|
|
"John Gault" <judgedredd@ij.net> wrote in message news:<biluia$1d1e$1@news1.ij.net>...
> rom: hulsmo@care2.com (Hunter Smoot L. Smoberg)
> Newsgroups: us.legal,soc.men,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated
> Subject: Re: fathers rights tactics
> Date: 28 Aug
|
|
|
taR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:<dh9pkvcgcehuabbdg2ku5uuo81mtmdnm5p@4ax.com>...
> On 26 Aug 2003 23:33:57 -0700, austinrayder2003@yahoo.com (Quantrell)
> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> >The United States Federal Government is a corporate en
|
|
|
"Tickle Mi" <ticklish@you.know.where> wrote in message news:<z%f3b.862513$3C2.19424595@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>...
> "Quantrell" <austinrayder2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:bd48ddf5.0308271448.281e7bf7@posting.google.com...
> > > Tell us, oh so
|
|
|
Stephen Jenuth <jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote in message news:<UFr3b.53164$la.986747@news1.calgary.shaw.ca>...
> In can.politics StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> > Both "income tax" and "revenue" as it relates to each other are
> > comm
|
|
|
rom: hulsmo@care2.com (Hunter Smoot L. Smoberg)
Newsgroups: us.legal,soc.men,alt.dads-rights.unmoderated
Subject: Re: fathers rights tactics
Date: 28 Aug 2003 08:34:53 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <fb9fa98a.03
|
|
|
In can.politics StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Both "income tax" and "revenue" as it relates to each other are
> commercial terms. In other words, they both exist in the realm of
> commerce. Your hand was revealed when you suggested that "inco
|
|
|
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:44:09 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
<jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>In can.taxes StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:20:14 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
>> <jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>In can.p
|
|
|
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 04:41:07 GMT, "Kevin and Lisa Reed"
<reed1000@irtc.net> wrote:
> Regardless that she had any suspicion she went into our account without our
> authorization and withdrew the money.
> What can I do? Is the bank in the wrong? can b
|
|
|
On 28-08-2003 01:41, in article 1agqkvkr79o97qc8eeumkrn3kpgbpc5nku@4ax.com,
"Scotius" <yodesbud@mnsi.net> wrote:
> Nate isn't criminalising drug users; the law does that, after
> they have morally incriminated themselves. I'm not talking about
> som
|
|
|
In can.taxes StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:20:14 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
> <jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>In can.politics StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 19:49:24 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
|
|
|
> >
> > Thank you, Chris. That made my night. I will attempt to be polite,
> > contrite, and well-prepared, but I don't know how I'm going to react to
the
> > situation. I know that situations of that kind tend to make me feel
uptight
> > so I'
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yeah, the ever-so-tiring diatribe of the confused tax protestor: the
ridiculous attempt to assert that contract law and its jurisprudence can be
used in matters of taxation and tax law. Wrong.
There are times when contract law has some consideration
|
|
|
"Quantrell" <austinrayder2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bd48ddf5.0308271448.281e7bf7@posting.google.com...
> > Tell us, oh so clever boy, what is the magic number needed to reach
> > "consent of the people" in a group consisting of 100? Is o
|
|
|
Killfile Stankyretta Kook Thomas and be gone with it.
--
Chief Administrator
US.* Usenet Hierarchy
http://www.usenetnews.info/
|
|
|
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 19:38:29 GMT, StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:57:09 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
><jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>In can.politics StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>> And now we will see why inco
|
|
|
n Wed, 27 Aug 2003 22:33:28 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
<jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>In can.politics StaR <star_law2003@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 14:02:55 GMT, Stephen Jenuth
>> <jenuths@horace.homacjen.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>In can
|
|
|
|
|
