Friday, October 07, 2005

Hank Goltz interviews Cindy Neun

20 Old Comments:

Lets spread the word.

Go to:

Create an account and "digg" the story. The more times its dug, the better the chances are of getting it as front page news on the site.

This is a high-volume, tech-oriented site. The audiance is full of people who seek truth in complexity- and the tax code is that.

Post this link and message wherever you can. Spread the word, lets see the hit counts go through the roof!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/07/2005 6:57 PM  


Sec. 530B. Ethical standards for attorneys for the Government

(a) An attorney for the Government shall be subject to State laws and rules, and local Federal court rules, governing attorneys in each State where such attorney engages in that attorney's duties, to the same extent and in the same manner as other attorneys in that State.

(b) The Attorney General shall make and amend rules of the Department of Justice to assure compliance with this section.

(c) As used in this section, the term "attorney for the Government" includes any attorney described in section 77.2(a) of part 77 of title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations and also includes any independent counsel, or employee of such a counsel, appointed under chapter 40.

By Anonymous Dale Eastman, at 10/07/2005 7:15 PM  

The problem assumes the greatest importance when we consider that we are probably only at the threshold of an age in which the technological possibilities of mind control are likely to grow rapidly and what may appear at first as innocuous or beneficial powers over the personality of the individual will be at the disposal of government. The greatest threats to human freedom probably still lie in the future. The day may not be far off when authority, by adding appropriate drugs to our water supply or by some other similar device, will be able to elate or depress, stimulate or paralyze the minds of whole populations for its own purposes. If bills of rights are to remain in any way meaningful, it must be recognized early that their intention was certainly to protect the individual against all vital infringements of his liberty and that therefore they must be presumed to contain a general clause protecting against government’s interference those immunities which individuals in fact have enjoyed in the past.
~ Friedrich Hayek, Constitution of Liberty

Thanks, and Your Welcome, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/07/2005 7:25 PM  

(\ ,__.__,'/)
_.-'-.( d\--/b ).-'-._
/' .-' ' .---.' '-. \ '\
/' .'(= (_) =) '. '\
/' .', -.__.-.__.-' ,. '\
( .'.' V V ;'' , )
( :: '-,__.-.__,-' :: )
( / :. .: \ )
'( ) ( : : ) ( )'
'( ) ( :. .: ) ( )`
( ( \ :.' .: / ) )
( ) \ :. '.: / ( )
( ) \ :. '.: / ( )
(' (_ ) :._'_.: ( _) )
\ ' _) .' '. (_' /
\ '_) / .'" ' "'. \ (_' /
'" \ ( ) / "'
\ \ / /
......"""'''-- _) (_--'''"""......
(_(_(__)_-'"' '"'-_)__)_)_)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/07/2005 7:29 PM  

“CRIMESTOP" means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, or failing to perceive logical errors, or misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to (an authority) and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction... CRIMESTOP, in short, means Protective Stupidity.” Geo. Orwell

Crimestop is most popular among bureaucrats. Ask a pointed question of the IRS like what section of the code unequivocally makes me, an American, liable to pay the un-apportioned income tax? OR If no one can claim exempt why is it on the form? You will most assuredly receive a pamphlet that has absolutely noting to do with your question. CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/07/2005 7:44 PM  

The 8:29pm post has, so far, been one of the most intelligent I've seen on this thread.

By Anonymous Frank Buckner, at 10/07/2005 9:33 PM  

Frank Buckner said...

Same O Same O

The 8:29pm post has, so far, been one of the most intelligent I've seen on this thread.

Little things amuse little minds.
I'm sure I speak for others when I say we are happy you are amused.

By Anonymous Dale Eastman, at 10/07/2005 10:03 PM  

It is going to take more than people seeing what is going on with this case. We are dealing with a government that believes it can do what it likes. They believe they have unlimited power. I am reminded of the Rodney King Verdict. THEY TOOK ACTION. In England when their government decided to pass the unfair poll tax THEY TOOK ACTION. No one pays that tax in England. Our government has decided on a course of tyranny. Dawson has decided to throw the laws of our nation out the window WE HAD BETTER TAKE ACTION. We must be prepared to suffer for our beliefs. On the day of Irwins verdict we had better be ready in mass from all over this country. We must let this bunch of thugs that call themselves our government know that we will not take anymore abuse. Unlike all the other high profile tax trials where justice has not been met this one is the most crucial. Here is a man that has obeyed the law to the letter wrote several books that interpret the law and no one to date has stood up and said this is not a fact here are the laws that prove him wrong. When ever he has tried to present the law they have said irrelevant, irrelevant, irrelevant. WELL I TELL YOU THAT OUR GOVERNMNET IS IRRELEVANT AND IF WE WANT ATTENTION FROM THIS TRIAL WE HAD BETTER CREATE SOME ATTENTION.


By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/07/2005 11:23 PM  

So are Cindy's allegations in her palimony petition about Irwin all true?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 8:50 AM  

Frank Buckner just blew it big time!!! Hahaha, he has just ruined anything and everything he may post, if he dares, in the future...from now on he will have to become anonymous and then it will be easy to decern his style.

"The 8:29pm post has, so far, been one of the most intelligent I've seen on this thread."

He refers to a cartoon type drawing. He proves his hatred for America and George Washington and James Madison for their quotes are posted and he makes no mention that they would be considered more intelligent than the cartoon.

Bye Frank..........CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 9:00 AM  

With regard to Cindy's allegations - I've witnessed many people, and famous people and well educated people and rich people and poor people and of all race and religions... do odd things when emotionally hurt upon a "breakup" and act outside their norm even to the point of murder. People tend to say things when emotionally upset...heck read some the posts on this site to witness lots of emotional upset and name calling and other mentally unbalanced make the call. CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 9:05 AM  

So it gives her a "right" to lie under oath.

Or was what she was saying really true?


By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 9:35 AM  

No one said she had a, as you put it, "right to lie under oath." Fact is you don't have "rights" for anything under your form of government, a legislative democracy. You elected to live with as you do and most likely did so without knowing and by fraud and deception for it was not disclosed to you what your government did up until the privacy act of the mid 70's. Then only a few have been able to figure it out.

So I believe the term "right" is mis-stated.

I am curious though, why do you not also ask if and where the judge is correct in his treatment and manner toward the defendants?

I know that two wrongs don't make a right...only three lefts do, but a bit of application of equal standard would be most helpful for those that may need to quell their fear, hate filled emotions, desire to be on the current winning team, need to slam others or whatever the problem is for the individual.

Cindy is not a saint and subject to all human sin.

The question to ask yourselves...Is the judge a saint? How bout the prosecution? How bout yourselves?
I know I'm not. Respectfully, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 1:26 PM  

To all the complainers, whiners, and name callers who act as though Irwin and Cindy did something to actually bring harm to YOU… Why is that? Why are you so desirous to see people hurt that didn’t do a thing to hurt you?

Law does not compel performance unless someone is harmed. Contracts compel performance. So when you identify the harm perpetrated upon you, as an individual, then and only then can you make claims against the defendants? If Cindy’s suit against Irwin has somehow harmed you, show it and prove it.

AND - when you can clearly identify the contract that you and everyone else is under which compels performance to the government and you can identify how your country and form of government was converted from a Republic to a Legislative Democracy and you identify who has exclusive legislative jurisdiction upon you, a so called American with no rights, then you will alter your negative thoughts and feelings toward the defendants and become scared to death of what can and will happen to YOU! Peace and love, CJ

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 1:39 PM  

"Law does not compel performance unless someone is harmed."

In the first four weeks of this trial, we saw witness after witness after witness who described their bankruptcy, liens, loss of employment, divorce, etc. because they believed in the crapola sold by Irwin Schiff and gang.

In comparison, Irwin can't introduce a single defense witness who told him his program worked. This from a guy who claims that 500,000 people have read his book.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 2:51 PM  

Lets get it straight they were illegal liens and levies. The IRS had no delegated authority from the Secretary. They are barred from dealing with income taxes by IRC 7608. They use code sections from CFR 27 to enforce income tax which is under CFR 26. The penalties they impose are from CFR 27 which is alcohol,tobacco, and firearms.It is the IRS that has comitted fraud and broken the law, so don't blame Irwin for what the government does.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/08/2005 4:26 PM  

Frank Buckner just blew it big time!!! Hahaha, he has just ruined anything and everything he may post, if he dares, in the future...from now on he will have to become anonymous and then it will be easy to decern his style

Really "CJ"? Perhaps you can learn to "discern" post styles too, it'll serve you well.

By Anonymous Frank Buckner, at 10/08/2005 7:53 PM  

Dear Friends and Foe:
I do not lie as the evidence presented in this trial proves. I have only done the things I had to do as the circumstances beyond my control required in order to survive. Lying is not one of those things. If you are one who pre-judges without enough information to make an intelligent and relevant decision, one day you will find the truth of the decision and words you propound. This will be your private and personal path to enlightenment.

Whether you know anything about me or not; whether you care to know anything about me or not; or, whether you care to know anything about anything with certainty or not is not my problem or responsibility. I will only say for whatever it is worth that cetain facts and circumstances are not always what they appear to be by first glance... Knowledge requires more than a glimpse in passing. When people act (including speak) without fully investigating the situation upon which they have prematurely adjudged, they will surely learn a valuable lesson and sometimes that lesson comes with some pain. This happened to me, once very judgmental of people who seemed to take more of social welfare programs than what I deemed appropriate and needful without investigationg the inner workings of the addictive organizations. Now, I pay for my ignorance and prejudicial thought processes based upon that ignorance. It is okay. I "made my bed"... Judge me however you wish for my heart aches for the truth of the things I have learned about people since regaining the use of my legs and this current plight is all I can carry by myself.

For everyone with life altering lessons and serious drama of their own, whether it is your health, your family problems or legal battles, I wish you well and I promise not to persecute or to judge you based upon my limited knowledge of your situations.

Thank you for your interest in the case of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. IRWIN SCHIFF, CYNTHIA NEUN & LAWRENCE COHEN, for that case is the case which will effect you all whether you know it or not.

Best regards,
Cynthia Smith-Neun

By Blogger cynthia, at 10/10/2005 9:20 AM  

Ms. Neun,

Do not concern yourself with these cretins.

They make personal attacks and satisfy themselves that somehow they have posted substance on the law.

You just take care of business in Dawson's corrupt court. Oh, and help Irwin with those sacks of kangaroo feed.

We'll take care of "discussions" with these idiots on the blog.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10/10/2005 11:27 AM  


"I'm sure I speak for others when I say we are happy you are amused."

Hey, I have to admit it was a nice break from the usual bile. But I guess that's kind of selfish of me; his benefit to the truth is in inverse proportion to his calmness and rationality, so tactically we're better off with Top-Poppin' Angry Frank than we are with Distracted, Easily-Amused Frank. But I guess *that* is not very considerate of *me* toward *him*. {sigh} I need sleep to figure this out.

Anonymous cowardly silly person said...

"In the first four weeks of this trial, we saw witness after witness after witness who described their bankruptcy, liens, loss of employment, divorce, etc. because they believed in the crapola sold by Irwin Schiff and gang."

(a) How has this been determined? (b) It's dangerous to be right when the gummint is wrong, and anyone who tells you otherwise is misleading you. That said, dangerous doesn't necessarily mean irredeemably so.

"In comparison, Irwin can't introduce a single defense witness who told him his program worked."

(a) How has this been determined? (b) Irwin can't get past "ahem" without an objection sustained by the "judge" before the persecutor even speaks it.


"Knowledge requires more than a glimpse in passing."

Not for Quatloosers! They are intellectual titans far above us mere mortals. (Just ask them.)

By Blogger Jamie, at 10/13/2005 1:26 PM