Under Duress (UD)

[Dianne]

When you file your income tax return, or pay any bill like a homeowner's association assessment, etc. Sign your name: John Brown (UD) which means under duress.

We need to start a UD movement. This basically means you do not agree with the payment you are making, but you have been threatened to sign it and submit it (a federal or state income tax return); and have been placed under duress.

Google it if you want, but this is perfect !!!! We all know for example, that there are no laws to substantiate people paying taxes on their labor. It's all a bs bluff... but where they get you is when you do file a return that you promise under penalty of perjury that everything you tell them in that return is true. If you sign your name (UD), it means you don't agree with what you are doing... but have been threatened to place your name in that box.


Since GOP hijacking the tea party movement Ron Paul supporters created... possible the new movement could be the "Under Duress" signature movement... forced but do not agree.

 

[Chaohinon]

I prefer just not filing

They don't care if you sign it as, "Dianne (FUCK YOUR MOTHER LOL)", as long as they get their plunder. Withold the money completely, and they'll start screeching.

 

[BuddyRey]

I love your idea, Mom, but I think I have one that's even better...

...

Just don't pay the taxes!

After all, Harry Reid says they're voluntary, remember?

 

[lynnf]

what threat?

I'm not sure this is a good idea. for instance, did someone actually come up to you and threaten you about the taxes? the supposed "threat" of an audit may not meet the test.

this could dilute the real UD cases that happen when someone is actually physically threatened.

any attorneys on here that can render an opinion?

lynn

 

[Dianne]

Actually what happened with me, is I took exception to paying my homeowners association dues. They took a $300. bill and turned it into a $1,500. bill within five months, and took out a foreclosure notice. My attorney said I had to pay it, or they would take the house.

So I did finally pay it, but signed the check (UD), so I have some recourse to go after them. If I had not signed UD, the court would have said "well why did you pay it, if you didn't agree with it?"

I'm using taxes as an example... there are many things we are required or forced to pay that we don't agree with such as a car inspection when you drive the brand new car off the lot..... UD will express your contempt and disagreement with what you are being blackmailed to pay.

 

[roho76]

I prefer just not filing

I don't file unless someone sends me something saying I made income but I'm freelance so that doesn't happen. But I will use this on any other forms I do not wish to sign.

 

[Dianne]

I'm not sure this is a good idea. for instance, did someone actually come up to you and threaten you about the taxes? the supposed "threat" of an audit may not meet the test.

this could dilute the real UD cases that happen when someone is actually physically threatened.

any attorneys on here that can render an opinion?

lynn

I am not sure.. but I thought it was commonplace knowledge that if you don't pay your federal and state taxes, you are going to federal prison. At least that is what I have always heard. Am I wrong about that?

 

[Dianne]

I just believe it's your statement that you do not agree with a certain payment; however, you have been threatened to pay it; therefore you are signing under duress.

 

[lynnf]

jailhouse rock

I am not sure.. but I thought it was commonplace knowledge that if you don't pay your federal and state taxes, you are going to federal prison. At least that is what I have always heard. Am I wrong about that?

sorry to have to tell you you are wrong about that.

Aaron Russo was one (of America: Freedom to Fascism) and I believe he named others.

Tom Cryer (Crier?) also comes to mind - he beat the IRS in court.

they did point out you have to know what you are doing or you will end up in jail. of course,
the IRS relies on this "commonplace knowledge" you speak of for enforcement.


lynn

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I prefer just not filing

They don't care if you sign it as, "Dianne (FUCK YOUR MOTHER LOL)", as long as they get their plunder. Withold the money completely, and they'll start screeching.

This.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

I am not sure.. but I thought it was commonplace knowledge that if you don't pay your federal and state taxes, you are going to federal prison. At least that is what I have always heard. Am I wrong about that?

Bob Ebert says otherwise (The guy who got elected in PA with 2 million taxes he "owes"...what a joke. The IRS is worse than the MONARCHY FOR FUCKS SAKE!!!!). Only if you lie then you will.

However, it must be said that if you don't file and they really want to be assholes they can garner your wages, like they did with Karl Hess.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Actually what happened with me, is I took exception to paying my homeowners association dues. They took a $300. bill and turned it into a $1,500. bill within five months, and took out a foreclosure notice. My attorney said I had to pay it, or they would take the house.

So I did finally pay it, but signed the check (UD), so I have some recourse to go after them. If I had not signed UD, the court would have said "well why did you pay it, if you didn't agree with it?"

I'm using taxes as an example... there are many things we are required or forced to pay that we don't agree with such as a car inspection when you drive the brand new car off the lot..... UD will express your contempt and disagreement with what you are being blackmailed to pay.

I don't think that helps you at all. You can send a payment for something like say a credit card bill and write on it "paid in full" but that does not mean you do not owe any more money.

 

[Dianne]

sorry to have to tell you you are wrong about that.

Aaron Russo was one (of America: Freedom to Fascism) and I believe he named others.

Tom Cryer (Crier?) also comes to mind - he beat the IRS in court.

they did point out you have to know what you are doing or you will end up in jail. of course,
the IRS relies on this "commonplace knowledge" you speak of for enforcement.


lynn

That's great... maybe you can get that information to Sherry Jackson's attorney, before she dies in a Federal prison:

http://cromalternativemoney.org/ind...erry-jackson-dying-as-political-prisoner.html

 

[lynnf]

tough nut to crack

That's great... maybe you can get that information to Sherry Jackson's attorney, before she dies in a Federal prison:

http://cromalternativemoney.org/ind...erry-jackson-dying-as-political-prisoner.html

like Aaron Russo said, you have to know what you're doing.
those that don't get flushed down the rat hole.

one of the methods they use is that they don't let you present evidence as exhibits - the judge rules it as inadmissible.

Tom Cryer knew his evidence so well he presented it in his testimony, which they couldn't stop.

and that' s only one of the tricks they use, I'm sure.


lynn

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

like Aaron Russo said, you have to know what you're doing.
those that don't get flushed down the rat hole.

one of the methods they use is that they don't let you present evidence as exhibits - the judge rules it as inadmissible.

Tom Crier knew his evidence so well he presented it in his testimony, which they couldn't stop.

and that' s only one of the tricks they use, I'm sure.


lynn

I don't think anyone knows the ins and outs better than Irwin Schiff and look what happened.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

As for Cryer here is why he was acquitted:

Cryer was acquitted on July 11, 2007.[9] Cryer did not make any of his arguments about the legality of the income tax to the jury itself. Instead he asserted that he really did not believe that he owed the taxes, so there was no criminal intent. According to the New Hampshire Union Leader:

Cryer convinced jurors that he genuinely believed he was not liable for the $73,000 in taxes the government says he owes for tax years 2000 and 2001. Absent proof of criminal intent, the jury acquitted him.[10]


The Courts don't care about the Constitution so stop even trying to use it to get acquittal. You can know the "law" inside and out and it won't matter. How many times will you have to learn this? If you don't believe me research Irwin Schiffs case. The Courts really don't give a shit, they are there merely to be part of the enforcement wing of the Government.

Perhaps we should take a page out of the Sons of Liberty playbook.....

 

[lynnf]

oh yeah?

I don't think anyone knows the ins and outs better than Irwin Schiff and look what happened.

some details on Cryer case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Cryer

The prosecution dropped its allegations of tax evasion (on which the law provides a maximum prison term of five years)[7] against Cryer on July 9, 2007. Cryer was then tried on two counts of willful failure to file tax returns, for which the maximum jail sentence is one year in prison.[8]

Cryer was acquitted on July 11, 2007.[9] Cryer did not make any of his arguments about the legality of the income tax to the jury itself. Instead he asserted that he really did not believe that he owed the taxes, so there was no criminal intent. According to the New Hampshire Union Leader:
Cryer convinced jurors that he genuinely believed he was not liable for the $73,000 in taxes the government says he owes for tax years 2000 and 2001. Absent proof of criminal intent, the jury acquitted him.[10]

Although the jury was not convinced of Cryer's willfulness,[10] the theories he raised in his motions for dismissal have been repeatedly rejected by the courts. (See Tax protester arguments and related articles.)

Cryer and the government have made various claims pertaining to tax law, and have cited many rulings by the courts that Cryer and the government contend support their conflicting positions. Citations to the cases can be found on web sites for Cryer and the government.

 

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

some details on Cryer case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Cryer

The prosecution dropped its allegations of tax evasion (on which the law provides a maximum prison term of five years)[7] against Cryer on July 9, 2007. Cryer was then tried on two counts of willful failure to file tax returns, for which the maximum jail sentence is one year in prison.[8]

Cryer was acquitted on July 11, 2007.[9] Cryer did not make any of his arguments about the legality of the income tax to the jury itself. Instead he asserted that he really did not believe that he owed the taxes, so there was no criminal intent. According to the New Hampshire Union Leader:
Cryer convinced jurors that he genuinely believed he was not liable for the $73,000 in taxes the government says he owes for tax years 2000 and 2001. Absent proof of criminal intent, the jury acquitted him.[10]

Although the jury was not convinced of Cryer's willfulness,[10] the theories he raised in his motions for dismissal have been repeatedly rejected by the courts. (See Tax protester arguments and related articles.)

Cryer and the government have made various claims pertaining to tax law, and have cited many rulings by the courts that Cryer and the government contend support their conflicting positions. Citations to the cases can be found on web sites for Cryer and the government.

Yes, I know about Cryer, I am saying he was acquitted not because he knew the law as written better than other tax protesters like Karl Hess and Irwin Schiff, but because he didn't challenge the law. That just goes to show the law is arbitrary and the Courts don't give a shit about the law!

I'm almost to the point where I'm ready to follow in the footsteps of the Sons of Liberty (I'm holding back to see if Ron will run in 2012).

We need to resist the income tax just like the SoL and Patriots resisted the Stamp Act and other forms of taxation.

 

[Weyland]

If you don't mind having your credit ruined and have a high tax bill, here's an idea: Pay your taxes with a credit card.

http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=101316,00.html

I was so angry about the Senate kissing the behinds of the banks, I researched this. Let Citibank or Bank of America pay your bill for you, and then either dispute the charge or let them do a write-off and don't pay them. If it's ok for them to use the government to steal from us, then morally it's ok for us to use the government to steal from them.

 

[Dianne]

Fascinating info... But there is precedent here... Charlie Rangle, Tom Daschle, Geitnher; to name a few that are White House professional tax dodgers.. why aren't they sitting in Folson Prison where they belong.... instead of drafting new laws to send you and me there?

Something gotta give guys... The fox have been sent to guard the chicken house.