Requirement for Consent

Even today, this devious tactic of separating responsibility from authority for government abuses among multiple branches 1 is very frequently used as the only real justification for what would otherwise be flagrant disregard for the rights of the 2 people by the government. For instance, if the government is abusing people’s rights in a way that gets negative media 3 attention, the most common justification you will hear is that the bureaucracy has gotten too big, is out of control, and is not 4 accountable directly to the people. The Executive branch will usually be the culprit, and no one in the Legislative Branch 5 will want to take responsibility to pass a law to fix it. Or worst yet, the Legislative Branch will pass a “dead law”, which is 6 a statute meant to appease the public but for which the Executive Branch positively refuses to write implementing 7 regulations to enforce. This is what happened with the campaign finance reforms in the 2001. Sound familiar? The more 8 layers of bureaucracy there are, the more effective this system of blame-shifting becomes. With more layers, public 9 servants can just conveniently excuse themselves by saying “It takes forever to get X to do anything so it’s unlikely that we 10 will be able to help you with your problem.” 11 To give you an example of how the IRS abuses this technique to their advantage, look at how they respond to Privacy Act 12 requests for Assessment documents. The Privacy Act requires them to respond with the documents requested within 20 13 days. After several people began using the Privacy Act to demand assessment documents, and since the IRS was not doing 14 legal assessments and wanted to hide the fact from the public, the IRS changed their Internal Revenue Manual in 2000 to 15 essentially delay and interfere with responding. In Internal Revenue Manual (I.R.M.), Section 11.3.13.9.4, the IRS 16 basically tells its Disclosure Officers essentially to bounce a person’s Privacy Act Request for assessment documents all 17 over its many hundreds of disclosure offices until the person gets frustrated and essentially gives up. Read this dastardly 18 section yourself at: 19 1. Before the distribution can be made, and notice is sent to the affected party stating the conditions under which the 25 distribution can be made without incurring tax liability. 26 2. If the party wants to take the distribution without tax withholding as prescribed in 26 U.S.C. §3406, they are told that 27 they must sign a statement under penalty of perjury that they meet the conditions required for not being “liable” for 28 federal income taxes. They will be told that if it is not under penalty of perjury, then they cannot get their money or 29 property back. 30 3. The statement the party must sign will contain a dire warning that if they are wrong in signing the form, they are 31 committing perjury and that they will violate 18 U.S.C. §1001, which carries with it a fine and jail time up to five 32 years! 33 4. In the meantime, the clerks processing the paperwork in the government, when consulted, will tell the submitter that: 34 4.1. We can’t provide legal advice. 35 4.2. We refuse to sign any statement under penalty of perjury which might help you to determine whether you meet 36 the criteria for not being taxable. 37 4.3. You are on your own and need to seek expensive legal counsel if you want assistance. 38 5. If you ask the clerks the phone contact information for the legal department to resolve your issue with the government 39 agency, they will tell you: 40 5.1. We can’t give it out 41 5.2. It only works internally and you can’t use it. 42 5.3. Calls are not authorized to the legal department. All inquiries must be in writing. Then when you write the legal 43 department of the agency, they will completely ignore your request and you will have no way to call them and do 44 follow-up to ensure that they respond. 45 6. The party will therefore be left with only two options: 46 6.1. Pay the withholding tax. 47 6.2. Hire an expensive legal counsel to “advise” you and then pay something approaching the cost of the withholding 48 tax to a government-licensed attorney who has a conflict of interest. The government-licensed attorney will tell 49 you that you have to pay the tax even if there is no law that requires this, because if he doesn’t, the government 50 will pull his license. Now you paid close to DOUBLE the withholding tax after everything is said and done, 51 because you have to pay an expensive attorney AND the withholding tax. 52 http://www.irs.gov/irm/part11/ch03s14.html#d0e13151 20 10.7.9 Terrorizing and threatening, rather than helping, the ignorant 21 Another famous techniques of criminals working in public service is to terrorize the ignorant. This technique is usually 22 only used when the financial stakes are high and a person is taking custody of a large sum of money that the government 23 wants to steal a part of. Here is how it works: 24

Requirement for Consent

351 of 396

Copyright Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry, http://sedm.org Form 05.003, Rev. 7-23-2013

EXHIBIT:________