JanDrew is right. 
Author Message
 JanDrew is right.

The CDC, the USPHS, the NIH, the 53 US dental schools AND the IRS all lie!

************************************

Wednesday, April 18, 2001

IRS allegedly bad-mouthed auditor
When the whistleblower sought a Texas accounting license, the agency
prepared to send a derogatory report to the state.
By Larry Margasak
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON - The IRS sought to thwart a whistleblower from getting her
accounting license, prompting concern on Capitol Hill about possible
retaliation. The auditor had testified at nationally televised hearings in
1997 that her agency harassed taxpayers.
Internal Revenue Service officials sent a routine form back to Texas
licensing regulators in February about Houston agent Jennifer Long,
declining to answer questions about her skill, character and integrity,
while alerting the agency that it was sending a "narrative" required for
derogatory information.
The agency then drafted a three-page letter to the regulators, dated March
22, that sharply criticized her work on multiple fronts, including
suggesting that she had mishandled audits.
"The probes for unreported income were not adequate," said the letter, which
was obtained by the Associated Press.
The Texas Board of Public Accountancy granted Long's license without regard
to the IRS's evaluation.
Long was the star witness at 1997 hearings before the Senate Finance
Committee that examined alleged abuses by the IRS. She was the lone agency
worker to shun a voice disguise and protective screen used by fellow
whistleblowers to conceal their identities.
IRS officials sent her a termination notice in 1999, but never fired her,
after members of Congress inquired about possible retribution.
The latest episode prompted Finance Committee chairman Charles Grassley (R.,
Iowa) to allege that the letter drafted for Texas regulators amounted to new
retaliation.
"I can only conclude that this action by the IRS may be a precursor to a
termination of Ms. Long in retaliation for her testimony as a congressional
witness," Grassley wrote to IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti this month.
Grassley added that he would "take every recourse within my power to protect
her."
IRS officials declined to discuss why the letter was drafted and why it was
never sent, citing employee privacy.
But Rossotti said in an interview that he was "very familiar . . . up to
date" about the incident, and was confident that there was no retaliation
against any agency whistleblowers.
"There have been various incidents of complaints that have come up. I have
made it a point to be sure that every one of those situations has been
thoroughly - and, I would say, very thoroughly - investigated," he said.
"I can tell you I am personally certain that none of these people were
retaliated against, and all have been treated fairly."
Long, whose job is to audit tax returns, alleged at hearings in 1997 that
"many agents are encouraged by management to pursue tax assessments that
have no basis in law from individuals who simply can't fight back."
Other IRS employees offered similar testimony with their faces hidden and
their voices disguised.
Long sued the IRS in federal court, alleging retaliation. But a federal
judge in Houston dismissed the lawsuit, pointing out in a footnote that the
federal office investigating her complaints had "closed the file."
The March 22 letter obtained by AP was prepared by K. Steven Burgess, an IRS
supervisor based in Dallas. He had partially filled out a state accountancy
board form for employers on Feb. 16, and had written "narrative to follow."
The draft letter by Burgess contended that, in a series of audits, "the time
charged to the examination was not commensurate" with the work Long had
done.
Burgess also accused Long of lacking "pre-audit planning," failing to
"provide an audit trail of actions," inadequately investigating unreported
income, and failing to follow new rules requiring examination notices to be
sent to both husband and wife when examining joint returns.
Burgess did not respond to calls to his office seeking comment.
Long said in an interview that Burgess provided her with the draft letter on
March 22, "and told me he would give me three days to look at it. I was to
call him Monday [March 26] and tell him whether I wanted him to send that
letter or wait six months and have the new manager review me."
William Treacy, executive director of the Texas accounting board, said the
IRS letter wouldn't have affected the approval because Long already had
informed his agency of her problems with the IRS, and had given her
rebuttal. Treacy said he approved her license because she met the
requirements for work experience and had passed the CPA examination.
"I think we used the best judgment," he said.

--
Posted from [38.26.235.186] by way of oe37.pav1.hotmail.com [64.4.30.94]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.***.com/



Sun, 05 Oct 2003 19:14:16 GMT
 JanDrew is right.

Quote:

>Date: 4/18/01 6:14 AM US Eastern Standard Time

>The CDC, the USPHS, the NIH, the 53 US dental schools AND the IRS all lie!

Investigate reports on A&E just did a feature on the IRS, they not only lie
they are ruining people's lives.

I just read this from the CDC:

Mercury is a well-recognized toxicant, but rapidly determining what portion of
mercury exposure comes from a person's diet and what portion come from other
sources has not been possible through the use of standard analytical methods.
This year, the laboratory developed a rapid {*filter*} and urine method; this method
will allow reseearchers to seperatee dietary exposure from other sources of
mercury exposure. The new method will be used in the Fourth National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES IV )starting in 1999 and in health studies
of mercury amalgams, mercury exposure from fish and emergencies caused by
mercury poisoning.

So it seems they are finally considering mercury amalgams as a cause.

Where will you hide Joel, when the day comes that everyone will have to admit
that mercury poisoning can be caused by mercury amalgams? The government has
already made some admissions as I have posted previously. It seems that you may
be left all alone in your beliefs.

Repost:

http://www.***.com/ #ARTICLEONE

US Government Document Admits That Mercury Vapors From Silver Fillings Exceeds
The Minimum Risk Levels Established By The US Department of Health & Human
Services!

Jan



Mon, 06 Oct 2003 06:41:42 GMT
 JanDrew is right.

Quote:
> Where will you hide Joel, when the day comes that everyone will have to
admit
> that mercury poisoning can be caused by mercury amalgams?

Where will you hide if they don't?

I look forward to the day there is consensus.



Mon, 06 Oct 2003 11:35:43 GMT
 JanDrew is right.

Quote:

>Date: 4/18/01 10:35 PM US Eastern Standard Time

>> Where will you hide Joel, when the day comes that everyone will have to
>admit
>> that mercury poisoning can be caused by mercury amalgams?

>Where will you hide if they don't?

I have no reason to hide. My concern is with all those who are still suffering,
not even thinking to check the teeth.

Quote:
>I look forward to the day there is consensus.

Consensus means nothing if the truth is being hid.

There was a great consensus when Jesus was hung on the cross.

Try again.

Jan



Mon, 06 Oct 2003 15:58:34 GMT
 JanDrew is right.
She will not hide even then.  She will state how the concensus was
rendered under pressure from "the mighty dentists" and that it is simply
another cover-up.

LOL,
SWF DDS

Quote:

> > Where will you hide Joel, when the day comes that everyone will have to
> admit
> > that mercury poisoning can be caused by mercury amalgams?

> Where will you hide if they don't?

> I look forward to the day there is consensus.



Tue, 07 Oct 2003 20:17:18 GMT
 JanDrew is right.

**> Where will you hide Joel, when the day comes that everyone will have to
**admit
**> that mercury poisoning can be caused by mercury amalgams?
**
**Where will you hide if they don't?
**
**I look forward to the day there is consensus.

Consensus means nothing ... sheeple will believe anything ...

There is "concensus" that {*filter*} implants are "safe" amongst the Plastic
Surgeons and $ilicone Manufacturers who makes millions putting them in and
taking them out ...

Science is fluid ... not about drawing premature conclusions ...

That's junk$cience.



Wed, 08 Oct 2003 05:30:05 GMT
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. JanDrew is right Dr. Fawks

2. JanDrew! JanDrew recommends avoiding urinals

3. JanDrew Vs. Eichen, JanDrew Vs. The World

4. am i doing this right?

5. Have testicular cancer, am I on right course?

6. Am I right?

7. Am I in the right NG?

8. Am I on the right course??/very long

9. Newbie - Am I in the right place?

10. Am i on the right track

11. Am I in the Right Place?

12. Ocular Albinism-Am I in the right place?


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software