AMA lawyers
09-12-2010, 06:41 PM
#276
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
It is easy to make statements like the total revenue from the magazine is $2.5 million annually...and in the next breath say it is operating in the RED.
Statements and declarations dont end with a question mark, QUESTIONS end with a question mark.
Yes, when I ask someone to choose between A or B, you are correct that the two exclusive options are indeed exclusive.
If so, profits play but one role in this discussion.
they do play a role in this discussion, I never said the entire subject is just this one facet
However
when folks want to categorically decry the OP as unbased unfounded unsubstantiated inuendo,
I have to wonder what data THEY are basing that on,
and do a quick reality check with them.
How can someone decide everything the OP said is unfounded
if that person can find some relevance in at least one facet of the OPs action.
Towit:
Everyone just LOVES to say the magazine turns a profit, despite that profit not being reported.
Folks like Muroc have gone so far to "prove" Hoss & me wrong (we believe the reports that say no profit)
that they have worked out complex "proofs" that there is indeed magazine profit.
Cue the IRS.
If the IRS chooses to believe Hoss & me saying the magazine runs in the red,
then theres no problems for AMA and the reports.
BUT
what happens if the IRS reads what Muroc and co have been shouting from the rooftops, that here is indeed magazine profit that we just dont put in the financial report.
Uh-oh, ain the IRS gonna have a tizzy over that?
Well, it is just some internet hearsay from a guy named frank, and robo, etc
...but when the IRS looks at Murocs complex "proof" that there is magazine profit, and they choose to believe the words of a bunch of members that let that slip out, along with the profit being so well documented by Muroc
... we could be in trouble if the IRS listens to the guys that not only let it slip, but proved it in detail
NOW, with that scary thought in mind,
tell me if everyone will suddenly become big supporters of the MA is Red-ink that Hoss and me have been saying,
or if everyone still believes Murocs proof that we have profit that dont show up in the reports
which plays directly in this thread:
If the OP might not be wrong there,
were else might he not be wrong?
09-12-2010, 06:50 PM
#277
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buckhannon,
WV
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
Quote: I went one better and contacted the IRS and now I am getting attacked for doing so.
No...that is not one better. You are complaining without justification. If you have a case...take it to an attorney and find out if you have a case before you start yelling to the IRS. If you are wrong...you are out on a very long limb and AMA has the saw.
I have looked at the Financial Documents for 2008 and 2009 and the numbers being bandied about are not even close. Plus what KidEpoxy has stated is not only false...but misleading. From the financial report, I would suggest that revenues he quoted of $1.0 million for ads and $1.5 million for subscriptions are inaccurate. Ads for 2009 were less than $1.0 million and subscriptions was less that $55 thousand. Not even close to $1.5 million. Magazine expenses exceeded these numbers by almost double. You folks should get your facts straight before making dangerous accusations.
AND what you folks have been saying didn't include the fact that the financial document indicates the magazine is operating in the RED. So...no profits...so where is your proof sufficient to call the IRS? You are going to need a lawyer...and soon...and I would suggest it won't be pretty. However, AMA may have bigger fish to fry...such as keeping the frequencies we use to fly our airplanes. If FCC has its way, we will lose a good portion of those frequencies that are so needed by the Amateur Radio fans.
Attacked...you bet. If you were right...no attacks. If you were right, you should have provided detailed information that is irrefutable not cryptic messages that are unsubstantiated. I know...you and others say it is in the documents. I looked and it isn't!
No...that is not one better. You are complaining without justification. If you have a case...take it to an attorney and find out if you have a case before you start yelling to the IRS. If you are wrong...you are out on a very long limb and AMA has the saw.
I have looked at the Financial Documents for 2008 and 2009 and the numbers being bandied about are not even close. Plus what KidEpoxy has stated is not only false...but misleading. From the financial report, I would suggest that revenues he quoted of $1.0 million for ads and $1.5 million for subscriptions are inaccurate. Ads for 2009 were less than $1.0 million and subscriptions was less that $55 thousand. Not even close to $1.5 million. Magazine expenses exceeded these numbers by almost double. You folks should get your facts straight before making dangerous accusations.
AND what you folks have been saying didn't include the fact that the financial document indicates the magazine is operating in the RED. So...no profits...so where is your proof sufficient to call the IRS? You are going to need a lawyer...and soon...and I would suggest it won't be pretty. However, AMA may have bigger fish to fry...such as keeping the frequencies we use to fly our airplanes. If FCC has its way, we will lose a good portion of those frequencies that are so needed by the Amateur Radio fans.
Attacked...you bet. If you were right...no attacks. If you were right, you should have provided detailed information that is irrefutable not cryptic messages that are unsubstantiated. I know...you and others say it is in the documents. I looked and it isn't!
09-12-2010, 06:51 PM
#278
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
take note of the punctuation marks I use.
Statements and declarations dont end with a question mark, QUESTIONS end with a question mark.
Yes, when I ask someone to choose between A or B, you are correct that the two exclusive options are indeed exclusive.
yes
they do play a role in this discussion, I never said the entire subject is just this one facet
However
when folks want to categorically decry the OP as unbased unfounded unsubstantiated inuendo,
I have to wonder what data THEY are basing that on,
and do a quick reality check with them.
How can someone decide everything the OP said is unfounded
if that person can find some relevance in at least one facet of the OPs action.
Towit:
Everyone just LOVES to say the magazine turns a profit, despite that profit not being reported.
Folks like Muroc have gone so far to ''prove'' Hoss & me wrong (we believe the reports that say no profit)
that they have worked out complex ''proofs'' that there is indeed magazine profit.
Cue the IRS.
If the IRS chooses to believe Hoss & me saying the magazine runs in the red,
then theres no problems for AMA and the reports.
BUT
what happens if the IRS reads what Muroc and co have been shouting from the rooftops, that here is indeed magazine profit that we just dont put in the financial report.
Uh-oh, ain the IRS gonna have a tizzy over that?
Well, it is just some internet hearsay from a guy named frank, and robo, etc
...but when the IRS looks at Murocs complex ''proof'' that there is magazine profit, and they choose to believe the words of a bunch of members that let that slip out, along with the profit being so well documented by Muroc
... we could be in trouble if the IRS listens to the guys that not only let it slip, but proved it in detail
NOW, with that scary thought in mind,
tell me if everyone will suddenly become big supporters of the MA is Red-ink that Hoss and me have been saying,
or if everyone still believes Murocs proof that we have profit that dont show up in the reports
which plays directly in this thread:
If the OP might not be wrong there,
were else might he not be wrong?
It is easy to make statements like the total revenue from the magazine is $2.5 million annually...and in the next breath say it is operating in the RED.
Statements and declarations dont end with a question mark, QUESTIONS end with a question mark.
Yes, when I ask someone to choose between A or B, you are correct that the two exclusive options are indeed exclusive.
If so, profits play but one role in this discussion.
they do play a role in this discussion, I never said the entire subject is just this one facet
However
when folks want to categorically decry the OP as unbased unfounded unsubstantiated inuendo,
I have to wonder what data THEY are basing that on,
and do a quick reality check with them.
How can someone decide everything the OP said is unfounded
if that person can find some relevance in at least one facet of the OPs action.
Towit:
Everyone just LOVES to say the magazine turns a profit, despite that profit not being reported.
Folks like Muroc have gone so far to ''prove'' Hoss & me wrong (we believe the reports that say no profit)
that they have worked out complex ''proofs'' that there is indeed magazine profit.
Cue the IRS.
If the IRS chooses to believe Hoss & me saying the magazine runs in the red,
then theres no problems for AMA and the reports.
BUT
what happens if the IRS reads what Muroc and co have been shouting from the rooftops, that here is indeed magazine profit that we just dont put in the financial report.
Uh-oh, ain the IRS gonna have a tizzy over that?
Well, it is just some internet hearsay from a guy named frank, and robo, etc
...but when the IRS looks at Murocs complex ''proof'' that there is magazine profit, and they choose to believe the words of a bunch of members that let that slip out, along with the profit being so well documented by Muroc
... we could be in trouble if the IRS listens to the guys that not only let it slip, but proved it in detail
NOW, with that scary thought in mind,
tell me if everyone will suddenly become big supporters of the MA is Red-ink that Hoss and me have been saying,
or if everyone still believes Murocs proof that we have profit that dont show up in the reports
which plays directly in this thread:
If the OP might not be wrong there,
were else might he not be wrong?
Brad
09-12-2010, 07:12 PM
#279
RE: AMA lawyers
Discussing the AMA sure seems to get things heated up. I for one just don't see the big deal with any of it. The lawyers simply messed up sending a letter to the OP and look a bit ridiculous now. Finding someone typing under an alias (screen name) and threatening a legal suit by claiming defamation for a person typing in an electronic chat forum. Sheeesh, give me a break. This is borderline hilarious 
Heck the person typing under DB's screen name could be someone's kid typing on their mom's computer for all anyone knows, much less could prove. The lawyers may need to think a bit more about this one and if possible save face somehow. After all they are lawyers and the higher percentage of lawyers are bottom dwellers with their hearts submerged in the darkness of greed.
If the OP found some discrepencies let him do what he desires to do. Hopefully he will use tact in doing so and have solid facts on the table, but that really is not our problem. We are just discussing the issues. He is merely letting folks know of his endeavors and what he has uncovered. If he has a hidden agenda that will be exposed in time, if not, then why not leave well enough alone?
[X(]
Heck the person typing under DB's screen name could be someone's kid typing on their mom's computer for all anyone knows, much less could prove. The lawyers may need to think a bit more about this one and if possible save face somehow. After all they are lawyers and the higher percentage of lawyers are bottom dwellers with their hearts submerged in the darkness of greed.
If the OP found some discrepencies let him do what he desires to do. Hopefully he will use tact in doing so and have solid facts on the table, but that really is not our problem. We are just discussing the issues. He is merely letting folks know of his endeavors and what he has uncovered. If he has a hidden agenda that will be exposed in time, if not, then why not leave well enough alone?
[X(]
09-12-2010, 07:14 PM
#280
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
From the financial report, I would suggest that revenues he quoted of $1.0 million for ads and $1.5 million for subscriptions are inaccurate. Ads for 2009 were less than $1.0 million and subscriptions was less that $55 thousand. Not even close to $1.5 million. Magazine expenses exceeded these numbers by almost double. You folks should get your facts straight before making dangerous accusations.
AND what you folks have been saying didn't include the fact that the financial document indicates the magazine is operating in the RED. So...no profits...
AND what you folks have been saying didn't include the fact that the financial document indicates the magazine is operating in the RED. So...no profits...
I love you man.
yup
the reports are VERY clear on the 2mil out with 1mil (ad + subs) In.
You did a fine job of seeing the mystery unreported "~Mil&half Member Subscription" is indeed not reported.
You hit the nail on the head: it just aint there in the report
Would you say we had a big problem
if folks can prove the unreported ~mil&half did exist and the magazine runs at a profit?
... edit append...
Yup again,
if the reports say no profit and the magazine did run in the red... no problemo
09-12-2010, 07:26 PM
#281
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
Contradictory statements if stated under oath are called perjury.
In common parlance it is usually called "caught in a lie".
However, contradictory statements are not always so. Correcting ones mistakes for instance. I thought X but having recieved better information I think Y.
Telling Mr. Z it is X while simultaneously telling Mr. W it is Y is a lie in my opinion.
In common parlance it is usually called "caught in a lie".
However, contradictory statements are not always so. Correcting ones mistakes for instance. I thought X but having recieved better information I think Y.
Telling Mr. Z it is X while simultaneously telling Mr. W it is Y is a lie in my opinion.
09-12-2010, 07:33 PM
#284
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
I am not sure what author said this but I feel the same.
"I am convinved that these things I believe are the Gospel truth, however, when met with good evidence to the contrary I will drop my beliefs like so much dirt."
"I am convinved that these things I believe are the Gospel truth, however, when met with good evidence to the contrary I will drop my beliefs like so much dirt."
09-12-2010, 07:37 PM
#285
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FrederickMD
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
Sheesh - go away for a couple days, and the number of misstatements and misunderstandings goes way up.
dbcisco - "Then they are not following the AMA procedure for clubs HERE " referencing a document on the AMA website. Get a CLUE! The document you reference is not an AMA procedure, its not an AMA requirement, its nothing more than an example provided by the AMA that clubs can use to apply for tax exempt status on their own.
From what I can gather, the basic problem dbcisco is trying to push on is that the AMA tax documents are not showing any revenues from Model Aviation as unrelated business. That's because its not unrelated to their tax exempt status. It is the primary means the AMA uses to EDUCATE its membership and others. Members are encouraged to donate their magazines to schools to further that educational purpose.
AMA members are not CHARGED $18 for Model Aviation. The Academy uses a figure of $18 per membership to BUDGET for the publication. This is not hidden from the IRS.
Spout off publicly misrepresenting things you either don't understand or choose to misunderstand. I don't care. I hope the AMA does pursue this. The letter from the lawyers is only the first step. They can now use that letter to show that you were given the opportunity to cease. Continue, and they'll establish a prima facia case that you have intent to defame.
I'm done with this discussion.
Brad
dbcisco - "Then they are not following the AMA procedure for clubs HERE " referencing a document on the AMA website. Get a CLUE! The document you reference is not an AMA procedure, its not an AMA requirement, its nothing more than an example provided by the AMA that clubs can use to apply for tax exempt status on their own.
From what I can gather, the basic problem dbcisco is trying to push on is that the AMA tax documents are not showing any revenues from Model Aviation as unrelated business. That's because its not unrelated to their tax exempt status. It is the primary means the AMA uses to EDUCATE its membership and others. Members are encouraged to donate their magazines to schools to further that educational purpose.
AMA members are not CHARGED $18 for Model Aviation. The Academy uses a figure of $18 per membership to BUDGET for the publication. This is not hidden from the IRS.
Spout off publicly misrepresenting things you either don't understand or choose to misunderstand. I don't care. I hope the AMA does pursue this. The letter from the lawyers is only the first step. They can now use that letter to show that you were given the opportunity to cease. Continue, and they'll establish a prima facia case that you have intent to defame.
I'm done with this discussion.
Brad
09-12-2010, 07:44 PM
#286
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
DB
No, I'm asking what other people think about stuff,
and I'm asking other people TO think about stuff.
I'm asking what other people think the reports say.
I'm asking what other people think is getting leaked.
I'm asking what conclusions other people are coming to.
I'm also referring folks to info put out by AMA and others.
What new info have I provided that isnt from AMA/others?
So Kid are you saying that the AMA is doing something illegal?
and I'm asking other people TO think about stuff.
I'm asking what other people think the reports say.
I'm asking what other people think is getting leaked.
I'm asking what conclusions other people are coming to.
I'm also referring folks to info put out by AMA and others.
What new info have I provided that isnt from AMA/others?
09-12-2010, 07:45 PM
#287
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
I am so glad that everyone knows everything. And they know everything I did in private as well.
I think I will let the IRS decide. If the IRS doesn't find anything objectionable I will be satisfied.
However, if the IRS agrees with a single thing I brought to their attention you will never live it down.
The only ones who know what is going on is me and the IRS. They aren't talking and I am not saying what transpires between me and the IRS.
I think I will let the IRS decide. If the IRS doesn't find anything objectionable I will be satisfied.
However, if the IRS agrees with a single thing I brought to their attention you will never live it down.
The only ones who know what is going on is me and the IRS. They aren't talking and I am not saying what transpires between me and the IRS.
09-12-2010, 07:50 PM
#288
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: bkdavy
AMA members are not CHARGED $18 for Model Aviation. The Academy uses a figure of $18 per membership to BUDGET for the publication.
AMA members are not CHARGED $18 for Model Aviation. The Academy uses a figure of $18 per membership to BUDGET for the publication.
"With every lawnmower you buy you get a free house, the lawnmower costs $200,000."
09-12-2010, 07:54 PM
#289
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
AMA members are not CHARGED $18 for Model Aviation.
a) well, if the $18 aint used, then there aint no Mil&Half revenue for MA, and it runs in the red by a Mil.
Right?
You are saying MA runs in the red
cause the members dont actually pay $18 Member Subsctription for the magazine?
Right?
b)
from CS, AMA Comptroller:
This transfer, on paper only, is for internal use but the idea is to treat publications like a separate company. This hypothetical company wouldn’t publish the magazine for free so $18 is used by the members for a subscription to MA. The remainder of member’s dues, $40, is used to cover other member services, insurance for one.
This transfer, on paper only, is for internal use but the idea is to treat publications like a separate company. This hypothetical company wouldn’t publish the magazine for free so $18 is used by the members for a subscription to MA. The remainder of member’s dues, $40, is used to cover other member services, insurance for one.
09-12-2010, 07:58 PM
#290
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: dbcisco
Contradictory statements if stated under oath are called perjury.
In common parlance it is usually called ''caught in a lie''.
However, contradictory statements are not always so. Correcting ones mistakes for instance. I thought X but having recieved better information I think Y.
Telling Mr. Z it is X while simultaneously telling Mr. W it is Y is a lie in my opinion.
Contradictory statements if stated under oath are called perjury.
In common parlance it is usually called ''caught in a lie''.
However, contradictory statements are not always so. Correcting ones mistakes for instance. I thought X but having recieved better information I think Y.
Telling Mr. Z it is X while simultaneously telling Mr. W it is Y is a lie in my opinion.
To me, a mistake is not a lie, it is just a mistake and may have really bad consequences. What happens is someone makes a mistake, then instead of being honest they attempt to cover it up? Lies can stem for not being honest about the mistake. A mistakes are usually done in ignorance. A mistake could be viewed as a lie by others that know not the facts and herein lay the issue, not knowing the facts or intent.
What is really bad about orgs is that there is a board and not a single individual making choices. It gets difficult to discern the intent when more are involved in the dicision making process. Keeping someone accountable is extremely difficult.
I guess I am thinking more along the lines of moral ground here, but as far as I am concerned this is where true discernment when judging such matters needs to exist.
Here is a scenario: Say the XAA made a mistake or poor choice and did not follow their articles of Incorp. and umbrella-ed in a profitable side business. Now, everything rolls along smoothly until someone comes along and discovers this profit. Now XAA follows the low road and says, "We must hide this somehow under the guise of our org status." They then set forth to deceive their members by covering up the info.
The intent gets exposed eventually but with large boards it can be very difficult and may take years. That is why few ever fight that type of battle.
09-12-2010, 08:01 PM
#291
RE: AMA lawyers
DBCisco, Kid Epoxy, and any others,
Let's drop this discussion of the Model Aviation magazine and it's pricing as it does not have anything to do with the topic of this thread. Any further discussion of this will be removed. Let's keep the dicussion on topic please
Ken
Let's drop this discussion of the Model Aviation magazine and it's pricing as it does not have anything to do with the topic of this thread. Any further discussion of this will be removed. Let's keep the dicussion on topic please
Ken
09-12-2010, 08:39 PM
#292
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ok, lets get back to the overall view
If Cisco sees what appears to be a guy breaking into a car,
Should he call the police?
Should we demand he be able to prove its a theft before calling the cops TO INVESTIGATE IT?
Should we say that if he dont have access to the surveillance tape to prove it, he cant call the cops to look at the tape?
Is it slander or libel to call the cops on the thief?
If the cops investigate and watch the surveillance tape that proves what Cisco claims, is it still slandering the carthief to call the cops?
If Cisco sees what appears to be a guy breaking into a car,
Should he call the police?
Should we demand he be able to prove its a theft before calling the cops TO INVESTIGATE IT?
Should we say that if he dont have access to the surveillance tape to prove it, he cant call the cops to look at the tape?
Is it slander or libel to call the cops on the thief?
If the cops investigate and watch the surveillance tape that proves what Cisco claims, is it still slandering the carthief to call the cops?
09-12-2010, 09:15 PM
#293
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
09-12-2010, 09:52 PM
#294
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: dbcisco
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
Which pretty much sums up my feelings about your AMA witch hunt.
09-12-2010, 09:54 PM
#295
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
I heard of a guy who did time in jail and was later murdered for trying to get people to do the right thing.
Maybe he should have just stopped wasting his time and life.
Maybe he should have just stopped wasting his time and life.
09-12-2010, 09:56 PM
#296
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: 804
I'd say in that hypothetical situation you are a snitch, tattle-tale, and lower than a snake-belly.
Which pretty much sums up my feelings about your AMA witch hunt.
ORIGINAL: dbcisco
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
Which pretty much sums up my feelings about your AMA witch hunt.
I suppose if he was selling dope that would be OK too.
09-13-2010, 06:27 AM
#297
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: sheridan,
IN
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: dbcisco
And you would have your teaching certifate voided by the state.
I suppose if he was selling dope that would be OK too.
ORIGINAL: 804
I'd say in that hypothetical situation you are a snitch, tattle-tale, and lower than a snake-belly.
Which pretty much sums up my feelings about your AMA witch hunt.
ORIGINAL: dbcisco
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
I catch John with a lit cigarrette in his mouth in school and turn him over to administration. Am I slandering John if I say he was smoking?
Which pretty much sums up my feelings about your AMA witch hunt.
I suppose if he was selling dope that would be OK too.
No wonder you equate taking advantage of legal tax laws to criminal tax evasion.
09-13-2010, 06:34 AM
#298
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: down here Ya\'ll,
TX
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
All you high and mighty AMAers just need to cool down. If the AMA has done nothing wrong, they have nothing to hide and as members you have nothing to worry about. As the Good Book says: "the truth shall set you free". If the IRS goes in and finds nothing wrong, I'm pretty sure this will all shut up. If the IRS goes in and finds illegal acts occcuring, so be it. Let justice be served. It's a pretty sick day and age when someone gets beat up for pointing out something that may be illegal. It's as bad as all of those videos you see on the news of a 16 year old girl getting raped and a bunch of people stand there and watch it happen. If it was me I'd shoot all the people standing there letting it happen then I would call the cops.
My point is if there is a wrong occuring in any organization and somebody tries to correct it,who the heck are any of you to stand in the way of it? Keep your friggin mouths shut and let DB be proven right or wrong. Same goes for the AMA lawyers. If they have nothing to hide.....the truth shall set them free!!
My point is if there is a wrong occuring in any organization and somebody tries to correct it,who the heck are any of you to stand in the way of it? Keep your friggin mouths shut and let DB be proven right or wrong. Same goes for the AMA lawyers. If they have nothing to hide.....the truth shall set them free!!
09-13-2010, 06:44 AM
#299
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: nhulsey
Keep your friggin mouths shut and let DB be proven right or wrong. Same goes for the AMA lawyers. If they have nothing to hide.....the truth shall set them free!!
Keep your friggin mouths shut and let DB be proven right or wrong. Same goes for the AMA lawyers. If they have nothing to hide.....the truth shall set them free!!
09-13-2010, 06:46 AM
#300
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Lansdale,
PA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: AMA lawyers
ORIGINAL: 804
Smoking a cig. = selling dope?
No wonder you equate taking advantage of legal tax laws to criminal tax evasion.
Smoking a cig. = selling dope?
No wonder you equate taking advantage of legal tax laws to criminal tax evasion.