jimbrown

LOL!!! Could you rephrase the question ,Counselor? Peace , Jim B

Money? It's just an illusion. It can be taken away from you as fast as they can fire up the presses to make more! No , money isn't yours and never will be. That is why it is so important to work toward self sufficiency! Have I told you about my Americana? She has a lot more value to me than a federal reserve note/ Peace, Jim B Peace, Jim B

Don't have to. There is no need to define "income" in tax codes. There is, however, an explaination of types of income and what they mean. "income" itself doesn't need to be to be legitimized anymore than the word "the". See, nanook , and this is why you are well ..you.LOL! Not meaning to single you out and obviously even an elite(!) ,a member of the board, an officer of the court is dumbstruck here! That's OK! I , Jim B, am here to enlighten you. I will unravel all this legal mess and leave your bedsheets folded crisply and clean so that tonight you can get a good nights sleep. Now here is an interesting fact; when laws are written it is necessary to also include a table of definitions in the statute because quite often the words in the statute aren't meanin' what you and I would commonly believe them to mean. It's the whole lawyer thing but do you realize that sometimes a corporation could be referred to as a" person"? Yes. that's very true. Bill Clinton based his entire defense on "the meaning of *is*"! When it comes to matters of law definitions are paramount1 So once again for all of you who know so damn much about every friggin' subject and every world situation , can anyone of you show us the definition of "income" within the tax code? Peace, Jim B Dude, there are only two, slightly different, definitions of "income" in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. You may choose tu use the first to base your taxes on, I will use the second. And, no, it is NOT needed to include a definition of each and every word. Clinton's "is" defense was seen for what it was...a desperate attempt to distract the court from it's true course. It didn't work. I challenge YOU to try to get out of paying income tax by claiming the word "income" is not defined in the tax code. People much better versed in the law than you and I will decide your fate. Let us know how it turns out. Again, another of the misinformed masses weighs in with his DZ.com opinion . Listen Belgian Draft, Clinton did pretty well with his definition of "is" defense. Would it interest you to know how State is defined in the tax code? Here ya go big guy, "to include the District of Columbia". Yes they define state in the income tax code but not "Income"? LOL!! For some one who hasn't been drinking the flouridated water it's easy but so many are just so thirsty! Oh do you realize that that definition of state excludes any of the 50 states of the union? Yes that is very true. By their defining state as including *x* they have excluded the rest of the alphabet as states! Wrap your nonlawyer brain around that piece of liver! Show the definition within the code. Should be easy right? Peace, Jim B

Don't have to. There is no need to define "income" in tax codes. There is, however, an explaination of types of income and what they mean. "income" itself doesn't need to be to be legitimized anymore than the word "the". See, nanook , and this is why you are well ..you.LOL! Not meaning to single you out and obviously even an elite(!) ,a member of the board, an officer of the court is dumbstruck here! That's OK! I , Jim B, am here to enlighten you. I will unravel all this legal mess and leave your bedsheets folded crisply and clean so that tonight you can get a good nights sleep. Now here is an interesting fact; when laws are written it is necessary to also include a table of definitions in the statute because quite often the words in the statute aren't meanin' what you and I would commonly believe them to mean. It's the whole lawyer thing but do you realize that sometimes a corporation could be referred to as a" person"? Yes. that's very true. Bill Clinton based his entire defense on "the meaning of *is*"! When it comes to matters of law definitions are paramount1 So once again for all of you who know so damn much about every friggin' subject and every world situation , can anyone of you show us the definition of "income" within the tax code? Peace, Jim B

Yawn. No problemo. Here it is: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/usc_sup_01_26_10_A_20_1_30_B_40_I.html Click on each sub-link, e.g., §61, §62, etc. Now back to my beer. Sorry Andy, You can't define a word by using the word in it's own definition. I'm not looking for the definition of "gross income " but "income". Happy hunting. Try again! Peace, Jim B

That link it to an authoritative source, so it must automatically be ruled out. It's not from the tax code so as much as you might hate it that you have been duped...., it doesn't count as law. Hery!!! you could participate and try to find the definition *within the tax code* . Or you could just continue to pay because you are ignorant of the law. Peace, Jim B

Sorry, That's not from the tax code but we have some nice consolation prizes for you out back . And feel free to try again! Peace, Jim B.

Quotehaven't you already asked this question on 3 or 4 other threads? In reviewing the other threads no one .., including yourself, has been able to meet the challenge. So , kelpdiver, can you provide us with the definition of "income" as is found in the Tax Code are did you just long to talk to me tonight? Peace, Jim B

I challenge any and all to provide the definition of "income" as defined within the Income Tax code. If you can't I wonder why you pay "income " tax every year? Are you required? Peace, Jim B.

[Got any plans for the Fourth of July? Maybe, you plan to protest a firework display or two? You're allowed to do that, too. Good to be an American. Is it not? You can thank a vet, those serving, and those you will serve for that. Actually.., I don't think it's the recent vets I should be thanking for my being an American. I'm also not quite so sure what debt of gratitude I'm obligated to past vets. I will be celebrating as July 4 is my birth day. Peace, Jim Brown Bear

Collectively, the over all international community felt a need, for whatever reason, to remove Saddam from power. The Coalition is evidence to this. Bush's underlying reason was mostly revenge. He all but abandoned the hunt for Bin Laden and wasted resources and manpower in a country that was retained and no longer a threat. Chances are Saddam would be close to a natural death by now anyways. Or a well placed missile could had taken him out in short order. Bush 1 said "You break it, you bought it". His son should had listened to him. The old man knew better than to go all the way in. Bush 2 acted solely on bravado. That alone might be consider a crime. But, you're welcomed to call whomever you wish a war criminal. It is a free country, after all.Quote I remember!!! The "Coalition of the Willing", bribed, and threatened . My.., I see the great Kingdom of Tonga on the list! I'm impressed!!!!! You can't spin it! Fact is that pre- emptive war is a crime against humanity. Even if you *feel* that the Saddam regime should have been removed , the invasion of Iraq and the murder of each innocent resulting from that action is a crime and anyone participating in any of those criminal acts is a criminal. It doesn't matter that they were duped into these criminal actions. The Charlie Manson defense doesn't cut it! The argument that Toby Kieth andHank Williams Jr. told them to do it through their music wont hold water. The invasion of Iraq was criminal , many innocents were slaughtered by the US military . The US Military (Army, Navy, Airforce, Marines) conspired to commit these crimes and each and every member of those criminal organizations are equally guilty of those crimes. Peace, Jim B

This birth certificate controversy is all "American Idol". It's a magicians' trick !! It's all about having you watch this instead of seeing that. What should you be seeing? Peace, Jim B

For one, street gangs are criminal organizations and do not follow the rules of society. They are dealt with accordingly. Armed forces follow rules of war (The Geneva Convention.) When members act outside of those rules they then become war criminals. When they are caught, they are then dealt with accordingly.Quote And if the invasion of Iraq was outside the rules of international society than every invader is a war criminal. They may escape prosecution but they are still war criminals. Peace, Jim B

I don't say this in meanness. I promise. But what you just said is very heretical and not up for debate. It is the stuff that cults are made of. It is the lie that was first told to Adam & Eve. ("Did God really say; You can be like God") Jesus taught us to pray "Our Father" He didn't say " My Father" If we all have the same Father as Jesus and Jesus is God ,it follows that we are all God. And just like the Christ we are all having a human experience . One more thing .., didn't Jesus tell us to forget all that old testament knownsense? Peace, Jim B

You don't have to call a rabbit a rabbit. That doesn't change what he is. Peace, Jim B. That is an insult to any anyone who has ever served for whatever type of government they believed in. True, some do join armed forces solely to kill, but the mass majority join because they believe, over all, they are doing what is right. And that solely depends on what side of the fence you stand on. When I joined, I honestly that Iran threatened our way of life. I was ready and willing to go to war. That would had not made me a criminal. Nor is my father a war criminal for serving several tours in Vietnam. I wonder, have you yourself ever served? I'm not meaning to insult anyone. I'm simply calling a rabbit a rabbit. You honestly believed but you were wrong . So what? If a member of the Crypts "honestly believes" that the Bloods are out to get him(when they aren't) does that justify a drive by shooting or is the shooting still a criminal act? Hare, Bunny, you can call it what you want. It's still a rabbit. Peace, Jim B

[replyAdded: Looking back at your quote, I totally disagree with one part. The part where you described Jesus as a "god like ourselves." Just gotta make that clear. We "are not" little gods. I didn't say "little"! Now here me out. The Master taught that we all have a soul, correct? And that soul is Spirit ,a part of God . Just like water taken out of the ocean is still ocean water and has those same properties , Spirit always retains those God properties. I know you have yet to learn this so let me enlighten you,jaybird. The greatest teaching of the Master Jesus the Christ and the most important piece of his education is that all of us are not just Human , but rather we are God living a Hunan experience. Peace, Jim B

[reply. I would not nor would I ever call those who serve with honor war criminals. You don't have to call a rabbit a rabbit. That doesn't change what he is. Peace, Jim B.

Both. Hypostatic Union - Jesus Christ was "fully" God and, at the same time, "fully" human. Impossible to explain properly or understand completely. It is in fact a mystery. But necessary. If He was one but not the other, then that is very bad news for us because we cannot be forgiven our sins. Both would be required for His sacrifice to be sufficient. Uhmm, My research indicates that the Master, Jesus the Christ taught that he was not the one to forgive our sins but rather it is up to each of us to forgive ourselves of our sins. Further my research indicates his teachings are that each of us are just like him (perhaps not yet quitw as educated) as we are all Sons of God . Evidence to this claim is in the prayer he taught us. Do you know it? Peace, Jim B

I say you have no understanding of the UCMJ and the consequences of laying down your rifle in a combat zone. No crime in being a conscientious objector but, that decision must be made prior to volunteering to serve in the military. Why don't you enlighten me as to the consequences , Ron? All I see is that you no longer kill people. And why don't you also explain why one can't make the decision to lead a more moral and "Christ" like life at anytime even after enlisting? Are you suggesting that soldiers aren't entitled to Free Will that the Creator bestowed upon them? Peace, Jim B

Peace to you as well. However, as far as the Bible teaches without the spin that man likes to put on everything (which believe it or not there are churches that try their best not to do that), baptism is command that we are to do after repenting and choosing to follow Jesus. Nowhere does it say its required to be "saved". However it is a public identifying of yourself with Jesus, nothing more. There is no magic that happens, you don't need to pay a priest to do this for you. I sometimes think the church (Jesus's followers in general) would actually thrive better and serve a better purpose if a world without church buildings. In many countries believers have to meet in secret in homes and have to do so on irregular schedules to keep from being discovered. We tie in so much cultural garbage and tradition into American Christianity, that I would say far more than the majority of church goers are completely missing it. When we strip all the superficial crap away, and its just fellow believers gathering for a purpose, that is a thing of beauty. If a person wishes to be baptized, the group can easily baptize anybody in a creek, swimming pool, bathtub, mudpuddle, or wherever, without the need of some priest or pastor that the (insert denomination) leadership has decided can be the only one to do it. You don't need some special "holy water" thats been blessed by so and so. I'm pretty sure it all has the same chemical makeup. It was never meant to be about money, and its a travesty if any churches have turned it into that. Its all about you and your creator. Don't let a bunch of annoying Christian hypocrites get in your way of knowing Him. Nobody on earth is controlling me and my actions except maybe my wife. I go to church to learn and equip myself, but I answer only to God. Here is a question for you to consider and you don't need to reply but I'd be interested in what you think . Was Jesus a man or was he a God? My research indicates that he was a man just like you and me who through education attained the highest enlightenment(the Christ initiation) thus earning the title "Master". Really if you think about it , if you are god and you let yourself be tortured to death, where is the sacrifice? A god could easilly block out the pain .Many humans (buddist monks for example) have this ability. Also if you are a god you would also know that you could never die. So was Jesus a god like ourselves(His teaching) or a Man like ourselves? Peace, Jim B.

Wow! You take ignorant naivete to an art form. Ron, I'm just trying to preach what the Master ,Jesus the Christ taught. That killing is always wrong. He taught that we should love our fellow humans. His teachings can never be reconciled with acts of killing,destruction ,torture and war. Was He also ignorant? What say you? Peace, Jim B

Listen young man, I realize you have been brainwashed to believe that which you posted above. Let me assure you that the only person in the world who can protect my Rights is me! Please do not attempt to put on to me the responsibility of your transgressions! Further please let me point out to you that the Rights ennumerated in the Constitution aren't reserved to just the American people but are inherent by birth to all the people of the world. If you have in anyway been a party to the invasion or occupation of any sovereign nation, you are a war criminal. Ya know, you could just put down your weapon and come home. You could leave today and come home and take care of your family. If all soldiers just put down their weapons and went home to take care of their families we would have no wars and the entire world could celebrate their Rights. It all starts with one ,shward, The invasion and the exodus. Peace, Jim B. Kelpdiver, as I said... Kind of a backhanded PM but that's not bothering me. I would like for you to attempt to justify invasion of a sovereign nation with its' expected death of innocent civilians and innocent military protecting their own borders. I doubt you can do it for I know there can never be "justification" as that act is simply criminal. If the act is criminal all those who take part in the act (conspiracy) are by definition criminals as well! They areb't *heroes* to be reveered or victims of circumstance! No they are criminals who decided to take money for their participation in the one of the greatest crimes anyone could ever commit. They accepted paynent to take the life of innocent people!!! And ignorance is no excuse! Peace, Jim B

Uhm.., yeah. Actually my research indicates that the Master ,Jesus the Christ taught that man didn't need priests as go betweens to have a relationship with God. As you can imagine that kinda pissed off the priests a bit.It cut into their profits! If I am correct and I sincerely believe that I am, then babtism by water or by "the Fire of the Holy Spirit(?) "{don't be afraid of that ghost!} is completely unnecessary and really all of the ""Christian " religions were a scheme designed to make money and control peoples behaviors. Peace to you, Jim B

Listen young man, I realize you have been brainwashed to believe that which you posted above. Let me assure you that the only person in the world who can protect my Rights is me! Please do not attempt to put on to me the responsibility of your transgressions! Further please let me point out to you that the Rights ennumerated in the Constitution aren't reserved to just the American people but are inherent by birth to all the people of the world. If you have in anyway been a party to the invasion or occupation of any sovereign nation, you are a war criminal. Ya know, you could just put down your weapon and come home. You could leave today and come home and take care of your family. If all soldiers just put down their weapons and went home to take care of their families we would have no wars and the entire world could celebrate their Rights. It all starts with one ,shward, The invasion and the exodus. Peace, Jim B.

That is a blatantly foolish statement regarding our military veterans.Quote Listen Muhhamed Ali went to jail rather than kill people. Each of these military volunteers (paid employees ) had that same option. Instead they took the cash and went over and participated in the invasion of a sovereign nation. I don't know how else you could classify it. They coujd be prosecuted under a number of statutes and they have prooven themselves to be dangerous and violent people easilly led into criminal activity. Peaxe, Jim B