|DISCLAIMER AND LICENSE AGREEMENT|
|TABLE OF CONTENTS:
The content of this page supersedes and is controlling over:
We take our job of educating and informing the public very seriously. Every possible human effort has therefore been made to ensure that the information available through this website is truthful, accurate, and consistent with prevailing law. However, all information contained on this website in its entirety, along with any communications with, to, or about the author(s), website administrator, and owner(s) constitute religious and political beliefs, and not facts. As such, nothing on this website is susceptible to being false, misleading, or legally "actionable" in any manner. Because everything on this website and all communications associated with it are religious and political speech and beliefs, none of it is admissible in any court of law pursuant to F.R.E. 610 unless accompanied by an affidavit from a specific person attesting to its truthfulness and accuracy, and the materials are only actionable to THAT SPECIFIC PERSON and no others in such a circumstance. Nothing here can be classified as fact without violating the First Amendment rights of the author(s). It is provided for worship, law enforcement, education, enlightenment, and entertainment and for no other purpose. Any other use is an unauthorized use for which the author(s), website administrator, and owner(s) assume no responsibility or liability. Users assume full, exclusive and complete responsibility for any use beyond reading, education, and entertainment.
There is only one exception to the above paragraph, which is that this Disclaimer is both FACT and IS admissible as evidence in its entirety in any court of law because it must be admissible as evidence in order to protect Ministry Officers and Fellowship Members from unlawful acts of persecution by a corrupted government.
This technique of making information provided herein opinions that are nonfactual and nonactionable and of publishing them anonymously is exactly the same approach as the government uses towards its own legal or tax publications, advice, and websites. If you don't like this disclaimer, then please direct your dissatisfaction at the government, or more specifically the IRS and the Founding Fathers, because they started this problem and we're just emulating their behavior. For proof, see:
"Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind." Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64 (1960). Great works of literature have frequently been produced by authors writing under assumed names. 4 Despite readers' curiosity and the public's interest in identifying the creator of a work of art, an author generally is free to decide whether or not to disclose her true identity. The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry. 5 Accordingly, an author's decision to remain anonymous, like other decisions concerning omissions or additions to the content of a publication, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.
The freedom to publish anonymously extends beyond the literary realm. In Talley, the Court held that the First Amendment protects the distribution of unsigned handbills urging readers to boycott certain Los Angeles merchants who were allegedly engaging in discriminatory employment practices. 362 U.S. 60 . Writing for the Court, Justice Black noted that "[p]ersecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all." Id., at 64. Justice Black recalled England's abusive press licensing laws and seditious libel prosecutions, and he reminded us that even the arguments favoring the ratification of the Constitution advanced in the Federalist Papers were published under fictitious names. Id., at 64-65. On occasion, quite apart from any threat of persecution, an advocate may believe her ideas will be more persuasive if her readers are unaware of her identity. Anonymity thereby provides a way for a writer who may be personally unpopular to ensure that readers will not prejudge her message simply because they do not like its proponent. Thus, even in the field of political rhetoric, where "the identity of the speaker is an important component of many attempts to persuade," City of Ladue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. ___, ___ (1994) (slip op., at 13), the most effective advocates have sometimes opted for anonymity. The specific holding in Talley related to advocacy of an economic boycott, but the Court's reasoning embraced a respected tradition of anonymity in the advocacy of political causes. 6 This tradition is perhaps best exemplified by the secret ballot, the hard-won right to vote one's conscience without fear of retaliation."
[McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d 426 (1995)]
The purpose of this disclaimer is not to undermine the credibility or accuracy of this ministry or website, but primarily to prevent retaliation from government caused by our commitment to exposing massive and ongoing illegal government activities. Such persecution and retaliation has been prevalent in the past and is likely to continue without this disclaimer.
“When the wicked arise, men hide themselves;
But when they perish, the righteous increase.”
[Prov. 28:28, Bible, NKJV]
“A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself,
But the simple pass on and are punished.”
[Prov. 22:3, Bible, NKJV]
“A prudent man foresees evil and hides himself; The simple pass on and are punished.”
[Prov. 27:12, Bible, NKJV]
“The simple believes every word,
But the prudent man considers well his steps.
A wise man fears and departs from evil,
But a fool rages and is self-confident.”
[Prov. 14:15, Bible,NKJV]
We do not sell anything connected with this website or the materials on it, nor do we condone or encourage unlawful behavior. Never have, never will. Consequently, nothing on this website may be truthfully characterized as false or injurious "commercial speech" or excluded from First Amendment free speech protections. We do not sell or promote any kind of investment or tax shelter, nor do we sell any kind of plan or arrangement under 26 U.S.C. §6700 (abusive tax shelters), which is guaranteed or likely to produce any kind of result against the IRS. As a matter of fact, the lawless, avaricious, ignorant, incompetent, and criminal misapplication of the federal tax laws by our government and the treasonous refusal of the judiciary to punish such despicable abuses virtually guarantees unpredictable and unjust results in the administration of our tax laws when the techniques described on this website are used. The definition of the term "person" used in 26 U.S.C. §6700 and found in 26 U.S.C. §6671(b) doesn't even apply to human beings such as us who don't work for corporations or partnerships within the federal United States (federal zone) as "public officers" and who thereby become "persons" and/or "natural persons". Furthermore, even though the government has attempted to use this statute to try to prosecute tax honesty advocates, they have done so illegally since there are no implementing regulations for this statute under the income tax "imposed" in section 1 of Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code and because they have done so against persons not domiciled within their territorial jurisdiction. See the following OFFSITE LINK for details on this SCAM:
IRS Due Process Meeting Handout, Form #03.008
All of the materials and information on this website have been prepared for educational and informational purposes only. Anyone and everyone may download and read our materials through this website and by doing so they consent to be subject to this Disclaimer Agreement. However, only those who satisfy all the criteria in this section may "use" our materials, which we define to include:
Those who satisfy all the following criteria may therefore "use" our materials as defined above:
If you meet any of the following criteria, then you may read but NOT "use" information or services available through this website and instead should consult http://www.irs.gov for materials or services you can "use":
This website and the educational materials on it were prepared for the use of the authors only by themselves. Any use of the terms "you", "your", "individuals", "people", "persons", "we recommend", "you should", "we" or "our readers", "readers", "those", "most Americans", "employers", "employees", and all similar references either on the website or in any verbal communications or correspondence with our readers is directed at the author(s) only and not other readers. The only exception to this rule is the Copyright/Software License Agreement below, which applies to everyone EXCEPT the author or ministry. All the authors are doing by posting these materials is sharing with others the results of their research and the play book they developed only for use by themselves. For instance, the bottom of every page of the Great IRS Hoax book says: "TOP SECRET: For Treasury/IRS Internal Use ONLY (FOUO)". Then in the "Disclaimer" at the beginning of the book, they define "Treasury" as the "Family Guardian Department of the Treasury". Consequently, how those materials impact or influence others is of no concern or consequence to the authors, and no motive may be attributed to any statements by the authors that would appear to be directed at third parties, because such statements are actually directed at themselves only. How readers use or apply the materials appearing here is entirely their choice and we assume no responsibility for how they act, or fail to act, based on the use of these materials. This approach is no different from that of the federal government, where the term "employee" in the Internal Revenue Code is made to "appear" like it applies to everyone, but in fact it only applies to federal agents, officers, and instrumentalities of the United States government, all of whom are described in 26 U.S.C. §6331(a). Any effort on the part of the government to redefine the words we use to mean anything other than what we define them to mean is an admission that we don't have First Amendment Rights, and such an act is an act of Treason punishable by death. How can a the authors have First Amendment rights if they can't even define the meaning of the words they use? How can the government claim that we have equal protection of the laws guaranteed under the Constitution (see Article 4, Section 2 and Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Declaration of Independence) if they can define the meaning of the words they use in their void for vagueness "codes", but we can't define the meaning of the words we use in our writings and must rely on some government lawyer or judge with a conflict of interest (in violation of 28 U.S.C. §144, 28 U.S.C. §455, and 18 U.S.C. §208) to define or redefine them? Hypocrisy! Click here for those who would question this paragraph or its reason for existence.
Under the "good samaritan rule", we cannot be subject to sanction or liability because we are not portraying our own words, but the words of anonymous third parties.
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."
[47 U.S.C. §230(c )(1)]
Click here for a detailed explanation of why this website and the owner(s), author(s) and the webmaster are entirely immune from federal and state jurisdiction relating to the materials posted here or any activities associated with them.
All use of the words "should", "shall", "must", or "we recommend" on this website or in any of the interactions of this ministry with the public shall mean "may at your choice and discretion". This is similar to the government's use of the same words. See Great IRS Hoax, sections 126.96.36.199 and 5.4.4 for further details.
The word "frivolous" as used on other websites in referring to this website shall mean "correct" and "truthful". Any attempts to call anything on this website incorrect or untruthful must be accompanied by authoritative, court-admissible evidence to support such a conclusion or shall be presumed by the reader to be untrustworthy and untruthful. All such evidence MUST derive EXCLUSIVELY from the consensual civil domicile of the defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(b). Parties subject to this agreement stipulate that any violation of this rule is a malicious prosecution and obstruction of justice in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1589(a)(3). Click here for details on domicile.
The term "federal income tax", in the context of this website, means the revenue scheme described in Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code as applied specifically and only to human beings who are not statutory "persons" or "individuals" under federal law and shall NOT refer to businesses. This website does NOT concern itself with businesses or corporations or artificial entities of any description.
The word "private" when it appears in front of other entity names such as "person", "individual", "business", "employee", "employer", etc. shall imply that the entity is: 1. A "nonresident" in relation to the state and federal government; 2. Not an entity defined within any state or federal statutory law; 3. Not engaged in a public office, "trade or busines" (per 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(26)); 4. Not consenting to contract with or acquire any status, privilege, or right under any state or federal franchise. For instance, the phrase "private employee" means a common law worker that is NOT the statutory "employe" defined within 26 U.S.C. §3401(c ) or 26 CFR §301.3401(c )-1 or any other federal or state law or statute.
The word "fact" means that which is admissible as evidence in a court of law BECAUSE ENACTED LAW makes it admissible AND because the speaker (other than us) INTENDED for it to be factual. It does NOT imply that we allege that it is factual, actionable, or even truthful. Any attempt by any government to make anything published on this website or anything said by members or officers of the ministry FACTUAL or ACTIONABLE in conflict with this disclaimer is hereby declared and stipulated by all members to be FRAUDULENT, PERJURIOUS, and a willful act of international terrorism and organized extortion.
The terms "law practice" or "practice of law": 1. Exclude any and all statutory references to said term in any state or federal statute; 2. Exclude any use of these terms found in any rule of court; 3. Exclude any litigation in which the party "practicing" is representing either a government instrumentality or acting as an officer for said instrumentality such as a statutory "taxpayer" (under the Internal Revenue Code), "driver" (under the vehicle code), "spouse" (under the family code), or "benefit recipient" (under any entitlement program, including Social Security); 4. Include litigation involving ONLY the protection of EXCLUSIVELY PRIVATE rights beyond the jurisdiction of any de jure government.
The word "sovereign" when referring to humans or governments means all the following:
The above requirements are a consequence of the fact that the foundation of the United States Constitution is EQUAL protection and EQUAL treatment. Any attempt to undermine equal rights and equal protection described above constitutes:
Other than the words defined above, all words used on this website and in the materials on it shall:
The only exception to this rule is that when a word is surrounded in quotation marks and preceded or succeeded by an indication of the legal definition upon which it is based, then and only then will it assume the legal definition.
The legal or statutory definitions for words used by this ministry in turn:
"When a statute includes an explicit definition, we must follow that definition, even if it varies from that term's ordinary meaning. Meese v. Keene, 481 U.S. 465, 484-485 (1987) ("It is axiomatic that the statutory definition of the term excludes unstated meanings of that term"); Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. at 392-393, n. 10 ("As a rule, `a definition which declares what a term "means" . . . excludes any meaning that is not stated'"); Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Lenroot, 323 U.S. 490, 502 (1945); Fox v. Standard Oil Co. of N.J., 294 U.S. 87, 95-96 (1935) (Cardozo, J.); see also 2A N. Singer, Sutherland on Statutes and Statutory Construction § 47.07, p. 152, and n. 10 (5th ed. 1992) (collecting cases). That is to say, the statute, read "as a whole," post at 998 [530 U.S. 943] (THOMAS, J., dissenting), leads the reader to a definition. That definition does not include the Attorney General's restriction -- "the child up to the head." Its words, "substantial portion," indicate the contrary."
The purpose of this requirement is to eliminate ALL presumptions from any legal proceeding about what we might write or say so that such false and unauthorized presumptions cannot be used to discredit or slander us or prejudice our rights or sovereignty. For instance, here are two examples:
|Statement from this website||Meaning|
|Wages are not taxable||Earnings from labor of a human being that do not fit the description of "wages" defined in 26 U.S.C. §3401(a) and 26 CFR §31.3401(a)-3 are not taxable without the consent of the subject.|
|"Wages" are taxable||Wages as defined in 26 U.S.C. §3401(a) and 26 CFR §31.3401(a)-3 ARE taxable because they fit the legal description of "wages".|
Key to Capitalization Conventions within Laws. Whenever you are reading a particular law, including the U.S. Constitution, or a statute, the Sovereign referenced in that law, who is usually the author of the law, is referenced in the law with the first letter of its name capitalized. For instance, in the U.S. Constitution the phrase “We the People”, “State”, and “Citizen” are all capitalized, because these were the sovereign entities who were writing the document residing in the States. This document formed the federal government and gave it its authority. Subsequently, the federal government wrote statutes to implement the intent of the Constitution, and it became the Sovereign, but only in the context of those territories and lands ceded to it by the union states. When that federal government then refers in statutes to federal “States”, for instance in 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(10) or 4 U.S.C. §110(d), then these federal “States” are Sovereigns because they are part of the territory controlled by the Sovereign who wrote the statute, so they are capitalized. Foreign states referenced in the federal statutes then must be in lower case. The sovereign 50 union states, for example, must be in lower case in federal statutes because of this convention because they are foreign states. Capitalization is therefore always relative to who is writing the document, which is usually the Sovereign and is therefore capitalized. The exact same convention is used in the Bible, where all appellations of God are capitalized because they are sovereigns: “Jesus" ”, “God”, “Him”, “His”, “Father”. These words aren’t capitalized because they are proper names, but because the entity described is a sovereign or an agent or part of the sovereign. The only exception to this capitalization rule is in state revenue laws, where the state legislators use the same capitalization as the Internal Revenue Code for “State” in referring to federal enclaves within their territory because they want to scam money out of you. In state revenue laws, for instance in the California Revenue and Taxation Code (R&TC) sections 17018 and 6017, “State” means a federal State within the boundaries of California and described as part of the Buck Act of 1940 found in 4 U.S.C. §§105-113. See the following URL to see what we mean: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=17001-18000&file=17001-17039.1
Terms in Quotation Marks: Whenever a term appears in quotation marks, we are using the statutory or regulatory definition of the term instead of the layman’s or dictionary definition. We do this to clarify which definition we mean and to avoid creating the kind of confusion with definitions that our government and the unethical lawyers who work in it are famous for. For instance, when we use say “employee”, we mean the statutory definition of that term found in 26 U.S.C. §3401(c ) and 26 CFR §31.3401(c )-1 rather than the common definition everyone uses, which means anyone who receives compensation for their labor. “Employees” are much more narrowly defined in the Internal Revenue Code to mean elected or appointed officers of the U.S. government only. We also put terms in quotation marks if they are new or we just introduced the term, to emphasize that we are trying to explain what the word means.
Geographical terms: The following geographical definitions apply in the reading of all law.
|Law||Federal constitution||Federal statutes||Federal regulations||State constitutions||State statutes||State regulations|
”We The People”
|“We The People”||State Government|
|“state”||Foreign country||Union state||Union state||Other Union state or federal government||Other Union state or federal government||Other Union state or federal government|
|“State”||Union state||Federal state||Federal state||Union state||Union state||Union state|
|“in this State” or “in the State”||NA||NA||NA||NA||Federal enclave within state||Federal enclave within state|
|“State” (State Revenue and taxation code only)||NA||NA||NA||NA||Federal enclave within state||Federal enclave within state|
|“several States”||Union states collectively||Federal “States” collectively||Federal “States” collectively||Federal “States” collectively||Federal “States” collectively||Federal “States” collectively|
|“United States”||states of the Union collectively||Federal United States**||Federal United States**||United States* the country||Federal United States**||Federal United States**|
What the above table clearly shows is that the word “State” in the context of federal statutes and regulations means (not includes!) federal States only under Title 48 of the U.S. Code, and these areas do not include any of the 50 Union States. This is true in most cases and especially in the Internal Revenue Code. The lower case word “state” in the context of federal statutes and regulations means one of the 50 union states, which are “foreign states”, and “foreign countries” with respect to the federal government as clearly explained in section 5.2.11 of the Great IRS Hoax book. In the context of the above, a “Union State” means one of the 50 Union states of the United States* (the country, not the federal United States**) mentioned in the Constitution for the United States of America.
 See California Revenue and Taxation Code, section 6017 at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=06001-07000&file=6001-6024
 See California Revenue and Taxation Code, section 17018 at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=17001-18000&file=17001-17039.1
 See, for instance, U.S. Constitution Article IV, Section 2.
In the final analysis, it simply doesn't matter who the authors are, because:
"It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice [including us] to silence our fears for the safety of our rights... Confidence [in ANY man] is everywhere the parent of despotism. Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence. It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power... Our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go... In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution [and positive law enacted consistent with the Constitution that acts as legal evidence]."
[Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798. ME 17:388]
The identity of the several authors who post materials on this website is considered secret, and this is done to protect them from becoming targets for persecution because of their decision to exercise their First Amendment rights. What we do is the equivalent of "anonymous pamphleteering". Everything on this website, in fact, is the equivalent of "anonymous pamphlets" as far as our participation is concerned. Even the Supreme Court has acknowledged that this approach is an honorable undertaking protected by the First Amendment:
“Under our Constitution, anonymous pamphleteering is not a pernicious, fraudulent practice, but an honorable tradition of advocacy and of dissent. Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority”
[McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d 426 (1995)]
"Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind." Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64 (1960). Great works of literature have frequently been produced by authors writing under assumed names. 4 Despite [ McINTYRE v. OHIO ELECTIONS COMM'N, ___ U.S. ___ (1995) , 7] readers' curiosity and the public's interest in identifying the creator of a work of art, an author generally is free to decide whether or not to disclose her true identity. The decision in favor of anonymity may be motivated by fear of economic or official retaliation, by concern about social ostracism, or merely by a desire to preserve as much of one's privacy as possible. Whatever the motivation may be, at least in the field of literary endeavor, the interest in having anonymous works enter the marketplace of ideas unquestionably outweighs any public interest in requiring disclosure as a condition of entry. 5 Accordingly, an author's decision to remain anonymous, like other decisions concerning omissions or additions to the content of a publication, is an aspect of the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment.
[ McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d 426 (1995)]
The freedom to publish anonymously extends beyond the literary realm. In Talley, the Court held that the First Amendment protects the distribution of unsigned handbills urging readers to boycott certain Los Angeles merchants who were allegedly engaging in discriminatory employment practices. 362 U.S. 60 . Writing for the Court, Justice Black noted that "[p]ersecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all." Id., at 64. Justice Black recalled England's abusive press licensing laws and seditious libel prosecutions, and he reminded us that even the arguments favoring the ratification of the Constitution advanced in the Federalist Papers were published under fictitious names. Id., at 64-65. On occasion, quite apart from any threat of persecution, an advocate may believe her ideas will be more persuasive if her readers are unaware of her identity. Anonymity thereby provides a way for a writer who may be personally unpopular to ensure that readers will not prejudge her message simply because they do not like its proponent. Thus, even in the field of political rhetoric, where "the identity of the speaker is an important component of many attempts to persuade," City of Ladue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. ___, ___ (1994) (slip op., at 13), the most effective advocates have sometimes opted for anonymity. The specific holding in Talley related to advocacy of an economic boycott, but the Court's reasoning embraced a respected tradition of anonymity in the advocacy of political causes. 6 This tradition is perhaps best exemplified [ McINTYRE v. OHIO ELECTIONS COMM'N, ___ U.S. ___ (1995) , 9] by the secret ballot, the hard-won right to vote one's conscience without fear of retaliation.
[ McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334, 115 S.Ct. 1511, 131 L.Ed.2d 426 (1995)]
"Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind."
[Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960)]
Since we are all God's agents and fiduciaries, then we want all glory and praise and thanks to go only to Him, and not us or any man. Since this is a charitable ministry, the Holy Bible also says this must be so:
"Take heed that you do not do your charitable deeds before men, to be seen by them. Otherwise you have no reward from your Father in heaven. Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites [lawyers and politicians] do in the synagogues and in the streets [and in jury trials, SCUM!], that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly."
[Matt. 6:1-4, Bible, NKJV]
Therefore, "secrecy", at least in the context of this ministry, is a "religious practice" and an exercise of political rights that is protected by the First Amendment (OFFSITE LINK) to the United State Constitution. Also, since the Constitution guarantees equal protection of the laws and because our opponent, the IRS, insists on protecting the identity of its employees in violation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), then we are entitled to "equal protection under the law" as mandated by section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment (OFFSITE LINK).
We therefore have a solemn and binding contract with our users and more importantly with God Himself not to reveal any information about our authors and contributors to any third party. In fulfillment of that binding contract:
The government cannot and will not be allowed to interfere with this contract we have with our authors, contributors, or Users, and the Supreme Court has said that the government is without authority to interfere with our private right to contract. See Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U.S. 700 (1878).
This website consists of privileged copyrighted information and computer software. Downloading any of the information here, using it in any legal proceeding against the copyright holder, communicating with the website administrator or copyright holder(s) constitutes unconditional consent by those engaging in such activities to abide by the mandatory Copyright and Software User License Agreement below and applying to all information appearing on this website and all forms of communications with us:
6.1 To admit THE ENTIRE website into evidence (except the rebuttal letters), including but not limited to the Tax Deposition CD, Form #11.301, the Family Guardian Website DVD, Form #11.103, the Great IRS Hoax book, etc.. No part of the website can be admitted without the ENTIRE website also being admitted and subject to examination by the jury.
6.2 That everything contained on this website is factual, truthful, actionable, and accurate IN THEIR CASE but not in the case of any other Member or officer of the Ministry.
6.3 To take complete and personal and exclusive responsibility for all consequences arising out of the nature of evidence they provide as being factual or actionable.
8.1 Users agree to litigate ONLY in a state court WITH a jury trial under the laws of the state and not the federal government, and to allow the jury to rule on BOTH the facts AND the law. No member of the jury or the judge may be either a "taxpayer", a statutory "U.S. citizen" pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1401, or be in receipt of any government benefit, to ensure that the trial is completely impartial. They also agree to allow us to say anything we want to the jury and call any witnesses we wish, and not to object to or rule out any of our testimony or our witnesses.
8.2 If the party using the materials off this website for litigation is any state or federal government, then they stipulate with the accused party to answer the Tax Deposition Questions in their entirety on a signed affidavit, and to provide at least an "Admit" or "Deny" answer to each question. Any question not answered by the government or its agents shall be deemed to be "Admit". They also stipulate to admit their response to the questions into evidence in any trial involving this website or the activities of the ministry or its officers, volunteers, or members.
8.3 None of the persons called as witnesses by either side at any trial involving this ministry may work for the federal or state government, receive retirement benefits from the government, receive financial benefits of any kind from the government, nor be "taxpayers", "statutory U.S. citizens", or statutory "U.S. residents". This will ensure that the all witnesses called will be completely objective, neutral, and unbiased.
8.4 Users and readers of our materials stipulate that their duty and allegiance to abide by this agreement is superior to their employment duties and any other agency they may claim to be exercising. Judicial, sovereign, or official immunity are therefore subordinate to the terms of this agreement. Readers and users of our materials agree that any and all lawsuits in which they are participants acting by or for or as witnesses for the Plaintiff shall be deemed to be filed by them personally, regardless of the party which they claim to be representing or which is named on the Complaint. For instance if a government attorney named "John Doe" quotes or uses our licensed materials in any legal proceeding in which he or she is the Plaintiff or an agent for the Plaintiff, and files the lawsuit in the name of the "United States", this agreement stipulates that the definition of "United States" or "United States of America" shall instead mean "John Doe" and John Doe stipulates that he is acting by and on his own behalf and not on the behalf of the government of the states united by and under the Constitution of the United States of America. This will ensure that the plaintiff or prosecuting attorney does not try to claim that he had no authority to bind the U.S. government to abide by this agreement. An important implication of this provision is that if John Doe prosecutes this case on paid time for the U.S. Government, then he can and will be fired and disciplined for conducting private business on company time.
11.1 Forfeit 50% of their pay as a federal public servant for the remainder of their life, and donate it to this ministry to help those who have been hurt by your failure to correct erroneous information provided on this website. This is in satisfaction of the IRS website's Mission Statement, which says in IRM Section 188.8.131.52 that the mission of the IRS is to "Provide Americas taxpayers top quality service by helping them [correctly] understand and meet their tax responsibilities with integrity and fairness all."
11.2 Pay the Author $10,000,000 prior to any litigation relating to false statements on this website and to not testify at all if they cannot pay the damages.
The purpose of the above license agreement is not to condone or advocate unlawful behavior of any kind by this ministry, its officers, or its members, but instead to:
"The makers of our Constitution undertook to secure conditions favorable to the pursuit of happiness. They recognized the significance of man's spiritual nature, of his feelings and of his intellect. They knew that only a part of the pain, pleasure and satisfactions of life are to be found in material things. They sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone - the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
[Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 478 (1928) (Brandeis, J., dissenting); see also Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210 (1990)]
Therefore, it cannot be said that the above license agreement has any illegal purpose whatsoever that might render it unenforceable in a court of law.
In consideration of the valuable copyrighted and licensed information and computer software available on this website, the reader/user and this ministry jointly agree on all of the following facts related to the ministry and the offerings of the ministry. Those who don't unconditionally agree and stipulate to these terms should not be viewing or using this website or obtaining or using any of the materials offered here.
The data on this website is the collaborative experience, contributions, and research of various websites, legal books, tax documents, researchers, associates, attorneys, CPA's, etc. and does not constitute legal advice. This website constitutes an expression of "religious speech" and "political speech" protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. See the free pamphlet entitled "Political Jurisdiction" (OFFSITE LINK) for details on what "political speech" is. The materials on this site are not legal advice or legal opinions on any specific matters. Legal advice involves applying the law to your specific and unique situation, which is your responsibility and not our responsibility. Transmission of the information is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship between the author(s) and the reader. The opinions expressed on this website and the documents it displays are those of the author(s), or the researcher(s) or content providers and the only authorized audience are those same author(s) and researcher(s). You must validate and verify the accuracy of this information for yourself with your own research, legal education, experience, and the advice of a competent legal and/or tax professional who is NOT licensed by a corrupted government to gag them from telling you the truth and create a conflict of interest. Readers should not act upon this information without first getting fully educated using the materials provided here and elsewhere.
The ONLY sources which may be relied upon to completely and accurately represent the policies of the owner of this website consist in the following:
You as the user agree not to hold us to a higher standard of accountability than the IRS or the government itself. The IRS claims in section 184.108.40.206.8 of its own Internal Revenue Manual that you cannot rely on its publications, which include its tax preparation forms. The courts have also said that you cannot rely on the IRS' telephone support personnel or its Internal Revenue Manual. Therefore, we will not be held to a higher standard than the IRS for our publications, statements, or actions, which include everything on this website, or for anything we say or write. We make all the same disclaimer statements about our publications, statements, and support as the IRS, in fact, which means we can have no liability for anything we produce. Click here for our article on this subject.
"Behold, the wicked brings forth iniquity;
Yes, he conceives trouble and brings forth falsehood [in their publications and their phone support],
He made a pit and dug it out,
And has fallen into the ditch [this disclaimer] which he made.
His trouble shall return upon his own head,
And his violent dealing shall come down on his own [deceitful] crown."
[Psalm 7:14-16, Bible, NKJV]
Everything appearing on this website is based entirely on publications, forms, statements, laws, and regulations published or made by the government. If you find that the information is erroneous, then you should be suing the government, not us. Furthermore, we would appreciate you promptly notifying both us and the government of their mistake so that both of us may prevent any harm from the government's mistake. Furthermore, if the government wishes to sue or prosecute this ministry or its officers for exercising its First Amendment rights, then they MUST sue the principal, and not the agent. We are acting entirely and only as a fiduciary for God himself, and so you need to sue God and not us for the statements and actions of this ministry in obedience to God's laws and calling on this ministry, and doing so will cause you to prosecute yourself, not only because of the Copyright License agreement connected with all ministry materials, but also because you are tampering with federal witnesses of extensive criminal activity by specific public servants.
We make no guarantees about the effectiveness of anything appearing on this website, nor do we profit in any way from the information presented. This website is strictly offered as a free educational public service designed to:
The materials on this website have been extensively reviewed for accuracy by the Dept. of Justice, the IRS, and the Federal Judiciary and nothing was found herein that is violative of any law, false, fraudulent, or injurious. Click here for details. We invite and always have invited anyone from the government or law enforcement to rebut the overwhelming evidence found on this website that specific agencies and persons working within the government are engaging in illegal and injurious behavior. We insist that anyone in government contact us within ten days through our Contact Us page as soon as they find anything that is illegal, injurious, false, or fraudulent or forever be estopped beyond that point from pursuing any kind of criminal prosecution or enforcement activity. The noteworthy failure of the government to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of our materials.
If the government wants to assert that any of the religious and political statements that are not factual appearing on this website are in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must meet that burden of proof consistent with the following:
The best way to prove us wrong is simply to:
Your submission will be promptly posted on our website for all to read and will be implemented if sufficient evidence exists to prove our materials inconsistent with reality.
If the government believes that our materials suggest, aide, abet, or sanction unlawful activity, they as public officers have a fiduciary duty to us as the public to bring that to our attention immediately so that it can be promptly fixed. A failure to rebut our materials promptly or provide legally admissible evidence that they are wrong:
2.1 Conspiracy to defraud the government pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §371.
2.2 Accessory after the fact pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3.
2.3 Misprision of felony pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §4.
Remember: Every tax crime has willfulness as a prerequisite. You must inform us something is wrong before it can BE wrong, and that notification MUST be in court admissible, affidavit form signed under penalty of perjury with your real legal birthname, agreeing to take responsibility personally if your information is wrong, and providing the address where you can be personally served with legal papers if in fact you are wrong or fraudulent.
This website was established to prevent terrorism, not promote it. We define any attempt to deprive anyone of life, liberty or property without their express consent manifested in a way that only they define as an act of terrorism. We believe that there are only two types of governments:
Original (pre-Orwellian) Definition of
the Word "Terrorism"
Funk and Wagnalls New
Practical Standard Dictionary (1946)
For a representation of the kind of government terrorism we oppose, see:
Statism and Terrorism - your government is terrorist.
For a list of specific government terrorist activites we oppose, see:
Ministry Introduction, Form #12.014, pp. 3-9 (OFFSITE LINK)
THIS WEBSITE CONDEMNS ANY AND ALL VIOLENCE, VIOLENCE PLANNING, VIOLENT RADICALIZATION AND OR THOUGHT CRIME, AND AS SUCH CONTAINS NO SUCH INFORMATION OR LINKS TO SUCH INFORMATION.
This website is in full compliance with H.R. 1955 , and Section 318, 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada and as such condemns and does not retain any information, plans, support, of a terrorist or violent propaganda, and or radicalization nature, and does not conduct, plan, or retain any forms of violent thoughts, feelings, impulses, moods, subconscious thought, primal urges, sexual cravings, hunger pains, restless leg twitches, rapid eye flutters, and or skin tone blemishes which may be mistook for a pre-anger flush. All fonts, typesets, font colors of a red nature are not - *NOT* to be mistaken for a angry tone or mistakenly linked to a violent radicalization agenda. Source files of interviews or MP3 files are strictly those of the authors and do NOT reflect the intent, mood or thoughts of the author(s) of this website.
This website does not enforce or support hate crimes, violent thoughts, deeds or actions against any particular person(s), group, entity, government, mob, paramilitary force, intelligence agency, overpaid politician, head of state, queen, dignitary, ambassador, spy, spook, soldier, bowl cook, security flunky, contractor, dog, cat or mouse, Wal-Mart employee, amphibian, reptile, and or deceased entity without a PB (Physical Body).
The GOVERNMENT crimes documented on this website fall within the ambit of 18 U.S.C. §2381: Treason. The penalty mandated by law for these crimes is DEATH. We demand that actors in the Department of Justice for both the states and the federal government responsible for prosecuting these crimes of Treason do so as required by law. A FAILURE to do so is ALSO an act of Treason punishable by death. Since murder is not only a crime, but a violent crime, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1111, then the government itself can also be classified as terrorist. It is also ludicrous to call people who demand the enforcement of the death penalty for the crimes documented as terrorists. If that were true, every jurist who sat on a murder trial in which the death penalty applied would also have to be classifed as and prosecuted as a terrorist. Hypocrites.