Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Title 15

Expand Messages
  • mobinem@aol.com
    I am getting a lot of calls and e-mails on Title 15 so I will try to explain our concept again. Use this with the previous explanation and people interested
    Message 1 of 8 , Nov 8, 2007
      I am getting a lot of calls and e-mails on Title 15 so I will try to explain our concept again. Use this with the previous explanation and people interested should understand the concept with very little research.
       
      The first rule of winning in court is to win before court. The second rule is to make the other party argue about something other than the case at hand. IRS attorneys know this, so should we.
       
       Going to court and arguing about taxes using Title 26 is ineffective for the following reasons.
      1) Title 26 is used by the government to determine the tax. see Title 26
      2) The IRS is a debt collection service, not a government agency. see Diversified Metal v. T-Bow trust/IRS
      3) The bill issued by the U.S. TREASURY (under Title 26) becomes a debt collected by the IRS (which has to follow Title 15).
      4) If you fight the IRS under Title 26, you are fighting something they have nothing to do with. It is like contesting the electric bill to the mail man, he will just think you are a nag and he can't do anything about it anyhow.
      5) The bill has already been adjudicated under nihil dicit judgement and stands if not contested under Title 15. You can not contest the bill under Title 26 since that is the government code on how to figure the bill, not the bill itself.
      6) Demanding the IRS verify the assessment (read as bill) requires them to cease and desist (under Title 15) until the supply the docs.
      7) The IRS can not supply the requisite docs and therefore you have beat them before court. see rule 1
      8) If you go to court you can argue the correct issue, the bill, not how they determined the bill, thusly you can win by arguing the right argument. see rule 2
      9) You can force the IRS to do the action in the judicial district, ie the court nearest the debtor, which they will not do, and therefore you won't go to court. see YHWH's scriptures.
        a) See; TITLE 26 > Subtitle F > CHAPTER 76 > Subchapter A > § 7408

      § 7408. Actions to enjoin specified conduct related to tax shelters and reportable transactions

      (d) Citizens and residents outside the United States

      If any citizen or resident of the United States does not reside in, and does not have his principal place of business in, any United States judicial district, such citizen or resident shall be treated for purposes of this section as residing in the District of Columbia .

       

      I know this seems over simplified, but a cursory study of unsuccessful IRS litigation against their victims will lead one to determine that one of the common denominators of acquittals is that somewhere or somehow the victim did some type of assessment request that was never affirmed. This is diametrically opposed to all the victims that lost using Title 26 and the absence of applicability to the code.

       

      In summary, just like a charge in a traffic ticket, don't fight the law and their reasoning, deny the bill and require them to prove it exists as a matter of record, before they make it a matter of record under nihil dicit judgement because you didn't deny it.

       

      Example:

      A contractOR (government under Title 26) issues you (contractEE) a bill through their third party collection service (IRS), you do not respond. Third party collector service, whose actions and remedies are defined in Title 15, goes to court ex-parte and receives a nihil dicit judgement. You get dragged into a foreign court (USDC) and attempt to fight the contractOR and their rules for issuing the bill under the Constitution and/or Title 26, neither of which applies, since it is the bill being discussed not the entity that issued the bill or how said entity determined the amount. Any attorney would tell you this is a waste of time. You (contractEE) must first void the bill under the appropriate code (Title 15) and demand the case be kept in the proper jurisdiction (nearest judicial district).

      In essence, Title 26 applies to the government entity that determined the bill and Title 15 applies to the collection agency attacking you for payment. Its almost incomprehensible to believe that legally Title 26, THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE has little to do with the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. This appears to be a well orchestrated word trick.



      John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects

      623-206-4339
      mobinem@...
      c/o postal service location
      21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
      Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf




      See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
    • Moisha Pippik
      John-Chester: Stuart and other members: This concept follows right along with what has been demonstrated by myself and others. That being that there must be a
      Message 2 of 8 , Nov 11, 2007

        John-Chester: Stuart and other members:
         
        This concept follows right along with what has been demonstrated by myself and others.  That being that there must be a contract for there to be a controversy.  A "breach" if you will.  I perfect strategy for the INTERNAL REVENUE AND INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.  This concept, which has been supported by many areas, works on everything in "commerce".  This is exactly what happens when one enters a  purported city/county/state court.  It isn't a court, it is an adminstrative agency, just like the IRS.  However, we think we are dealing with a real court, with a real judge, and there just isn't any.  Whether or not the purported judge has an oath of office, or a bond, does not make him a judge.  We are dealing with fake/fictitious/imposters.  Ministerial agents have no more power than notary publics, which precludes any judgements or use of judgement.
         
        Way to piece it together John!!
         
        Moisha

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        http://mail.yahoo.com

      • geraldmc4
        Funny what you can dig up READ (a) and THEN READ (d)(e) WHAT ARE THINKING ABOUT THIS CHAPTER 21—NATIONAL POLICY ON EMPLOYMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY TITLE 15
        Message 3 of 8 , Nov 14, 2007
          Funny what you can dig up

          READ (a) and THEN READ (d)(e) WHAT ARE THINKING ABOUT THIS

          CHAPTER 21—NATIONAL POLICY ON EMPLOYMENT AND PRODUCTIVITY
          TITLE 15 > CHAPTER 21 > § 1021
          § 1021. Congressional declarations

          (a) Generally
          The Congress declares that it is the continuing policy and
          responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable
          means, consistent with its needs and obligations and other essential
          national policies, and with the assistance and cooperation of both
          small and larger businesses, agriculture, labor, and State and local
          governments, to coordinate and utilize all its plans, functions, and
          resources for the purpose of creating and maintaining, in a manner
          calculated to foster and promote free competitive enterprise and the
          general welfare, conditions which promote useful employment
          opportunities, including self-employment, for those able, willing,
          and seeking to work, and promote full employment and production,
          increased real income, balanced growth, a balanced Federal budget,
          adequate productivity growth, proper attention to national
          priorities, achievement of an improved trade balance through
          increased exports and improvement in the international
          competitiveness of agriculture, business, and industry, and
          reasonable price stability as provided in section 1022b (b) of this
          title.

          (b) Full opportunities for employment
          The Congress further declares and establishes as a national goal the
          fulfillment of the right to full opportunities for useful paid
          employment at fair rates of compensation of all individuals able,
          willing, and seeking to work.
          (c) Inflation
          The Congress further declares that inflation is a major national
          problem requiring improved government policies relating to food,
          energy, improved and coordinated fiscal and monetary management, the
          reform of outmoded rules and regulations of the Federal Government,
          the correction of structural defects in the economy that prevent or
          seriously impede competition in private markets, and other measures
          to reduce the rate of inflation.

          (d) Coordination of Federal policies and programs
          The Congress further declares that it is the purpose of the Full
          Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978 [15 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.]
          to improve the coordination and integration of the policies and
          programs of the Federal Government toward achievement of the
          objectives of such Act through better management, increased
          efficiency, and attention to long-range as well as short-range
          problems and to balancing the Federal budget.

          (e) Federal controls
          The Congress further declares that, although it is the purpose under
          the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978 [15 U.S.C. 3101
          et seq.] to seek diligently and to encourage the voluntary
          cooperation of the private sector in helping to achieve the
          objectives of such Act, no provisions of such Act or this chapter
          shall be used, with respect to any portion of the private sector of
          the economy, to provide for Federal Government control of
          production, employment, allocation of resources, or wages and
          prices, except to the extent authorized under other Federal laws.

          (f) Expansion of private employment
          The Congress further declares that it is the purpose of the Full
          Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978 [15 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.]
          to maximize and place primary emphasis upon the expansion of private
          employment, and all programs and policies under such Act shall be in
          accord with such purpose. Toward this end, the effort to expand jobs
          to the full employment level shall be in this order of priority to
          the extent consistent with balanced growth—
          (1) expansion of conventional private jobs through improved use of
          general economic and structural policies, including measures to
          encourage private sector investment and capital formation;
          (2) expansion of private employment through Federal assistance in
          connection with the priority programs in such Act;
          (3) expansion of public employment other than through the provisions
          of section 206 of such Act [15 U.S.C. 3116]; and
          (4) when recommended by the President under section 206 of such Act
          [15 U.S.C. 3116] and subject to the limitations in such section, the
          creation of employment through the methods set forth in such
          section.

          (g) Trade deficits
          The Congress further declares that trade deficits are a major
          national problem requiring a strong national export policy including
          improved Government policies relating to the promotion,
          facilitation, and financing of commercial and agricultural exports,
          Government policies designed to reduce foreign barriers to exports
          through international negotiation and agreement, Federal support for
          research, development, and diffusion of new technologies to promote
          innovation in agriculture, business, and industry, the elimination
          or modification of Government rules or regulations that burden or
          disadvantage exports and the national and international
          competitiveness of agriculture, business, and industry, the
          reexamination of antitrust laws and policies when necessary to
          enable agriculture, business, and industry to meet foreign
          competition in the United States and abroad, and the achievement of
          a free and fair international trading system and a sound and stable
          international monetary order.

          (h) Balanced Federal budget
          The Congress further declares that it is the purpose of the Full
          Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978 [15 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.]
          to achieve a balanced Federal budget consistent with the achievement
          of the medium-term goals specified in section 1022a of this title.

          (i) Investment needs of private enterprise
          The Congress further declares that it is the continuing policy and
          responsibility of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State
          and local governments, to use all practical means consistent with
          other essential considerations of national policy to provide
          sufficient incentives to assure meeting the investment needs of
          private enterprise, including the needs of small and medium sized
          businesses, in order to increase the production of goods, the
          provision of services, employment, the opportunity for profit, the
          payment of taxes, and to reduce and control inflation. To the extent
          it is reasonably possible to do so, private enterprise investments
          in depressed urban and rural areas should be promoted to reduce the
          high levels of unemployment that exist there.

          (j) Reliance on private sector
          The Congress further declares that it is the purpose of the Full
          Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978 [15 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.]
          to rely principally on the private sector for expansion of economic
          activity and creation of new jobs for a growing labor force. Toward
          this end, it is the purpose of this chapter to encourage the
          adoption of fiscal policies that would establish the share of the
          gross national product accounted for by Federal outlays at the
          lowest level consistent with national needs and priorities.
        • mobinem@aol.com
          So you are saying that congress recognizes that there is such a thing as private sector employees and they are protected under Title 15, which may mean such
          Message 4 of 8 , Nov 14, 2007
            So you are saying that congress recognizes that there is such a thing as private sector employees and they are protected under Title 15, which may mean such people have nothing to do with Title 26.
            Such an opinion could make one believe that Title 26 is only concerned with US Citizens, Federal Employees and elected officials as stated in 6331.

            ( 6331-.. “Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official...”);

             


            John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects

            623-206-4339
            mobinem@...
            c/o postal service location
            21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
            Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf




            See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
          • Don Schwarz
            Correct, just to whom does Title 26 or Title 15 apply. Without the full knowledge of the actual pleading from the court of record, we are left peeking thru
            Message 5 of 8 , Nov 15, 2007


              Correct, just to whom does Title 26 or Title 15 apply.

              Without the full knowledge of the actual pleading
              from the court of record, we are left "peeking thru
              the keyhole".

              Unless the courtroom proceedings are broadcast
              over the Internet etc., everyone can see the actual trial,
              or you can buy the transcript, we are just kept
              ignorant by our public servants.



              At 06:34 PM 11/14/07 -0500, you wrote:
              So you are saying that congress recognizes that there is such a thing as private sector employees and they are protected under Title 15, which may mean such people have nothing to do with Title 26.
              Such an opinion could make one believe that Title 26 is only concerned with US Citizens, Federal Employees and elected officials as stated in 6331.

              ( 6331-.. “Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee, or elected official, of the United States, the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the District of Columbia, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401(d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official...”);
               


              John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects
              2b773d.jpg
               
              623-206-4339
              mobinem@...
              c/o postal service location
              21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
              Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf




              See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.


              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG Free Edition.
              Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.31/1130 - Release Date: 11/14/07 9:27 AM
            • rebel382003
              ... Addressing Title 26 only, the courts have declared only taxpayers are concerned with that Title. Taxpayer is defined at 26 USC 7701 (a)(14)as any person
              Message 6 of 8 , Nov 16, 2007
                It appears Don Schwarz <vigilespaladin@...> has asked:


                > just to whom does Title 26 or Title 15 apply. (?)


                Addressing Title 26 only, the courts have declared only taxpayers
                are concerned with that Title. Taxpayer is defined at 26 USC 7701
                (a)(14)as "any person SUBJECT to any internal revenue tax."

                A subject is a subordinate position. This concurs with adjudication
                that taxation is a matter of sovereignty, and that over which a
                government is not sovereign is not a suitable basis for taxation.
                To be subject to an internal revenue tax, the individual must
                therefore be subordinate to government.

                The courts have further declared that if the power to tax exists, it
                is not a matter of concern to the courts if the tax destroys the
                object being taxed.

                It follows that if an individual can properly be the subject of an
                income tax, the government can legally confiscate 100% of the
                subject's earnings. [This appears to be the object of government.]
                The situation would clearly be one of slavery.

                If the income tax can properly be levied upon the citizenry, the tax
                has perverted a government where LIBERTY supposedly preserved and
                adjudicated for 200 years to include the RIGHT to pursue a
                livelihood secured within a REPUBLIC of sovereign citizens, has been
                replaced with a totalitarian regime where the government can
                confiscate the earnings of the people.

                The tax has completely reversed the role of the citizen and
                government.

                Reb
              • Michael Noonan
                ... Don t stop, and assume, there. WHO is subject to any internal revenue tax? The code says, a taxpayer. It always references a taxpayer, and lets anyone
                Message 7 of 8 , Nov 17, 2007
                  --- rebel382003 <liberty@...> wrote:

                  > just to whom does Title 26 or Title 15 apply. (?)
                  >
                  >
                  > Addressing Title 26 only, the courts have declared
                  > only taxpayers
                  > are concerned with that Title. Taxpayer is defined
                  > at 26 USC 7701
                  > (a)(14)as "any person SUBJECT to any internal
                  > revenue tax."


                  Don't stop, and assume, there. WHO is subject to any
                  internal revenue tax? The code says, a taxpayer. It
                  always references a "taxpayer," and lets anyone who
                  cares to assume he/she is the taxpayer identified.

                  If one starts from the premise, "I am not a taxpayer
                  until the IRS can prove it," then not a single
                  sentence, paragraph, comma or period of Title 26
                  apples.

                  Keep the burden of proof where it belongs and avoid
                  the smoke and mirror writings of the code. It is
                  purposefully well designed to deceive.

                  "Who" is a taxpayer is never defined other than one
                  who is "subject to," or one who has "gross income.."

                  Who is "subject to?" A taxpayer.

                  Who has "gross income?" A taxpayer.

                  The loop is firmly in place and sucks in a lot of
                  "volunteers."

                  I am not a taxpayer, according to what is contained in
                  the code, and the IRS has never proved otherwise.

                  Cheers!

                  mn


                  ____________________________________________________________________________________
                  Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                  http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                • mobinem@aol.com
                  Mostly true and correct, with a caveat: See: _TITLE 26_ (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode26/usc_sup_01_26.html) _Subtitle F_
                  Message 8 of 8 , Nov 17, 2007
                    Mostly true and correct, with a caveat:
                     

                          See: TITLE 26  Subtitle F CHAPTER 79 § 7701 Definitions

                             (39) Persons residing outside United States

                             If any citizen or resident of the United States does not reside in (and is not found in) 

                             any United States judicial district, such citizen or resident shall be treated as

                             residing in the District of Columbia for purposes of any provision of this title

                             relating to—

                                 (A) jurisdiction of courts, or

                                 (B) enforcement of summons.

                     

                    If you do not inform them that you live in a judicable district they will make the presumption, and the court will agree to said presumption under nihil dicit, which is exactly what they do to convert an illegal tax to a legal debt.

                     


                    John-Chester: Stuart: sovereign without subjects

                    623-206-4339
                    mobinem@...
                    c/o postal service location
                    21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
                    Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf




                    See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.