PDA

View Full Version : Where to stamp a FRN



Delawarejones
03-17-11, 01:57 PM
Where does one place one's redemption stamp on a FRN? I've seen front and back placement. Ultimately, I do not think location is that important, only showing the fact that redemption has occurred.

Personally, I place mine on the front and over the legal tender language for two reasons.
1. Because of this link from the SF fed bank. (http://www.frbsf.org/publications/federalreserve/annual/1995/history.html) Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."
That is why I stamp the front of each FRN.

2. I choose to place it over the legal tender language because in my mind I am changing the nature of the FRN and therefore potentially altering the validity of the legal tender language.

Click on FRN to see enlargement or click on attachment 127 to download pic.

Delawarejones
127
127

David Merrill
03-17-11, 02:47 PM
Very good! I had not thought that through. I stamp the backsides (http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/9559/redeemed100s.jpg) so as not to put off cashiers. I am thinking that you might be charged with felony destruction of money/tender if you get to pushy about it. The Code reads that if you render the currency to have no value, then you are guilty of the violation. So that might simply mean you have made the bills unacceptable to a cashier somewhere.

I suggest you use water-based red ink. If you get a complaint then wash the notice out with soap.

The redemption, you understand is worthless on the bill itself. By the time you are holding cash, you have already made your demand; or not. That is important to understand. I am only stamping the bill for edification purposes.

However, it is indicated that when ordering transcripts and paying for court cases, the stamp on the bills may be quite effective to own the material instead of the state.


Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-17-11, 02:51 PM
Good explanation, I like it. May I suggest another thing though, is to put a line through the serial number.

I had discussion with a friend who made demand for lawful money at the bank, after speaking with the bank manager the bank employee recorded the serial numbers to take them out of the system so the intent could really be for lawful money [ Public Money } and also that it could not be reissued, reducing the debt liability for everyone.

5. Deposit to Reduce Liability for Outstanding Notes
Any Federal Reserve bank may at any time reduce its liability for outstanding Federal Reserve notes by depositing with the Federal Reserve agent its Federal Reserve notes, gold certificates, Special Drawing Right certificates, or lawful money of the United States. Federal Reserve notes [12 USC 415. As reenacted by act of June 21, 1917 (40 Stat. 237); and as amended by acts of Jan. 30, 1934 (48 Stat. 339); June 30, 1961 (75 Stat. 147); March 18, 1968 (82 Stat. 50); and June 19, 1968 (82 Stat. 189). The act of June 30, 1961, is the Old Series Currency Adjustment Act.]
Source: http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm

4. If a taxpayer provides evidence that a remittance has been stolen and/or altered.

A. Obtain a written statement from the taxpayer that the original negotiable instrument was made payable to the United States Treasury (or Internal Revenue Service (IRS)) and sent to IRS.
Source: http://www.irs.gov/irm/part5/irm_05-001-002.html

Also I had a discussion with an IMF employee about the contract forms within their system, they said it is illegal to completely remove words from the form and place new ones, this is like counterfeit securities, BUT it is ok to renegotiate the terms in a sense of putting a line through the words and write above it.

Delawarejones
03-17-11, 03:59 PM
Very good! I had not thought that through. I stamp the backsides (http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/9559/redeemed100s.jpg) so as not to put off cashiers. I am thinking that you might be charged with felony destruction of money/tender if you get to pushy about it. The Code reads that if you render the currency to have no value, then you are guilty of the violation. So that might simply mean you have made the bills unacceptable to a cashier somewhere.

I have had no complaints. No one questions them. A handful of cashiers will look at it, scrunch their face and usually put them in the cash drawer. One however, did pull out a marker to check the validity of the currency, i.e. 50FRN or 100FRN (this was a 20FRN). It was real, so she put in her drawer. Even the courts have taken them without question.


EDITED TO ADD: I am not worried about defacing/destruction of the FRN. I am doing neither. A FRN has value as long as there is 50% or greater of the note (it's not a note) remaining. Destruction is not occurring. Defacing? Nope, as the FRN has been redeemed, I am acting in "good faith," letting those who can comprehend its meaning to have the ability to make a choice regarding acceptance of public money. Good faith is what the law requires. If there is a problem, then the law can show me the proper way.

To date, no one has refused them. If they did, I would need them to state in writing that my FRNs were refused, signed and dated, and if possible company policy guideline and/or code. With that, I can make a legal determination of my own regarding my next course of action.
Delawarejones

Delawarejones
03-17-11, 05:00 PM
Good explanation, I like it. May I suggest another thing though, is to put a line through the serial number.

I had discussion with a friend who made demand for lawful money at the bank, after speaking with the bank manager the bank employee recorded the serial numbers to take them out of the system so the intent could really be for lawful money [ Public Money } and also that it could not be reissued, reducing the debt liability for everyone.

Also I had a discussion with an IMF employee about the contract forms within their system, they said it is illegal to completely remove words from the form and place new ones, this is like counterfeit securities, BUT it is ok to renegotiate the terms in a sense of putting a line through the words and write above it.
Good idea. After thinking about though, I do not think I would cross out the serial number. Here is why: if the FRN gets NOTICED by a fed bank employee, I want them to strike out the serial number or in whatever fashion they extinguish the notes. By striking through the serial number, I could see a determination made stating since the number is unrecognizable (eventhough it may not be), there is NO need to treat it as redeemed and to okay a reissue. I want the FRN to be redeemed on their books without giving them a reason to deny the redemption.

I am merely hypothesizing and assuming a fed employee will take ACTUAL NOTICE of the FACT the FRN has been redeemed.

Delawarejones

martin earl
03-17-11, 06:13 PM
"Because of this link from the SF fed bank. Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:
More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."

You are missing one important nuance of the above statement:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable.

Those are 2 separate statements.

1."More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender".

2. "Only the front of a dollar bill is considered valuable."

If you will look more closely at any bill larger than the 1, you will find there are 2 notes, separated by a curved line and/or artistic curved lines, but there is always a solid line between the left side and the right side of the bill.

The left side NOTE (50%) is the FRN, all the lettering and the seal and the "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER...."

There is nothing on FRN side of the note that crosses the line to the NOTE on the right side, which is clearly titled "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" has the Treasury seal and nothing about it being legal tender. The serial numbers match, but even they are separate registration numbers, one for the FED books, the other for the Treasury.

Notice the above quote is for "A" dollar bill. That definition does not speak for anything but the 1 dollar bill. Certainly nobody would agree "A DOLLAR BILL" is the same thing, legally or lawfully as "A 5 (five) DOLLAR BILL".

Now, compare again the 1 dollar bill to any other, the 1 is unique in that only it has no physical separation of Notes (boxes) from left side to right side.

I would be very careful about defacing the Federal Reserve NOTE (which only is the NOTE in the box to the left) in any way. Or the face of any 1 dollar FRN.

However, the US Treasury Note on the right of the FACE is already properly TITLED as what it is (Again, for everything above the 1 dollar denomination) and does not even need the "Redeemed Lawful money stamp".

Maybe since there is a 1 dollar coin already available, there was no need to have 2 separate Notes on the 1 dollar note, it is easy enough to redeem in coin?

Also, make no mistake, the Treasury Note is still on the right side of the face is still FIAT (not gold backed) UNTIL our demand for redemption per 12-USC 411. (If that were not true, the serial number on the US Note would be RED in color, not green) and there would be no way of knowing which of the 2 NOTES was being endorsed/used in any transaction.

After all, 300 million is still the max lawful amount of money mandated to be in circulation any given year. That is also the amount of GREENBACKS (the first FIAT national currency) that were backed by Gold in the 1800's.

Nearly all of those greenbacks were redeemed in Gold coin at Banks and were not seized again until FDR and the Gold seizure of 33/34, and then, US BANK NOTES (RED SEALS AND SERIAL NUMBERS) were issued, in that amount, and the people could take their FRN to any bank and redeem them for US BANK NOTES dollar for dollar.

I believe that gold coin, in that amount, is what "backs" our demand for redemption, since the FRN of today serves 'essentially the same purpose' as the US BANK NOTES did. (Still FIAT, but backed by Gold).

The design of the FRN was changed to include an UN-REDEEMED US Treasury NOTE and put in its own box on the Right side of the note for every denomination above the 1 DOLLAR FRN.

I believe the LAW is being fulfilled, as that is a requirement and function of law. By law, there must be 300 million Gold backed Publicly accessible "dollars".

Those Gold coins can be traced back to the 300 million in gold coins redeemed and then seized in the past and now held in Public Trust by the United States Treasury and your and use of those US Treasury Notes on the right side of the face is actually what NOTE you are using to conduct your private and public transactions.

That is how they (the Government agents) allow us and them to uphold the requirements of the law and still provide for the general welfare of the US Citizen. It is only by our endorsement and demand can they know which side of the LAW we are standing on and that dictates how they treat us, as Subjects or men and women with unalienable rights and lawful protections.

David Merrill
03-17-11, 09:51 PM
"Because of this link from the SF fed bank. Scroll to bottom and under did you know to read the second bullet:
More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable. If you could separate the front of a bill from the back, only the front half would be considered "money."

You are missing one important nuance of the above statement:

More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender, and only the front of a dollar bill is valuable.

Those are 2 separate statements.

1."More than half of a dollar bill is considered legal tender".

2. "Only the front of a dollar bill is considered valuable."

If you will look more closely at any bill larger than the 1, you will find there are 2 notes, separated by a curved line and/or artistic curved lines, but there is always a solid line between the left side and the right side of the bill.

The left side NOTE (50%) is the FRN, all the lettering and the seal and the "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER...."

There is nothing on FRN side of the note that crosses the line to the NOTE on the right side, which is clearly titled "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" has the Treasury seal and nothing about it being legal tender. The serial numbers match, but even they are separate registration numbers, one for the FED books, the other for the Treasury.

Notice the above quote is for "A" dollar bill. That definition does not speak for anything but the 1 dollar bill. Certainly nobody would agree "A DOLLAR BILL" is the same thing, legally or lawfully as "A 5 (five) DOLLAR BILL".

Now, compare again the 1 dollar bill to any other, the 1 is unique in that only it has no physical separation of Notes (boxes) from left side to right side.

I would be very careful about defacing the Federal Reserve NOTE (which only is the NOTE in the box to the left) in any way. Or the face of any 1 dollar FRN.

However, the US Treasury Note on the right of the FACE is already properly TITLED as what it is (Again, for everything above the 1 dollar denomination) and does not even need the "Redeemed Lawful money stamp".

Maybe since there is a 1 dollar coin already available, there was no need to have 2 separate Notes on the 1 dollar note, it is easy enough to redeem in coin?

Also, make no mistake, the Treasury Note is still on the right side of the face is still FIAT (not gold backed) UNTIL our demand for redemption per 12-USC 411. (If that were not true, the serial number on the US Note would be RED in color, not green) and there would be no way of knowing which of the 2 NOTES was being endorsed/used in any transaction.

After all, 300 million is still the max lawful amount of money mandated to be in circulation any given year. That is also the amount of GREENBACKS (the first FIAT national currency) that were backed by Gold in the 1800's.

Nearly all of those greenbacks were redeemed in Gold coin at Banks and were not seized again until FDR and the Gold seizure of 33/34, and then, US BANK NOTES (RED SEALS AND SERIAL NUMBERS) were issued, in that amount, and the people could take their FRN to any bank and redeem them for US BANK NOTES dollar for dollar.

I believe that gold coin, in that amount, is what "backs" our demand for redemption, since the FRN of today serves 'essentially the same purpose' as the US BANK NOTES did. (Still FIAT, but backed by Gold).

The design of the FRN was changed to include an UN-REDEEMED US Treasury NOTE and put in its own box on the Right side of the note for every denomination above the 1 DOLLAR FRN.

I believe the LAW is being fulfilled, as that is a requirement and function of law. By law, there must be 300 million Gold backed Publicly accessible "dollars".

Those Gold coins can be traced back to the 300 million in gold coins redeemed and then seized in the past and now held in Public Trust by the United States Treasury and your and use of those US Treasury Notes on the right side of the face is actually what NOTE you are using to conduct your private and public transactions.

That is how they (the Government agents) allow us and them to uphold the requirements of the law and still provide for the general welfare of the US Citizen. It is only by our endorsement and demand can they know which side of the LAW we are standing on and that dictates how they treat us, as Subjects or men and women with unalienable rights and lawful protections.



That is some wonderful insight! Thanks!

motla68
03-17-11, 10:41 PM
In reference to the backing you mentioned, this was part of the New Deal F.D.R. mentioned.

133

I did a little searching for backing this up, I see where the changeover happened confiscating the gold, but so far as backing I have only seen information on stock commodities and not mortgages as it specifically states in the attachment, but depending on what stock commodities they could be one in the same.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 01:31 AM
In reference to the backing you mentioned, this was part of the New Deal F.D.R. mentioned.

133

I did a little searching for backing this up, I see where the changeover happened confiscating the gold, but so far as backing I have only seen information on stock commodities and not mortgages as it specifically states in the attachment, but depending on what stock commodities they could be one in the same.

"held in trust" (http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4556/governmentbondslarge.jpg)


http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_TWA_Collections.jpg

motla68
03-18-11, 02:55 AM
Under president Gerald Ford:
August 14, 1974 - Congress authorized U.S. citizens to own gold; December 31, 1974 - private U.S. citizens were allowed to buy and own gold for the first time in more than 40 years.
http://www.usmint.gov/historianscorner/index.cfm?action=timeline&century=1900
(Click on the site and scroll down to category " 1974")

U.S. Citizens are statutory persons, subject to that trust construction. Those who have pledged themselves to the U.S. Corporate Construct Trust no matter what the circumstances. Blind ambition I guess.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm0pmlq/executive-office-of-the-united-states-government
( Executive Office Of The United States Government in Washington, DC is a private company)

David Merrill
03-18-11, 03:11 AM
Under president Gerald Ford:
August 14, 1974 - Congress authorized U.S. citizens to own gold; December 31, 1974 - private U.S. citizens were allowed to buy and own gold for the first time in more than 40 years.
http://www.usmint.gov/historianscorner/index.cfm?action=timeline&century=1900
(Click on the site and scroll down to category " 1974")

U.S. Citizens are statutory persons, subject to that trust construction. Those who have pledged themselves to the U.S. Corporate Construct Trust no matter what the circumstances. Blind ambition I guess.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm0pmlq/executive-office-of-the-united-states-government
( Executive Office Of The United States Government in Washington, DC is a private company)


If that were true, then you would know of remedy. There would be a remedy within the scope of the context you keep fabricating.

The remedy is written into the law and so the contract is with the Fed - endorsement. That is the contractual nexus you keep trying to fabricate with these bunnytrails and blind alleys.

motla68
03-18-11, 04:25 AM
If that were true, then you would know of remedy. There would be a remedy within the scope of the context you keep fabricating.
The remedy is written into the law and so the contract is with the Fed - endorsement. That is the contractual nexus you keep trying to fabricate with these bunnytrails and blind alleys.

Are we now calling the U.S. Mint a liar and Manta.com as well? If so how can I possibly work with this?

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?113-To-claim-quot-remedy-quot-or-not-to-claim-quot-remedy-what-is-the-quot-solution-quot&highlight=solution
I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere. All I am concerned about is
energy spent, energy received. I do not believe the fruit of labor is money, what I do believe the that fruit is the time. We are talking natural law here, does a
child really give a crap about all the money and toys you can throw at them, NO, in most cases it is the time you spend with them is what counts.

The truth I know is in spirit, the only thing real to me. Lets get real here, this is not a brain trust, this is a paper trust here. I am doing the best I can to accommodate what you all seem to worship here. Unfortunately spirit cannot be put on paper, so I do with what I can, how I can. Much less all the details of conversation with a cop on the side of the road. I could have recorded it yeah, but that is acting like an attorney with a commercial interest, I am not looking to injure someone or be injured in commerce, I do not do as they do, their law is not my God.

As hard it is to believe I do not claim ownership to a name on paper, mom and dad said what she we call him NOT what shall we write him.
Seals are related to Sigil (Black Magic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_%28magic%29
I have a sense that writing words down is casting spells, how do you create a form as in forming a letter? you have to cast it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spell
How do you get around this, not sure right now, but from what I have researched the Druids lived hundreds of years without a written language,
the only thing found was a Calendar which was said to be the most accurate one in the world.
Some of the most successful lawyers practice things in the mirror all the time that has nothing to do with what they learned in law school, it has to
do with reading postures and eye movements.
Through my conscious I see a lot of connections through this stuff, I allow the spirit to increase my knowledge, because knowledge is the Treasure, not this paper and metal we keep chasing after. 2 Ch 1:12 Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.
I know you do not give a rats behind about any of this, but I do and see a lot of connections that your not going to find in a law book anywhere,

You asked me to show some things from start to finish and I have, but where those who complain about my post you say, where is their success story? where is their completed posts start to finish? Is it fair to make the same demands upon me that they will not do themselves when it comes to a complete process? I think not.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 11:09 AM
Are we now calling the U.S. Mint a liar and Manta.com as well? If so how can I possibly work with this?

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?113-To-claim-quot-remedy-quot-or-not-to-claim-quot-remedy-what-is-the-quot-solution-quot&highlight=solution
I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere. All I am concerned about is
energy spent, energy received. I do not believe the fruit of labor is money, what I do believe the that fruit is the time. We are talking natural law here, does a
child really give a crap about all the money and toys you can throw at them, NO, in most cases it is the time you spend with them is what counts.

The truth I know is in spirit, the only thing real to me. Lets get real here, this is not a brain trust, this is a paper trust here. I am doing the best I can to accommodate what you all seem to worship here. Unfortunately spirit cannot be put on paper, so I do with what I can, how I can. Much less all the details of conversation with a cop on the side of the road. I could have recorded it yeah, but that is acting like an attorney with a commercial interest, I am not looking to injure someone or be injured in commerce, I do not do as they do, their law is not my God.

As hard it is to believe I do not claim ownership to a name on paper, mom and dad said what she we call him NOT what shall we write him.
Seals are related to Sigil (Black Magic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_%28magic%29
I have a sense that writing words down is casting spells, how do you create a form as in forming a letter? you have to cast it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spell
How do you get around this, not sure right now, but from what I have researched the Druids lived hundreds of years without a written language,
the only thing found was a Calendar which was said to be the most accurate one in the world.
Some of the most successful lawyers practice things in the mirror all the time that has nothing to do with what they learned in law school, it has to
do with reading postures and eye movements.
Through my conscious I see a lot of connections through this stuff, I allow the spirit to increase my knowledge, because knowledge is the Treasure, not this paper and metal we keep chasing after. 2 Ch 1:12 Wisdom and knowledge is granted unto thee; and I will give thee riches, and wealth, and honour, such as none of the kings have had that have been before thee, neither shall there any after thee have the like.
I know you do not give a rats behind about any of this, but I do and see a lot of connections that your not going to find in a law book anywhere,

You asked me to show some things from start to finish and I have, but where those who complain about my post you say, where is their success story? where is their completed posts start to finish? Is it fair to make the same demands upon me that they will not do themselves when it comes to a complete process? I think not.

Focusing:

As described in previous posts I have no need for remedies, only have want for solutions:

My intention in forming this Category as a Lesson Plan is to keep the Readers clarified about Remedy. That is what the 'Saving to Suitor' Club was formed around:


...saving to suitors in all cases, the right of a common law remedy where the common law is competent to provide it
If you are looking for solutions instead of remedy that makes no sense because in this context they are the same thing. If you are thinking there are solutions, that are not based in remedy, then you are talking about something else.

I think that to clarify the source of the friction between you and I will be very edifying to the Readers - and for that I thank you greatly - as it causes me to sleep on it, and to simply justify my implication that you are pushing fabrications. You keep pushing the idea that there is an account, but then you back off, saying:

I do not care any more about all this accounting lingo, nor did I ever give a crap about some money in some account somewhere.

If it makes no sense to me, then I have to doubt it is making sense to anybody else. You put some dots out there and I admit I even threw in a couple dots to make my point - that you do care about your premise, that there are funded accounts hypothecated upon the birth certificate. That is why you never paint a sensical portrait by connecting any more than two or three dots at once; like your MANTA link and out-of-context quotes from the Treasury. You just declare that you don't care and go into infantile deletion tizzyfits.

The source of the discrepancy is that the Emergency needs to be properly defined. Then the Readers and maybe you, can get it; why the 'saving to suitors' clause demands that when the US government turned over responsibility for money in America to the Fed, they had to provide remedy, yes remedy, to each and every one of us for us to decide - to make a conscious decision - with each and every cash-received transaction, electronic or not.

The original Emergency upon which IN GOD WE TRUST originated (1863) was:

No State, or Confederation of States may secede from the Union.

The Emergency of 1933 - the War on the Great Depression (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_FDRs_inaugural_declaration.jpg) - was to save the Fed from the 20-year expiration (http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/267/charterexpiressmall.jpg) of the Charters on Fed Banks. The bankers dealing in Fed Notes were about to make a run on the Fed - redeeming lawful money (http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/3011/12usc411pre1934.jpg). That is the Trust (http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4556/governmentbondslarge.jpg);


http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/4556/governmentbondslarge.jpg

...held in trust

Why can't we just redeem gold? Because we already spent it to Save the Fed! That is what FDR was pleading we cooperate with - saving the Fed by going into the New Trust (Deal) with our signature bonds on the backsides of the salary checks. He wanted us to form the new trust by endorsing it.

This (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_FR_Bulletin_March_1933.jpg) is where the HJR-192 funding falls through for your fabrications.

Your constant attempts to convince me the birth certificate is being hypothecated on fail because HJR-192 (reinstatement of the gold clause) and the Emergency was ended in 1974-76 (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL94-412.jpg). However, the emergency lives on in the Stipulation that another Bankers' Holiday may be called (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL94-412_stipulation.jpg) by either the President or the Secretary at any time - in order to save the Fed from the new Fed banks - the people supporting FDR's new trust of 1933.*

People do that by non-endorsing their paychecks. Remedy. That is the Solution. Same thing in this context. My responsibility, I feel, even with Internet Yarn is to make this as simple as possible. The hypothetical hypothecations you keep trying to fabricate are welcome as they express the same patriot mythologies that many suitors have broken free from. All that I did was help them to connect the dots - and when they kept trying and could not, they started seeking the simpler answer/solution/remedy naturally. It will come to light and that is what is so exciting about 'Saving to Suitors' Club!

As we redeem lawful money according to law, we are causing the Run on the Fed we bought out of in 1933 with all that gold (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_TWA_Collections.jpg).



Regards,

David Merrill.


* Pull up this image (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL94-412_stipulation.jpg) again and look at §502 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000095---a000-.html); This is all based in the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000095---a000-notes.html) - the ability to seize gold during the War on the Great Depression. But we also find a duplicate citation - under the same number 95(a) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000095----000-.html) that explains the same thing in different words. §95(b) of that duplication reads:


...the Comptroller of the Currency may designate by proclamation any day a legal holiday for the national banking associations

And of course moving on to §95(b) (click Next at the top) shows:


§ 95b. Ratification of acts of President and Secretary of the Treasury under section 95a

The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority conferred by section 95a of this title, are approved and confirmed.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 11:43 AM
P.S. Your spirit, and expressing things of the spirit is great except for the limitations of language make the discussion subject to interpretation. The demands are those that you put upon yourself. We actually all put these demands upon ourselves and let's face it; you are showing us other people's success stories here - not your own. [You are having scanner/camera troubles, remember?] If suitors and others do not want to make that demand of themselves that is fine by me. Many of them have provided small samplings for me to sanitize so that I can do the same thing you have done; show some food for thought about the reproducible mental models that are useful in practice day to day where we need to depend on expressing ourselves clearly.

What I am addressing is your consistent assertion that America's participation in FDR's gold seizure was somehow dishonest. He presented his new trust and people began signing their paychecks into it. The gold was spent to save the Fed America loves enough to murder Presidents over (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImYmRjZTVjMDMtMzU3Mi00MjE5LWE0O DYtNmVkNDM0OTJiOTcy&hl=en) when they start getting in the way. Watch the driver's (William GREER) left hand closely.

martin earl
03-18-11, 04:11 PM
From the perspective of a former Police Officer, (I am still a peace officer) I can tell you this and I will make it as clear as I can.

The Police officer on the side of the road has the discretion to cite, arrest, warn, instruct or arrest.

Many, many times people record "Success" because they think something they said or did had some lawful/binding effect on the cop, I can tell you, that is NOT the case.

More often than not, the Cop literally tells himself (or another cop tells them) "I am not dealing with this @#$T right now.

In my years of law enforcement, never ONE time did I ever hear a dispatcher tell any officer over the radio some kind of "WARNING: this guy knows the law and you better leave him alone."

With these exceptions: Diplomats. Dealing with certain Federal Law enforcement officers (FBI/CIA/SS) because the vehicle registration or the DL would trigger LE/undercover alerts in the NCIS system. Usually with a DNS/DND, Do not stop/Do not detain.

Or, dealing with high end military or Radio Active/ Nuke/classified transport vehicles. (In which cases NOTHING would come up on the computer or there would a Suburban on the scene soon enough and guys with heavy arms to politely explain to the State or city officer, in no uncertain terms, that vehicle was "HANDS OFF" and should the officer push the issue, well, he would lose, badly.

There are credible accounts of State officers being handcuffed to their own vehicles to while the vehicle they stopped drove quietly away. While I never witnessed this occur I did hear about it happening more than once.

In short, the Government does not re-cognise any Spiritual power (from you and I anyway) individual officers might, but that in no way is a REMEDY or Solution in my book.

There are tales of men living in the wilderness and being fed by Ravens too, is that a REMEDY or Solution to Grocery stores that is applicable to the average man or woman with a family?

With enough faith, I agree it could be, but the fact is, we live in a world where MONEY is depended on for daily living.

Within the rules of this world, their is REMEDY/Solution to that system which allows me and my family to conduct our business affairs with non-elastic lawful money, so that is what I will do.

Will this temporal act or law SAVE me? Nope, never claimed it would, but it is part of living a lawful life in this physical existence, and even the Master obeyed the law of the land He lived on.

What most spiritual warriors fail to see is this: The law is binding on all men, even the ones who hide behind Titles and offices of public trust. IF they choose to break the law, it does not mean I have the right not to bound by the same law.

That is what makes the DEMAND for lawful money binding on me and them, but they still have the choice to be a criminal, its called AGENCY and it is a crime for me to take agency away from another without DUE POSSESS of law, Spiritual or physical.

Part of MY due process is using and trading with lawful money, that is ORDER, I live the law to the best of my ability and knowing and then demand the protections it provides me, the nature of the law being both spiritual and temporal.

motla68
03-18-11, 04:12 PM
Ok, I am going to take 1 or 2 last attempts at trying to clarify some things here, if we cannot make any headway then I am just going to be the majority here and sit back as an observer instead of a participant and be entertained because right now your making put more work into this then I ever had since we first started back in 2009, we have since then made it a lot simpler, with spirit comes faith, faith cannot really completely described on paper, you know the gut feeling inside that started this journey to begin with. This is attempts to address your thoughts by paragraph in post #13 and #14:

- Fine, yes finally something we can agree on is that I see the separation of remedy and solution and that is not the conscience of brain trust (paper trust).

- Fabrications; No i really do not care all about that, the fact that I even do mention accounting is for your benefit and not my own. We started out where you are all at now, but it is not where we ended up so again, I am going out of my element to help get you there, but by needing so much specific information within the confines of mammons law to complete a thought your making this more complicated then it has to be. Mammons law is the lesser of authority here, this maybe the other disagreement because of the suitors clause, to claim to be a suitor within that clause you all have to accept the lesser authority, mammons law. When you claim things upon this earth you become subject to it. That is a hard pill to swallow, but it is the truth that I know. The only time I claim anything it is first that the owner God has given to all as a gift for our use for the next generations, so when we give or receive it effects everyone in how we do that.

- Just as the states formed the United States of America in trust with each other because their representative signed on, yes the powers of separation with in that clause hold true. But despite this when the Hague was formed it created a New Trust with bringing the old trust USA into it as a whole. I see this through the chamber of commerces (plural) cities, and yes there is a United States Chamber of Commerce - http://www.uschamber.com/ as well as more up in the chain of hierchy such as Organization of American States - http://www.oas.org/en/member_states/default.asp You may not like it, but they did it anyway, and they could care less about what we think due to that Paderford vs. City of Savannah case have mentioned many times that we were not part of it. We are just " customers " to that corporation getting serviced as the DMV once told me. And you cannot get into the show without a ticket so you better have your Revenue Receipt ready. It is funny how basic life mimicks this, most movie theatres, you pay at the window to get a receipt/ticket coupon, then you the holder take that to the receiver to gain access into the show. Acts and Statutes (props) for your entertainment.

- NO, I did not say the HJR-192 emergency had ended, just the hoarding of Gold part of it. This actually happened where the Hoarding of Gold was lifted, tried to find again the act in which sealed this part of it where it makes it clear that the emergency was still in effect but the hoarding clause ended and could not find it so I had to use a substitute unfortunately since I am getting away from the whole statutory person thing we have all started deleting some of the garbage on our hard drives because of where we are at now.

- I know you keep on saying We because of this suitors clause thing and the hypothication that we are " We The People " in the constitution, I do not believe this because of a lot of things I said, but you go ahead and believe what you want, who am I to judge otherwise, one has a right to their own self determination, will you not give the same consideration?
This is reminding me of a lot of IRS letters received way in the past and others I have seen that it does not make one bit of difference what your argument is with them, they will always say that it is " frivolous " and continue to enforce their belief that you are the Person/Taxpayer they are looking for. If we are not the Person then are we really the Taxpayer or the one just giving energy into the society for consideration of energy returned which restores our bodies so we can keep giving back to society?

- I can agree that redeeming lawful money is a step in the right direction, BUT it is not the destination nor do I believe the suitors clause is either, for on lawful money who's seal is upon them greenbacks? NOT my families seal, so then who really owns it? Is Gold your God? In Reference to the one Article we should have all seen by now where Treasury was to be the Central Bank, yeah when we are in a lawful money system and makes sense because of the anthropology of the seals mentioned earlier. If all Lawful Money is kept at the central Bank and the bills get returned to following the order in the Liber Code Articles 31 and 38, do you suppose this is how indemnification happens? just like the old woman in the biblical story who gave all, do you suppose she was then indemnified ? Think about who's seal possibly was upon that coin she gave?

- Lastly in message #13 and Post #14 you are again throwing statutes at me that I really do not give a flip about, again I only mention them for your benefit. If I give everything for the benefit of all then do you suppose I would be indemnified?
If I do not own the legal title to the money or monetary system, should i be responsible for the accounting of it? I do not have a " We the People " Ego that limits my existence upon this earth. These papers, statutes, regs, the money, the metal when I claim ownership to them they limit my existence upon this earth that Promulgates the gift given to all of us by the creator. These Corporations who devise all these instruments taking resources from that gift are not my God Genesis 1:26 - 28.
This may not be your remedy, but it is my solution which many more of us are working towards. If you cannot accept that, then I post no more about any or this on the forum, as said before I will just remain an observer here in the background unless someone asks then as a fellow steward on the land who loves thy neighbor feel compelled to answer if thy spirit moves in that direction. When I get arrangements for some type of other scanner then I will just attach it to the same threads as the ones I have already started to keep it simple.

Peace be with you,

David Merrill
03-18-11, 04:55 PM
Under president Gerald Ford:
August 14, 1974 - Congress authorized U.S. citizens to own gold; December 31, 1974 - private U.S. citizens were allowed to buy and own gold for the first time in more than 40 years.
http://www.usmint.gov/historianscorner/index.cfm?action=timeline&century=1900
(Click on the site and scroll down to category " 1974")

U.S. Citizens are statutory persons, subject to that trust construction. Those who have pledged themselves to the U.S. Corporate Construct Trust no matter what the circumstances. Blind ambition I guess.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm0pmlq/executive-office-of-the-united-states-government
( Executive Office Of The United States Government in Washington, DC is a private company)


You are repeating your posts?

I explained about the rescission of the Emergency in my $10K-character post above. I have a lot more though. There is actually a book about it (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImODVkMmJiYzktMDdlYS00ZWFkLWI4Z WMtNmJiMWI0ZmU1MzEx&hl=en) - the Senate Report is an entire book!

I made my point by showing you the Public Law as it was integrated into the US Code to officially end the emergency. And I pointed out, how the only potential emergency remaining is for people to begin redeeming lawful money by demand, and that is a perfectly acceptable option (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?124-First-Success-At-Bank-For-Redemption).

My guess is that by repeating a post you are saying, Here is the proof!

I believe that the MANTA link, which is by the way not the one you want anyway - you probably want the one that shows two million or so employees and OBAMA as the CEO, I have that link around somewhere and it demonstrates how the US government as a body politic operates in international commerce like a business. Looking around (http://www.manta.com) I just proved that the United States of America is an ice skating rink. The USA Inc. (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImNDllZDU0ODYtOTFkNC00ODdkLWFjY zItN2EwODFiYzk3N2Yz&hl=en) is a firm that never got off the ground for promoting sports events - look closely. If you start promoting that material as any "proof" the USA is a corporation though - your name is mud with me; for what that's worth. I am only reluctant because of the RAP/RuSA James Timothy TURNER crowd potentially misusing my research mind you - I am not accusing you of anything, I am just left with everybody trying to interprete you repeating posts without any explanation.

I said above that the demand for process-to-results images is what you are putting on yourself, Motla68. - After you indicated that I am demanding it of you. In the Rules on the Forums Main Page we find that we really don't have any yet. Aside from irrational rants and porn I doubt Admin will be banishing anybody soon. If you demand to be believed though; the images will be necessary - speaking for myself only.



Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-18-11, 04:59 PM
From the perspective of a former Police Officer, (I am still a peace officer) I can tell you this and I will make it as clear as I can.

The Police officer on the side of the road has the discretion to cite, arrest, warn, instruct or arrest.

Many, many times people record "Success" because they think something they said or did had some lawful/binding effect on the cop, I can tell you, that is NOT the case.

More often than not, the Cop literally tells himself (or another cop tells them) "I am not dealing with this @#$T right now.

In my years of law enforcement, never ONE time did I ever hear a dispatcher tell any officer over the radio some kind of "WARNING: this guy knows the law and you better leave him alone."

With these exceptions dealing with certain Federal Law enforcement officers (FBI/CIA/SS) because the vehicle registration or the DL would trigger LE/undercover alerts in the NCIS system. Usually with a DNS/DND, Do not stop/Do not detain.

Or, dealing with high end military or Radio Active/ Nuke/classified transport vehicles. (In which cases NOTHING would come up on the computer, but there would a Suburban on the scene soon enough and guys with heavy arms to politely explain to the State in no uncertain terms that vehicle was "HANDS OFF" and should the officer push the issue, well, he would lose.

There are legends of State officers being handcuffed to their own vehicles to while the vehicle they stopped drove quietly away. While I never witnessed this occur I did hear about it happening more than once.

In short, the Government does not re-cognise any Spiritual power (from you and I anyway) individual officers might, but that in no way is a REMEDY or Solution in my book.

There are tales of men living in the wilderness and being fed by Ravens too, is that a REMEDY or Solution to Grocery stores that is applicable to the average man or woman with a family?

With enough faith, I agree it could be, but the fact is, we live in a world where MONEY is depended on for daily living.

Within the rules of this world, their is REMEDY/Solution to that system which allows me and my family to conduct our business affairs with non-elastic lawful money, so that is what I will do.

Will this temporal act or law SAVE me? Nope, never claimed it would, but it is part of living a lawful life in this plain of physical existence, and even the Master obeyed the law of the land He lived on.

Thank you for chiming in Martin and for all you have done to serve the inhabitants of this land.

Since I come into new prospective on a lot of things it has given me a renewed relationship with the public servants around here. Yes, I was once one of them patriot types who was always getting into some controversy over something and had this EGO of how everyone was out to get us, but now I consider them public servants my neighbors and do not hold anything against them, they are just doing their job they were told to do so they can take care of their families and go home safely too. You have to admit though there is public servants out there that do bad things because they are human, I cannot blame the system at large for a couple bad apples in the crate.
I consider the county sheriff here a friend of mine, he is there if needed when called upon and I would do the same for him if a situation came to it. The local city police here have a bit of a turnover rate so some of the rookies do not know me. Every now an then I will have to tell them to contact their supervisor so they can come to the scene and fill them in, at least the local supervisor knows me anyway. Some of them are some good neighbors too, I once left something behind and called up the supervisor and he had one of his uniformed employees come to the camp and drop it off, thankful for peace officers such as this.
We have a state trooper in one of our groups not near me unfortunately though and he is aware of some of the knowledge we extrude, it depends on the situation how he will react from what I hear, tail light out or going to fast for road conditions or some other small infraction he will give a warning, BUT definitely not for DUI or exceeding speed limit way beyond reasonable means.

I have some stories about DNS/DND but, they are just stories that will not meet the approval of the brain trust so I will save us from that waisted energy.

As I think you can see by your post that the MONEY is quite a black cloud handing over everyone's head to remind us we are not alone.
I do believe there is a need for government, but on a limited basis, " peace officers " NOT so much as " enforcement officers ", I have read a couple articles lately where the United States has more people in prison then any other country in the World. Some people just make bad choices, maybe this is why the rest of the world thinks about Americans the way they do, I really do not know. If you could live without the money would you do it thought?

If one provides or a neignbor helps with Food, fuel, shelter and travel and also directly contracts with local police, fire company and ambulance should one be indemnified of so much government regulation? I would be interested to hear your opinion on that.

Peace be with you.

motla68
03-18-11, 05:13 PM
You are repeating your posts?

I explained about the rescission of the Emergency in my $10K-character post above. I have a lot more though. There is actually a book about it (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImODVkMmJiYzktMDdlYS00ZWFkLWI4Z WMtNmJiMWI0ZmU1MzEx&hl=en) - the Senate Report is an entire book!

I made my point by showing you the Public Law as it was integrated into the US Code to officially end the emergency. And I pointed out, how the only potential emergency remaining is for people to begin redeeming lawful money by demand, and that is a perfectly acceptable option (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?124-First-Success-At-Bank-For-Redemption).

My guess is that by repeating a post you are saying, Here is the proof!

I believe that the MANTA link, which is by the way not the one you want anyway - you probably want the one that shows two million or so employees and OBAMA as the CEO, I have that link around somewhere and it demonstrates how the US government as a body politic operates in international commerce like a business. Looking around (http://www.manta.com) I just proved that the United States of America is an ice skating rink. The USA Inc. (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImNDllZDU0ODYtOTFkNC00ODdkLWFjY zItN2EwODFiYzk3N2Yz&hl=en) is a firm that never got off the ground for promoting sports events - look closely. If you start promoting that material as any "proof" the USA is a corporation though - your name is mud with me; for what that's worth. I am only reluctant because of the RAP/RuSA James Timothy TURNER crowd potentially misusing my research mind you - I am not accusing you of anything, I am just left with everybody trying to interprete you repeating posts without any explanation.

I said above that the demand for process-to-results images is what you are putting on yourself, Motla68. - After you indicated that I am demanding it of you. In the Rules on the Forums Main Page we find that we really don't have any yet. Aside from irrational rants and porn I doubt Admin will be banishing anybody soon. If you demand to be believed though; the images will be necessary - speaking for myself only.

Well Turner and his posse are not what we are about either, there was a " guardian " he called himself from that group who infiltrated one of our meetings, questions were asked, but thankfully he is a friend too so he showed some respect until the meeting was over and talked to me about his beliefs, I had already read most of them online of course though.
He tried one more time and then after that I hear from him no more about it.

Everything else it is what it is until I get some scanned images up here I guess. We encourage those in our group though to ask the questions so they may receive the answers as well right from the horses mouth so to speak. The cat has been let out of the bag so to speak more so lately and government has become less and less responsive which makes it difficult for growth in the way of our intended purpose.

Peace be with you.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 05:28 PM
From the perspective of a former Police Officer, (I am still a peace officer) I can tell you this and I will make it as clear as I can.

The Police officer on the side of the road has the discretion to cite, arrest, warn, instruct or arrest.

Many, many times people record "Success" because they think something they said or did had some lawful/binding effect on the cop, I can tell you, that is NOT the case.

More often than not, the Cop literally tells himself (or another cop tells them) "I am not dealing with this @#$T right now.

In my years of law enforcement, never ONE time did I ever hear a dispatcher tell any officer over the radio some kind of "WARNING: this guy knows the law and you better leave him alone."

With these exceptions: Diplomats. Dealing with certain Federal Law enforcement officers (FBI/CIA/SS) because the vehicle registration or the DL would trigger LE/undercover alerts in the NCIS system. Usually with a DNS/DND, Do not stop/Do not detain.

Or, dealing with high end military or Radio Active/ Nuke/classified transport vehicles. (In which cases NOTHING would come up on the computer or there would a Suburban on the scene soon enough and guys with heavy arms to politely explain to the State or city officer, in no uncertain terms, that vehicle was "HANDS OFF" and should the officer push the issue, well, he would lose, badly.

There are credible accounts of State officers being handcuffed to their own vehicles to while the vehicle they stopped drove quietly away. While I never witnessed this occur I did hear about it happening more than once.

In short, the Government does not re-cognise any Spiritual power (from you and I anyway) individual officers might, but that in no way is a REMEDY or Solution in my book.

There are tales of men living in the wilderness and being fed by Ravens too, is that a REMEDY or Solution to Grocery stores that is applicable to the average man or woman with a family?

With enough faith, I agree it could be, but the fact is, we live in a world where MONEY is depended on for daily living.

Within the rules of this world, their is REMEDY/Solution to that system which allows me and my family to conduct our business affairs with non-elastic lawful money, so that is what I will do.

Will this temporal act or law SAVE me? Nope, never claimed it would, but it is part of living a lawful life in this physical existence, and even the Master obeyed the law of the land He lived on.

What most spiritual warriors fail to see is this: The law is binding on all men, even the ones who hide behind Titles and offices of public trust. IF they choose to break the law, it does not mean I have the right not to bound by the same law.

That is what makes the DEMAND for lawful money binding on me and them, but they still have the choice to be a criminal, its called AGENCY and it is a crime for me to take agency away from another without DUE POSSESS of law, Spiritual or physical.

Part of MY due process is using and trading with lawful money, that is ORDER, I live the law to the best of my ability and knowing and then demand the protections it provides me, the nature of the law being both spiritual and temporal.

Thank you for that reasonable post. I want to share something I think is quite supporting, by way of Crosstalk:


That is the key to identification; My name is True Name. I am not showing you this license card for identification purposes.

-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2011 7:15 AM
To:
Subject: Re: True Name's Appeal


a good reason to have the insurance and registered title in the name of a Trust. Therefore, whoever uses the car is beneficiary.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Suitors;


First an update on plumes of radioactive steam:


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=146&d=1300468312

Nickname and I had lunch and I caught up a little about her appeal. A month ago the US clerk entered a Judgment on the Judge's ORDER and True Name filed a Writ Coram Vobis (Writ of Error from our court to your court) that was filed as a Letter by the US clerk. Nickname has filed the Notice of Appeal and In Forma Pauperis according to Forms from the US Courthouse. One Sentence (memory serving):

The Stopping Officer who stopped me, True Name, was not the same officer who the Prosecutor brought to testify at the Trial.

Now one thing peculiar about Nickname's endeavor is that she was fined over $1K and jailed for a week upon conviction because she had no proof of insurance even though she showed a valid proof-of-insurance card and had been paying premiums up-to-date! The reasoning the (false) witness brought to the stand at trial was that her driver license card had been suspended at the time of the Stop. Think that over a moment - recall I called this Colorado's New Cash Cow on SJC and with these broadcasts. During that time consuming Stop, I believe the decision was made to try pushing some shock testing and form precedent, that would start people paying the insurance company for basically bogus policies, and upon a Notice of Suspension, cause people to be paying fines on this jail-mandatory statutory charge too. Little did whoever pushed this decision think that True Name would be taking the simplicity of the syndicalism to the 10th Circuit, and then on to the Supreme Court next if necessary.

Investigation may reveal that the shill substituted at trial was to implement Colorado's New Cash Cow. After all, Nickname's USDC case now being appealed was Dismissed with Prejudice; meaning the judge decided to bias her cause so that it could not be heard ever again in the federal judiciary! The main component and thrust of her appeal is to launch a simple investigation as to why she recalls a female motorcycle cop pulling her over but a male cop was at the trial:

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/3492/perjury.jpg


That DO NOT COPY watermark is interesting, considering she paid the full price for her transcript.

Interestingly one night, over on Motor City Drive - where they light it up like Christmas to sell cars 24/7 Nickname was driving without headlights. She was pulled over and presented the standard request. Her wallet was packed tight and she gave the Driver License Card (signed "True Name") to the police officer and was intending to state the "...not for ID purposes" but was distracted trying to get her Insurance Card, "Just a minute..." instead. The officer strangely, took the driver license back to his squad car, not waiting for the Insurance Card. Ten minutes later he returned with the driver license and his business card handing them to Nickname, "Here you go."

Nothing more! He volunteered his card without Nickname asking.


Ok, I am going to take 1 or 2 last attempts at trying to clarify some things here, if we cannot make any headway then I am just going to be the majority here and sit back as an observer instead of a participant and be entertained because right now your making put more work into this then I ever had since we first started back in 2009, we have since then made it a lot simpler, with spirit comes faith...

Peace be with you,

You wrote a long post and it probably took a lot of time considering the quoted part is all I read of it.

I will be saddened to see you go Motla68. Actually I don't believe you will be able to sit quietly in the bleachers though. You have brought some great process-to-results images for us, and I have been saving them this time because of your deletion rant. I have been dissecting them for us as well, showing that the redemption of lawful money is far more likely the cause of any success, than your (CoreSource Group or whatever) implication that the US government has the funds on account for the Setoff. That is simply because the US Code and Fed Act show us clearly what the law is, while like I posted earlier this morning above, entering the trust by endorsement means the seized gold was already spent to form the new "held in trust" agreement and therefore the gold was already spent to save the Fed from certain destruction, expired charter and the inevitable run in 1933. We became the general fed banks by endorsement signature.

The source of your contention with the facts and truth is that you would continue to assert that there is some kind of accounts, based on your earlier (deleted by yourself) assertion akin to that the SEC registers all S/Ns of FRNs as stock certificates. That might be so; you have failed to convince me. I have a slew of cases telling me that the Fed is an Instrumentality of the US Government because the FRNs as stock certificates are designed to depreciate over time - that is called fractional lending (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_Story_of_Money.zip). If you want to consider FRNs as stock certificates, that is valid - the SEC would be required to arrest the US Government and Fedsters though for such a flagrant disrespect for fiduciary responsibility to the stockholders - again we find the gold was spent to save the Fed by the willing and assumed voluntary, knowledgeable consent (Ha!) aka Conditioning of the endorsing public.

It would be more becoming of an intellectual looking for a learning experience to dissect my commentary on your process-to-results images rather than to threaten us with your silence.


Regards,

David Merrill.

martin earl
03-18-11, 06:08 PM
Thank you for chiming in Martin and for all you have done to serve the inhabitants of this land.

I did my best to so honorably, but the adversary is in charge of that Government and his influence permeates it.


Since I come into new prospective on a lot of things it has given me a renewed relationship with the public servants around here. Yes, I was once one of them patriot types who was always getting into some controversy over something and had this EGO of how everyone was out to get us, but now I consider them public servants my neighbors and do not hold anything against them, they are just doing their job they were told to do so they can take care of their families and go home safely too. You have to admit though there is public servants out there that do bad things because they are human, I cannot blame the system at large for a couple bad apples in the crate.

This is the only point at which I do not agree with you, from being in that crate, I can assure you, the system is inherently EVIL (for lack of a better word) and in its current form, is an enslavement tool for mankind's spiritual and physical energies. The system infects even the most valiant public servant at one point or another and provides them too much protection when they cross that line. I am not out of that system for any other reason but Divine intervention, since I was too arrogant and fearful at the loss of "career security and income" to follow the promptings of my own spirit to get out of it. There is a reason so many police officers are drug/alcohol dependent or commit suicide, or overtly Religious, they are being convicted by their own spirits, in MY opinion.

I consider the county sheriff here a friend of mine, he is there if needed when called upon and I would do the same for him if a situation came to it.

Not if doing so would jeopardize his status or paycheck or retirement, in 40 years I can count on 1 hand the number of Law enforcement officers who would do that. (And they were not the ones I would have thought they would be).


Indeed, the spirit may be willing, but the flesh is weak, do not bet on your "friend" to see things the same way you do should it come to that point.

The local city police here have a bit of a turnover rate so some of the rookies do not know me. Every now an then I will have to tell them to contact their supervisor so they can come to the scene and fill them in, at least the local supervisor knows me anyway. Some of them are some good neighbors too, I once left something behind and called up the supervisor and he had one of his uniformed employees come to the camp and drop it off, thankful for peace officers such as this.
We have a state trooper in one of our groups not near me unfortunately though and he is aware of some of the knowledge we extrude, it depends on the situation how he will react from what I hear, tail light out or going to fast for road conditions or some other small infraction he will give a warning, BUT definitely not for DUI or exceeding speed limit way beyond reasonable means.

Getting along in a small town was simple enough for me, but once their dishonorable High Priests got involved, many saw it as a chance to take down a big dog (me, because of a reputation and a set of skills I once fancied as important)

I have some stories about DNS/DND but, they are just stories that will not meet the approval of the brain trust so I will save us from that waisted energy.

Like I posted, never got to meet up with anyone on a NCIC (National Crime Information Center) or STATE CIC level that had that designation. Local or county there were plenty of people we "let alone" but that was from personal relationships and under-standing. Once outside that little circle of influence, all bets were off.


As I think you can see by your post that the MONEY is quite a black cloud handing over everyone's head to remind us we are not alone.
If you could live without the money would you do it thought?

I would and have lived without money, but to get my wife on board with that is not going to happen today, the system is going to self regulate soon and I have lived through that as well.

If one provides or a neignbor helps with Food, fuel, shelter and travel and also directly contracts with local police, fire company and ambulance should one be indemnified of so much government regulation? I would be interested to hear your opinion on that.

If one pays for those goods and services with redeemed lawful money and restricts their endorsements on contractual agreements, that is exactly how I handle all agreements with ANY Government entity. My restricted non-promissory endorsement and even lining out sections of their contract offer is how I handle any application for service.

I recently did so with a passport application, and was very clear that I would not testify or act under "the penalty of perjury" that any of the information about a DOB, place of birth or US Citizen status was not mine as I was not a witness to those events and only was relating those dates as "reported" or speculative and not for ID. I also was very careful to restrict the application information to only be used to obtain a passport for travel and no other uses expressed or not were authorized.

I even "refused for cause" their offer to keep my lawful money payment should they not give me the passport, revoked any presumed or assumed power of attorney the application gave them, signed in my true name etc.

I got their passport without comment, restriction or counter offer to my terms.

Peace be with you.

Thanks to David and [a few] others who have shown me the lawful way to control all my contact/covenants in my true name and with a reservation of my Creator given rights. I do not serve mammon, but I do allow mammon to serve me, lawfully.

I see no issue with that.

Peace be with you as well.
martin

David Merrill
03-18-11, 06:19 PM
Some of them are some good neighbors too, I once left something behind and called up the supervisor and he had one of his uniformed employees come to the camp and drop it off, thankful for peace officers such as this.


This is not very appealing to a wife and I should say most people. I like to backpack and enjoy that, especially the hot shower after.

We have a brain trust of suitors and this is the closest I have ever come to advertising, this Website. It is all referral up to now except two or three from SJC. I can assure you if I promoted living in a camp as a noble and patriotic way to be - to avoid the evils of money and food, shelter and a private comfortable room to excrete; this never would have happened.

martin earl
03-18-11, 07:03 PM
This is not very appealing to a wife and I should say most people. I like to backpack and enjoy that, especially the hot shower after.

We have a brain trust of suitors and this is the closest I have ever come to advertising, this Website. It is all referral up to now except two or three from SJC. I can assure you if I promoted living in a camp as a noble and patriotic way to be - to avoid the evils of money and food, shelter and a private comfortable room to excrete; this never would have happened.

LOL! Thus, my allusion to the "fed by ravens" in my post.

I did happen upon one thing during this thread, Jesus (so far as the record of the New Testament) never is shown to have handled money Himself.

For the Temple TAX, He commissioned Paul to cast the net into the sea. The fish had the coins for that TAX in its mouth (a cool redemption from the sea of non-floating currency I might add) to pay the TAX for both Jesus and Paul.

Also, Judas is reported to be the Treasurer for the troop/brain trust and paying for its obligations.

Does anyone else find it interesting that when redeeming lawful money, my Obligation to pay is correctly and similarly remanded to the Treasurer [of the US TRUST]?

motla68
03-18-11, 07:36 PM
Thanks to David and [a few] others who have shown me the lawful way to control all my contact/covenants in my true name and with a reservation of my Creator given rights. I do not serve mammon, but I do allow mammon to serve me, lawfully.
I see no issue with that.

Peace be with you as well.
martin

I am glad you said all that in responses to quote and that it did not come from me. now people have some evidence to go by if those words ever came out of my fingers.
Luke 6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

I have a private contract of performance with the county sheriff has hinted in my last post. I might be why he is so nice to me right now, I even got a christmas card from his private home that same year. Of course I cannot show any of that here or it would not be private.. correct?

Yeah man, getting the wife on board I agree is a big issue. She would not come to the garden co-op to help us out, but of course she enjoyed the fruits of the labor. This year I decided to plant a bunch of stuff here at the camp so al she has to do is water and harvest. It is the little things that we do that can bring our wives to this kind of thinking.

As noted above I hear you on contractual performance, technically they should do otherwise but a lot of them are out of abeyance of the usufruct, enforcement is a tricky situation on this, if you do the wrong thing then you become a subject of their statutes, so all we can do is give notice where notice should be given and let God take care of the rest, anything else we be the light and attract others to it.

We have found some evidence that actually a " authenticated " certificate of live birth also operates as a passport, I hear stories so am now In the process of trying to prove that out for myself and once done I can show the proof everyone requests.

John 9:1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.

Gal 4:19 My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

Rev 12:2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

Keep up the good study, truth in action will be revealed to you when it is time.

Have a great day.

motla68
03-18-11, 08:00 PM
This is not very appealing to a wife and I should say most people. I like to backpack and enjoy that, especially the hot shower after.

We have a brain trust of suitors and this is the closest I have ever come to advertising, this Website. It is all referral up to now except two or three from SJC. I can assure you if I promoted living in a camp as a noble and patriotic way to be - to avoid the evils of money and food, shelter and a private comfortable room to excrete; this never would have happened.

My home is in Heavan along side my spirit, I sojourn just temporarily upon this earth.
Phl 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
Jer 42:15 And now therefore hear the word of the LORD, ye remnant of Judah; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; If ye wholly set your faces to enter into Egypt, and go to sojourn there;

Remember these words that come from your fingers: " I can assure you if I promoted living in a camp as a noble and patriotic way to be - to avoid the evils of money and food, shelter and a private comfortable room to excrete; this never would have happened."

Residence is a place of permanence, the only place this holds true is within the confines of my skin. That drivers license and that ticket, do they describe the person in plastic or the real man? My interpretation is that they describe the person not the man as I described the court case in a previous post. So then by this analogy when we are given invitation to come to court or suffer, is this proper notice to the man?
I like the name " brain trust " , I just feel that technically it is mis-associated / Dislocated from the paper form the forum relies upon. BUT it is just a name, anyone can call anything that best fits their conscience. Free will.

Camp is certainly not on the top of my wife's list either, she wants not part of the country. Last time we visited there, not 45 mins after arrival she was stung with a bee, I got to keep lemon grass plants at the front door and the back to keep her from getting bitten up by mosquitoes.

Have a great day.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 08:40 PM
The law is a public contract with the sheriff. Better yet, it does not keep one restricted to any home county too. I expect some sort of gag order from the county attorney or AG if what you say is true and they get wind of your private performance contract. Possibly impeachment.



LOL! Thus, my allusion to the "fed by ravens" in my post.

I did happen upon one thing during this thread, Jesus (so far as the record of the New Testament) never is shown to have handled money Himself.

For the Temple TAX, He commissioned Paul to cast the net into the sea. The fish had the coins for that TAX in its mouth (a cool redemption from the sea of non-floating currency I might add) to pay the TAX for both Jesus and Paul.

Also, Judas is reported to be the Treasurer for the troop/brain trust and paying for its obligations.

Does anyone else find it interesting that when redeeming lawful money, my Obligation to pay is correctly and similarly remanded to the Treasurer [of the US TRUST]?

I love talking about this stuff (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImYzlkNjc2MjItNjdhYy00YjBhLWI1Z DItMDJmM2JkYmQ4Mzc0&hl=en)! By looking at Macabees we see that foreign kings were donating to the Temple Priest functions for quite some time which allowed them to hoard the drachma and shekels, contracting and then demanding that currency for the temple tax during the Tabernacles holiday.

This deserves a thread of its own though I imagine.

Here we have a great example (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImOWMwMjUxZTYtZmViNy00NmI1LWEyN zItMDgxYzFkZWMxNmVi&hl=en) of priestcrafting and the public performance bond. The next day the newspaper was trying to get comment from John William why he was cleaning out his desk early - No Comment. Even now, his oath of office (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_John_Suthers'_AG_oath.jpg)is faulty for two reasons - it was obviously 60 days late (30 days allowed by law) [That was a suitor's doing btw. You might sense a little scurrying to get that prescribed and published.] Secondly, he is outside the fiat system IN GOD WE TRUST! Note that he swears but by no authority - no name of God. That is even outside of statutory form. Form of oath (http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/6332/formofoath.jpg). Form of affirmation (http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/1953/formofaffirmation.jpg).

The fun part is figuring out why.

Now for some accusation that I am putting words in Motla68's mouth.

I am talking about the verbiage on most of the process-to-results images you have provided stating that the obligations are owned by the government. You say We helped with those docs. So I am not putting any words in your mouth - rather if my evaluation of the docs is incorrect I was hoping you would comment and articulate yourself, for your Group or whatever.



Regards,

David Merrill.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 08:54 PM
My home is in Heavan along side my spirit, I sojourn just temporarily upon this earth.
Phl 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:
Jer 42:15 And now therefore hear the word of the LORD, ye remnant of Judah; Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; If ye wholly set your faces to enter into Egypt, and go to sojourn there;

Remember these words that come from your fingers: " I can assure you if I promoted living in a camp as a noble and patriotic way to be - to avoid the evils of money and food, shelter and a private comfortable room to excrete; this never would have happened."

Residence is a place of permanence, the only place this holds true is within the confines of my skin. That drivers license and that ticket, do they describe the person in plastic or the real man? My interpretation is that they describe the person not the man as I described the court case in a previous post. So then by this analogy when we are given invitation to come to court or suffer, is this proper notice to the man?
I like the name " brain trust " , I just feel that technically it is mis-associated / Dislocated from the paper form the forum relies upon. BUT it is just a name, anyone can call anything that best fits their conscience. Free will.

Camp is certainly not on the top of my wife's list either, she wants not part of the country. Last time we visited there, not 45 mins after arrival she was stung with a bee, I got to keep lemon grass plants at the front door and the back to keep her from getting bitten up by mosquitoes.

Have a great day.


The "camp" comment was obviously an inference by me. That is more Robert Arthur MENARD's position these days - as he is living in a van. Something about Freeman Valley too. To most though - it is squatting.

You made mention I believe that we/I are where you used to be. That would mean that you have made progress to achieve a spiritual understanding with the sheriff in a private performance contract? Or was that a papering package (http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/6137/worldfreemansocietymemb.jpg)?

Do you understand? You said that you were not involved with a papering package - Rob's or otherwise. Do you mean you have a constructive trust with the sheriff?


Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-18-11, 08:57 PM
The law is a public contract with the sheriff. Better yet, it does not keep one restricted to any home county too. I expect some sort of gag order from the county attorney or AG if what you say is true and they get wind of your private performance contract. Possibly impeachment.

Now for some accusation that I am putting words in Motla68's mouth.

I am talking about the verbiage on most of the process-to-results images you have provided stating that the obligations are owned by the government. You say We helped with those docs. So I am not putting any words in your mouth - rather if my evaluation of the docs is incorrect I was hoping you would comment and articulate yourself, for your Group or whatever.

The intent for that had a lot to do with constructing a back up plan if something were to happen to me when test driving out the Coresource Methods in court, who runs security in the courthouse ? normally the sheriff department. Would this have worked if I had to use it? cannot say for sure, never had to go that route yet. Did it having anything to do with things happening the way they did in court? no verifiable proof since all that is done in the private outside the public venue.

I apologize for that, it was partly my mistake of not first conveying intent of what I posted. My presentment here in this forum is still a work in progress. Eventually somewhere we will have a meeting of the minds on all that.

Getting time for dinner, have a great evening.

motla68
03-18-11, 09:17 PM
The "camp" comment was obviously an inference by me. That is more Robert Arthur MENARD's position these days - as he is living in a van. Something about Freeman Valley too. To most though - it is squatting.

You made mention I believe that we/I are where you used to be. That would mean that you have made progress to achieve a spiritual understanding with the sheriff in a private performance contract? Or was that a papering package (http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/6137/worldfreemansocietymemb.jpg)?

Do you understand? You said that you were not involved with a papering package - Rob's or otherwise. Do you mean you have a constructive trust with the sheriff?


Mammon calls it squatting, I call it freely sojourning upon the earth as any man deserves to do. Just to make it clear I have not purchased any paper package from Menard nor did I receive one for free, I did however watch a lot of videos along the path to where I am now.

I am not completely past not using any paper at all, but am a lot closer then when i first started back in 2002 on my journey. To get where I need to be that would mean everyone else would need to be operating from the same dimension of thought and we are a long way from that.

Long way in the past back between 2003 and 2006 I was involved in a paper package, but it was one I created for myself pulling from many resources and not of any one resource strictly.
Constructive trust with the sheriff you say, sure if you want to call it that, but not what i claim, it was an offer and through some meeting of the mind eventually he agreed to it. How do I know this? his office sent a receipt. It sat on his desk for a couple of months I found out and then one day when I was down town I had seen him and approached him along side his secretary he said that he did not know what it was about so I explained and after that he said that he would take care of it and asked if I would like a receipt, I said yes and that is what he did about 2 weeks later. Privately in confidence I have showed MJ all of this once when we gathered at a meeting, not sure if he remembers that though.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 10:07 PM
I am sure MJ remembers just about everything that is interesting - like your agreement.

My point, like with MENARD's papering package is that it is outside the sheriff's charter to be filing papers that are private, or outside his scope of operations. That is what I was talking about though; you say it was setting on his desk and he did not know what to do with it. That is my point.

With Rob's papering package though we would have multiple government officials receiving the same package from multiple World Freeman Society members. It is not in the charter of the offices being papered to go to OfficeMax and buy an extra filing cabinet for this sort of paper material - for one thing. It is just not part of their job to be tracking who are the Freemen and who are the Sheeple or whatever you want to call these groups you propose on segregating in society.

Rob drinking publicly at the bus station in downtown Toronto at midnight was simply tolerated probably because of some stupid reason, like as far as homeless drunks there go, Rob seemed pretty civil. Now that could be considered a private contract in a way, compliment the officer for doing a fine job - which was Rob's way and you might get the impression your paper package was doing its job in the background. But when the rubber hits the road, there really are no private contracts like you described because the public is the official's boss at the end of the day and the public would quickly impeach or by any means replace your sheriff if he ever admitted to anything like what you describe.

Then there is a spiritual side of things too. I could go on and on about how wonderful the world is when you get right with God. I cannot describe what I do much better than intelligence nexus or that I draft remedy and that always just leads to more questions. How about, I am High Priest of the DEITI?

[Dutch East Indies Trading Industry]

That one got a few laughs but think about it a while after reading this post (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?24-The-first-constitutions&p=235&viewfull=1#post235).


P.S. Oh!! I almost forgot!

I am DAVID MERRILL.

David Merrill am I. [KJV - Here am I, LORD.] Page 1 (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImMmY1N2NiZDAtYmQzNi00NDZkLTllN TMtZTVmMDBmY2UzM2Jm&hl=en), Page 2 (http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/page2.jpg).

David means Beloved. Mara means Master (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImMmY1N2NiZDAtYmQzNi00NDZkLTllN TMtZTVmMDBmY2UzM2Jm&hl=en) and the suffix El means Of God. [DANIEL - Judge of God.] Ergo, my title DAVID MERRILL (constructive trust) is Beloved Master of God.

Michael Joseph
03-18-11, 11:06 PM
Motla's agreement was quite interesting in deed. As he decided to gain a private agreement with the local sheriff. How many will strike up an agreement with a sheriff? Most EXPECT that the sheriff is their servant - Why? If Motla should decide to offer any further detail that will be his choice. I will keep his trust.

Michael - Who is like the El - God [Yehovah]
Joseph - Yehovah gives the increase

I'll let you figure out what it means to speak that name. Yet I am proud to be called Michael Joseph, a member of the Spiritual Commonwealth of Yisra'el [Israel].

"Who will go for us: is the call: Here am I, send me was the response from yeshayahu [Isaiah] = Yehovah is Salvation.

Isa 6:8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, Here am I; send me.

The Temple was cleansed by Yehovah in 1433 BC [I believe]. Man asked for a king - so Yehovah consented - but Yehovah NEVER waived the bylaws of the Trust Agreement - Torah.

Even in the days of Zachariah [Remembered of Yehovah]:

Zec 2:7 Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon.


Yehoshua = Yehovah Saves [Once] - Now get on with it - Life. According to Torah - which is really expressed in just two fundamental laws - Love your God and Love your fellow Man.

Torah can easily be known just by observation of Nature. In fact one really need not attend any building on a corner - most are "bethaven" - Houses of vanity - the bad fig - what seest thou Jeremiah? The greatest source of power and control comes from Beth-aven. The people TRUST pastor.

Hos 4:15 Though thou, Israel, play the harlot, yet let not Judah offend; and come not ye unto Gilgal, neither go ye up to Bethaven, nor swear, The LORD liveth.

H1007
bêyth 'âven
bayth aw'-ven
From H1004 and H205; house of vanity;

For those who don't know Gilgal is where one of the School's of the Prophets was convened. There is a deeper message here for those who can see. I shall touch on the surface....What? - you think the "priests" at beth-aven are ordained of Yehovah? These come from the "cemetary" - i mean seminary - divinity schools.


Some Keep the Sabbath (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?68-Can-God-die&p=446&viewfull=1#post446) this way.


To those who can see: The following is an express Trust of God in the Election. God Trusting in his Election.

Isa 6:13 But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.

"their leaves" is NOT in the manuscript.

motla68
03-19-11, 04:28 AM
I am sure MJ remembers just about everything that is interesting - like your agreement.

My point, like with MENARD's papering package is that it is outside the sheriff's charter to be filing papers that are private, or outside his scope of operations. That is what I was talking about though; you say it was setting on his desk and he did not know what to do with it. That is my point.

With Rob's papering package though we would have multiple government officials receiving the same package from multiple World Freeman Society members. It is not in the charter of the offices being papered to go to OfficeMax and buy an extra filing cabinet for this sort of paper material - for one thing. It is just not part of their job to be tracking who are the Freemen and who are the Sheeple or whatever you want to call these groups you propose on segregating in society.

Rob drinking publicly at the bus station in downtown Toronto at midnight was simply tolerated probably because of some stupid reason, like as far as homeless drunks there go, Rob seemed pretty civil. Now that could be considered a private contract in a way, compliment the officer for doing a fine job - which was Rob's way and you might get the impression your paper package was doing its job in the background. But when the rubber hits the road, there really are no private contracts like you described because the public is the official's boss at the end of the day and the public would quickly impeach or by any means replace your sheriff if he ever admitted to anything like what you describe.

Then there is a spiritual side of things too. I could go on and on about how wonderful the world is when you get right with God. I cannot describe what I do much better than intelligence nexus or that I draft remedy and that always just leads to more questions. How about, I am High Priest of the DEITI?

[Dutch East Indies Trading Industry]

That one got a few laughs but think about it a while after reading this post (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?24-The-first-constitutions&p=235&viewfull=1#post235).


P.S. Oh!! I almost forgot!

I am DAVID MERRILL.

David Merrill am I. [KJV - Here am I, LORD.] Page 1 (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImMmY1N2NiZDAtYmQzNi00NDZkLTllN TMtZTVmMDBmY2UzM2Jm&hl=en), Page 2 (http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/page2.jpg).

David means Beloved. Mara means Master (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImMmY1N2NiZDAtYmQzNi00NDZkLTllN TMtZTVmMDBmY2UzM2Jm&hl=en) and the suffix El means Of God. [DANIEL - Judge of God.] Ergo, my title DAVID MERRILL (constructive trust) is Beloved Master of God.

The Private agreement did not come from the Arena of Menard and his fan fair, in fact his work is a very very small part in the path where I am at. It started with a mentor who sojourns on the land know as Florida, I then heard some good vibes coming from a private group in canada also NOT associated with Menard,, then heard some stuff from a man named Vic Beck also in Canada which is not part of the Menard clan of patriots up there. The rest has just been our Coresource group online and the local study group here.

Yeah, Rob is quite the radical guy in many ways, he is just a high spirited man who has a following and yes sometimes I agree the Ego explodes from his head sometimes, BUT even Vic beck has had his times of radical thinking which he was in jail for about 24 hours, they got tired of him educating the other prisoners so they threw him out of jail and it was one of the coldest days of the year, public transpo shut down so they banged on the door begging to be let back in the jail. They let him back in but in a secluded room away from general population. This also got him tossed out of the private group up there from what I hear, because doing what he did to cause him to go to jail was not exactly the peaceful inhabitant type of action.

haha, funny you mentioned high priest. Here is a clip from a well written man in our group who goes by Onlashuk, he has been my right hand man at our local group meetings for about a year now:
"" Furthermore, to be a Royal Priest, which is to be of the Holy Royal Priesthood, which all Sons and Heirs of the Living Creator are, who are adopted (Galatians 4:1-12). "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light..." (1 Peter 2:9) A Priest cannot, and is not allowed to have, "MONEY," on them at anytime. This goes especially for the Royal Priesthood replaced that of the OLD Priesthood. Since everything is provided for a Priesthood they never had any need of having MONEY. Therefore, it cannot be any different for the Son and Heir who takes their responsibility to this seriously. ""

He only has 1 post on here, maybe someday he will post more when the spirit moves him to do so.

The name my mother had chosen to call me is equivalent to the name of the biblical Archangel. Luckily she did not cave in to the name my drunken biological father wanted to give me which is of a southern satire, and this is a man who's bloodline has a Rockefeller in it. That's ok, I will stick with mom's humble blue collar legacy for me.

Have a blessed evening.

motla68
03-19-11, 05:00 AM
Motla's agreement was quite interesting in deed. As he decided to gain a private agreement with the local sheriff. How many will strike up an agreement with a sheriff? Most EXPECT that the sheriff is their servant - Why? If Motla should decide to offer any further detail that will be his choice. I will keep his trust.


1. Now he is my employee to where I no longer receiving his services as a benefit through the state, if we are in a state court then he has to bend to their bidding, but if he now interferes with my intent in there he is in breach of contract, some may call it breach of trust.

2. Back in the civil war days, Lincoln and the liber code, the counties had posse comitatus and the hightest ranking officer was the county sheriff, also known as the HIgh Sheriff, But he also had another hat which was Provost Marshall which is only answerable to the Provost Marshall General.

A North Carolina Provost Marshall:
http://newbern.cpclib.org/digital/reed/xxv017.htm

" After the close of the war, officials in Richmond appointed Sheriff Turner as Provost Marshall. Turner organized two companies under command of Reynolds and Penn with “authority to organize a military court to try these marauders and execute or imprison them.” The county ordered the sheriff to organize militia “for the purpose of suppressing the lawless outrages now being committed. The county stipulated, however, that this militia was “not intended to interfere in any manner with the authority of the United States or any other legitimate state of Federal Government.”
souce: http://www.freestateofpatrick.com/rjrh.htm

PMG:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provost_Marshal_General

David Merrill
03-19-11, 10:37 AM
You keep making the same connection to MENARD - papering public officials. It is like NESARA - private law does not exist. There are no private agreements in effect. If discovered, your official as your private employee will be terminated, like you admit.

It is much better to bring the agreements out into the light.

Is your private agreement with the sheriff published at the county clerk and recorder? Examine carefully why it is that we cannot read your Agreement here or maybe sit down and discuss it with your sheriff. You papered him and he gave you a receipt - proof of service. But you cannot share either with us.

It is secret law.

motla68
03-19-11, 11:38 AM
You keep making the same connection to MENARD - papering public officials. It is like NESARA - private law does not exist. There are no private agreements in effect. If discovered, your official as your private employee will be terminated, like you admit.

It is much better to bring the agreements out into the light.

Is your private agreement with the sheriff published at the county clerk and recorder? Examine carefully why it is that we cannot read your Agreement here or maybe sit down and discuss it with your sheriff. You papered him and he gave you a receipt - proof of service. But you cannot share either with us.

It is secret law.

- What about Private International Law ?
http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3452.htm

- This " proof of service " was concluded back in '2004 and the same man is sitting in that sheriff's position, people like him and he keeps getting re-elected. You may want to re-think your position on that: http://www.donnieharrison.org/
Again, additionally this concept comes from that we should be able to contract with these people directly, fire company, ambulatory e.t.c. without receiving such services through the county or state as a benefit. I checked here and it seems everything is chartered by the state, cities and counties so to receive these services without doing this would be receiving benefits from the state. If we are made in the image of the creator why are we making these excuses not to do things, we must go and create for it is better to give then receive.

This PA is very simple, it just requests the protection of life and property, family members are described and vehicles described including the vin #s, it was also noticing him of the came near the intersection of this road and that road e.t.c. Lastly the serial number of the money order is mentioned in there as far as the primary proof of service, I really did not need a receipt, but it save me having to go pay $4 from the post office to get proof it was cashed.
The figure calculation what to offer is using CAFR to figure how much county sheriff's office get annually and divide that by the population of the count, it is not as much as you would think,

Anthony Joseph
03-19-11, 02:19 PM
Wouldn't the standing and/or required oath of office of this public servant be the "contract" which would render the same results? I offer that the required oath of office is charitable in nature and is given FREELY to anyone who will clearly and declaratively accept it as a voluntary promise to do what you say this man does for you in private. I also believe that the acceptance of this "promise" is non-binding, non-obligating and non-subjugating to the acceptor since it is God-given rights which are being voluntarily protected - God's work. We are mostly deceived into a mindset and notion that we should accept only the "enforcement officer" role which has jurisdiction over us rather than the "peace officer" role which is there only to keep the peace and to protect and serve our inherent rights derived from the Almighty Creator.

This is the "dual roles" concept I have been discussing and developing regarding the oath-sworn officers/agents we may encounter. My stance is that the role that manifests depends on us; how we identify ourselves, and our absence from their "contracted fealty" by and through our demand for, and right to, lawful money. In other words, we refuse consent/contract to be re-venued into their district overlays as is our unalienable right.

I believe that this private agreement you present is already existing in public form - the oath of office, according to requirements of law upon those who occupy these "offices". The acceptance of of these charitable oaths can be fully disclosed and filed in the public record without the need to keep private and secret agreements which will possibly be terminated when "crunch time" comes. Of course a verbal inquiry and acceptance of an officer's "oath-sworn status" works during an encounter with someone you are unfamiliar with. The officer must then lie on the stand when and if he/she is questioned in court about your inquiry and acceptance.

Perhaps you could reveal a generic version of this agreement for us to peruse in order to get a better idea of what you claim to have accomplished.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 02:28 PM
- What about Private International Law ?
http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3452.htm

- This " proof of service " was concluded back in '2004 and the same man is sitting in that sheriff's position, people like him and he keeps getting re-elected. You may want to re-think your position on that: http://www.donnieharrison.org/
Again, additionally this concept comes from that we should be able to contract with these people directly, fire company, ambulatory e.t.c. without receiving such services through the county or state as a benefit. I checked here and it seems everything is chartered by the state, cities and counties so to receive these services without doing this would be receiving benefits from the state. If we are made in the image of the creator why are we making these excuses not to do things, we must go and create for it is better to give then receive.

This PA is very simple, it just requests the protection of life and property, family members are described and vehicles described including the vin #s, it was also noticing him of the came near the intersection of this road and that road e.t.c. Lastly the serial number of the money order is mentioned in there as far as the primary proof of service, I really did not need a receipt, but it save me having to go pay $4 from the post office to get proof it was cashed.
The figure calculation what to offer is using CAFR to figure how much county sheriff's office get annually and divide that by the population of the count, it is not as much as you would think,

Ergo, this is why he said it is laying on his desk and he does not know what to do with it. There is no such thing as private or secret law! You just demonstrated that for us - finally. I have to point out how annoying it is for you to pussyfoot around, like you are trying to tell us/me something worth hearing, and because of your misperceptions about public and private, when it finally comes down to showing us/me, you try making it sound like I have been ignorant or stupid for not understanding what you are showing us/me - before you have described or shown us/me.

There is no secret or private law - ergo you have no contract with your sheriff any different than anybody else who clicks the Donation Button Contribute Online on the right, and gives money to the sheriff's department.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=147&d=1300543877

Not until you publish your agreement! Look at your link:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=149&d=1300543946

These Private International Treaties are between public states. [Are you a statesman?] Do you need proof? Sure, you do! Everybody does! That is what the State Department Bulletin is about. Even the Secret (http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/7357/pl945644.jpg)Jamaica-Rambouillet Accord is found in the State Department Bulletin.


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=148&d=1300543944

Here is what I suggest you do then. You publish your agreement and receipt with the sheriff at the county clerk and recorder. If you have a marked Received or Filed copy from when you tendered it, publish that one. Then you might serve the original from the C&R on him again and publish the Proof of Service. Recordation. Publication. Now everybody knows you two have established private international law between whatever - my guess is between a statesman in the unincorporated county and the sheriff for the incorporated county - bringing his services into the unincorporated county for your private use as a man there, on the land there.

When you get it published, you might as well show us here too. Of course you might sanitize it a bit as far as your abode's location and your full legal name and such. That is because we are not really the neighbors you need to be notifying about all the details. I assure you that there is no such thing as private or secret law - that has any effect outside the scope of the parties signed and/or served. [The Masons have their "jurisdictions" too, but if you don't like the esoterics, resign or quit paying your dues/tax. I assure you that HARRISON cannot act as the Sheriff for them, and the sheriff for you at the same time, in two different capacities until you publish the agreement. That would be like him acting as Sheriff and Mason at the same time.] The sheriff cannot act on your process or he will be terminated. Once published people might get a little ragged about it but at least people may follow in your footsteps and contract for his protective and law enforcement services privately too.

Very clever, find the funding in the county CAFR and divide that per capita! Pay that amount in lawful money and you effectively "own" your portion of the sheriff's attention.



Regards,

David Merrill.



P.S. Once you have that all in place and published send it to the State Department for publication under that same Private International Law doctrine you linked! That will be really clever.

P.P.S. After doing all this it will be interesting to see if through private international treaty you get any different attention than covered in the sheriff's oath of office. But you will have achieved in my opinion a private agreement for the identical services everybody else does publicly. You will be able to easily R4C any assumpsit presentments following a 911 emergency, for example.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 03:03 PM
P.S. I suspect that the county attorney will R4C your publication publicly and refund your donation, within three days.

P.P.S. You said something about 2004? You realize by dividing the CAFR per capita you are only paying for a one year contract at a time? Your agreement expired in 2005 if you have not kept up your end.

martin earl
03-19-11, 03:55 PM
motla68,

I am glad to see you are still here. From my own legal training I can tell you, any Contract you have with the Sheriff is outside his Official Capacity. He can come to your aid as a friend, but if he did so in his Uniform, with Official ID or a Badge or even Identified his "self" verbally as the SHERIFF, he would be

"Impersonating a POLICE OFFICER. Look up that Statute, it will most likely include this statement: "even if the AGENCY the person is representing does not exist..."

If he acts privately for YOU, under your contract, even if you claim he was doing so as your AGENT, you have no AGENCY.

There is no County of motla68 Sheriffs Department, no taxing authority, no record, no survey, no RE-COGNITION of your "nation". His recognized authority as a Sheriff only exists inside his County. If you are inside his county, you cannot be a FREEMAN, only a person of some sort.

There is NO Statute or "crime" I have ever seen titled "Impersonating a Peace Officer", why?

Because they are not the same thing, at all.

From my own life, I can tell you this: When I left one Police Department and went to work for another, in the gap between my employment, the Brass was very clear to tell me this:

"YOU are NOT allowed to enforce any STATE, or LOCAL Statute that is not a Breech of the peace or a violent felony in progress. Even if you do have those elements, you cannot IDENTIFY yourself as a POLICE OFFICER, nor wear any ID."


I was still a STATE Certified Peace officer, but I could not do any POLICE duties, until I was employed as by an AGENCY.

I have seen retired officers arrested for wearing their old Department Patched uniform shirts for Boy Scout fund raising events. Even Halloween party goers have been charged for wearing official Police uniforms.

Your sheriff could face the same fate should he act as a Police officer (or Sheriff) under your agreement without question. And, nothing he did for YOU would hold any legal authority with the county.

That is not to say he might pull some strings politically for you or quietly tell his deputies to back off you, but like I warned already, he will not give up his paycheck and pension for you or go to jail.

That is a local effect, it is not a remedy or a solution unless you never plan on leaving his county without recognizable paperwork with their SEAL on it.

A ruling from an Article III District court trumps the guys with guns because it LEGALLY and LAWFULLY binds those guys to their Oaths of OFFICE, which is the only Contract with their signature on it that counts because it's Bonded by their own currency as a man or woman.

Even the demons RECOGNIZED the Master, but most State agents do not have that cognitive ability, but they recognize a District Court SEAL. While I do not accept their MARK on me, I will let their Mark provide COGNITION of my standing to them in a language, seal and symbols they UNDERSTAND.

Its only fair.

Peace be with you.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 04:21 PM
That is a very good explanation.


http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certificate_corrected.jpg

Failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted.

motla68
03-19-11, 04:47 PM
Wouldn't the standing and/or required oath of office of this public servant be the "contract" which would render the same results? I offer that the required oath of office is charitable in nature and is given FREELY to anyone who will clearly and declaratively accept it as a voluntary promise to do what you say this man does for you in private. I also believe that the acceptance of this "promise" is non-binding, non-obligating and non-subjugating to the acceptor since it is God-given rights which are being voluntarily protected - God's work. We are mostly deceived into a mindset and notion that we should accept only the "enforcement officer" role which has jurisdiction over us rather than the "peace officer" role which is there only to keep the peace and to protect and serve our inherent rights derived from the Almighty Creator.

This is the "dual roles" concept I have been discussing and developing regarding the oath-sworn officers/agents we may encounter. My stance is that the role that manifests depends on us; how we identify ourselves, and our absence from their "contracted fealty" by and through our demand for, and right to, lawful money. In other words, we refuse consent/contract to be re-venued into their district overlays as is our unalienable right.

I believe that this private agreement you present is already existing in public form - the oath of office, according to requirements of law upon those who occupy these "offices". The acceptance of of these charitable oaths can be fully disclosed and filed in the public record without the need to keep private and secret agreements which will possibly be terminated when "crunch time" comes. Of course a verbal inquiry and acceptance of an officer's "oath-sworn status" works during an encounter with someone you are unfamiliar with. The officer must then lie on the stand when and if he/she is questioned in court about your inquiry and acceptance.

Perhaps you could reveal a generic version of this agreement for us to peruse in order to get a better idea of what you claim to have accomplished.

Rom 2:11 - For there is no respect of persons with God.
Soon as he puts on that "uniform" his loyalty is to the state, in the statutes their is rules of Uniform Trust and those Oath's office are also color of law, not to mention that the word Public has it's own municipal corporate tie ins. All of man is equal, but when he puts on that uniform then there is unequality authority so for me to accept him as even a public peace officer within the law of mammon it is waiving the abundance of natural rights for color of law/bowl of soup which is a lesser of authority if that makes any sense.

Your second paragraph, your on the right track, accepting the color of law which is not of my Creator is re-venuing. Be a creator.

The state and all of it's underlying agents are going through great lengths to hide these oaths of office if they exist, in some instance there is not oath of office at all, but since I was not part of the constitution (paderford vs. City of Savannah) their authority could care less about our complaints about it. No more remedies, being a creator of solutions here.

Since all this is still theory of operation I dare not put a sample up, no proof that it actually did anything yet .

motla68
03-19-11, 04:58 PM
Ergo, this is why he said it is laying on his desk and he does not know what to do with it. There is no such thing as private or secret law! You just demonstrated that for us - finally. I have to point out how annoying it is for you to pussyfoot around, like you are trying to tell us/me something worth hearing, and because of your misperceptions about public and private, when it finally comes down to showing us/me, you try making it sound like I have been ignorant or stupid for not understanding what you are showing us/me - before you have described or shown us/me.

There is no secret or private law - ergo you have no contract with your sheriff any different than anybody else who clicks the Donation Button Contribute Online on the right, and gives money to the sheriff's department.

Here is what I suggest you do then. You publish your agreement and receipt with the sheriff at the county clerk and recorder. If you have a marked Received or Filed copy from when you tendered it, publish that one. Then you might serve the original from the C&R on him again and publish the Proof of Service. Recordation. Publication. Now everybody knows you two have established private international law between whatever - my guess is between a statesman in the unincorporated county and the sheriff for the incorporated county - bringing his services into the unincorporated county for your private use as a man there, on the land there.

When you get it published, you might as well show us here too. Of course you might sanitize it a bit as far as your abode's location and your full legal name and such. That is because we are not really the neighbors you need to be notifying about all the details. I assure you that there is no such thing as private or secret law - that has any effect outside the scope of the parties signed and/or served. [The Masons have their "jurisdictions" too, but if you don't like the esoterics, resign or quit paying your dues/tax. I assure you that HARRISON cannot act as the Sheriff for them, and the sheriff for you at the same time, in two different capacities until you publish the agreement. That would be like him acting as Sheriff and Mason at the same time.] The sheriff cannot act on your process or he will be terminated. Once published people might get a little ragged about it but at least people may follow in your footsteps and contract for his protective and law enforcement services privately too.

Very clever, find the funding in the county CAFR and divide that per capita! Pay that amount in lawful money and you effectively "own" your portion of the sheriff's attention.
P.S. Once you have that all in place and published send it to the State Department for publication under that same Private International Law doctrine you linked! That will be really clever.

P.P.S. After doing all this it will be interesting to see if through private international treaty you get any different attention than covered in the sheriff's oath of office. But you will have achieved in my opinion a private agreement for the identical services everybody else does publicly. You will be able to easily R4C any assumpsit presentments following a 911 emergency, for example.

I guess you missed the part where I met with him in person and explained what it was about and he did a handshake on it. ( this natural law is a lost art that needs restored)

Revenuing this agreement into the public is not my choice, some of those reasons are in my reply to Anthony in post #41 of this thread.

motla68
03-19-11, 05:04 PM
P.S. I suspect that the county attorney will R4C your publication publicly and refund your donation, within three days.

P.P.S. You said something about 2004? You realize by dividing the CAFR per capita you are only paying for a one year contract at a time? Your agreement expired in 2005 if you have not kept up your end.

The agreement had no expiration date and in the notice it lets him know if more funds are needed to do his job to let me know. The calculation of how I came up with that figure were not in the notice, it was just a general rule to figure out what to offer. The money order also did have the lawful money statement on it so that was covered too.

Michael Joseph
03-19-11, 05:16 PM
That hand shake is notice of agreement Under Natural Law.

In the converse:

Pro 22:26 Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts.

motla68
03-19-11, 05:22 PM
motla68,

I am glad to see you are still here. From my own legal training I can tell you, any Contract you have with the Sheriff is outside his Official Capacity. He can come to your aid as a friend, but if he did so in his Uniform, with Official ID or a Badge or even Identified his "self" verbally as the SHERIFF, he would be

"Impersonating a POLICE OFFICER. Look up that Statute, it will most likely include this statement: "even if the AGENCY the person is representing does not exist..."

If he acts privately for YOU, under your contract, even if you claim he was doing so as your AGENT, you have no AGENCY.

There is no County of motla68 Sheriffs Department, no taxing authority, no record, no survey, no RE-COGNITION of your "nation". His recognized authority as a Sheriff only exists inside his County. If you are inside his county, you cannot be a FREEMAN, only a person of some sort.

There is NO Statute or "crime" I have ever seen titled "Impersonating a Peace Officer", why?

Because they are not the same thing, at all.

From my own life, I can tell you this: When I left one Police Department and went to work for another, in the gap between my employment, the Brass was very clear to tell me this:

"YOU are NOT allowed to enforce any STATE, or LOCAL Statute that is not a Breech of the peace or a violent felony in progress. Even if you do have those elements, you cannot IDENTIFY yourself as a POLICE OFFICER, nor wear any ID."


I was still a STATE Certified Peace officer, but I could not do any POLICE duties, until I was employed as by an AGENCY.

I have seen retired officers arrested for wearing their old Department Patched uniform shirts for Boy Scout fund raising events. Even Halloween party goers have been charged for wearing official Police uniforms.

Your sheriff could face the same fate should he act as a Police officer (or Sheriff) under your agreement without question. And, nothing he did for YOU would hold any legal authority with the county.

That is not to say he might pull some strings politically for you or quietly tell his deputies to back off you, but like I warned already, he will not give up his paycheck and pension for you or go to jail.

That is a local effect, it is not a remedy or a solution unless you never plan on leaving his county without recognizable paperwork with their SEAL on it.

A ruling from an Article III District court trumps the guys with guns because it LEGALLY and LAWFULLY binds those guys to their Oaths of OFFICE, which is the only Contract with their signature on it that counts because it's Bonded by their own currency as a man or woman.

Even the demons RECOGNIZED the Master, but most State agents do not have that cognitive ability, but they recognize a District Court SEAL. While I do not accept their MARK on me, I will let their Mark provide COGNITION of my standing to them in a language, seal and symbols they UNDERSTAND.

Its only fair.

Peace be with you.

Again you all are trying to completely justify this by mammons law, are you all forgetting about the Providence and being a agent/ambassador of the one most high? I am sure you all heard about the biblical phrase one cannot have 2 masters. I am not going to try an think things out for this man nor am I going to try and predict the future, I can only live in the now.

motla68
03-19-11, 05:37 PM
That hand shake is notice of agreement Under Natural Law.

In the converse:

Pro 22:26 Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts.

If you recall this agreement took place in 2004, well before we created Coresource Solution in 2009, I think a little differently these days, all it is used for is a conversation piece since I have never had to use it since creating it. The new found knowledge way of life is working for me so I doubt it will be needed for anything.

Technically though we all have fallen short of that verse, with CS going in the direction of a resourced based society we are at least have an intent to go by it unlike a lot of other groups out there who are trying to enforce 20 or 30 million dollar liens, which you should know by now having been at local meetings and our other conversations.

martin earl
03-19-11, 07:35 PM
Again you all are trying to completely justify this by mammons law, are you all forgetting about the Providence and being a agent/ambassador of the one most high? I am sure you all heard about the biblical phrase one cannot have 2 masters. I am not going to try an think things out for this man nor am I going to try and predict the future, I can only live in the now.


No, I am not trying to JUSTIFY. Nor am I a servant of Mammon. But I do know more about Cops and their belief system than you do. The Sheriff is a SWORN SERVANT of what you call "mammons law". It is his JOB to uphold and protect that system. That is the sum of everything I have posted.

He is backed by an ARMY men, Judges, Attorneys and spiritual criminals who defy your "natural law" every day with ZERO repercussions.

You have no STANDING to make him do anything, he answers to the System he serves and gets paid very well to serve.

"In the mouths of 2 or 3 witnesses shall all truth be established."

If you put more stock in the witness of the Spirit to a fallen man in the service of the System than he does, that is YOUR error, not his.

Remember, there where Roman Soldiers near the Cross who testified of Jesus STANDING, but they did nothing to stop it.

Do not try to say I do not believe the Spirit cannot move people, I am proof it can, that is why I am here and not still strapping a gun on every day and "protecting and serving" the Spirit has witnessed to me EXACTLY what and WHO they are "protecting and serving".

Those men under-stand ONE THING, their own LAWS and STATUTES. I can use those laws and statutes just like Christ did, to show them they have no jurisdiction over ME and in their own diction and rules they do not rule over me.

Everything else is just a "patriot/religious conspiracy nut case and dangerous" because they are TRAINED that way.

You may be lucky enough to have a Sheriff who is different, but again, that is not the norm and it is not a protection for the rest of us who do not have that blessing.

In short, you have provided me nothing here from a Law enforcement stand point or a natural law standpoint that would have bound me when I was a Cop.

David has, it fits everything I know about natural law, Statutes, civil law, trust law, Scriptural Law et al.

And, more importantly THEY know it and are bound by it when I have the witness of a District Court to SEAL IT.

"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven..."

That means truth and law it is re-cognizable no matter what "law" or god you are claiming you serve. There must be ORDER, because my God is not a God of Chaos, but one of Law and Order.

By your own statements your FAITH in your agreement has not been tested by fire. MINE HAS and not one of my former "brothers in arms" stood by me, in fact, they relished the thought of proving me wrong, including a Sheriff I once risked my own life to protect. They love the idea of seeing a "believer" fed to lions or at least, in cages with the rest of thieves and criminals. Been there, done that.

Peace be with you.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 07:41 PM
The agreement had no expiration date and in the notice it lets him know if more funds are needed to do his job to let me know. The calculation of how I came up with that figure were not in the notice, it was just a general rule to figure out what to offer. The money order also did have the lawful money statement on it so that was covered too.


The agreement expired a year later in 2005. You explained that already. Unless you are trying to get one over on the sheriff - six or seven years for the price of one. If you did not explain the fee evaluation from the CAFR in your conversation then you handshake is useless. Your money order was nothing more than a donation like many other people make.

Otherwise you have a pretty keen plan for not paying the taxes on the public collection system like everybody else though. However, you will probably end up paying more for fire, 911 service, police (because 911 connects to police, not the sheriff) and whatever else you select from the CAFR menu. Remember, that you cannot report a robbery to the sheriff if you are in city limits - the sheriff will refer you to police. If you out in the county though, then you will get a deputy.

I like the theory though. It is just that you do not gain anything by it and I just do not buy into your theories about mammon and the system. I think you are better enjoying your sovereignty by using the system from a lawful money standpoint. That is why the remedy is there to begin with. It is there because in 1913 the Fed was created to furnish elastic currency.


http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5853/titlesmall.jpg

This deception and false balances of only paying the sheriff for one year and thinking he is obligated forever really bugs me about your method too.



Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-19-11, 07:57 PM
The agreement expired a year later in 2005. You explained that already. Unless you are trying to get one over on the sheriff - six or seven years for the price of one. If you did not explain the fee evaluation from the CAFR in your conversation then you handshake is useless. Your money order was nothing more than a donation like many other people make.

Otherwise you have a pretty keen plan for not paying the taxes on the public collection system like everybody else though. However, you will probably end up paying more for fire, 911 service, police (because 911 connects to police, not the sheriff) and whatever else you select from the CAFR menu. Remember, that you cannot report a robbery to the sheriff if you are in city limits - the sheriff will refer you to police. If you out in the county though, then you will get a deputy.

I like the theory though. It is just that you do not gain anything by it and I just do not buy into your theories about mammon and the system. I think you are better enjoying your sovereignty by using the system from a lawful money standpoint. That is why the remedy is there to begin with. It is there because in 1913 the Fed was created to furnish elastic currency.


http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5853/titlesmall.jpg

This deception and false balances of only paying the sheriff for one year and thinking he is obligated forever really bugs me about your method too.


Ok, you got your beliefs about that and I really do not care to argue the point any more mostly because have never needed to use it anyway also I do not think the same way today that I did back then about the system/mammon or the bible.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 09:04 PM
Understood. Thank you anyway! You have opened up some great new doors with your research. I will get back on a new thread soon.

Anthony Joseph
03-20-11, 07:23 PM
No, I am not trying to JUSTIFY. Nor am I a servant of Mammon. But I do know more about Cops and their belief system than you do. The Sheriff is a SWORN SERVANT of what you call "mammons law". It is his JOB to uphold and protect that system. That is the sum of everything I have posted.

He is backed by an ARMY men, Judges, Attorneys and spiritual criminals who defy your "natural law" every day with ZERO repercussions.

You have no STANDING to make him do anything, he answers to the System he serves and gets paid very well to serve.

"In the mouths of 2 or 3 witnesses shall all truth be established."

If you put more stock in the witness of the Spirit to a fallen man in the service of the System than he does, that is YOUR error, not his.

Remember, there where Roman Soldiers near the Cross who testified of Jesus STANDING, but they did nothing to stop it.

Do not try to say I do not believe the Spirit cannot move people, I am proof it can, that is why I am here and not still strapping a gun on every day and "protecting and serving" the Spirit has witnessed to me EXACTLY what and WHO they are "protecting and serving".

Those men under-stand ONE THING, their own LAWS and STATUTES. I can use those laws and statutes just like Christ did, to show them they have no jurisdiction over ME and in their own diction and rules they do not rule over me.

Everything else is just a "patriot/religious conspiracy nut case and dangerous" because they are TRAINED that way.

You may be lucky enough to have a Sheriff who is different, but again, that is not the norm and it is not a protection for the rest of us who do not have that blessing.

In short, you have provided me nothing here from a Law enforcement stand point or a natural law standpoint that would have bound me when I was a Cop.

David has, it fits everything I know about natural law, Statutes, civil law, trust law, Scriptural Law et al.

And, more importantly THEY know it and are bound by it when I have the witness of a District Court to SEAL IT.

"Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven..."

That means truth and law it is re-cognizable no matter what "law" or god you are claiming you serve. There must be ORDER, because my God is not a God of Chaos, but one of Law and Order.

By your own statements your FAITH in your agreement has not been tested by fire. MINE HAS and not one of my former "brothers in arms" stood by me, in fact, they relished the thought of proving me wrong, including a Sheriff I once risked my own life to protect. They love the idea of seeing a "believer" fed to lions or at least, in cages with the rest of thieves and criminals. Been there, done that.

Peace be with you.

What a great asset to have you here martin earl! Were you on the old suijuris site under a different name?

I am interested in your offerings as to how you diffuse negative roadside encounters with conditioned and ignorant LEOs who attempt to impose their will over you. We already have information about properly identifying ouselves in our True Names, but I would like your perspective on the issue since you have been on the inside and know how they think and what their cognizant weaknesses/limitations are.

Great to have you here.

David Merrill
03-20-11, 09:41 PM
Yes. Martin Earl is already an asset for us all at StSC;


There is a familiar thread in his writing that may tie to what is called natural religion - the Seven Noahide Laws (http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/4397/foreignere.jpg). Page 1 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg), Page 2 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg).


Deu 15:1 At the end of every seven years thou shalt make a release.
Deu 15:2 And this is the manner of the release: Every creditor that lendeth ought unto his neighbour shall release it; he shall not exact it of his neighbour, or of his brother; because it is called the LORD'S release.
Deu 15:3 Of a foreigner thou mayest exact it again: but that which is thine with thy brother thine hand shall release;

Deu 23:20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.


Be like the Son.


Mat 17:25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.

This proverbial Babylonian Law System is for real (http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/8468/tractatesanhedrin2.jpg) people. Page 1 (http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/2541/nausner1.jpg), Page 2 (http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5027/nausner2.jpg). It is difficult to prove as dominant today, but it is the foundation of all common law at the same time. It is really the first successful natural law system ever recorded and is still recorded today on a dolomite stela in the Louvre (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&rlz=1R2GGLT_enUS423&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&wrapid=tlif130065607784410&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=louvre&fb=1&gl=us&hq=louvre&cid=0,0,3160718266159698595&ei=3W-GTb2vLcPB0QGM5PW_CA&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=image&resnum=2&ved=0CDUQnwIwAQ) and known as The Code of Hammurabi (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp). If I may read this into Martin Earl's post, it is prevalent current law as much that it has survived as that it is in alignment with a constant and archaic human condition like what Jesus redacted of the Ten Commands - Love the LORD thy God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.

In 1997 it surfaced in an acceptance letter (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=163&d=1300656787) to the Republic of Texas by the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin loosely cited Public Law 102-14 from 1991.


This Court, therefore, urges the Attorney General of the United States of America, Janet Reno, currently under the Political Leadership of President Bill Clinton to answer to the charge of failure to hear a grievance that is brought before its duly appointed Courts, and it has 90 working days in which to show cause as to why this case should not be heard before this Court and to submit documents showing that it has conformed with all treaties, conventions and wishes of the native peoples and with states accepted or annexed under the Constitutional principles and Noahide law, which was adopted as Law in the United States by Congress.

Page 1 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg), Page 2 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg). In trying to find the source of certain behavior and the lack of it with LEO's I really feel the links in this post might be worth your time.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_30.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_31.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_32.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_33.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_34.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_35.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_36.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_37.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_38.jpg

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_6.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_7.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_8.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_9.jpg


http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_6.jpg

Some may only feel pertinent; not seem so much so rationally.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_6.jpg


And yet some may appertain (http://www.aish.com/ci/be/48936597.html) only in my imagination. I wont apologize though, I think this post may be the basis of a lot of people understanding Martin Earl's post much more thoroughly.



Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-21-11, 01:40 AM
Yes. Martin Earl is already an asset for us all at StSC;


There is a familiar thread in his writing that may tie to what is called natural religion - the Seven Noahide Laws (http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/4397/foreignere.jpg). Page 1 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg), Page 2 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg).




Be like the Son.



This proverbial Babylonian Law System is for real (http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/8468/tractatesanhedrin2.jpg) people. Page 1 (http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/2541/nausner1.jpg), Page 2 (http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/5027/nausner2.jpg). It is difficult to prove as dominant today, but it is the foundation of all common law at the same time. It is really the first successful natural law system ever recorded and is still recorded today on a dolomite stela in the Louvre (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&rlz=1R2GGLT_enUS423&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&wrapid=tlif130065607784410&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=louvre&fb=1&gl=us&hq=louvre&cid=0,0,3160718266159698595&ei=3W-GTb2vLcPB0QGM5PW_CA&sa=X&oi=local_result&ct=image&resnum=2&ved=0CDUQnwIwAQ) and known as The Code of Hammurabi (http://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp). If I may read this into Martin Earl's post, it is prevalent current law as much that it has survived as that it is in alignment with a constant and archaic human condition like what Jesus redacted of the Ten Commands - Love the LORD thy God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself.

In 1997 it surfaced in an acceptance letter (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=163&d=1300656787) to the Republic of Texas by the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin loosely cited Public Law 102-14 from 1991.



Page 1 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg), Page 2 (http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg). In trying to find the source of certain behavior and the lack of it with LEO's I really feel the links in this post might be worth your time.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_30.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_31.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_32.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_33.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_34.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_35.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_36.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_37.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_page_38.jpg

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_6.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_7.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_8.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_PL_102-14_9.jpg


http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_info_6.jpg

Some may only feel pertinent; not seem so much so rationally.

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_5.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_March_3_6.jpg


And yet some may appertain (http://www.aish.com/ci/be/48936597.html) only in my imagination. I wont apologize though, I think this post may be the basis of a lot of people understanding Martin Earl's post much more thoroughly.




This is good stuff, thanks Martin and David.
I was going to mention Reagan's p.l. 97-280 back in 1982, but it appears that this p.l. 102-14 was established 1991. Not too much then the way the rest of their system operates. Does not take a rocket science to tell that their political system is the same system with 2 different names,

I met with MJ today and we had a little discussion about that Raven and the differences of intent between Jacob and Esau, some of our discussion was relating to a post I put out last night,
about the conscience of man and making the choice of what laws meet the moral values, original intent of the one most high.
Corps/courts cannot see man in flesh and bone, if no name is given at all they will create a resulting trust(jane doe / john doe) and attempt to trick us into arguments against it, once we do that they got you in their snare.
165
The Coresource method we just acknowledge what they created for themselves letting them know I know what you have done. But when a express trust is created of the original intent of the one most high this is the other part of the story that needs to be completed. Maybe Y'sreal Nation is a step in that direction, will just have to see how things are setup now that their nation is officially established.
Very grateful for all that and hope to have more in the future.

martin earl
03-24-11, 11:55 PM
What a great asset to have you here martin earl! Were you on the old suijuris site under a different name?

I am interested in your offerings as to how you diffuse negative roadside encounters with conditioned and ignorant LEOs who attempt to impose their will over you. We already have information about properly identifying ouselves in our True Names, but I would like your perspective on the issue since you have been on the inside and know how they think and what their cognizant weaknesses/limitations are.

Great to have you here.

Thank you! I posted as freecell on the other forums. I will be happy answer the other questions when I have more time. Just wanted to say thank you (and David) for your kind words and warm welcome to the forum.

Anthony Joseph
03-25-11, 01:49 AM
Thank you! I posted as freecell on the other forums. I will be happy answer the other questions when I have more time. Just wanted to say thank you (and David) for your kind words and warm welcome to the forum.

Aha! Freecell, I knew you were familiar to me. I enjoyed your offerings on the other forums and I look forward to your offerings here, welcome again.

David Merrill
03-25-11, 01:54 AM
Aha! Freecell, I knew you were familiar to me. I enjoyed your offerings on the other forums and I look forward to your offerings here, welcome again.


Me too. I have enjoyed Freecell's posts!

martin earl
03-27-11, 06:19 PM
Thank you all again! As for the officers standpoint on all this:

As David has pointed out, the Court takes place on the side of the road. The Officer makes a legal determination that a Statute has been violated and initiates the arrest. (The BS that it is a detention is ridiculous, detention only occurs after an arrest has been made, not the other way around).

Now, in most cases, the officer wants to get the "person" to Identify himself and sign the appearance promise. Why?

Because traffic court means 2 things to the Officer: First, a STAT, recorded on a weekly report of production. This is good for promotions and performance reviews, which means a raise or career advancement.

Second: Citations lead to traffic courts, which mean OVERTIME pay. Most courts happen while the officer is off duty, which means more money for going to court at a time and half pay rate.

Thus, David has shown us how to give the officer what he wants (or think so anyway) by giving them the Drivers license as a Drivers License (after all, nothing on the DL states it is for ID) it is what it says it is, it shows the STATE has tested the skills of an Operator of motor vehicles.

When one states "That is not to be used for ID..." he/she is in fact, RESTRICTING their ENDORSEMENT of the DL to that of its true legal nature, a DL and not ID. Thus not allowing the Officer to "fractionalize" or amend the DL into an ID.

But, the officer is not trained in law enough to see that, and since he is only looking for a STAT, goes ahead and writes the citation and gets the signature and promise to appear.

In my years of study, I have never been exposed to a better way to give the officer what he/she wants, avoid the "Sovereign Citizen" title and all its issues and set up a proper "refusal for Cause" for the man or woman to avoid the money making scam of non-injury, no-victim 'crimes' of statute infractions.

BTW, it is a common tactic of officers to LIE about who the arresting (or charging officer) is. When one officer screws up a charge, they will often bring in a higher ranked officer to actually claim the "arrest" for themselves in an attempt to salvage the case. This has ZERO bearing on the R4C nor what should be said or done on the side of the road.

In my opinion, the entire process of getting a DL should be controlled and recorded with a reservation of rights and all signatures done in True name and "without prejudice" or "all rights claimed/reserved" above that.

That way, the signature will match the DL, the application and the citation. Also, when getting the DL remember, their Birth Certificate should be used and the same thing should be said about ID:

"That is simply to get a drivers license, it is not to be used for ID nor is that paper "me or my self"". or something to that effect. When done with a smile, the clerk will most likely just get use it for ID, but not because you endorsed them to do that.

Anthony Joseph
03-27-11, 07:36 PM
Thank you all again! As for the officers standpoint on all this:

As David has pointed out, the Court takes place on the side of the road. The Officer makes a legal determination that a Statute has been violated and initiates the arrest. (The BS that it is a detention is ridiculous, detention only occurs after an arrest has been made, not the other way around).

Now, in most cases, the officer wants to get the "person" to Identify himself and sign the appearance promise. Why?

Because traffic court means 2 things to the Officer: First, a STAT, recorded on a weekly report of production. This is good for promotions and performance reviews, which means a raise or career advancement.

Second: Citations lead to traffic courts, which mean OVERTIME pay. Most courts happen while the officer is off duty, which means more money for going to court at a time and half pay rate.

Thus, David has shown us how to give the officer what he wants (or think so anyway) by giving them the Drivers license as a Drivers License (after all, nothing on the DL states it is for ID) it is what it says it is, it shows the STATE has tested the skills of an Operator of motor vehicles.

When one states "That is not to be used for ID..." he/she is in fact, RESTRICTING their ENDORSEMENT of the DL to that of its true legal nature, a DL and not ID. Thus not allowing the Officer to "fractionalize" or amend the DL into an ID.

But, the officer is not trained in law enough to see that, and since he is only looking for a STAT, goes ahead and writes the citation and gets the signature and promise to appear.

In my years of study, I have never been exposed to a better way to give the officer what he/she wants, avoid the "Sovereign Citizen" title and all its issues and set up a proper "refusal for Cause" for the man or woman to avoid the money making scam of non-injury, no-victim 'crimes' of statute infractions.

BTW, it is a common tactic of officers to LIE about who the arresting (or charging officer) is. When one officer screws up a charge, they will often bring in a higher ranked officer to actually claim the "arrest" for themselves in an attempt to salvage the case. This has ZERO bearing on the R4C nor what should be said or done on the side of the road.

In my opinion, the entire process of getting a DL should be controlled and recorded with a reservation of rights and all signatures done in True name and "without prejudice" or "all rights claimed/reserved" above that.

That way, the signature will match the DL, the application and the citation. Also, when getting the DL remember, their Birth Certificate should be used and the same thing should be said about ID:

"That is simply to get a drivers license, it is not to be used for ID nor is that paper "me or my self"". or something to that effect. When done with a smile, the clerk will most likely just get use it for ID, but not because you endorsed them to do that.

Very well stated and the added insight into the inner workings and thought process of officers and their superiors is very helpful.

I agree with your assessment and mental model in that these "things" (DL, BC, etc) do NOT identify us unless we consent or acquiesce to that falsehood. Without that endorsement, these "things" are rendered powerless and of no consequence. Along the way, the beast will reveal itself through DISHONOR in some way. When that occurs, all bets are off and all claims from that dishonorable standing become NULL and VOID. We of course are diligent and honorable record keepers as courts of competent jurisdiction rendering the only outcome possible to stay in honor; abatement. Anything else would necessitate further dishonor in order to catch and trap you into their venue. Coercion, trickery, deceit and bully tactics are the methods of choice for this type of attempted re-venuing. Societal conditioning and controlled public information and education makes for an overwhelmingly high "success" rate in this regard.

HONOR and DISHONOR; a rightful and lawful claim can only come from one of those two positions ONLY.

Mark Christopher
04-02-11, 04:39 AM
Uh...Where do we stamp a FRN again? or do we need too? Kinda hard to tell.

OK seriously though, ME points out the left side is is the FRN and the right side is US note side and only on bills larger than a george. Also no need to stamp. David stamps them on the back not to tick off cashiers and possibly to prevent a felony (Not sure, does that go for all bills?). Motla puts a line thru the serial number (or not, lotta context on that). Oh not to forget the thread maker Delawarejones who gives the legal tender phrase the surname treatment with a red stamp.

And then it went south from there. But I see we have several great possibilities. I don't want jail time (or the chance of it) so I will have to go with stamping the back or not at all. I don't like the thought that we caught the snipe yet, he is one sly bird. But now that I think of it, the legal tender phrase for all debt pulic and private are we re-venueing the dolllar back to the re-public by claiming lawful money...hmm DJ is on to something, buuutt that felony thing, I gotta look into that more.

I have to give props to David and Motla on the thread. That was some enthraling reading kept me up till 12:30am :) Sorry if I condensed anyones ideas just trying to congeal my thinking.
Be Well
Mark Christopher.

motla68
04-02-11, 06:09 AM
How i figure this is that I ask: what would the pros do about this?

On the following form check out Page 2 Section 5 (certification). The little note at the bottom see what it says about striking out the language?
http://www.standard.com/annuities/eforms/10516.pdf
You can see here where it basically says if a legal determination is made then STRIKEOUT the language in section 2.

Now since I have heard a couple of stories where lawful money was demanded at a bank, the bank manager then proceeded to record the serial numbers, When asked the manager said it was to remove the serial numbers from the system. So what better way to do this then to STRIKEOUT the serial number for making the legal determination that the intent be Lawful Money.
You can pretty much say that IRS and the Federal Reserve System are on the same team from my own understanding of the way system operates.

Another thing I add is to the upper right on the border write: 12 USC 411 - Lawful Money, where this is placed comes from the determination by way of totem poles, the higher authority is always at the top, putting Lawful Money above a Federal Reserve Note. Then putting to the right has some spiritual meaning, but that is all up to you, that is just my personal conscience.

martin earl
04-02-11, 03:28 PM
How i figure this is that I ask: what would the pros do about this?

On the following form check out Page 2 Section 5 (certification). The little note at the bottom see what it says about striking out the language?
http://www.standard.com/annuities/eforms/10516.pdf
You can see here where it basically says if a legal determination is made then STRIKEOUT the language in section 2.

Now since I have heard a couple of stories where lawful money was demanded at a bank, the bank manager then proceeded to record the serial numbers, When asked the manager said it was to remove the serial numbers from the system. So what better way to do this then to STRIKEOUT the serial number for making the legal determination that the intent be Lawful Money.
You can pretty much say that IRS and the Federal Reserve System are on the same team from my own understanding of the way system operates.

Another thing I add is to the upper right on the border write: 12 USC 411 - Lawful Money, where this is placed comes from the determination by way of totem poles, the higher authority is always at the top, putting Lawful Money above a Federal Reserve Note. Then putting to the right has some spiritual meaning, but that is all up to you, that is just my personal conscience.

The US Treasury Note is on the right side of the face of the note, for lawful reasons. I have sometimes drawn a red box around the serial number on the FRN side of the note. What you might be missing is the issue and Law of agency in using fiat currency.

The next man or woman has the agency to use either the FRN or the US treasury note, nothing I do to the notes makes it exclusively an FRN or a US Treasury Note.

The only difference is the RECORD OF DEMAND for Redemption of the FRN by me, for me. Identify that DEMAND however you like, but it must be made by each handler of the NOTE.

motla68
04-02-11, 04:22 PM
The US Treasury Note is on the right side of the face of the note, for lawful reasons. I have sometimes drawn a red box around the serial number on the FRN side of the note. What you might be missing is the issue and Law of agency in using fiat currency.

The next man or woman has the agency to use either the FRN or the US treasury note, nothing I do to the notes makes it exclusively an FRN or a US Treasury Note.

The only difference is the RECORD OF DEMAND for Redemption of the FRN by me, for me. Identify that DEMAND however you like, but it must be made by each handler of the NOTE.

ok, so if the next "user" does not like the idea of lawful money, then they can go trade it in for a Federal Reserve Note as intended. Question is, which do you prefer exactly? make a decision for one.
Biblically speaking choosing 2 you will love one and hate the other.

martin earl
04-02-11, 05:03 PM
ok, so if the next "user" does not like the idea of lawful money, then they can go trade it in for a Federal Reserve Note as intended. Question is, which do you prefer exactly? make a decision for one.
Biblically speaking choosing 2 you will love one and hate the other.

No, my actions do not and cannot take away your agency to use the NOTE as legal tender or redeemed lawful money. There is nothing "go trade "it" in for a Federal Reserve Note. The FRN is still there, it did not go anywhere, it is still there, even if you draw a line trough it.

YOU me, or anyone else always has the agency to choose, short of murdering me or force, you cannot LAWFULLY make any choice for me unless you and I have an express TRUST/Covenant, which we do not.

I cannot redeem lawful money for you, you must demand it. That has nothing to do with the duality of the FIAT currency with the green backs, it has to do with personal choice and the eternal truth of AGENCY.

You striking out the serial number does not make an FRN "righteous" it only makes your use of it "lawful" in terms of Law of the Land vs. law of the Sea.

The millions of animal sacrifices of pre-Atonement Israel did not save one man or woman from the effects of sin and death, they were a "legal tender" for forgiveness. Only the acceptance of the Lawful sacrifice of Christs blood can Atone.

The trillions of legal tender sacrifices of men and women today cannot provide Payment for or forgiveness of debt, it must be paid lawfully.

I cannot compel you to accept Christ as your redeemer, no matter what mark I put on you (lawful or not, spiritual or temporal) is must be your choice to accept His offer of redemption.

I can hand you a redeemed FRN with whatever mark on it I want, that does not mean YOU have to use it as redeemed lawful money and without your own recorded demand to use it as such, the presumed standing of that note is that it is an elastic, depreciating note of negative value.

Anthony Joseph
04-02-11, 05:29 PM
Exactly. It is a kind of mental conditioning to overcome (took me awhile) regarding the nature of the FRN piece of paper in your hand. The demand is what matters; the paper serves both purposes at once so there is no need to "trade it in" because it will function as whatever the holder of it deems it to be; endorsed private credit or lawful money. The key is whether or not you pledge yourself, either willingly or by acquiescence, as the bond behind the elasticity and fractional lending of this credit and currency which increases the debt, devalues over time and requires a "return of income" use fee every April 15th. The fact that you were 'too stupid' to not act like a real FED bank and fractionally lend for profit is not their problem.

motla68
04-02-11, 05:33 PM
No, my actions do not and cannot take away your agency to use the NOTE as legal tender or redeemed lawful money. There is nothing "go trade "it" in for a Federal Reserve Note. The FRN is still there, it did not go anywhere, it is still there, even if you draw a line trough it.

YOU me, or anyone else always has the agency to choose, short of murdering me or force, you cannot LAWFULLY make any choice for me unless you and I have an express TRUST/Covenant, which we do not.

I cannot redeem lawful money for you, you must demand it. That has nothing to do with the duality of the FIAT currency with the green backs, it has to do with personal choice and the eternal truth of AGENCY.

You striking out the serial number does not make an FRN "righteous" it only makes your use of it "lawful" in terms of Law of the Land vs. law of the Sea.

The millions of animal sacrifices of pre-Atonement Israel did not save one man or woman from the effects of sin and death, they were a "legal tender" for forgiveness. Only the acceptance of the Lawful sacrifice of Christs blood can Atone.

The trillions of legal tender sacrifices of men and women today cannot provide Payment for or forgiveness of debt, it must be paid lawfully.

I cannot compel you to accept Christ as your redeemer, no matter what mark I put on you (lawful or not, spiritual or temporal) is must be your choice to accept His offer of redemption.

I can hand you a redeemed FRN with whatever mark on it I want, that does not mean YOU have to use it as redeemed lawful money and without your own recorded demand to use it as such, the presumed standing of that note is that it is an elastic, depreciating note of negative value.

It is true from my past knowledge that within commercial law of the realm of negotiable instruments, ALL instruments are negotiable unless on it's face it says " non-negotiable " . It is not my intent to stand in your way of what you believe, therefore you have a right to your own self determination on the purpose of that instrument no more then I can tell you what to use a butter knife for. I actually have a treatise on this converted to audio

See EPISODE18 - TOOL-deconstructed
http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/25279

On other discussions through CS I have described this as used with the Drivers License when being pulled over on the side of the road, through conditional acceptance I changed the intent in the officers mind of whom that license benefits relating to a stop back in January 2009.

You can choose the christ if you want, think I will choose Immanuel. Do you know the difference?
just asking, it is not intended as sarcasm.

martin earl
04-02-11, 06:29 PM
It is true from my past knowledge that within commercial law of the realm of negotiable instruments, ALL instruments are negotiable unless on it's face it says " non-negotiable " . It is not my intent to stand in your way of what you believe, therefore you have a right to your own self determination on the purpose of that instrument no more then I can tell you what to use a butter knife for. I actually have a treatise on this converted to audio

See EPISODE18 - TOOL-deconstructed
http://www.talkshoe.com/tc/25279

On other discussions through CS I have described this as used with the Drivers License when being pulled over on the side of the road, through conditional acceptance I changed the intent in the officers mind of whom that license benefits relating to a stop back in January 2009.

You can choose the christ if you want, think I will choose Immanuel. Do you know the difference?
just asking, it is not intended as sarcasm.

The fact is, it does not matter to THEM what you nor I believe, it is what THEY believe (the enforcers and judges) believe.

The workings of their spells and magic are what move them, not your belief or faith in them.

Their god is a powerful one and he rules this mortal planet we live on (for now), Christ or Immanuel or whatever you like to call Him (as I doubt he has personally introduced Himself in the flesh to you, so that ends the presumption to me that you know Him better than I because of your choice of "name" for the Son of God) had no issue in the Old Testament or the Old conversing with Lucifer before or after his fall from grace.

I cannot help but get a reading you somehow think I serve the wrong god or do not love the True one because I know how their religion and magic work, as this is at least the second time you have implied I do because of my posts.

Well, to that I say, you are not my Judge and my intent is not so much to know Him, as it is that He knows me.

Matthew 7:22-23 (King James Version)

22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

I highly doubt my fulfillment of the Law to the best of my ability will somehow be overshadowed by my use of the word Christ over Immanuel, Yeshua, I am, Jesus, The Savior et al in my posts or conversations.

But, you are free to judge as you see fit, there is nothing in the Law I know of that requires us to agree on every jot and tittle.

motla68
04-02-11, 06:53 PM
The fact is, it does not matter to THEM what you nor I believe, it is what THEY believe (the enforcers and judges) believe.

The workings of their spells and magic are what move them, not your belief or faith in them.

Their god is a powerful one and he rules this mortal planet we live on (for now), Christ or Immanuel or whatever you like to call Him (as I doubt he has personally introduced Himself in the flesh to you, so that ends the presumption to me that you know Him better than I because of your choice of "name" for the Son of God) had no issue in the Old Testament or the Old conversing with Lucifer before or after his fall from grace.

I cannot help but get a reading you somehow think I serve the wrong god or do not love the True one because I know how their religion and magic work, as this is at least the second time you have implied I do because of my posts.

Well, to that I say, you are not my Judge and my intent is not so much to know Him, as it is that He knows me.

Matthew 7:22-23 (King James Version)

22Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

I highly doubt my fulfillment of the Law to the best of my ability will somehow be overshadowed by my use of the word Christ over Immanuel, Yeshua, I am, Jesus, The Savior et al in my posts or conversations.

But, you are free to judge as you see fit, there is nothing in the Law I know of that requires us to agree on every jot and tittle.

Just making the distinctions between Jesus Christ vs a Jesus who is called Christ just as I would God versus Lord God. You might believe in the trinity that some churches believe in, I have no idea, what I think of you is not the debate here.

Deu 1:17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.

It is not my intent to judge you, only to form discussion. I actually have some respect of the knowledge in which you have written in recent past.

martin earl
04-02-11, 07:37 PM
Just making the distinctions between Jesus Christ vs a Jesus who is called Christ just as I would God versus Lord God. You might believe in the trinity that some churches believe in, I have no idea, what I think of you is not the debate here.

Deu 1:17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.

It is not my intent to judge you, only to form discussion. I actually have some respect of the knowledge in which you have written in recent past.

Nor is it my place or intent to judge you. I can, however provide a unique perspective on how those with guns will see your reasoning and use of scripture to attempt to discourage them in the service of their GODLY DUTIES.

The FRN or the US Treasury Note is theirs, "they" are the Servants of their god, they carry his mark and do his bidding. My Faith is clearly not strong enough to survive in this world without their money, although I do not rely on it, desire it or even care for it, nor anything it will buy.

However, I do desire to help others regain some semblance of freedom and lawful protections for them, their families and (even if transcendent and temporary) their property.

Without them going through what I had to go through to get there. I do not believe we all need to crucify ourselves or the wonderful life that is offered on this land to show our hearts and hands worthy of Gods blessings. Not everyone is willing to spend the time in the wilderness or the lions den. That does not mean we are not righteous or wanting to live lawfully.

The deception is there and always has been. Stamping the FRN will never make it Gold or Silver coin and the law of this land is that ONLY Gold and Silver coin can be used to lawfully pay a debt.

REPORTEDLY there are $300 million in Gold Coins in public trust to provide backing for those who choose to demand it. The stamping of the FRN/US Note is NOT THE DEMAND (it certainly could be evidence of a demand) but, as nowhere in the CODE does is spell out the FRN needs to be stamped or changed in any way (currently), it is not legally the way to make the demand.

The Demand must be made and RE-COGNIZABLE to the STATE or its agents by each and every person who uses FRNs in any form and for any transaction.

If the demand is not recognizable to the STATE or its agents, there is no reason for them to change their actions or behavior toward YOU, regardless of your righteous nature, the intentions of your heart or your Standing before the Almighty.

Now, He might choose to send Cherubim (or our faith powerful enough to do it ourselves) with a flaming sword to protect us, but the LAW (even theirs), will mostly do it and should do it for those who do not see this as a spiritual battle only. (When of course, it is) :)

motla68
04-02-11, 08:29 PM
Nor is it my place or intent to judge you. I can, however provide a unique perspective on how those with guns will see your reasoning and use of scripture to attempt to discourage them in the service of their GODLY DUTIES.

The FRN or the US Treasury Note is theirs, "they" are the Servants of their god, they carry his mark and do his bidding. My Faith is clearly not strong enough to survive in this world without their money, although I do not rely on it, desire it or even care for it, nor anything it will buy.

However, I do desire to help others regain some semblance of freedom and lawful protections for them, their families and (even if transcendent and temporary) their property.

Without them going through what I had to go through to get there. I do not believe we all need to crucify ourselves or the wonderful life that is offered on this land to show our hearts and hands worthy of Gods blessings. Not everyone is willing to spend the time in the wilderness or the lions den. That does not mean we are not righteous or wanting to live lawfully.

The deception is there and always has been. Stamping the FRN will never make it Gold or Silver coin and the law of this land is that ONLY Gold and Silver coin can be used to lawfully pay a debt.

REPORTEDLY there are $300 million in Gold Coins in public trust to provide backing for those who choose to demand it. The stamping of the FRN/US Note is NOT THE DEMAND (it certainly could be evidence of a demand) but, as nowhere in the CODE does is spell out the FRN needs to be stamped or changed in any way (currently), it is not legally the way to make the demand.

The Demand must be made and RE-COGNIZABLE to the STATE or its agents by each and every person who uses FRNs in any form and for any transaction.

If the demand is not recognizable to the STATE or its agents, there is no reason for them to change their actions or behavior toward YOU, regardless of your righteous nature, the intentions of your heart or your Standing before the Almighty.

Now, He might choose to send Cherubim (or our faith powerful enough to do it ourselves) with a flaming sword to protect us, but the LAW (even theirs), will mostly do it and should do it for those who do not see this as a spiritual battle only. (When of course, it is) :)

It does not mean they will not make it available if the people demand it enough, the Berlin Wall did not come down by itself, it took a little civil disobedience.
Check out what might be coming to a Mall near you in the near future:
http://travel.usatoday.com/destinations/dispatches/post/2011/01/las-vegas-atm-dispenses-gold/138002/1

One needs to make declaration or notice that they have a private relationship with the creator and for them to drag it into the public is a offence not only to the one most hight but to humanity in general, Human Declaration of Rights at the Hague, not as our benefit but for theirs.

Revelations 1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

Love and Fear is in the eyes of the beholder. In most cases one attracts what they fear just as when one attracts love. This is one of the things they study, why some courts still use bibles to swear or affirm then they take it away to manipulate manifestations. BUT suppose you brought your own then how much influence could YOU project?
Manifestation can control you or you control it, it is a balancing act. None of this has set standards though that you will find in any book, it is of free will and faith where the journey will take you.

Mark Christopher
04-04-11, 01:39 PM
My agreement card now reads "All transactions on this account are intended by demand to be redeemded in Lawful Money pursuant to title 12usc411." I think this is all that is needed to put all on notice of my use of lawful money. Now if I use a debit card (linked to the account), check or atm, they know my intent. I care not how they choose to do their accounting. If they come a knocking I will point them to agreement card and be happy to give them the checks with non-endoersements also.

Thanks
MC

Goldi
05-22-11, 12:37 AM
"Now one thing peculiar about Nickname's endeavor is that she was fined over $1K and jailed for a week upon conviction because she had no proof of insurance even though she showed a valid proof-of-insurance card and had been paying premiums up-to-date!" Wow, I have been waiting to see if anyone would substantiate this and indeed it is going on, probably in all states now ... I heard about this gov. money making scam through a man in the midwest perhaps a year ago who explained what happened to him. The cop pulled him over, for no reason other than the cop pulled up behind him and ran his plates. When pulled over the cop said "our records show you do not have current insurance", upon which the man opened the glove box and proffered the proof of current insurance card. The cop said, sorry but our records show you don't have current insurance and therefore I am going to have to confiscate your plates and tags. You will be required to come down to the DMV and show your proof of insurance and re-purchase the plates and the tags at that point. Have a nice day." Now, what I came away with is the substantiation that now it is POLICY for gov. to go off of their own records about you, regardless if correct, wrong, falsified etc. That is BY FAR the bigger threat here.

Goldi
05-22-11, 01:03 AM
David, where did the FDR quote about paychecks being held in trust come from? I'd like to see the language concerning "the new forms" he mentions.

David Merrill
05-22-11, 02:24 AM
David, where did the FDR quote about paychecks being held in trust come from? I'd like to see the language concerning "the new forms" he mentions.


The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin Delano Roosevelt - 1933 The Year of Crisis.

Goldi
05-22-11, 02:59 AM
I found the quote online here: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ppotpus/4925381.1933.001/49?page=root;rgn=full+text;size=100;view=image;q1= recognized+government+bonds

FYI: Did you all know that an assassination attempt on FDR happened just prior to his March 1933 Inauguration?

David Merrill
05-22-11, 08:05 AM
Now, what I came away with is the substantiation that now it is POLICY for gov. to go off of their own records about you, regardless if correct, wrong, falsified etc. That is BY FAR the bigger threat here.


At first that went past me.

The Government does not have its own records of you. What is in the file is what you or another party using the TIN or SSN associated to your legal identity has filed with the IRS.

Just to be clear then Goldi;

What you mean is being reassessed according to an employers W-2 or 1099?

Goldi
05-23-11, 06:30 PM
The records they have are of activities of you operating in commerce thru "it". So I agree with that, but we were talking about the state having false records of current insurance. And it's that policy they have implemented across the country that is very harmful to us. I know at least 5 people who moved to another state, and when they returned back for a visit, all of them were pulled over, ticketed and fined for a suspended license in the old state. So this practice is widespread. Whatever their records are of your activities, regardless if false, regardless of your proof of moving to another state and holding that new state's license, they are going to rape you if you don't know how to handle it.

Trust Guy
05-23-11, 09:56 PM
Interesting FDR quote David .

Allow me to interject a little on Public Policy .

Was listening to Ronald Reagan’s Sec. of the Treasury, Donald Regan , on C-Span one day . D.C. Press Club Luncheon . In the Q & A session a question came from the floor .

Q : Given the admitted complexity of the Revenue Code , and the perception of the general public that this complexity benefits special interests , wouldn’t it be possible to streamline the Revenue Code , thereby increasing public confidence in the Code’s fairness , while still raising enough revenue for the Treasury ?

A : The purpose of the Revenue Code is not to raise revenue . The purpose of the Revenue Code is to enforce Public Policy . Next question .

David Merrill
05-23-11, 11:02 PM
I found the quote online here: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ppotpus/4925381.1933.001/49?page=root;rgn=full+text;size=100;view=image;q1= recognized+government+bonds

FYI: Did you all know that an assassination attempt on FDR happened just prior to his March 1933 Inauguration?


I did not know about that assassination attempt.

This link is a great find! I appreciate that!

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ppotpus/




Interesting FDR quote David .

Allow me to interject a little on Public Policy .

Was listening to Ronald Reagan’s Sec. of the Treasury, Donald Regan , on C-Span one day . D.C. Press Club Luncheon . In the Q & A session a question came from the floor .

Q : Given the admitted complexity of the Revenue Code , and the perception of the general public that this complexity benefits special interests , wouldn’t it be possible to streamline the Revenue Code , thereby increasing public confidence in the Code’s fairness , while still raising enough revenue for the Treasury ?

A : The purpose of the Revenue Code is not raise revenue . The purpose of the Revenue Code is to enforce Public Policy . Next question .


It is just one mind boggling revelation after another!

allodial
06-22-11, 02:50 AM
U.S. Department of Justice to knowledge was formed for prosecution of war. DEA/Navy JAG/IRS/ATF are all under USDOJ.