Posted by Patrick Henry on January 11, 1998 at 16:22:54:
In Reply to: WHINING SHEEPEOPLE/Re: 2 IRS Agents Expose it all posted by Richard on January 11, 1998 at 08:41:59:
: : Dear fellow Americans,
: Body deleted to save space:
: 1st. I have been a reader of this and other forums
: for quite some time and all I have heard from many is
: that these people are acting like and being WHINING SHEEPEOPLE,
: you know who you are.
: You all want you freedom(s) but like all SHEEPEOPLE
: you want someone (like BIG BROTHER) to give it to you.
: Well, let me tell you that's notthe way one gets or takes back
: their lost or stolen freedom(s). You get it back at a
: cost - it's not free, never was and never will be.
: 2nd. Someone - using a bad mouth - put down, stated
: that you should all save your money and spend it on junk food,
: and not to bother to get the information being offered
: by the magistrate on traffic tickets, and this person also
: stated that the information was in a childish language, and
: that everyone knew all the information on the disk.
: I say to that person; There are many who do not know anything
: of what the disk contains, secondly, the information on the disk
: is in plain language for everyone to understand.
: If that "person" requires information in some cryptic, non-understandable
: language then that "person" should stick to the IRS code,
: and stop putting out disinformation.
: I myself had a problem regarding a traffic ticket,
: I purchased the disk and using the information that
: it contained, BEAT THE TICKET, on my own and with no help
: from individuals like "that Person."
: Also, I have been in a fight with the IRS for two years now,
: and was getting nowhere. Then I got smart, and started
: listning and corresponding and collecting, (and yes, I did
: have to pay, afterall FREEDOM is not "free" only the word is)
: opinion letters from respectable individuals such as,
: (((former Judge Rizzo, from Nevada at firstname.lastname@example.org
: and a IRS tax consultant in Florida, at email@example.com)))
: just to name a few, and using these individuals' letters,
: as well as others that I received, was able to stop the IRS
: dead in their tracks.
: Did I pay for them, damn straight I did, $2,240.00 to date,
: and I intend to gather more and they were well worth it,
: because what these disinformationsits (most likely work for the IRS)
: and sheepeople do not see, admit to, understand, or choose to overlook
: is that, these opinions letters are SIGNED by these individuals and the
: writers of these opinion letters, and they know full well that they can
: be called into a court of law, on behalf of the defendant using their letters,
: to justify the TRUTH about IRS and it's fraud.
: Are they putting them selves at risk by signing their names to their
: opinion's, damn straight they are, and they need to be respected for comming
: forthe doing so, not condemened or put down for it. They are willing to
: put their GOOD NAMES on the line - ARE YOU.
: Do you think that a judge who no longer sits on the bench, where
: the weight of their opinion(s) became LAW, and just because they are retired
: and helping others, that their opinion means less, or that they suddenly
: became stupid,I DON'T THINK SO.
: Do you think an individual that is a registered
: tax consultant is going to put his/her GOOD NAME and family support on
: the line for something that is NOT WORTH A DAMN, or is untrue,
: I don't think so.
: The two former IRS agents are absolutely 100% correct
: in what they say.
: Therefore, In parting, I say to all the WHINING SHEEPEOPLE
: you have one of two choices to make;
: You can either remain as the SLAVES YOU ARE, continue your whining
: and be slowly beaten and blead to death, or;
: You can STAND YOUR GROUND LIKE MANY OF US HAVE, gather as much
: and as many opinion letters and TRUE information that you can afford
: and take back your F R E E D O M, either way, there is
: a price. As for me, I prefer my blood right where it
: belongs, and not at someones feet.
: The choice is yours, and if you choose slavery, then you
: have no bitch.
: NOTE: If there are those among you who would like to take
: back their freedom and would like a list of the names
: of other professional individuals that I have contacted
: across the country for their opinion letters, reply
: to this post with an e-mail address and I will send it
: to you.
: I was wrongly placed in a situation regarding a traffic
Everyone has a RIGHT, not only to HAVE an opinion,
but ALSO to EXPRESS that opinion. That includes
YOU, ME, and everyone else. If YOU choose to TAKE
OFFENSE at the opinion of someone else, and to
express that offense publicly, then you--as the
RESPONSIBLE individual your post attempts to
portray yourself as being--have a DUTY to AT LEAST
accurately respresent what that other individual
actually said. If you do not understand standard
English well enough to comprehend what was actually
said, then seek the counsel of someone who DOES
understand the language, and reserve your comments
and opinions until you have a better "handle" on
what was actually said. Shooting from the hip
merely makes you look ignorant to those others
who do actually understand the language.
If you will re-read my post, and then compare it
to your response ... Now, can you tell me the
difference in meaning between the term I used
(illiterate), and the term you said I used
(childish)? They are not even similar in meaning.
Do you not understand the difference between the
phrase "common knowledge" and "everyone knew all
the information?" Sad if you don't, but not at
By the way, perhaps litere English is "a cryptic,
non-understandable language" to you, but it most
certainly IS NOT to me. Words have specific
meanings, without which communication is impossible.
If a person is so illiterate as to be unable to
ACCURATELY convey what he intended to convey, then
his attempt to communicate is fruitless, and more
often than not, causes confusion among his peers
who also are illiterate.
I stand by my original post. I believe the traffic
information to be illiterate and legally worthless.
I also have no proof that the seller of that info
is in fact a person with legal training. I
question that claim strictly based upon the quality
of the work product. Where I come from, those
who hold those judical offices are better educated
that the person who prepared this information appears
If my opinion offends you, or even the seller of
that info, then I apologize for the offense, but
NOT for the opinion. That I stand by.
If you "won" a traffic infraction by using it,
congratulations. You probably would have won just
by showing up.
I estimate that I have spent in excess of $40,000
over the past few years on various information
packets. The vast majority of it DID have some
EDUCATIONAL value--namely, it taught me the lesson
that if I want to know the truth about ANY matter,
then it is up to me to thoroughly research it for
myself, and make my own conclusions. It has been
my experience that the BULK of the so-called
knowledge floating around is based entirely upon
a false premise which arose out of the individuals'
basic lack of understanding of the English language.
I'm talking about some very GOOD research, that
would be DYNAMITE, but is in fact useless because
the underlying premise is false based upon the
author's lack of understanding of the meaning of
words, the rules of grammar--in short, the rules
of our language.
Several thousand years ago, Yahweh inspired one of
His prophets to pen the words "My people perish
for lack of knowledge." They perish yet today,
not necessarily because of a failure to seek for
knowledge, but rather because the information which
they collect and label knowledge is nothing more
One final word. If expressing a contrary opinion
is "bad mouthing," then by your definition you are
the pot calling the kettle black, since the statement
of YOUR opinion of ME would also constitute
P. S. I also DO NOT make it a practice to post
messages anonymously. Do you?
Post a Followup