It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

7000 Citizens Violently Threatened By The State Of Indiana

page: 20
38
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by American-philosopher
I can see more states doing this as more budgets are cut and more revenue will need to be retrived. This almost goes along the lines of that commerical in pennslyvania


HAHHAHAHAH

HOW ORWELLIAN IS THIS




posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Frightening. Someone has a very sick sense of humor.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

The article specifically says "arrest" - I can read - I have two eyes.

Thus, I did not lie.

Claiming the article is wrong does not make me a liar. If I knew the article was wrong and then proceeded to say they sent out arrest warrants, I would be a liar. Of course, this is not what happened.


The article was corrected the same day it was published to present the truth; it eliminated any reference to "arrest."
Hundreds Clog CCB After Delinquent Tax Warnings Sent

If you'd read through the comments, you'd have noted the response from the Dept. of Revenue:

These tax warrants are civil warrants, not criminal (arrest) warrants. The Indiana Department of Revenue, as always, welcomes and encourages WRTV to contact us and verify facts related to stories it airs to the public.
Civil warrants allow the county sheriff to garnish a taxpayer's wages, levy a taxpayer's bank account(s) and/or auction off personal property in an effort to collect on delinquent taxes.
The Indiana Department of Revenue issued more than 80,000 tax bills to individuals across the state in July, giving taxpayers notification and time under Indiana law to resolve their bills before they escalated to a warrant stage. Taxpayers could pay their bills in full, or use the Department's newly launched payment plan tool online to set up their own payment arrangements prior to the deadline date stated on their tax notifications.

We issued a news release about this information in early July.

Stephanie McFarland, APR
Director of Public Relations
Indiana Department of Revenue
317.234.3793

IDOR
(originally posted by UntOppableOne: www.abovetopsecret.com...)

You could've verified the report by checking your source with the Dept. of Revenue:
Stephanie McFarland's Facebook wall

Or, you could've chosen to see what "tax warrants really are:
Dept. of Revenue - Tax Warrants

Or, you could've checked the Press Release that Ms. McFarland referred to in the original article's comments:

Bills that are not paid by the due date could convert into tax warrants and be turned over to the county sheriff or a professional collection agency, as is allowed by law. Both county sheriffs and professional collection agencies have the option to levy bank accounts, garnish wages or even auction off personal property in an effort to collect on unpaid tax debts that have converted to warrants.

www.in.gov...

Or, you could've gone to either of the links I posted in my first response:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In any of these instances, you would have seen that the title of your thread: "7000 Citizens Violently Threatened By The State Of Indiana," was completely baseless in fact.

It is truly regrettable that ATS members fail or refuse to perform even perfunctory analysis of a story, article or blog before accepting it as fact, then ruthlessly defending an unfounded position with name calling and worse.

deny ignorance

jw

[edit on 29-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by truthquest
 

Do you even read what you post?


She should then have every right to sue me in court for every penny she is owed that I fail to pay her in full. If I owe her $75 for a message, then I have to pay Jane Smith the promised $75. If people make a promise to pay someone money, then they should keep their promise... not just part of it, but all of it.


And if she gets a judgment against you because you did not pay her, then she has the right to what? Garnishment!!

So, why isn't anyone else entitled to the same rights? Including the state.

Your "logic" is laughable.


Wage garnishment is a simple parlor trick that disguises the unprovoked violence of the state.


That is entirely meaningless, and completely contradicts your example of the $75 you owe Jane agter she wins in court.


If my logic is so laughable why did you fail to make an argument against it, and instead seem to actually agree with it when saying Jane Smith will win her court case when her promised wages are not paid in full? I'll have to repeat this again more clearly so you have a better chance to refute the logic. The logic is this:

1. Taking without asking is stealing.
2. The only time stealing is acceptable is when someone causes harm that should be compensated with money, but the violator refuses to compensate the victim in full.
3. Wage garnishment involves stealing money from someone who may have never been declared guilty of any crime or harm. For example, if I promise Jane Smith $75 for a message and then the IRS orders me to pay them $25 citing Jane Smith's debts (as if I were responsible for paying someone else's debt!), the IRS has just stolen $25 of my money.

Owership requires some level of control. If Jane Smith never receives the $25 due to wage garnishment, she never has any level of control over that money. Therefore the IRS has not taken $25 from her, they have taken it from her employer which then means the employer has had $25 stolen from them without just cause sine they are not the one's who owe the $25.

Since the logic is so flawed I'm sure it will be very little trouble for you to highlight the actual flaw. But on the other hand you seem to imply the court would rule in Jane Smith's favor that her contract was violated which would support my logic.

Shockingly, you were right about the warrants not being arrest warrants, which few people expected. So go ahead and take a shot at my logic too, and who knows, lighting may strike twice.



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


A lie is saying something that you know to be false that is actually true. Therefore, when you engaged in name-calling (calling mnemeth a liar) you were wrong. mnemeth was incorrect about the arrest warrant is not a liar. Being wrong and being a liar are worlds apart. If mnemeth called you any names that is too bad, but since you definitely called mnemeth a liar you should practice what you preach.

[edit on 29-8-2010 by truthquest]



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


So you are blaming me because I pulled a story from a credible news source that said 7000 people were afraid of being arrested so they packed into a small city building trying to pay their taxes? This is somehow my fault? I have "a perfunctory duty" to investigate every single claim made by a news source before I am allowed to comment on it?

The article WAS NOT edited the same day to remove any reference to arrest - see paragraph 2 line 3 - hence, you are the liar.

Any way you slice it, there is a gun involved.

Property seizure requires weapons.

If the bank refuses to comply with the account seizures, people with guns show up and raid them.

If the homeowners refuse to give up their property to tax auction, nice men with guns show up to throw them out.

If the business owners refuse to deduct taxes from their employees, nice men with guns show up to make them comply.

And on and on and on.

So really it doesn't matter how you look at it, because at the ultimate end of the line, there is a gun.

If a person runs their own business and doesn't report taxes, they get raided by armed men.



[edit on 29-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Demoncreeper
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Arrest

An arrest is the act of depriving a person of his or her liberty usually in relation to the investigation and prevention of crime or harm to others and oneself as well.

No mention of violence there.

Violence is only encountered at the choice of the arrested.

Edited to add...

Pay your damn taxes


[edit on 24-8-2010 by Demoncreeper]


I think this statement might be the funniest thing I have ever read on ATS... Wake up DC, maybe fifty sixty years ago that definition of arrest could be applied but not in the year 2010.

Or are you actually going to attempt to argue that the person being arrested always makes the choice to encounter violence from the police. This is flat out crazy, police routinely use excessive force these days in response to even the most minor affront , you can bet your bottom dollar that if you even so much as disagree with the wrong officer you will be treated to a nice dose of "violence" from the boys in blue.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by daddio
 


Sent that in over a month ago and haven't heard anything since. Haven't paid property taxes or a mortgage for almost a year now.


No doubt they are still passing that around the various offices and branches.

They probably haven't stopped laughing long enough to take any serious action.


From reading your other posts, you have no idea of what "law" really is. A statute, ordinance, regulation, code and such are NOT LAWS.

They are not enforceable on the Sovereign people, and the legislature CAN NOT legislate TO the people but only FOR the people.

Please get an education before you post trash, as above.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by daddio

From reading your other posts, you have no idea of what "law" really is. A statute, ordinance, regulation, code and such are NOT LAWS.

They are not enforceable on the Sovereign people, and the legislature CAN NOT legislate TO the people but only FOR the people.

Please get an education before you post trash, as above.


Precisely daddio! I see people spouting nothing but the same tired rhetoric that has been pounded into their heads by both MSM as well as the other beaten down sheep.

Statute this, regulation that, blah, blah, blah.

If it is LAW that I have to pay taxes on my income, please tell me where I can find said LAW. Good luck!



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
The State of Indiana took the unusual step of issuing 7,000 violent threats of arrest against its citizens in a single day for failing to pay their taxes (protection money).




People should be arrested if they dont pay taxes. I live in a very exclusive area with street sweepers and cops on foot. If these people dont pay their taxes then these guys wont have jobs and when I walk out of my building it will be very dirty in the streets. It is not a doormans responsibility to clean the streets. These people need to start supporting their state or leave if they dont like it. Personally I think all of them sould be thrown in jail to teach them a lesson that taxes and peoples jobs should be taken seriously and are not a joke.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tigpoppa
 


If you DO NOT understand WHO is supposed to pay the vast majority of the taxes in this world, please do some research.

Corporations are GIVEN the privilege to exist BY the people. They are to be so taxed as to cover the costs of roads, street signs and clean-up. THEY, the corporations, use the roadways FOR profit and gain, they use OUR natural resources for profit and gain, THEY, the corporations must pay for doing business, they make a tidy profit from you and I and they must share the wealth by covering the expenses of the things THEY use.

Got it yet?

You pay an excise tax on gasoline, this also pays for the roadways. Got it? You pay a sales tax on your auto and on the parts you buy to repair it, you pay a tax on the service of it. ALL this pays for the roadways.

SO.....where does all the other tax money go? That's right, into the politicians pockets to keep YOU duped and paying for the Corporate Crooks and their families to live happily ever after, while YOU and I suffer the burden.

Isn't that what the founding fathers wanted? Isn't that why the Delaration of Independence was written? Ever read it?

I thought not.

Flesh and blood, living souls can NOT be TAXED, period.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthquest
reply to post by jdub297
 
A lie is saying something that you know to be false that is actually true. Therefore, when you engaged in name-calling (calling mnemeth a liar) you were wrong. mnemeth was incorrect about the arrest warrant is not a liar. Being wrong and being a liar are worlds apart. If mnemeth called you any names that is too bad, but since you definitely called mnemeth a liar you should practice what you preach.


I have never called the author of the thread a liar.

The title of the thread is a lie; a false statement of fact.

Posts that assert that 7000 people showed up at the City County Building have NO BASIS ANYWHERE, and are false statements of fact.

Posts that state that the same people were subject to arrest are similarly false.

Posts can be a lie. It is up to others to judge the character and motivations of the post-er.

I have challenged false posts and statements without name calling.

Most people understand that a false statement of fact is a lie.

The author is free to voice opinions; but, false statements invite repudiation.

Sorry.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by jdub297
 
So you are blaming me because I pulled a story from a credible news source that said 7000 people were afraid of being arrested so they packed into a small city building trying to pay their taxes?


The story did not say that; it said that "hundreds" came downtown, and that 7000 "received warnings."


This is somehow my fault?


Yes, it is.


I have "a perfunctory duty" to investigate every single claim made by a news source before I am allowed to comment on it?


No. "Perfunctory" appears to be the standard you've adopted for your own validation.

Moreover, you did not "comment" on it; you adopted it and exaggerated it. No excuse for that.


The article WAS NOT edited the same day to remove any reference to arrest - see paragraph 2 line 3 - hence, you are the liar.


Here's the article's site:

Hundreds Clog CCB After Delinquent Tax Warnings Sent
7,000 Warrants Issued


POSTED: 11:58 am EDT August 23, 2010
UPDATED: 6:29 pm EDT August 23, 2010
www.theindychannel.com...


Any way you slice it, there is a gun involved.

Property seizure requires weapons.


Nope. I "seized" $28,325.44 today from a NY corporation that refused to pay 2005 property taxes. No guns, no threats. Your assertion is patently false.


If the bank refuses to comply with the account seizures, people with guns show up and raid them.


1st, your statement is pure fantasy.
2nd, no bank has ever refused a lawful Court order I've sent.
3rd, the Constitution provides remedies for wrongful detention.
4th, there are no guns involved in civil enforcement; it's all about the bucks in the account.


If the homeowners refuse to give up their property to tax auction, nice men with guns show up to throw them out.


No, they don't. Title passes to the4 successful bidder. It is up to them to deal with the squatters, if any.


If the business owners refuse to deduct taxes from their employees, nice men with guns show up to make them comply.


No, they don't. Deductions are a choice between the employee and the employer; if the employer chooses not to make deductions, then the employee keeps the funds to set aside herself.

I've chosen to go "tax exempt" for almost 30 years. None of my bosses have been shot.


If a person runs their own business and doesn't report taxes, they get raided by armed men.


Failure to report is different from failure to pay what you've reported.

This thread is predicated upon upon an article about people who failed to pay, not those evading reporting.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by truthquest
 

A lie is saying something that you know to be false that is actually true.


If you say it, and know it is "false," how can your statement be "actually true?"

I am so glad that I do not live in any universe in which this statement actually makes sense.

Do you even read what you post?



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by daddio
 

From reading your other posts, you have no idea of what "law" really is. A statute, ordinance, regulation, code and such are NOT LAWS.


Please send me a transcript of the next court appearance in which you offer this argument in a court of "law."

I can't wait.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


Yeah, its all fun and games.

No guns are involved in tax enforcement.

The sad thing is people actually believe your propaganda.

New York State:
www.tax.state.ny.us...

Approximately 2,900 civil violations resulted as well as 475 misdemeanor and felony criminal counts.


Of course, I could go on listing articles indefinitely for every state and every county and every federal tax program and every federal regulatory fee and on and on and on.

There are criminal penalties for tax evasion that result in armed men putting a gun to your head.

To argue otherwise is pure Orwellian fantasy.

To argue that the State would be able to collect taxes without the threat of violence is utterly ridiculous on its face. Frankly its so utterly ridiculous that I can't even believe I'm in here wasting my time arguing the point with you. Everyone with even a shred of common sense understands guns are involved in tax enforcement.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

To argue that the State would be able to collect taxes without the threat of violence is utterly ridiculous on its face.


Please explain that to the millions who pay property, income, excise, gasoline, sales, alcohol and tobacco taxes every day WITHOUT threats.


Frankly its so utterly ridiculous that I can't even believe I'm in here wasting my time arguing the point with you.


Oh, I understand: you intend to delude and mislead.

What, did you run out of news stories to misquote or bastardize?.


Everyone with even a shred of common sense understands guns are involved in tax enforcement.


The pathetically frightened believe that if they speak up, they will be struck down. This is the classic argument of the willfully deceitful.

There are many avenues of contesting "tax enforcement;" none of which involve guns or violence.

Funny how someone professedly against "guns and violence" seems to think they are the ONLY resolution of dispute.

I've yet to see anyone, other than you, say here (or anywhere) that government violence is necessary to the enjoyment of social stability.

Sounds a little inflammatory, and unrealistic, to me.

[edit on 30-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

There are criminal penalties for tax evasion ,,,


And?

This thread is not about "evasion," but failure to pay what was already determined due.

You are getting desperate, and more pathetic.



[edit on 30-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 

To argue that the State would be able to collect taxes without the threat of violence is utterly ridiculous on its face. Frankly its so utterly ridiculous that I can't even believe I'm in here wasting my time arguing the point with you.


Of course you can't in a world devoid of reference in reality.

The state collects taxes in the Billions of dollars via VOLUNTARY assessments and payments.

Please identify any fiduciary "threatened" for gas, sales, property or excise taxes.

As with EVERY SINGLE ONE of my earlier requests for support of your paranoid delusions, you can not do so.

(P. S.: I do not intend to pay Obama's tax on those who "opt out" of Obamacare." I am prepared to defend myself without silly sophistry and name-calling. I will win.)



[edit on 30-8-2010 by jdub297]



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Ha, why are we so surprised? It's all about money money money, we always owe it but if it was turned around on the people we all would get an I.O.U.!



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join