ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Canada issues , FOTL , Freeman movement

Reply
Old 1st September 2010, 11:56 AM   #281
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
However, I posted the original and still quite adequate and meaningful definition of the term 'govern' as meaning to steer or pilot a ship
No, you didn't. You posted the etymology of a related word in Ancient Greek. You might have gotten a clue about the fact that it was an etymology, not a definition, by the fact that it was labelled as an etymology.

You didn't post any definitions at all.

In case you hadn't noticed, people here tend to speak and write English. Except for "freeman" tax protesters, who can usually at best achieve gibberish.
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:00 PM   #282
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
We can add religion in The Roman Empire to the growing list of topics that EldonG knows nothing about.
The Isis Cult and Mithraism had little in common,and in fact competed with each other for followers.
And it is sort of contradictory for somebody who talks so much about "Creator God" to knock religon like that.
I'll forgive your total ignorance of the subject matter, but around 350 AD, when ordered by Emperor Constantine to convert to Christianity, Mythraism ceased to exist, except maybe in a few holdout pockets of the Roman Empire.

If Creator God had anything to do with either the creation of Mythraism or Christianity, then that only proves that Creator God is/was a damned fool.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:05 PM   #283
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by drkitten View Post
No, you didn't. You posted the etymology of a related word in Ancient Greek. You might have gotten a clue about the fact that it was an etymology, not a definition, by the fact that it was labelled as an etymology.

You didn't post any definitions at all.

In case you hadn't noticed, people here tend to speak and write English. Except for "freeman" tax protesters, who can usually at best achieve gibberish.
Where in Hell do you think most words and terms come from in the English language? - Latin, Greek, German and French.

And, what do you think (if you think at all) 'etymology' means?

You are very weak in your debunking powers.

Mod WarningRemoved breach of Rule 12 and Rule 0.
Posted By:LashL

Last edited by LashL; 1st September 2010 at 04:43 PM.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:08 PM   #284
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,646
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Where in Hell do you think most words and terms come from in the English language? - Latin, Greek, German and French.

And, what do you think (if you think at all) 'etymology' means?

I'd post a definition, but I'm afraid of what that might trigger.


Quote:
You are very weak in your debunking powers.
Edited by LashL:  Removed quote of modded content.
....and I'll just leave this bit here for the mods to edit after I report it......
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

Last edited by LashL; 1st September 2010 at 04:45 PM.
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:11 PM   #285
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
I'd post a definition, but I'm afraid of what that might trigger.






....and I'll just leave this bit here for the mods to edit after I report it......
Mod WarningRemoved breach of Rule 0 and Rule 12.
Posted By:LashL

Last edited by LashL; 1st September 2010 at 04:46 PM.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:15 PM   #286
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,646
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Edited by LashL:  Removed quoted modded content.


Yes, violate both the rules of the forum that you agreed to, and common decency, when people point out your nonsense.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd

Last edited by LashL; 1st September 2010 at 04:46 PM.
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:15 PM   #287
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Where in Hell do you think most words and terms come from in the English language?
They come from other words.

Quote:
And, what do you think (if you think at all) 'etymology' means?
The study of the history and origins of words, as opposed to lexicography and/or semantics, which is the study of the meanings of words.

As some simple examples, can men be "hysterical"? Can women in Manhattan be "lesbians"? Is a "leopard" a crossbreed between a panther and a lion? Are "praying mantises" religous? Does a "pineapple" grow on a tree? How many feet does a "centipede" have?

When you understand how the common house centipedes (Scutigera coleoptrato) can have 15 pairs of feet (30 in all), you'll understand how etymology doesn't control meaning.
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:17 PM   #288
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,278
EldonG, please take a gander at the Membership Agreement. All the insults are going to accomplish is to get you suspended or something. If you'd like to keep posting here, just keep it civil. This shouldn't be too hard.

Anyway, while words came into English from Greek or whatever, words mean, in 2010, what they mean. Take the words "gay" or "faggot" for instance. In North America in the year 2010 those don't mean "happy" or "bundle of sticks." There is no secret code in legal language. "Govern" does not refer to a ship. A person is a person. Heck, people are people!
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:17 PM   #289
Alareth
Philosopher
 
Alareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by Macgyver1968 View Post
I thought the Jews controlled the world?
Ooooo!!! Oooooo!!! I can answer this one!

You see the act of going to Pontius Pilate by the Jewish elders to resolve their little Jesus problem, caused the Jews to cede sovereignty to Rome and become forever subservient to the Catholic Church which didn't exist yet.

They are just another set of pawns in the Pope's grand game.

The worst part is I didn't make that up, it came from a Catholic CT website I read a few years ago.
Alareth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:23 PM   #290
D'rok
Free Barbarian on The Land
 
D'rok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,399
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
So??? The Bills of Exchange Act of Canada has not been otherwise modified, making promissory notes 'negotiable instruments' as per the Financial Administration Act of Canada.

The Bills of Exchange Act was enacted or revised in the early 1930s to allow 'settlement' of debt because there was no real asset value money to 'pay' a debt, thus preventing a creditor from sueing or confiscating property because they did not get an exchange of a real asset for an asset sold. So, if Parliament says that Canadian currency is no longer a bill of exchange, then that means that creditors are getting truly ripped off, and currency is purely a con game.

The revision just says that Canadian Currency is now pure Monopoly Money, and is a total fraud upon the Canadian people.
Natch. Invincible delusion. Facts that directly counter your beliefs are in fact evidence for them.

Get help.
__________________
"War exists within the continuum of politics, in which play is continuous, and no outcome is final, save for a global thermonuclear war, which might be." - Darth Rotor

"Life, like a Saturday afternoon, finds its ruination in purpose." - MdC
D'rok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:43 PM   #291
Aitch
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,725
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Anyway, while words came into English from Greek or whatever, words mean, in 2010, what they mean. Take the words "gay" or "faggot" for instance. In North America in the year 2010 those don't mean "happy" or "bundle of sticks." There is no secret code in legal language. "Govern" does not refer to a ship. A person is a person. Heck, people are people!
Which causes confusion/amusement to US tourists when they see 'Faggots in Gravy' for sale in UK supermarkets.
Aitch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:53 PM   #292
BaaBaa
Semi-literate hench-person
 
BaaBaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,448
I think 'sticks in gravy' pretty much says it all about English cookery. Although I expect it can be blamed on Benedict VIII, yeah?

Also, it's "MITHRA", not "Mythra".
__________________
"Damn, i think you are illeterate"
BaaBaa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 12:54 PM   #293
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,889
Eldon, as I said I am very interested in your way of dodging taxes. Could you provide a real world example of where it works?
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 01:53 PM   #294
Ian Osborne
JREF Kid
Tagger
 
Ian Osborne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 7,325
You'll have to wait three days. He's been suspended. Though of course, in his world, the suspension only applies to the entity called EldonG, and he's not restricted by names, governments, the Roman Catholic church or reality.
__________________
"Faith without doubt leads to moral arrogance, the eternal pratfall of the religiously convinced" - Joe Klein, Time magazine

"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." - Carl Sagan
Ian Osborne is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 01:58 PM   #295
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,395
Originally Posted by Ian Osborne View Post
You'll have to wait three days. He's been suspended. Though of course, in his world, the suspension only applies to the entity called EldonG, and he's not restricted by names, governments, the Roman Catholic church or reality.
Why am I not shocked at EldonG being suspended?
His career at JREF is not going to be long and will not end well.....
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 02:04 PM   #296
Alareth
Philosopher
 
Alareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by Aitch View Post
Which causes confusion/amusement to US tourists when they see 'Faggots in Gravy' for sale in UK supermarkets.
Back in the 80's I had a dive instructor from the UK. One morning he walks into the dive shop and says, "I'm feeling a bit queer, I could really use a fag."

After we were able to pull ourselves up off the floor where we were rolling around laughing we sat him down and had a discussion of US vs UK slang.

Last edited by Alareth; 1st September 2010 at 02:06 PM.
Alareth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 02:19 PM   #297
drkitten
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
Originally Posted by Ian Osborne View Post
You'll have to wait three days. He's been suspended. Though of course, in his world, the suspension only applies to the entity called EldonG, and he's not restricted by names, governments, the Roman Catholic church or reality.
Shrug. Won't be the first case of suicide by mod, won't be the last.

I'm sure this is just proof that Randi is a crypto-Jesuit who only pretends to be one of the world's most outspoken atheists.....
drkitten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 02:22 PM   #298
lopeyschools
Critical Thinker
 
lopeyschools's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 401
Okay, while he is gone...

How much is the Pope paying you guys? After my shill taxes I'm barely scraping by.

lopeyschools is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 02:35 PM   #299
BaaBaa
Semi-literate hench-person
 
BaaBaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,448
All I've gotten so far is a crappy "trainee" name tag and some snazzy red socks.
__________________
"Damn, i think you are illeterate"
BaaBaa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 03:30 PM   #300
JLord
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 426
I'm sorry to hear that EldonG has been banned for three days. I will reply now regardless in hopes that EldonG will respond after three days when he is able to post again.

Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
So??? The Bills of Exchange Act of Canada has not been otherwise modified, making promissory notes 'negotiable instruments' as per the Financial Administration Act of Canada.
That doesn't mean that promissory notes are money. Obviously promissory notes are negotiable instruments by definition, and they always have been.

Quote:
The Bills of Exchange Act was enacted or revised in the early 1930s to allow 'settlement' of debt because there was no real asset value money to 'pay' a debt,
No, the act has never been inacted or revised for this reason.

Quote:
thus preventing a creditor from sueing or confiscating property because they did not get an exchange of a real asset for an asset sold.
No. Switching to a fiat currency at no point allowed anyone to make this argument. If you think that anyone ever did make this argument succesfully feel free to point us to the decision.

Quote:
So, if Parliament says that Canadian currency is no longer a bill of exchange, then that means that creditors are getting truly ripped off, and currency is purely a con game.
Yes, it is a fiat currency and I can understand why some poeple have trouble with the concept. But money has value because the vast majority of people value it highly. This is the same for anything when you break it down. Gold only has value because the vast majority of people value it. Gold has some intrinsic value and fiat currency doesn't, but at the end of the day both are highly valued by the vast majority of people. Nobody is getting ripped off.

If a person for some reason doesn't value money and thinks getting paid in money is a "rip off" they are free to negotiate payment in any form they like. If you can find someone willing to pay you for your labour in chickens, or gold, or magic beans rather than money there is nothing preventing you from entering into this kind of arrangement.

Quote:
The revision just says that Canadian Currency is now pure Monopoly Money, and is a total fraud upon the Canadian people
It isn't a fraud because everyone knows we have a fiat currency. Most people understand what this means and are still happy to accept money as payment for their services. This isn't any kind of secret, and as I pointed out, people are not forced to accept money if they can make other arrangements. So the situation clearly doesn't come close to anything amounting to fraud.

Quote:
What is the point of attempting to discuss such matters with a traitor and liar?
I guess calling me a traitor is somewhat subjective and you are entitled to your opinion. But to call me a liar it would make sense to first point out something I have said that you believe is a lie. You haven't really responded to any of my points and I believe that I can provide evidence and reaons to back up what I have said here. So I would suggest that you should either point out what you consider to be a lie or else retract your statement.

Quote:
All the evidence and proof in the world would not change your loyalty to your primary oath to the Lawyers Guild ( The BAR) of the City of London, and thus the Pontiff's Holy Roman Empire evil dictatoprship.
First of all, the fact that lawyers swear an oath to uphold the law does not mean that pledged any loyalty to the government above their clients. I am not a government employee and I regularly assist individuals who are in disputes with the government. I have no loyalty to the pope or to city of London because obviously no lawyer's oath has anything to do with these entities. It is an oath to uphold principles of fairness and to follow the law. Not an oath to follow or be loyal to any specific entity.

Also, there is not a "Lawyers Guild" but lawyers in Canada are members of the law society in their respective provinces. However being a member does not require anyone to swear any kind of oath of loyalty to the organization. The law society is responsible for setting the requirements for education, training, and qualifications that someone must complete and maintain in order to become or remain a lawyer. The law society obviously does not prevent someone from being swayed by good arguments even if they run counter to best interests of the law society (not that any of your arguments have anything to do with the law society even if I did swear some kind of oath to them). There is also nothing that prevents a lawyer from representing clients in disputes with the law society, something which happens regularly.

Quote:
A good example of this is 'person'. That term is commonly used to mean a human creature, but in legal terms/code, it means a subservient member of a corporate body, or a crewmember on a ship, who is subservient to the supreme command of the captain of the ship.
This is not the case. There are countless numbers of statutes that define "preson." None of which define it in the manner you suggest. There are also many cases where the courts have considered the legal definition of person (many where people have tried to make the same type of argument you are making here). Again, none of these decision have agreed with your definition.

So if you are the only one saying that a certian definition is the right one, I think by default yu are wrong regardless of what type of linguistic argument you make. Reality has simply trumped whatever linguistic/historical/legal argument you think you have.
JLord is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 03:51 PM   #301
lopeyschools
Critical Thinker
 
lopeyschools's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 401
Originally Posted by BaaBaa View Post
All I've gotten so far is a crappy "trainee" name tag and some snazzy red socks.
Are they red robed priests of Isis socks?

Last edited by lopeyschools; 1st September 2010 at 05:40 PM.
lopeyschools is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 03:57 PM   #302
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,654
Originally Posted by lopeyschools View Post
Are they reb robed priests of Isis socks?
If a trainee gets that I'm complaining. It took me years.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 07:16 PM   #303
patchbunny
Graduate Poster
 
patchbunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Right about... here.
Posts: 1,850
Originally Posted by Alareth View Post
Back in the 80's I had a dive instructor from the UK. One morning he walks into the dive shop and says, "I'm feeling a bit queer, I could really use a fag."

After we were able to pull ourselves up off the floor where we were rolling around laughing we sat him down and had a discussion of US vs UK slang.
And Brits get revenge when they hears Yanks talk about stuffing our cameras back into our fanny packs.
__________________
"So, they laugh at my boner, will they? I'll show them! I'll show them how many boners the Joker can make!" -- The Joker, Batman #66
patchbunny is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 07:22 PM   #304
BaaBaa
Semi-literate hench-person
 
BaaBaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,448
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
If a trainee gets that I'm complaining. It took me years.

My uncle Dave got me in: I'm a legacy.
__________________
"Damn, i think you are illeterate"
BaaBaa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st September 2010, 07:23 PM   #305
BaaBaa
Semi-literate hench-person
 
BaaBaa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,448
Originally Posted by lopeyschools View Post
Are they red robed priests of Isis socks?

Hugo Boss, actually.
__________________
"Damn, i think you are illeterate"
BaaBaa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd September 2010, 05:44 AM   #306
TjW
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,097
Originally Posted by EldonG
Originally Posted by TjW View Post
Thus, liber homo -- a man at which a judge should throw the book.
Nice try - mister dis-info.

From GOOGLE Latin to English translator:

Liber = Translations: free, child, book, offspring, independent, unrestricted

You see Section 20 of the Magna Carta above. Are you suggesting that 'liber homo', where it is obvious that 'homo' is the Latin term for 'man', that the phrase 'liber homo' meant: child man, book man, or offspring man?

Independent man, or unrestricted man would be appropriate.
Man without a sense of humor would be even more so.
TjW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 02:16 PM   #307
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
[quote=JLord;6289202]I'm sorry to hear that EldonG has been banned for three days. I will reply now regardless in hopes that EldonG will respond after three days when he is able to post again.

Originally Posted by EldonG
So??? The Bills of Exchange Act of Canada has not been otherwise modified, making promissory notes 'negotiable instruments' as per the Financial Administration Act of Canada.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
That doesn't mean that promissory notes are money. Obviously promissory notes are negotiable instruments by definition, and they always have been.
Well, if you look at the history of paper money, it was always 'promissory notes' to pay the real asset valued money, and the assets have historically in the caucasian world, gold or silver, and a measure thereof, as depicted in the US Coinage Act of 1793. When currency is not a promissory note, it is a pure 'con' game - with the term 'to con' meaning to defraud by deceit. Thus, you say that Canadian currency is valued by the CON-fidence of the Canadian people.

Originally Posted by EldonG
The Bills of Exchange Act was enacted or revised in the early 1930s to allow 'settlement' of debt because there was no real asset value money to 'pay' a debt,

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
No, the act has never been inacted or revised for this reason.
If not, then What is the reason? Just making the statement proves nothing, especially when the one making the unsupported statement is representing the Mickey Mouse fiction world that is corporate Canada, and the corporate Crown of the City of London.

Originally Posted by EldonG
thus preventing a creditor from sueing or confiscating property because they did not get an exchange of a real asset for an asset sold.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
No. Switching to a fiat currency at no point allowed anyone to make this argument. If you think that anyone ever did make this argument succesfully feel free to point us to the decision.
Who would make or issue such a decision? A black robed priest? They are just administrative officers of the make-believe ship at sea called Canada, with their allegiance pledged to the Crown of the City of London. Canada has always, since claimed by the British, been a vassal colony of the City of London through the British Board of Trade (run out of the City of London). Remember, the Monarch and Lords of GB have been vassals of the Pontiff since 1213, so calling something British and headed by a Lord Carnarvon in the 1800s. And, I am not refering to the Roman Catholic Church that became a sub-corporation long after the establishment of the secular rule by the Red Robed Priesthood of Isis in what is now Italy.

Originally Posted by EldonG
So, if Parliament says that Canadian currency is no longer a bill of exchange, then that means that creditors are getting truly ripped off, and currency is purely a con game.


Originally Posted by JLord View Post
Yes, it is a fiat currency and I can understand why some poeple have trouble with the concept. But money has value because the vast majority of people value it highly. This is the same for anything when you break it down. Gold only has value because the vast majority of people value it. Gold has some intrinsic value and fiat currency doesn't, but at the end of the day both are highly valued by the vast majority of people. Nobody is getting ripped off.
So? What is fiat currency but a tool to control slaves and used to harvest the fruits of the labour of the slaves by both taxation harvesting and by 'watering down the soup' inflation, so that even savings by the peons is stripped from them. And, don't tell me that such has not been the case with Candian funny money. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, $10,000 would get one a decent 1,000 sq foot house. Now, one would be looking at $400,000 for the same house. In those days, a $100,000 nest egg was plenty as a retirement account. Now $5,000,000 would be needed to maintain the same standard of living for the senior years. Fortunately, the USA is being forced into going back to the gold standard, and when they do, Canada will be obliged to follow suit.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
If a person for some reason doesn't value money and thinks getting paid in money is a "rip off" they are free to negotiate payment in any form they like. If you can find someone willing to pay you for your labour in chickens, or gold, or magic beans rather than money there is nothing preventing you from entering into this kind of arrangement.
Not if CRA finds out, and assesses some inflated value for the magic beans.


Originally Posted by EldonG
The revision just says that Canadian Currency is now pure Monopoly Money, and is a total fraud upon the Canadian people


Originally Posted by JLord View Post
It isn't a fraud because everyone knows we have a fiat currency. Most people understand what this means and are still happy to accept money as payment for their services. This isn't any kind of secret, and as I pointed out, people are not forced to accept money if they can make other arrangements. So the situation clearly doesn't come close to anything amounting to fraud.
Everybody knows???? Since when. And, if all one gets in rexchange for their labour/time/life is this con job called fiat money, and then CRA takes it from them because CRA sees them as slaves belonging to the corporate Crown, and subject to the harvesting of the fruits of their labour, may I suggest that the fraud is all too evident.

Originally Posted by EldonG
All the evidence and proof in the world would not change your loyalty to your primary oath to the Lawyers Guild ( The BAR) of the City of London, and thus the Pontiff's Holy Roman Empire evil dictatoprship.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
First of all, the fact that lawyers swear an oath to uphold the law does not mean that pledged any loyalty to the government above their clients.
If the law meant what the term is supposed to mean, then you would be dedicated to 'doing no harm, and helping others who have suffered harm. Legal is NOT law, it is statutory rules - rules of a corporate body, a make believe ship at sea with a captain, officers, and slave crewmembers subservient to the captain and officers.


Originally Posted by JLord View Post
I am not a government employee and I regularly assist individuals who are in disputes with the government. I have no loyalty to the pope or to city of London because obviously no lawyer's oath has anything to do with these entities. It is an oath to uphold principles of fairness and to follow the law. Not an oath to follow or be loyal to any specific entity.
If you are an 'officer of the corporate Crown', then your first loyalty is to that corporation. Follow what law? The rules made by the 'policy makers' (politicians) of the corporate Parliament of corporate Provincial legislatures? Who owns those corporate bodies. The judge in the People of Wetaskiwin v. Milton Littlechild MP certainly pointed out that, once an MP is sworn in as an officer of Parliament, they were not beholden to the people who voted for that MP.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
Also, there is not a "Lawyers Guild" but lawyers in Canada are members of the law society in their respective provinces. However being a member does not require anyone to swear any kind of oath of loyalty to the organization.
Maybe in fact, but not in practise. I have met lawyers who were disBARred for defending someone against Crown policy.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
The law society is responsible for setting the requirements for education, training, and qualifications that someone must complete and maintain in order to become or remain a lawyer. The law society obviously does not prevent someone from being swayed by good arguments even if they run counter to best interests of the law society (not that any of your arguments have anything to do with the law society even if I did swear some kind of oath to them). There is also nothing that prevents a lawyer from representing clients in disputes with the law society, something which happens regularly.
As long as their defense tactic is ineffective, I presume.

Originally Posted by EldonG
A good example of this is 'person'. That term is commonly used to mean a human creature, but in legal terms/code, it means a subservient member of a corporate body, or a crewmember on a ship, who is subservient to the supreme command of the captain of the ship.

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
This is not the case. There are countless numbers of statutes that define "preson." None of which define it in the manner you suggest. There are also many cases where the courts have considered the legal definition of person (many where people have tried to make the same type of argument you are making here). Again, none of these decision have agreed with your definition.
Let's have a few quotes that shows that 'person' means an adult free will man. In case you weren't aware, an adult man(male or female) can only have the status of 'free will', or 'subservient/slave status' while on Planet Earth. Describing a man as an 'individual', 'married', 'single','husband' or 'wife', does not address the issue of status. If a man can be punished for disobeying a rule where there is no victim, or have his life/time/labour confiscated without his voluntary approval, that certainly signifies a status of subservience to another. And, within every statute by any level of Government that deals with mankind, and rules to be followed, and prohibitions to be observed upon penalty of punishment, the term 'person' is used. Thus, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck.... Quo Warranto?

Originally Posted by JLord View Post
So if you are the only one saying that a certian definition is the right one, I think by default you are wrong regardless of what type of linguistic argument you make. Reality has simply trumped whatever linguistic/historical/legal argument you think you have.
Trumped? By whom? A defender of the Mickey Mouse fiction world that is Government and corporate bodies politic?

Last edited by EldonG; 5th September 2010 at 02:19 PM.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 02:34 PM   #308
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Eldon, as I said I am very interested in your way of dodging taxes. Could you provide a real world example of where it works?
Well, first off, I don't offer a way to 'dodge taxes'. One doesn't have to submit to the harvesting of the fruits of the labour of an owned slave, unless you desire to be a slave, where all your labour and fruits of your labour belong to a foreign corporate body. If that is the case, then have at it.

I use my filing system in 2003 for the year 2001 in filing with the IRS for my pension payout from the airline for which I worked for 19 years. I am Canadian, but have a USA SSN#. If I had filed their way, I would likely have owed 1/2 Mil. $$. Using my method, I paid the IRS nothing.

Also, the damage control goon cite the 'myths' posted by CRA and the 'false tax arguments, posted on the net by the IRS. Neither mention anything in relation to my system of filing. And, absolutely nobody has been hauled into court for using my method, at least that I know about, anyway.

Since my system is, and always has been free and available on the internet, I have no idea how many use it. And, further, I really don't care. It is information I post as a service and a ministry to my fellow man - unlike a lawyer, who is a mercinary predator upon those who break, and are charged with the myriad of rules that no man could possibly know of or about, or, in many cases accept.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 02:48 PM   #309
LightinDarkness
Master Poster
 
LightinDarkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Well, first off, I don't offer a way to 'dodge taxes'. One doesn't have to submit to the harvesting of the fruits of the labour of an owned slave, unless you desire to be a slave, where all your labour and fruits of your labour belong to a foreign corporate body. If that is the case, then have at it.

I use my filing system in 2003 for the year 2001 in filing with the IRS for my pension payout from the airline for which I worked for 19 years. I am Canadian, but have a USA SSN#. If I had filed their way, I would likely have owed 1/2 Mil. $$. Using my method, I paid the IRS nothing.

Also, the damage control goon cite the 'myths' posted by CRA and the 'false tax arguments, posted on the net by the IRS. Neither mention anything in relation to my system of filing. And, absolutely nobody has been hauled into court for using my method, at least that I know about, anyway.

Since my system is, and always has been free and available on the internet, I have no idea how many use it. And, further, I really don't care. It is information I post as a service and a ministry to my fellow man - unlike a lawyer, who is a mercinary predator upon those who break, and are charged with the myriad of rules that no man could possibly know of or about, or, in many cases accept.
Looks like someone is to busy embracing delusions again, time to pull you back to reality.

Lots of people have tried the same thing..and you will meet their fate, free loader By the way, for someone so enraged and frothing at the mouth over the value of fiat currency, he sure is doing quite a bit to protect his worthless paper money. If you REALLY believe that your "system" is perfectly legal and you've found a loophole in the gigantic system used to enslave us all that cannot be touched, why not PM me your name and address? I'll do nothing but send it to the IRS, and if you've found a perfectly legal method to escape all this terrible enslavement then you have nothing to worry about. If, however, you are simply a tax evader, it could cause problems.

Your "method" is simply tax evasion: You have to file in both countries (if you are a citizen for both), if you don't file in either or tell each country you filed in the other they DO communicate with each other and will flag you as a tax evader. And unfortunately for you, if we are really talking about a tax liability of hundreds of thousands, you will very soon be paying up or be in jail since thats enough money to motivate the IRS to do something.
There are two possible things going on here: either you are a US citizen (since most people can only get a SSN if they are a citizen - SSDI has a ton of exemptions against non-citizens getting it) and a Canadian citizen, or you are one of the few who qualify for a SSN as a non-resident and are only a Canadian citizen. In the first case, you have to pay US taxes and possibly Canadian taxes, and if you lie to either government they have treaties in place to find out. In the second case you are paying at the minimal SSDI taxes at some point and are only a Canadian citizen, which if you no longer paying because your retired means you only owe taxes in Canada, in which your scheme would still fail.

Last edited by LightinDarkness; 5th September 2010 at 02:55 PM.
LightinDarkness is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 02:51 PM   #310
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Anyway, while words came into English from Greek or whatever, words mean, in 2010, what they mean. Take the words "gay" or "faggot" for instance. In North America in the year 2010 those don't mean "happy" or "bundle of sticks." There is no secret code in legal language. "Govern" does not refer to a ship. A person is a person. Heck, people are people!
Your arguments have offered inviolate proof that the Jesuit program of 'dumbing down' of the Canadian population in their control of school curriculum and textbooks is most effective. Common usage of certain words is most effective in trapping the unwary in the world of legal code meanings that are intended to deceive and defraud mankind of the realm. If men cannot be deceived, they cannot be dominated as slaves. Thank you.

Now, offer some proof that 'govern' does not mean to steer, direct or administer a ship at sea, or to administer, steer, or direct a make-believe ship at sea, called an incorporated body, of which Government is a 'body politic' (policy making fictional body) - a thing that does not exist in nature.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 03:29 PM   #311
Sledge
Grammaton Cleric
 
Sledge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,114
Anyone provided proof of this nonsense working yet?
__________________
"The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.
Sledge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 03:38 PM   #312
LightinDarkness
Master Poster
 
LightinDarkness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,583
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Your arguments have offered inviolate proof that the Jesuit program of 'dumbing down' of the Canadian population in their control of school curriculum and textbooks is most effective. Common usage of certain words is most effective in trapping the unwary in the world of legal code meanings that are intended to deceive and defraud mankind of the realm. If men cannot be deceived, they cannot be dominated as slaves. Thank you.

Now, offer some proof that 'govern' does not mean to steer, direct or administer a ship at sea, or to administer, steer, or direct a make-believe ship at sea, called an incorporated body, of which Government is a 'body politic' (policy making fictional body) - a thing that does not exist in nature.
This is classical CT rationalization before our very eyes...every time EldonG is debunked the facts that debunked him simply become part of a larger conspiracy. Now, the fact that his arguments on the meanings of words has been debunked and shown to be wrong means that its a part of the "jesuit education conspiracy."

He then COMPLETELY ignores that the word "govern" indeed does NOT mean to steer a ship at sea, and acts like all the proof that debunked him simply doesn't exist.
LightinDarkness is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 04:57 PM   #313
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,889
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Well, first off, I don't offer a way to 'dodge taxes'. One doesn't have to submit to the harvesting of the fruits of the labour of an owned slave, unless you desire to be a slave, where all your labour and fruits of your labour belong to a foreign corporate body. If that is the case, then have at it.

I use my filing system in 2003 for the year 2001 in filing with the IRS for my pension payout from the airline for which I worked for 19 years. I am Canadian, but have a USA SSN#. If I had filed their way, I would likely have owed 1/2 Mil. $$. Using my method, I paid the IRS nothing.

Also, the damage control goon cite the 'myths' posted by CRA and the 'false tax arguments, posted on the net by the IRS. Neither mention anything in relation to my system of filing. And, absolutely nobody has been hauled into court for using my method, at least that I know about, anyway.

Since my system is, and always has been free and available on the internet, I have no idea how many use it. And, further, I really don't care. It is information I post as a service and a ministry to my fellow man - unlike a lawyer, who is a mercinary predator upon those who break, and are charged with the myriad of rules that no man could possibly know of or about, or, in many cases accept.
It sure looks like dodging taxes to me. However, I asked for a real verifiable example of this working. That means, someone taking it to court and winning. As it is right now, either the reason you haven't been caught (again, right?) is dumb luck, or you have taken it to court and you have the documents to prove the legality of your "system". If so, I'd like to see those documents.
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 05:28 PM   #314
Lyrandar
Thinker
 
Lyrandar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
So? What is fiat currency but a tool to control slaves and used to harvest the fruits of the labour of the slaves by both taxation harvesting and by 'watering down the soup' inflation, so that even savings by the peons is stripped from them. And, don't tell me that such has not been the case with Candian funny money. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, $10,000 would get one a decent 1,000 sq foot house. Now, one would be looking at $400,000 for the same house. In those days, a $100,000 nest egg was plenty as a retirement account. Now $5,000,000 would be needed to maintain the same standard of living for the senior years. Fortunately, the USA is being forced into going back to the gold standard, and when they do, Canada will be obliged to follow suit.
If this were true, wouldn't every smart government in the world be insuring rising inflation so they could take advantage of their slaves some more?

In case you're curious, this isn't the case. There are in fact countries in which deflation is a bigger problem - Japan is the only example I can think of off the top of my head but I'm sure there are more.

Quote:
Everybody knows???? Since when. And, if all one gets in rexchange for their labour/time/life is this con job called fiat money, and then CRA takes it from them because CRA sees them as slaves belonging to the corporate Crown, and subject to the harvesting of the fruits of their labour, may I suggest that the fraud is all too evident.
*shrug* It's just one of those things which no one thinks about, because it doesn't matter. My employer flips a few bits in a server somewhere every month and suddenly I have something I can use to buy food, computer games, etc. If we were on the gold standard, it would be no different; the only thing that would change would be the identity of the materials I was exchanging for goods or services.

Quote:
Let's have a few quotes that shows that 'person' means an adult free will man. In case you weren't aware, an adult man(male or female) can only have the status of 'free will', or 'subservient/slave status' while on Planet Earth. Describing a man as an 'individual', 'married', 'single','husband' or 'wife', does not address the issue of status. If a man can be punished for disobeying a rule where there is no victim, or have his life/time/labour confiscated without his voluntary approval, that certainly signifies a status of subservience to another. And, within every statute by any level of Government that deals with mankind, and rules to be followed, and prohibitions to be observed upon penalty of punishment, the term 'person' is used. Thus, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck.... Quo Warranto
Except that by holding the status of a US citizen (or Canadian citizen or whatever you are) you are in fact implying that you are willing to incur the responsibilities inherent with that. Any position, title, or status with benefits will have at least minimal responsibilities. And don't try and say it's not voluntary - you can give up your citizenship, if you so desire. Just keep in mind that you lose all the benefits of a citizen when you do that - including, probably, the ability to stay in the country. And if you don't like that, well, that's the way the world works. There is no such thing as a completely free lunch.
Lyrandar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:18 PM   #315
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
Looks like someone is to busy embracing delusions again, time to pull you back to reality.
Well, who is the one here in delusion? The one supporting the world of fictional ships at sea, where mankind is made slaves of those copporate fictional bodies? Or the one teaching that an adult man is a free will mind and Son of Creator Diety, and has the natural unalienable rights of life, liberty, property and due process of law? And, by due process - no 'mens rea' damage or harm to another man - no law broken.

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
Lots of people have tried the same thing..and you will meet their fate, free loader
That is a statement for which you have no proof. I am the only party who has taught the method I use. And, I have no idea who has used my method, no one has reported even being cited with any charge bringing them into the administrative court system. Yes, some have had money stolen from bank accounts that were not properly set up, but they are warned in my program info to take asset protection precautions from outright theft by CRA or the IRS. If they don't heed the warnings, it is not my fault.

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
By the way, for someone so enraged and frothing at the mouth over the value of fiat currency, he sure is doing quite a bit to protect his worthless paper money.
I use the analogy of the flimsy plastic bags one finds on the rolls at the produce section of the supermarket, as being a representation of the Canadian or American fiat currency. It is not those bags which have any value. It is the produce you have selected and paid for (defrauded the store owner by paying them fiat currency) that is in those plastic bags that has value to you. When you accept the worthless currency as exchange for your labour, the currency you have in your pocket or bank account is filled with the fruits of your labour. Now suppose you clear the grocery store checkout and proceed to your car in the parking lot, and are intercepted by store security demanding those bags with the store name on them. They don't give a damn what you have in them, they just want 50% of the bags back, which they then throw in the garbage bin. That is the story of income tax, and what CRA does when collecting the worthless fiat money from a working man.

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
If you REALLY believe that your "system" is perfectly legal and you've found a loophole in the gigantic system used to enslave us all that cannot be touched, why not PM me your name and address? I'll do nothing but send it to the IRS, and if you've found a perfectly legal method to escape all this terrible enslavement then you have nothing to worry about. If, however, you are simply a tax evader, it could cause problems.
Is that supposed to scare me, or others reading this forum? Who do you think I sent the IRS 1040 to in the summer of 2003. And, it was the IRS who
sent me a 'bussiness expense statement' a month or so later to complete the return. They had full knowledge as to how much the gross amount was that the Airline recorded that they paid to me as pension. Also, they certainly communicated with CRA at that time. And, both recognized that no taxes were unpaid or evaded by myself.

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
Your "method" is simply tax evasion: You have to file in both countries (if you are a citizen for both), if you don't file in either or tell each country you filed in the other they DO communicate with each other and will flag you as a tax evader. And unfortunately for you, if we are really talking about a tax liability of hundreds of thousands, you will very soon be paying up or be in jail since thats enough money to motivate the IRS to do something.
How can it be 'tax evasion' (refusing to pay over the fruits of the labour of an owned slave to the slave owner, under the property right) when, income tax only applies to a fictional legal entity/name which does not have a live man (declared legally dead) attached to it as an accessory, making the live man also the property of the owner of the legal name - the corporate Crown of the City of London?

Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
There are two possible things going on here: either you are a US citizen (since most people can only get a SSN if they are a citizen - SSDI has a ton of exemptions against non-citizens getting it) and a Canadian citizen, or you are one of the few who qualify for a SSN as a non-resident and are only a Canadian citizen. In the first case, you have to pay US taxes and possibly Canadian taxes, and if you lie to either government they have treaties in place to find out. In the second case you are paying at the minimal SSDI taxes at some point and are only a Canadian citizen, which if you no longer paying because your retired means you only owe taxes in Canada, in which your scheme would still fail.
Not a US citizen (citizen = slave) , but a green card immigrant to the USA.

The legal name, ELDON WARMAN may be a slave of the Crown in right of Canada, but the free will adult man who uses the name as his agent in commerce under private necessity is certainly not a citizen -slave owned by the Crown.

Eldon Warman/ELDON WARMAN may have to pay taxes, if taxes are owed after deducting basic exemptions from income. However, since ELDON WARMAN is merely an agent, the only income an agent has is the fee for services. And, that fee is determined by private contract between the free will man and the Crown owned legal name. The Crown doesn't set the fee.
As a free will adult man, one is a mind existing within a human body/a vessel.
As an operating system in a computer, a human mind has no substance, nor other physical presence. It is an interaction process of electrons within the physical brain/computer. Thus, a mind cannot be identified by a name. A mind can only have sounds, words and terms that it recognizes through hearing, vision or other senses. That is called an appellation - commonly called term. The legal system of make-believe ships at sea/corporate bodies requires an identifying name.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:23 PM   #316
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by Sledge View Post
Anyone provided proof of this nonsense working yet?
Anyone provided proof that Eldon's detax system hasn't worked?

Of course, one has to be able to read and comprehend the English language to determine whether it may, or may not work.

And, I could care less if someone does determine that it won't work. All we need is less than 2%of the population believing and doing to make the '100th monkey' feature kick in, and blow away the whole fiction world of the Wonderful Wizard of Oz - the Pontiff of Rome, and his 104 Red Robed hoodlems.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:25 PM   #317
D'rok
Free Barbarian on The Land
 
D'rok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,399
Long story short: Eldon pays his taxes.
__________________
"War exists within the continuum of politics, in which play is continuous, and no outcome is final, save for a global thermonuclear war, which might be." - Darth Rotor

"Life, like a Saturday afternoon, finds its ruination in purpose." - MdC
D'rok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:27 PM   #318
EldonG
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 211
Originally Posted by LightinDarkness View Post
This is classical CT rationalization before our very eyes...every time EldonG is debunked the facts that debunked him simply become part of a larger conspiracy. Now, the fact that his arguments on the meanings of words has been debunked and shown to be wrong means that its a part of the "jesuit education conspiracy."

He then COMPLETELY ignores that the word "govern" indeed does NOT mean to steer a ship at sea, and acts like all the proof that debunked him simply doesn't exist.
Well.. You can believe that the world is flat, and Bugs Bunny is a real rabbit if you wish. But, that doesn't make it so. So far, nothing that I have written has been 'debunked' on this thread, except the list I posed for D'rok, to allow him to debunk the dis-information types 'red herring' diversions.
EldonG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:29 PM   #319
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,889
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Well, who is the one here in delusion? The one supporting the world of fictional ships at sea, where mankind is made slaves of those copporate fictional bodies? Or the one teaching that an adult man is a free will mind and Son of Creator Diety, and has the natural unalienable rights of life, liberty, property and due process of law? And, by due process - no 'mens rea' damage or harm to another man - no law broken.



That is a statement for which you have no proof. I am the only party who has taught the method I use. And, I have no idea who has used my method, no one has reported even being cited with any charge bringing them into the administrative court system. Yes, some have had money stolen from bank accounts that were not properly set up, but they are warned in my program info to take asset protection precautions from outright theft by CRA or the IRS. If they don't heed the warnings, it is not my fault.



I use the analogy of the flimsy plastic bags one finds on the rolls at the produce section of the supermarket, as being a representation of the Canadian or American fiat currency. It is not those bags which have any value. It is the produce you have selected and paid for (defrauded the store owner by paying them fiat currency) that is in those plastic bags that has value to you. When you accept the worthless currency as exchange for your labour, the currency you have in your pocket or bank account is filled with the fruits of your labour. Now suppose you clear the grocery store checkout and proceed to your car in the parking lot, and are intercepted by store security demanding those bags with the store name on them. They don't give a damn what you have in them, they just want 50% of the bags back, which they then throw in the garbage bin. That is the story of income tax, and what CRA does when collecting the worthless fiat money from a working man.



Is that supposed to scare me, or others reading this forum? Who do you think I sent the IRS 1040 to in the summer of 2003. And, it was the IRS who
sent me a 'bussiness expense statement' a month or so later to complete the return. They had full knowledge as to how much the gross amount was that the Airline recorded that they paid to me as pension. Also, they certainly communicated with CRA at that time. And, both recognized that no taxes were unpaid or evaded by myself.



How can it be 'tax evasion' (refusing to pay over the fruits of the labour of an owned slave to the slave owner, under the property right) when, income tax only applies to a fictional legal entity/name which does not have a live man (declared legally dead) attached to it as an accessory, making the live man also the property of the owner of the legal name - the corporate Crown of the City of London?



Not a US citizen (citizen = slave) , but a green card immigrant to the USA.

The legal name, ELDON WARMAN may be a slave of the Crown in right of Canada, but the free will adult man who uses the name as his agent in commerce under private necessity is certainly not a citizen -slave owned by the Crown.

Eldon Warman/ELDON WARMAN may have to pay taxes, if taxes are owed after deducting basic exemptions from income. However, since ELDON WARMAN is merely an agent, the only income an agent has is the fee for services. And, that fee is determined by private contract between the free will man and the Crown owned legal name. The Crown doesn't set the fee.
As a free will adult man, one is a mind existing within a human body/a vessel.
As an operating system in a computer, a human mind has no substance, nor other physical presence. It is an interaction process of electrons within the physical brain/computer. Thus, a mind cannot be identified by a name. A mind can only have sounds, words and terms that it recognizes through hearing, vision or other senses. That is called an appellation - commonly called term. The legal system of make-believe ships at sea/corporate bodies requires an identifying name.
Ok, so if I understand you correctly, one does not have to pay income tax, because income tax is something invented by those that wants to enslave people? Income tax is basically an invention to get a piece of your money?

Well, duh. Income tax is a fee that's going towards paying for costs that citizens (slaves, as you put it) incur throughout their lives, such infrastructure costs, and in the case of Sweden (my home country) and, I believe, Canada, towards funding health care. Paying income tax is called "living in a society". If you don't want to live in society, you will have to exclude yourself from all the benefits that taxes go towards paying, such as infrastructure (no more driving on roads for you), benefits, health care (other than private, non-subsidized health care) etc. Basically, you will have to go live in the wilderness, away from society.

If you do not, you are nothing but a free-loader, living off the benefits payed for by tax-payers.
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th September 2010, 08:30 PM   #320
uke2se
Philosopher
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,889
Originally Posted by EldonG View Post
Anyone provided proof that Eldon's detax system hasn't worked?
Not how it works. Rather than us proving a negative, the burden of proof is on you to prove that it works.
uke2se is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.