it from your neighbor. you even claim they steal it do you not?

    Others that will provide for jurisdiction are claims of status. A statutory citizen as defined in title 8 section 1401 which status is presumed on any federal form that asks for such status. 1040 form anyone?

    Claim of residence and being resident also provides for jurisdiction. A perfect example of this is licensing. They will not provide you with the licensed you begged (applied) for unless you claim they have jurisdiction. It is part of the benefit. You get to use their courts to hear matters that you bring before them. They issue you the license.

    Just disagreeing with you is not a reason to be “banned” but is expected because it is a spirit I am familiar with. I mean why not right. you argue from a perspective that it is ok to take benefits at the expense of your neighbor and not be liable for it…at least you have not denied this the multiple times I have brought it up.

    What “rules of argument”. no rules apply here right? your rules? prove the rules of argument apply, show me evidence.
    “allowed” to post here? Voluntary right? or not? if it is not voluntary than inherently what is it?

    silly spooky, just plain silly.

    •What I approve I do not reject. I cannot approve and reject at the same time. I cannot take the benefit of an instrument, and at the same time repudiate it.

    in His Peace,
    Damon

  123. spooky2th Says:

    As usual, more baseless, unprovable, bogus and imaginary arguments/claims/assertions by, damon.

    damon, you’ve lost any semblance of credibility on Marc’s web sight long ago.

    The one making the argument, claim or assertion bears the burden/responsibility of proof.

    Prove your arguments for a change!?!?

    Asking for the 100th plus time, show or prove the jurisdiction that makes any victimless crime applicable to any one, citizen or not!?!? Bennie taker or not!

    You can’t and everyone here knows that. Why don’t you ask whoever you got your bogus info from what their proof of claim is??? See what they say?

    laughing,

    It’s just too easy to show what a shill you are with you not having the first shred of evidence of anything you argue, claim or assert.

  124. damon Says:

    And this is why you are in the bondage you are in spooky and from what I gather thus far, rightfully so.

    in His Peace,
    Damon

  125. spooky2th Says:

    damon, do you ever have anything factual to say???

  126. Rad Says:

    ” Supposedly, the people, but i got a feeling the people have been robbed and the contract is with the crown corporation because if it was with the people you would be all getting a dividend from everyones payments. Now it goes to a private corporation. ”

    When “the people” appear in their “corporate person”(in the scriptures of government) the “corporate person” is really a supernatural anthropomorphism of the people(also called the “body politic”). When you sign up for a DMV licence, ever notice who’s signature goes on the “contract”? Only 1 person signs the application, and the term “contract” never appears. Why does only 1 signature appear in the four corners? Because the other supposed “party” is a supernatural anthropomorphism of the modern day “state religion” of America. An imaginary fictional “entity”. Like Pennywise the Clown or Santa. The “crown corporation” is likewise a deity of the religion of statism. Where do you find “the crown corporation”‘s signature in the four corner’s of any contract? You don’t? Why do you suppose that may be? Because just like Mars, the god of War, “The Crown Corporation” is a cult deity. This superhuman “entity” has no physical corporeal existence.

  127. Rad Says:

    When you stop make-believing in their deities, you realize the whole rigmarole of going through signing the supposed “contract” with “the State” is a religious ritual to appease the violent cultists. Just like how in the Roman State religion there were compulsory sacrifices to the pagan deities, they now make you pay into the church of State (it’s really about the money) through the ritual of “licensing”. Just like the Christians who didn’t pay the homage to the pagan deities were crucified and fed to the dogs, participating in the compulsory ritual tithings to “The State” is done under threat of tazer/jail. An empty ritual the vampire cultists use to take money. Not a contract between flesh and blood humans. There is no obligation to the deity of “the State”. Uncle Sam, Columbia, Leviathan, “The Republic”, the deities have many names, “The United States of America” is their supreme deity aka “The Federal State”. It’s a made up false pagan religion.

  128. Terry A Says:

    The onus of proof is on those making the claim. They don’t understand logical fallacies and they use words and make those words mean whatever they want them to mean:

    “When I uses a word,” Humpty-Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, ‘it means what I chose it to mean – neither more nor less’ ‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’ ‘The question is,’ said Humpty-Dumpty’which is to be the master – that is all.’
    Lewis Carroll Through the Looking Glass

  129. RAD Says:

    In argumentation ethics, shouldn’t the word mean whatever the one using it says it means? If you tell me a subway has 1000 calories and I say that’s “Wrong” because a subway is a train that goes under the ground, not a sandwich, who is using a fallacy?

  130. Al: Says:

    Dear Rad, (reference date, December 6, 2015) I’m sure you can argue that point all day long, however, if one is looking for peace of mind rather than liking to be argumentative then one must learn to look for a common ground so when you are speaking, others can understand and be responsive to your liking. Otherwise, CHAOS all day long. A duck is a duck is a duck no matter what argument one uses.

  131. Iseedo_u Says:

    I have to say that I see both sides, Damon’s & Spooky’s argument. However, one may not apply if a person has not become the signature of the Gov doc/contracts that makes you part of their system/matrix!

    So Damon, if for example the person is free of all the entanglements we unknowingly sign into, no birth cert., no SS, no w-4’s etc… and so on then the question Spooky is asking on Jurisdiction and the law applying because you are in said Jurisdiction would be relevant, right?

    One thing I would like to say is, the system is rigged and all the legal arguments are really pointless because the corrupt ones who promote, protect and enforce this tyranny really could care less about your facts! Whether right or wrong, while we think it matters, it matters not. Through the stealing of the people our own enslavement is funded! That is what pisses me off the most…as long as they have the guns and assumed authority over us to enforce their laws with our own consent of, then this will continue. As this continues be sure it will continue to get worse, our High Prison population is prove that it will and is. That is a whole other topic on it’s own so I won’t go any further there.

    OK, that’s all I have to say.

  132. Sackbut4 Says:

    @Iseedo_u

    I feel you! The gathering of facts, no matter how interesting and/or reassuring to those of us who know the truth does little to abate the abuse of power perpetrated by our government servants. They have ingeniously outnumbered us mentally where they cannot physically and the populace aids their efforts by buying into the arguments/issues that the power abusers set for us. What was once “the home of the brave, land of the free” is now neither! Whenever we have govt agencies that can operate under color of law or however they wish with impunity, because EVERYONE is afraid to call them on it, there goes freedom…as a result of the lack of bravery.

    If it weren’t for the thorough brainwashing through the years it would quite simple to bring our govt servants back in line, i.e. How about if all (non-government related) workers just refused the file taxes. They’d be forced to listen. Unfortunately it’ll never happen.

2 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP - Nov 14, 2015 - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] a responsive answer when challenging their evidence to prove their territorial jurisdiction: IRS – Lots of Evasions, Plenty of Dishonesty – Never Any Evidence. <-try to count the total number of logical fallacies; post your tallies in the comments […]

  2. Bad Proof is Bad! 2/18/16 | mhudson2014blog Says:

    […] Photo Credits: http://marcstevens.net/articles/irs-lots-of-evasions-plenty-of-dishonesty-never-any-evidence.html […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream broadcast via Ustream.tv. You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.





Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.






Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here