PDA

View Full Version : The Certificate of Live Birth is a Pledge Document



EZrhythm
06-02-11, 06:30 AM
The Certificate of Live Birth is a pledge document providing value to the corporate FEDERAL/STATE agencies every time it is used, a "benefit" obtained or a charge is made to the NAME, commercial, civil or criminal.

The Birth Certificate is the certifying document that the pledge exists/was made.

Definition of PLEDGE

1a : a bailment of a chattel as security for a debt or other obligation without involving transfer of title
b : the chattel so delivered
c : the contract incidental to such a bailment


2a : the state of being held as a security or guaranty
b : something given as security for the performance of an ac

Definition of BAIL

transitive verb
: to deliver (personal property) in trust to another for a special purpose and for a limited period

Definition of CHATTEL

: an item of tangible movable or immovable property except real (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chattel#) estate and things (as buildings) connected with real property (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chattel#)

Hence the NAME is PLEDGED as BAIL and used as CHATTEL.

Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson
(President 1913 - 1921),

Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property
(that's you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.
They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.
This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation(USA) to forment this plot against America. -
Colonel Edward Mandell House

David Merrill
06-02-11, 02:13 PM
I disagree. There may be an inherent factor because of SDR's but the Birth Certificate itself says nothing regarding it being a bail pledge.

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

The driver license is a bail though. It says nothing about that on the license but the state you are in considers it of value to you, if you carry one for about $250 in value. That is why the police officer lets you go on a bail of about that much every traffic ticket you drive away from.

I know a fellow who started challenging jurisdiction - about a year back - and he received notice that there was a warrant on him, in the mail. He thought there must be a mistake but they told him his bail was set at $250, payable only by Pay to the Order of... a check! He would have gone to jail but instead sat in custody while somebody came downtown to pay his bail. The magistrate determined that this man was a Sovereign Citizen and put no value on his driver license.

With the birth certificate endorsement is the bail value. That value is derived by how many people place value in their birth certificates, not by an account like I have demonstrated through a Canadian financial official above. Social Security is all one account and records of people putting trust into that one account. SDR's are a fictional currency basket of five exemplary nations and the value of the SDR's are determined by collateral unanimous declaration of conditioning to endorse the central bank - the Fed around here in America. As people decline to post bond/bail here in the West, BRICS formed.

Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. (http://img809.imageshack.us/img809/4923/doc23noticeofliencombri.pdf)

It looks like (http://www.usps.com/shipping/trackandconfirm.htm) the authorities in Brazil and Russia intercepted the letters after they cleared Customs.


EG415704775US (Brazil), customs declaration LC64310812US
EG415704761US (Russia), customs declaration LC643410826US
EG415704758US (India)
EG415704744US (South Africa)


The USDC was sent certified mail, 7010 2780 0002 7566 2889.

allodial
06-02-11, 02:29 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

Or more likely, a birth certificate is a charter document which gives the entity or entities chartered certain powers or rights concerning a State/Province. The B/C in the Canadian Provinces is more likely a share in the Province rather than in Federal Canada. The numbers on back are serial numbers as in a stack of blanks all have a serial number on the back of them. As they are printed off on a custom basis, the serial numbers are control numbers are likely sequential.


With the birth certificate endorsement is the bail value.

The value of a BC more likely actually comes from 'doing business' in, through or under the associated entity or entities. The more cars, bank accounts and the lke that you register under the BC...the more value perhaps? Transfer of energy to or through the entity in some manner voluntarily by "you".


The Certificate of Live Birth is a Pledge Document
On in as much pledging comes from ....you.

David Merrill
06-02-11, 03:01 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

Or more likely, a birth certificate is a charter document which gives the entity or entities chartered certain powers or rights concerning a State/Province. The B/C in the Canadian Provinces is more likely a share in the Province rather than in Federal Canada. The numbers on back are serial numbers as in a stack of blanks all have a serial number on the back of them. As they are printed off on a custom basis, the serial numbers are control numbers are likely sequential.



The value of a BC more likely actually comes from 'doing business' in, through or under the associated entity or entities. The more cars, bank accounts and the lke that you register under the BC...the more value perhaps? Transfer of energy to or through the entity in some manner voluntarily by "you".


On in as much pledging comes from ....you.


I think you have said the same thing more eloquently.

That doing business begins cashing or depositing for check transfer, your paycheck. The signature happens on the backside - endorsement. The fractional lending you endorse creates new bills to lend and lubricates new business (while depreciating the value of the bills and devaluing the stock/bond bail). Twenty years ago the bail amount on the driver license was likely half - more like $120.

shikamaru
06-02-11, 04:29 PM
I would like to point out that registering of names is not a common law custom.
In common law, you can have any name or as many as you like so long as one is not engaged in fraud (learned courtesy of Am. Jur.).

I tend to think of one's birth certificate as an account.
An account is a chose in action.
Charges and the like are assessed against the account.

One could think of the birth certificate as the establishment of one's trade name.
One could be a sole proprietor.

allodial
06-02-11, 05:08 PM
The birth/berth (http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,berth) is being registered not names. Similar or equivalent:


corporate charter
statement of origin


http://www.scripophily.com/webcart/vigs/rulynkath2.jpg
http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/audit/mv/CHAPTER%205_files/image002.gif
http://thedalzells.org/gallery2/d/2633-1/Elise+Birth+Certificate.jpg

Note: one prominent feature in all images above is one or more common seals.

Keep in mind that according to one or more dictionaries (http://1828.mshaffer.com/) that the word 'birth (http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/word/birth)' is held to be synonymous with the word 'origin (http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,origin)'.

****


Re chattel: apparently you can choose to make yourself chattel (http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,vassalage).

Darkcrusade
06-02-11, 06:01 PM
Who holds the original? Where was the Birth certificate delivered to?


“Delivery”, with respect to an instrument, document of title, or chattel paper, means voluntary transfer of possession.


“Document of title” includes bill of lading, dock warrant, dock receipt, warehouse receipt or order for the delivery of goods, and also any other document which in the regular course of business or financing is treated as adequately evidencing that the person in possession of it is entitled to receive, hold, and dispose of the document and the goods it covers. To be a document of title, a document must purport to be issued by or addressed to a bailee and purport to cover goods in the bailee’s possession which are either identified or are fungible portions of an identified mass.

“Warehouse receipt” means a receipt issued by a person engaged in the business of storing goods for hire.

“Delivery order” means a record that contains an order to deliver goods directed to a warehouse, carrier, or other person that in the ordinary course of business issues warehouse receipts or bills of lading.

“Certificate of title” means a certificate of title with respect to which a statute provides for the security interest in question to be indicated on the certificate as a condition or result of the security interest’s obtaining priority over the rights of a lien creditor with respect to the collateral.

“Chattel paper” means a record or records that evidence both a monetary obligation and a security interest in specific goods, a security interest in specific goods and software used in the goods, a security interest in specific goods and license of software used in the goods, a lease of specific goods, or a lease of specific goods and license of software used in the goods. In this paragraph, “monetary obligation” means a monetary obligation secured by the goods or owed under a lease of the goods and includes a monetary obligation with respect to software used in the goods. The term does not include (i) charters or other contracts involving the use or hire of a vessel or (ii) records that evidence a right to payment arising out of the use of a credit or charge card or information contained on or for use with the card. If a transaction is evidenced by records that include an instrument or series of instruments, the group of records taken together constitutes chattel paper.

Still searching for that mythical Sovereign Citizen tho.:p

shikamaru
06-02-11, 10:26 PM
The birth/berth (http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/search/word,berth) is being registered not names.

What is an event without its title?

When one wants to change "their name", they are directed to do so at the nearest Probate Court .....

Richard Earl
06-03-11, 12:16 AM
Who holds the original? Where was the Birth certificate delivered to?

Your mother delivered a statement of live birth - witness to an event. They certify the statement and send you a certificate of birth?

Reigne
06-03-11, 12:51 AM
I agree the BC is a 'registering/reporting' an event.

Without that 'event' occuring, you can't opt into SS, DL, etc. I am beginning to believe it IS a form of identification (whereas SS is NOT to be used as ID).
This is the conundrum I find myself in - IF the BC is actually a form of ID, then using it to obtain anything else would be a crime right? And if it is NOT a form of ID, then using it to obtain anything else would be a crime ... Is it possible to commit Identity Theft on oneself?

But then I found this today:
USC Title 18 Part 1 Chapter 1 Section 9
Vessel of the United States defined.
The term “vessel of the United States”, as used in this title, means a vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States, or any citizen thereof, or any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof.
(emphasis mine)
So now I'm back to the whole birth/berth thinking again ... however, a birth/berth is not the only way to become a US citizen (ie: naturalization - I'd really like to see the paperwork -front and back - that they fill out).

Trust Guy
06-03-11, 02:07 AM
Off subject , but interesting . There is emphasis in the original not transferred with these snips .

I’m recently led to understand TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE was never properly voted out by the Senate . House , yes . Wonder if my source is correct . Might be interesting to find out .

This history outline from the Law Librarians' Society of Washington, D.C.- pdf - 6 pgs, 34.0 KB : United States Code: Historical Outline and Explanatory Notes (http://www.llsdc.org/attachments/wysiwyg/544/us-code-outline.pdf) - Prepared by Richard J. McKinney, Assistant Law Librarian, Federal Reserve Board, for Law Librarians' Society Program, November 9, 2004
Last Revised in June 2011

6) In 1919, Col. E. C. Little, Chairman of the House Committee on the Revision of Laws began the work to codify U.S. law, appointing Prof. William Burdick of Kansas as Reviser. Others aided.

7) The completed work was introduced as H.R. 9389 (60 titles) in the 66th Congress and passed the House on Dec. 20, 1920 (60 Cong. Rec. 571-574). Bill died in Senate. (s.a. H. Rept. 781, 2 pts.).

8) Bill reintroduced with corrections in the 67th Congress as H.R. 12 and it passed the House unanimously on May 16, 1921 (61 Cong. Rec. 1479), but again it died in the Senate after being debated in the House and Senate (64 Cong. Rec. 2084, 2090, 2846, 3137, 5019, 5087-5102; H. Rep. 68).

9) The bill, with an updated supplement, was reintroduced in the 68th Congress as H.R. 12 and unanimously passed the House on January 7, 1924 (65 Cong. Rec. 643, H. Rept. 2). It was referred to the Senate Committee on the Revision of the Laws where it was reported unfavorably on the grounds that it contained some 600 errors, omissions, and inaccuracies. Instead the Committee reported S.J. Res. 141 (S. Rept. 722), to establish a commission to revise laws. It passed the Senate (66 Cong. Rec. 3800) and was reported from House Committee (H. Rept. 1573) w amdts.

10) The two revision committees then employed staff members at West Publishing Co. and Edward Thompson Co. to do the work of codification using Little's work (60 titles) as a basis and checking with experts in law and government departments (see 67 Cong. Rec. 7787; H. Rept. 69-900).

11) In the 69th Congress, the new Code (laws in force as of Dec. 7, 1925) introduced as H.R. 10000 (50 titles), reported by the Committee (H. Rept. 900), debated and passed the House on Apr. 19, 1926 (67 Cong. Rec. 7787-7793) to be prima facie law until July 1, 1927. The Senate Committee reported it (S. Rept. 832). It was debated, amended and passed by the Senate (67 Cong. Rec. 9737, 10403, 10478, 10480, 11799, 11963, 11971) as prima facie evidence only. House concurred (67 Cong. Rec. 12076) and was signed by President on June 30, 1926 (44 Stat. pt. 1, Public No. 440).

12) The Code enacted no new law (not really), repealed no prior law and in cases of inconsistency the statutes were to prevail. However, like the Revised Statutes, which was enacted into positive law, the Code is to encompass the general and permanent laws authored by Congress (not private and local matters, nor annual appropriations). Some 537 errors were later found; 88 of them errors of substance. See H. Rept. 70-1706 to accompany H.R. 13622, a bill to provide Supplement I volume to Code (act of May 29, 1928, ch. 911, 45 Stat. 1008).

EZrhythm
06-03-11, 06:39 AM
The birth event may occur for each registration but it is the NAME that is the property they want and the NAME that is pledged for their use. The state holds the original pledge document but only as a facsimile since the original wet ink copy isn't required for their use.
There is no account attached until the SSN is created.
The BC is not used as an ID, it is certification that the pledge was made.

Reigne
06-03-11, 09:42 AM
Thanks for sharing the info on the Senate records ;o)

Regarding the BC as Identification and that it is actually a record of an event ... I found this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5EV0rN_JwU
He talks about the BC being "ID" at about 2:30 into the vid

*Note: this is just 1 of 8+ videos he has up. While I do not agree with everything he says, the issue of BC being ID/the Foundational Document makes sense to me.
I still have not seen any evidence that the BC's are 'bonds/shares/etc (esp when folks say they are worth 1Million or 'unlimited' as some "gurus" have stated). If someone here has the evidence please show it to me or inform me of where I can go (internet) to find it.

allodial
06-03-11, 04:52 PM
Thanks for sharing the info on the Senate records ;o)

Regarding the BC as Identification and that it is actually a record of an event ... I found this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5EV0rN_JwU
He talks about the BC being "ID" at about 2:30 into the vid

*Note: this is just 1 of 8+ videos he has up. While I do not agree with everything he says, the issue of BC being ID/the Foundational Document makes sense to me.
I still have not seen any evidence that the BC's are 'bonds/shares/etc (esp when folks say they are worth 1Million or 'unlimited' as some "gurus" have stated). If someone here has the evidence please show it to me or inform me of where I can go (internet) to find it.

You make up the value as you go along. Likely you can pledge as much as you'd like?


The birth event may occur for each registration but it is the NAME that is the property they want and the NAME that is pledged for their use. The state holds the original pledge document but only as a facsimile since the original wet ink copy isn't required for their use.
There is no account attached until the SSN is created.
The BC is not used as an ID, it is certification that the pledge was made.

The Birth Certificate signifies creation/charter and origin of a legal entity or the like. If one is convinced that one is the person therein named, then perhaps one is so convinced? A State driver license or State ID gives rise to creation of an account or accounts as well (think: State revenue department). The account at the Social Security Administration is distinct and different from the account at the IRS.

EZrhythm
06-15-11, 06:40 AM
Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson
(President 1913 - 1921),

Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property
(that's you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.
They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.
This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation(USA) to forment this plot against America. -
Colonel Edward Mandell House

Rock Anthony
06-15-11, 09:17 PM
For the life of me, I cannot find the source of that quote.

Christopher David
06-16-11, 01:48 AM
For the life of me, I cannot find the source of that quote.

ditto. i think its fabricated.

allodial
06-16-11, 02:34 AM
Have researched it and found no realiable sources IMHO. The BC instrument seems to become a 'pledge' instrument when you start pledging and 'running that business' or 'being that person'--as in they try to make you think you are JOHN HENRY DOE (different name) or JOHN H DOE (yet another different name) when you might be Christopher or David or John Henry or....

motla68
06-16-11, 03:04 AM
Have researched it and found no realiable sources IMHO. The BC instrument seems to become a 'pledge' instrument when you start pledging and 'running that business' or 'being that person'--as in they try to make you think you are JOHN HENRY DOE (different name) or JOHN H DOE (yet another different name) when you might be Christopher or David or John Henry or....

Exactly, it is a constructive trust, an offer on the table. The first one to flinch pays the bill, same thing is done with a DL , put it on a dashboard, tell cop if he wants a benefit then take it. Enjoy the reaction later. The DL i have is signed " non-assumpsit " so whomever picks it up after offer is made accepts the liability for it. One has decision to walk away from the name, when you make claims against property someone else owns (Cesti que trust) you suffer the pains and penalties.

David Merrill
06-16-11, 03:14 AM
Exactly, it is a constructive trust, an offer on the table. The first one to flinch pays the bill, same thing is done with a DL , put it on a dashboard, tell cop if he wants a benefit then take it. Enjoy the reaction later. The DL i have is signed " non-assumpsit " so whomever picks it up after offer is made accepts the liability for it. One has decision to walk away from the name, when you make claims against property someone else owns (Cesti que trust) you suffer the pains and penalties.


I think that mental model is faulty. At best, faulty.

The birth certificate is good for a driver license and that will tell a creditor who you are, for credit purposes. That and a good job, with a good credit history used to get you a nice loan... Now you don't need much more than being alive though.

That is what a birth certificate is worth; how much you can convince the car dealer or loan officer that is what it is worth - that you are good to pay back the loan plus the interest.

EZrhythm
06-16-11, 09:52 PM
For the life of me, I cannot find the source of that quote.

I haven't been able to find the source either but I did find, Intimate Notes; http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Intimate_Papers_of_Colonel_House.html?id=-3EShjGGNpUC

Considering CMH's involvement such as helping to choose the board for the FRB, one could certainly consider that is his quote.
Besides whether those are his actual words or not, it does reference what they followed through to do.

David Merrill
06-16-11, 11:24 PM
I have done some research and never come across that particular letter.

Frederick Burrell
06-22-11, 06:13 PM
Here is one source for the comments attributed to Colonel Edward Mandell House

time the weekly magazine vol 1 #17 June 25,1923

It comes from a book titled,

Fruit from a Poisonous Tree‎
by Melvin Stamper Jd - Law - 2008

Here's where the quote can be read, so it appears more legitimate than just a webpage. Use the book's internal search function if you can't find it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=6Tc29qnfjtgC&lpg=PT75&...

There are three results in that book for Edward Mandell House, besides the quote above. Another says he was the architect of the 16th Amendment, instrumental in creating the Federal Reserve, and yet another says he was agent provocateur of Rothschild.

But I can't read page 60 the ending of the quote to see if there is a source for the information. Supposed info comes from Wilson private papers according to the Author. fB

David Merrill
06-22-11, 11:05 PM
Thanks fB;


I will look into that tomorrow. That is the book (http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6033/wilsonbooks.jpg) on the bottom. That magazine article will be there too.


P.S. This looks like McFADDEN's quote. I can get a shot of that while I am there. I have been saying this (http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/4047/remedyavailablep60fruit.pdf) though, about Title 12 U.S.C. §411 and US Notes for some time now...


HJR-192 was the supersedeas bond that kept endorsers of private credit in the counterfeiting syndacalism all this time "legally".

allodial
06-23-11, 03:32 AM
The Birth Certificate as a 'pledge'...

[1] I witnessed a police officer (duty boss) admit that State-issued birth certificates belong to the State
[2] Same po-po admitted that the name(s) on the State-issued birth certificate were the State's.

So I was puzzled since I wasn't the State and and its the State's certificate and name... then how in the heck could I 'have' a birth certificate or even better how could JOHN HENRY DOE be me? In perspective: as much as you immerse yourself into the role then perhaps through that means it becomes a pledge...your volunteering. My own analysis and the reasonably reliable reports coming from 'upper echelon' of a Canadian Provincial Government and my own study of exchequer/treasury bills or the like ..as well as military history gives rise to the B/C being something that a shady banker would never want you to know what it really is.


"Over here the people are too well informed and there is therefore little opportunity to do anything." (May 1836, James ROTHSCHILD at Paris to Nathan/Nat ROTSCHILD at London. Source: The World of Private Banking, pp 27 (http://www.amazon.com/Private-Banking-Studies-Financial-History/dp/1859284329/).)

[Crosstalk ..definitely.... (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?146-DL-was-NOT-provided-or-used-as-ID&p=3225&viewfull=1#post3225)]
Reiterating-> back to the baby-swap..imagine ma and pa not only taking the fake baby and the real baby home but taking care of both the fake baby and the real baby but primarily neglecting and stupifying the real baby to the extent that they even call the real baby out of its name for the rest of its life...denying the real baby's existence...from cradle to grave. Perhaps a slow homicide and/or suicide for an "Israelite baby" "in Egypt"? From day 1 until age 21 ..when real baby grows up and can walk away but the wager is on the real baby never figuring it out all. The saviour-midwife (a kind of witness or cloud of witnesses) together with ministering angels perhaps saves the baby by revealing to the baby its true nature and nature or at least she does something to maintain a 'division'.

Its possible that the Edward Mandell House quote might be legit..but consider how much he THOUGHT he knew vs how much he really-really knew. =)

Further-> if you know the difference between yourself and fake baby--then the EMH quote IMHO should be without auspiciousness in that regard.

It may be that full comprehension of what has been transpiring requires knowledge of that which is called "municipal trading (http://books.google.com/books?id=dfUCAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover)" and "social credit". That is, it is likely that those working to undermine good society took something that was meant to work for your good and have set out to use it not only against you but for their own enrichment. Consider that the Social Security Administration was based on a system set up by an allegedly-Christian Otto von Bismarck [apparently anti-Catholic and anti-Jesuit..but yet his Social Insurance system was adopted by the USA?!??! Hmmm.].

That is back in 1913 perhaps there were those in the know who didn't want to see Americans receive the full return of to their own estate so they set out to undermine such. But there were perhaps failsafe mechanisms in place which perhaps might only 'fail' if you got a faulty 'instruction manual'? Thus the banker-influence on public education in the states of America?

That is...if John Henry can rightly and brightly see the difference between himself and John Henry Doe...he might be on to something big!


Adolph Hitler had a conversation with his finance minister in which he said things that will make clear where contrary claims come from. This was discovered in the book "The Twentieth Century Journey" - by William Shirer, where he tells of Hitler's question to his finance minister. He said, "We have made the political decision to build up our military in violation of the treaties so, how are we going to finance the buildup?" The finance minister said, "First you will need to use the printing press. Second, we have confiscated enormous amounts of Jewish property, and third, we will block the foreign credit that will enable you to use the credit of your political enemies to build up your military."

So, what you see there is the formula for a Blocked Grant as the means to derive foreign (PRIVATE) credit from the rolls of residents of Municipalities in the county that is run by the county attorney and the one who prosecutes you on charges therefrom. These BLOCKED Grants are the credit used by the county attorney to purchase Mutual Funds that are the "source" of Revenue used to finance the product of those who bring bills against you. These Mutual Funds are the Derivatives used to finance the IMF and are the "source" the 1099 instructions refer to. So when we get a bill from a merchant or vendor, that bill was financed by the "source" that is measured in International Units that can travel in electronic circuits in return (tax return) to the source. (Source: The Nature of a Remedy (http://freedom-school.com/bonds/the-nature-of-a-remedy.html))

Now with respect to the Social Security Administration, does not that organization have pertinence with respect to persons that are disabled or handicapped? Is there such a thing as an economic disability? :)


disability

DISABILITY, n. [from disable.]

1. Want of competent natural or bodily power, strength or ability; weakness; impotence; as disability arising from infirmity or broken limbs.

2. Want of competent intellectual power or strength of mind; incapacity; as the disability of a deranged person to reason or to make contracts.

3. Want of competent means or instruments. [In this sense, inability is generally used.]

4. Want of legal qualifications; incapacity; as a disability to inherit an estate, when the ancestor has been attainted. [In this sense, it has a plural.]

Disability differs from inability, in denoting deprivation of ability; whereas inability denotes destitution of ability, either by deprivation or otherwise.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3RXUPjNtZOI/SjOojp2j86I/AAAAAAAAAJU/Y_VndkYXMkw/s400/Wizard-of-Oz-w02.jpg
http://www.goldjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/confiscation-banner-pic-1.jpg
http://expressivehart.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/yellow-brick-road-2.jpg


retirement

RETI'REMENT, n.

1. The act of withdrawing from company or from public notice or station.

2. The state of being withdrawn; as the retirement of the mind from the senses.

3. Private abode; habitation secluded from much society or from public life.

Caprea had been the retirement of Augustus.

Retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome.

4. Private way of life.

Retirement, rural quiet, friendship, books, progressive virtue and approving heaven.

***

Edward Mandell House is said to have written a book anonymously...

In 1912, House published anonymously a novel called Philip Dru: Administrator, in which the title character, Dru, leads the democratic western U.S. in a civil war against the plutocratic East, becoming the dictator of America. Dru as dictator imposes a series of reforms which resemble the Bull Moose platform of 1912 and then vanishes. [Lash pp 230-35](Source: Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_M._House#Biography))

The Bull Moose Platform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)#The_Progre ssive_convention_and_platform) was as follows according to Wikipedia:


The main work of the convention was the platform, which set forth the new party's appeal to the voters. It included a broad range of social and political reforms advocated by progressives.[6][7]

In the social sphere the platform called for
A National Health Service to include all existing government medical agencies.
Social insurance, to provide for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled.
Limited injunctions in strikes.
A minimum wage law for women
An eight hour workday
A federal securities commission
Farm relief.
Workers' compensation for work-related injuries.
An inheritance tax.
A Constitutional amendment to allow a Federal income tax.

The political reforms proposed included
Women's suffrage.
Direct election of Senators.
Primary elections for state and federal nominations.

The platform also urged states to adopt measures for "direct democracy", including:
The recall election (citizens may remove an elected official before the end of his term).
The referendum (citizens may decide on a law by popular vote).
The initiative (citizens may propose a law by petition and enact it by popular vote).
Judicial recall (when a court declares a law unconstitutional, the citizens may override that ruling by popular vote).

However, the main theme of the platform was an attack on the domination of politics by business interests, which allegedly controlled both established parties. The platform asserted that
To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.[8]

To that end, the platform called for
Strict limits and disclosure requirements on political campaign contributions.
Registration of lobbyists.
Recording and publication of Congressional committee proceedings.

Might there be some insight into his mindset in his book that would or would not support the alleged quote? Book-> here (http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/8phlp10h.htm).

allodial
06-23-11, 05:02 AM
At least key points from above:

(1) Be careful how you hear.
(2) Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

http://jeffreyhill.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341d417153ef01348841423c970c-550wi
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_aqarqVv9ebo/TKkZCwljYGI/AAAAAAAAAGk/J4G2icgHmIQ/s400/babybathwater1.gif
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_J44Z7ctMC14/SxijWpEvjuI/AAAAAAAAA3g/_qD61SseYXE/s320/Baby+Bathwater.JPG

Frederick Burrell
06-23-11, 05:17 AM
Thanks allodial. I just returned to the thread to post more info on Mr. House, only to find that you had aready done so. Great job. After looking into his back ground the before mentioned quote seems quite possible. It fits with his writing and connection to the NWO and what we see has transpire in this country. fB

allodial
06-23-11, 06:01 AM
There are reviews/comments concerning the book on Amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/Philip-Administrator-Edward-Mandell-House/dp/1419141309/.

An article:

Glen Beck Discovers... (http://www.jbs.org/component/content/article/1009-commentary/6405-glenn-beck-discovers-philip-dru-administrator).

And a video...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqAzxHmbzaY

Treefarmer
06-23-11, 03:56 PM
Thank you for the links allodial.
I'll be reading these things as I have some time.
I appreciate you putting it in one place here.

Darkcrusade
06-26-11, 03:00 PM
I agree the BC is a 'registering/reporting' an event.

Without that 'event' occuring, you can't opt into SS, DL, etc. I am beginning to believe it IS a form of identification (whereas SS is NOT to be used as ID).
This is the conundrum I find myself in - IF the BC is actually a form of ID, then using it to obtain anything else would be a crime right? And if it is NOT a form of ID, then using it to obtain anything else would be a crime ... Is it possible to commit Identity Theft on oneself?

But then I found this today:
USC Title 18 Part 1 Chapter 1 Section 9
Vessel of the United States defined.
The term “vessel of the United States”, as used in this title, means a vessel belonging in whole or in part to the United States, or any citizen thereof, or any corporation created by or under the laws of the United States, or of any State, Territory, District, or possession thereof.
(emphasis mine)
So now I'm back to the whole birth/berth thinking again ... however, a birth/berth is not the only way to become a US citizen (ie: naturalization - I'd really like to see the paperwork -front and back - that they fill out). I think you have found the bloodtrail.:cool: when a ship goes down at sea,they re-port that ''30 souls were lost at sea'' or '' 100 souls lost'' &c. Which correlates with Rev 18:13 The merchants traffic,in mens souls.

Is the vessel a ship with soul(s) are you a vessel with a soul?

vessel: [ˈvɛsəl]n


1. any object used as a container, esp for a liquid
2. (Transport / Nautical Terms) a passenger or freight-carrying ship, boat, etc.
3. (Engineering / Aeronautics) an aircraft, esp an airship
4. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Anatomy) Anatomy a tubular structure that transports such body fluids as blood and lymph
5. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Botany) Botany a tubular element of xylem tissue consisting of a row of cells in which the connecting cell walls have broken down
6. a person regarded as an agent or vehicle for some purpose or quality- she was the vessel of the Lord

[from Old French vaissel, from Late Latin vascellum urn, from Latin vās vessel]
For we are all vessels upon our sea of commerce, in fact, every item you see or imagine can be a vessel. Your contracts are vessels too, as they carry goods from one port to the next.

The beast that comes out of the sea and stomps upon the dry land,admiralty\maritime
law. The author of the following book revealed much back years prior.Happy hunting>

http://autismtreatmentnow.com/Secret_Banker%27s_Manual.pdf

David Merrill
06-27-11, 12:13 AM
Mar - sea. The Merovingian bloodline (of Jesus CHRIST) is alleged to have began by King Merovee's mother being raped by a sea monster while swimming in the ocean.

allodial
06-27-11, 01:05 AM
Mar - sea. The Merovingian bloodline (of Jesus CHRIST) is alleged to have began by King Merovee's mother being raped by a sea monster while swimming in the ocean.


In recent years, a great deal of information has been published in books like Holy Blood, Holy Grail alleging that the Holy Grail actually refers to a bloodline descended from Jesus. By this account Jesus and Mary Magdalene produced offspring, and their descendants gave rise to the Merovingian dynasty, which ruled France from 476 to 750 A.D. Well intentioned readers and even authors have been deceived by this story and have mistaken it for the revelation of a suppressed history. Unfortunately the only thing that has been suppressed is the truth.


The Grail is not a bloodline. This false story originated in reams of fraudulent documents created by an extreme right-wing French sect. The group responsible for these fictions, calling itself the "Priory of Sion" and claiming an ancient esoteric lineage, has kept its own authentic history carefully hidden. How it constructed its fraud has not been revealed. It is long past time for the light of truth to reveal the "Priory of Sion" and the fictional bloodline it has promoted for what they are really are -- a fraud. The background of this group reveals its actual motives and sources of information. (Source: The Priory of Sion Hoax. (http://www.alpheus.org/html/articles/esoteric_history/richardson1.html))

Relevantly, in the movie the Matrix, its shown that "the Merovignian" was the husband of Persephone. Persephone in Greek or Roman mythology was the wife of Hades. One interesting thing is that it is suggested that William the Conqueror's lineage can be traced back to the Merovingian line. Interestingly enough, by 1070 (1000 years after the temple destruction) he had come from the sea as pertains to what are called the British Isles. Perhaps one could say that he was 'set loose' on the Isles? With William the Conqueror came Roman religion. Relevantly, the one called "Saint Patrick" (who said to have brought the Greek language to Hibernia) was never officially canonized as a Saint by the Roman Catholic system. Interestingly its said that the island group called Hibernia was never wholly subjected to Roman rule. Instead of Saint Patrick, the first canonized Roman Catholic to Ireland is said to be Saint Malachy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Malachy) who is apparently responsible for erecting the first ever stone 'Cathedrals' on any of the Hibernian isles.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_PFZ92dMys

Interestingly enough, around the time (70AD) the Temple at Jerusalem was destroyed and such Rome also managed to conquer Briton (around 74 - 78 AD).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roman.Britain.campaigns.43.to.60.jpg


William I (circa 1028[1] – 9 September 1087), also known as William the Conqueror (Guillaume le Conquérant), was the first Norman King of England from Christmas 1066 until his death. He was also Duke of Normandy from 3 July 1035 until his death, under the name William II. Before his conquest of England, he was known as William the Bastard because of the illegitimacy of his birth.

To press his claim to the English crown, William invaded England in 1066, leading an army of Normans, Bretons, Flemings, and Frenchmen (from Paris and Île-de-France) to victory over the English forces of King Harold Godwinson at the Battle of Hastings, and suppressed subsequent English revolts in what has become known as the Norman Conquest.[2] (Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_the_Conqueror))

Perhaps Patrick was similar to Martin Luther for Hibernia except a thousand years or so prior. Interestingly, Patrick is lauded for his part in driving the serpents or snakes out of Ireland. Interesting the story goes that he got it to get into a box and then threw it into the ocean. Perhaps there is some allegory?

Trust Guy
06-28-11, 12:44 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfnJ1rOFK7o&feature=player_embedded

David Merrill
06-28-11, 04:24 PM
I believe it dangerous to consider the birth certificate as a monetary instrument. (Referring to the cute video.)

It is however the basis for identification which grants a credit rating. The birth certificate is therefore worth exactly what the banker, car dealer or credit union is willing to loan you, based in your identity (credit rating). Things like your career, and payment history play into that too. - Or at least they used to.

The SDRs are a measure though, of the social pseudonomania along those lines. People conditioned to protect their credit, and therefore the bankers, and even become as bankers involved in the national debt through endorsement of private credit from the Fed etc...

It helps to realize that until recently, gold had no value but being pretty and staying shiny while other metals lose lustre when they oxidize. Gold is heavy and too soft for weapons for example. The original monetization of sin is modeled in the Golden Calf Imagery as we find the gold cover there so distracting that Fire on the Mountain was ignored over it.

David Merrill
07-01-11, 03:55 AM
Here is one source for the comments attributed to Colonel Edward Mandell House

time the weekly magazine vol 1 #17 June 25,1923

It comes from a book titled,

Fruit from a Poisonous Tree‎
by Melvin Stamper Jd - Law - 2008

Here's where the quote can be read, so it appears more legitimate than just a webpage. Use the book's internal search function if you can't find it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=6Tc29qnfjtgC&lpg=PT75&...

There are three results in that book for Edward Mandell House, besides the quote above. Another says he was the architect of the 16th Amendment, instrumental in creating the Federal Reserve, and yet another says he was agent provocateur of Rothschild.

But I can't read page 60 the ending of the quote to see if there is a source for the information. Supposed info comes from Wilson private papers according to the Author. fB

I finally got around to the federal repository. I don't find the quote.

David Merrill
07-01-11, 08:57 PM
Dear Frederick Burrell;



Thanks for being patient. The Cover I notice features Colonel HOUSE, so here is the entire Edition of Time Weekly. Click Here (http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/5803/timeweeklyvol117june251.pdf).

doug555
07-03-11, 05:40 PM
The intimate papers of Colonel House arranged as a narrative by Charles Seymour. [Click Here (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=genpub;idno=ACL9380.0001.001)]

Maybe the quote is in here... If not, the point is that it appears to have come true... we are enslaved... we have been tricked out of birthright just like Esau was by Jacob... payback! Someday we will both realize how vain competition is, and learn to love one another.

doug555
07-03-11, 07:16 PM
Mel Stamper's book cites it from Wilson's private papers... [click (http://books.google.com/books?id=6Tc29qnfjtgC&lpg=PT75&dq=%22edward%20mandell%20house%22%20%22social%20in surance%22&pg=PT75#v=onepage&q=Edward%20Mandell%20House&f=false)]

allodial
07-03-11, 07:56 PM
It is however the basis for identification which grants a credit rating. The birth certificate is therefore worth exactly what the banker, car dealer or credit union is willing to loan you, based in your identity (credit rating). Things like your career, and payment history play into that too. - Or at least they used to.

Or perhaps such is basically saying: until there is a charge, activity or instrument of some kind, the balance is at zero. However there could be investment activity on the B/C BOND from its inception by Government fiduciaries hedging against risk. After all, aren't birth certificates typically actuarial (risk management related) in nature?


The SDRs are a measure though, of the social pseudonomania along those lines. People conditioned to protect their credit, and therefore the bankers, and even become as bankers involved in the national debt through endorsement of private credit from the Fed etc...

It helps to realize that until recently, gold had no value but being pretty and staying shiny while other metals lose lustre when they oxidize. Gold is heavy and too soft for weapons for example. The original monetization of sin is modeled in the Golden Calf Imagery as we find the gold cover there so distracting that Fire on the Mountain was ignored over it.

The imagery of a lightbulb over the head (as in intelligence or having a clue) comes to mind re "Fire on the mountain". Perhaps they shrugged to having a brighrt shiny clue and instead yielded to stupidity ..ignorance (actually ignoring the bright, shiny clue)? And yes gold is interestingly enough ..shiny stuff. With key notion of having a sound standard not necessarily about the gold itself but about our fairness/honesty with each other.

And "fire on the mountain" somehow brings to mind a crown on the head (i.e. use of sovereignty) rather than yielding to idols or the like?

Darkcrusade
07-03-11, 09:19 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2zvhokVBRs

doug555
07-03-11, 09:24 PM
"Loose yourself from the bonds of your neck, O captive daughter of Zion!" Isa 52:2 (http://www.studylight.org/desk/?l=en&query=Isaiah+52%3A2&section=6&translation=nkj&oq=Isaiah%252052%3A2&new=1&sr=1&nb=isa&ng=52&ncc=52)

A Bond is a Promise to Pay, a Pledge. We are being told the break this bond.

Those in power can LEGITIMATELY, and with PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY, make the PRESUMPTION that the American people PLEDGED their property as collateral for the national debt, as evidenced by the Certificate of Live Birth (COLB)... UNLESS and UNTIL we REBUT that PRESUMPTION by expressing it rather as a TRUST relationship as the Grantor via an Indenture on the Hospital Birth Certificate (BC) having our footprints on it and a date prior to the COLB, and recording a notice of that under seal at a county register of deeds.

I believe the Beneficiary Transfer of Equitable Title (by indorsing bills) must be authorized by Grantor's indenture on BC. I think this is what we have been missing. They have plausible deniability to ignore our indorsed instruments since there is no specific grant of authority to the Trustee to apply the asset funds, much less demanding lawful money as those asset funds.

See attached... Stamp (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B8BdR0w2oZY_MDQ1Y2ViYWItYzYxMS00NjBlLWFjY TktYjE4N2YzYWE5MDdi&hl=en_US) and Letter (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B8BdR0w2oZY_YzMwNTNkMDQtYTFmYS00OTMwLTg4Y WYtZDc2ZTIyNWJlNmFh&hl=en_US)

These 2 documents are private and for educational purposes only. The Letter and Stamp are the main documents... the other supporting information is available privately upon request.

I believe the BC is Equitable, not Legal, Title, and must be "indentured" to provide the Grantor's authorization needed by the Beneficiary to transfer the equitable title of the Man's asset amount to the Trustee so the Trustee can legitimately use it to extinguish the liability amount the trustee holds, by operation of law.

The attached Letter and Stamp are the main documents... the rest is supporting information available privately upon request.

Using the BC with footprints from hospital pre-dates and thereby trumps the later county-registered "Certificate of Live Birth".

I do not think we need to go to the extreme of leaving the system entirely. I think we can use what is already in place... we just need to understand TRUST and the key trust instruments being used against us, which I think we can rebut the presumptions about them and use them to our advantage to overcome the slavery.

Perhaps we should create a very small "focus group" to discuss this approach on a Skype conference call . Brainstorming often helps if it is focused.

Doug
Skype: a-pilgrim555

David Merrill
07-03-11, 11:50 PM
Or perhaps such is basically saying: until there is a charge, activity or instrument of some kind, the balance is at zero. However there could be investment activity on the B/C BOND from its inception by Government fiduciaries hedging against risk. After all, aren't birth certificates typically actuarial (risk management related) in nature?




Birth certificates as I understand them are events recorded for the purpose of regional health records, like a census. Department of Health stuff. That is all they are.

What you are speaking of are SDR's in my estimation. Special Drawing Rights but that is based much more heavily on endorsement of private credit than on birth certificates.


http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

I probed about briefly on the World Freeman Society website, where from Rob's video; Security of the Person (http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/09/14/video-security-person-robert-arthur-menard-august-2008-1-hour-36-minutes) he has made a terrible blunder releasing such blatant claims found at the 5:00 Minute Mark and the 1:00 Hour Mark.

This pastor cropped up:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaFiX7fV7fs&

The pastor producing it seems very convinced that the Schedule II (http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/2691/canadianownershipandcon.pdf) and its annuity factoring figures are associated with the Canadian Ownership and Control Determination Act (http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/2691/canadianownershipandcon.pdf). But a closer look shows that the two documents have nothing to do with one another! The pastor looks at $7.91 (rounding up) as $7.9M for a trading price on Male infants under 1 year-old for example:



http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/6990/scheduleiipage2dce.jpg

This is an instance of seeing what you are expecting to see. The pastor is deluded. He certainly seems to honestly think that Schedule II is associated with The Ownership Act there anyway.

Just to clarify though here is a great example (http://loveforlife.com.au/content/08/09/14/video-security-person-robert-arthur-menard-august-2008-1-hour-36-minutes) of a million times factor explained atop a money table. Here is the Report (http://www.clubdeparis.org/sections/communication/communiques/club-paris-publie8455/downloadFile/PDF/PR20110629-Publication_of_Paris_Club_claims.pdf?nocache=13093 32558.97)and we find the Table clearly related to the Report.


Regards,

David Merrill.

allodial
07-04-11, 02:08 AM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

The equivalent of the birth certificate for Federal Canada and Federal U.S. would be the SI # or Social Security card. It may have been that Mass. was originally based around a "share based" system.

padreilluminato
07-04-11, 03:17 AM
As far as I can tell, the BC is a registry of an event, most likely a birth event.

A certificate or extract was given to a holder, not a holder in due course, but a holder.

The option was never mentioned at first, DO NOT use the BC as identifiation, keep in a safe place.

So the assumption under the public fool system that the name which was given at birth merged with a family name (surname) was that of the child, and thus used as such.

Now if they are deriving a NAME or Name from the BC, well we know it is not identification, cannot idenity an individual, but certain a thing.

If you look in the vital stats act (canadian version):
http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/00_96479_01#section4

Name of child

4 (1) The surname of a child must be registered as follows:

(a) if only one parent completes the statement under section 3, the surname must be the one chosen by that parent;

(b) if both parents complete the statement under section 3, the surname must be a surname chosen by both of them;

(c) if both parents complete the statement under section 3, but do not agree on the child's surname, the surname must be

(i) the parents' surname, if they have the same surname, or

(ii) a surname consisting of both parents' surnames hyphenated or combined in alphabetical order, if they have different surnames;

(d) if a person who is not the child's parent completes the statement under section 3, the surname must be

(i) the parents' surname, if they have the same surname,

(ii) a surname consisting of both parents' surnames hyphenated or combined in alphabetical order, if they have different surnames, or

(iii) if only one parent is known, that parent's surname;

(e) in accordance with an order of the court under section 4.1 (1).

(2) Despite subsection (1), a surname must not contain more than 2 surnames hyphenated or combined, and if the mother or father or both have a hyphenated or combined surname, only one of the names in that surname or those surnames must be used.

(3) For the purpose of subsection (1) (c) (ii) and (d) (ii) and if subsection (2) applies, the one name to be used under subsection (2) is the name that alphabetically precedes the other.

You can see that they are talking about the registration of a SURNAME:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/surname

There seems to be an equity split there (courts of equity), the given names and then SURNAME registered.

It would seem that liabilities are attached to such a document, and a warning as such was presented with each order of a BC, DO NOT use as Identification, keep in a safe place.

If not for ID then what is it used for ?

On most BCs I have seen it states NAME, not first, second or last name, and from Quebec since they have a civil code, the list is slightly different.

One would have to check the applicable vital stats act for his own State or Province.

Few other things to mention, yes it most likely is printed on a Canadian Bank note - Their Property
I have also seen were the BC had mentioned it is copyright of the crown, just like the acts and statutes - Also their property
I have heard in court on youtube a PRO-Secutor waived the copyright on the BC, and the judge turned to the alledged defendant and said, are you going to waive the copyright also....


Peace

Padre

padreilluminato
07-04-11, 04:10 AM
I am also in accordance with Doug to a point. If the man is getting statements of the accounting, then there is an issue.

The Trustee (Minister of Finance) first took care of the baby bonuses, then at some point when we used the BC to get a SIN, we subrograted that relationship to say we can do it on our own, we then RE-SIDED and took on the debtor position.

I believe the proper notification to the right parties would make a change in this presumption that the debtor is the State (bank of canada) and that the BC acknowledges there is a credit account open as to set-off the liabilities created in that NAME (trust/estate)

The proper why that I see it should be done, is send notice of proper lien by the NAME being the creditor and Canada and the province of being the debtors. Set up the collateral section and then fill out a financial statement and register it accordingly.

Divert all statement from then on to the proper parties and have them clear the account everytime.

This is just an educated guess, since I have seen the AFV and PN work. One must leave the liaibility on the one who created it in the first place. Why do they try so hard to get the NAME and if not given then you possibly go to jail ?

The account is wide open:
statement
1. Summary document outlining the status of an open credit account showing amounts due and paid. The term is commonly used interchangeably with "invoice" or "bill" by direct marketers.


Peace

PAdre

Chex
07-25-11, 09:31 PM
David: Do you have more of this (http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/4047/remedyavailablep60fruit.pdf)

Rock Anthony
07-27-11, 04:20 AM
I second that inquiry!

David Merrill
07-27-11, 04:39 AM
Sorry. My post did not register.

I think you might get lucky searching Oaths and Fruit of the Poisonous Tree. I cannot remember why I only saved a few pages but suspect there was some material I thought incorrect.

I have been doing some research on this with the Quatlosers and have confirmed more than ever that there is no account associated with the SSN or birth certificate that can be drawn against. What I believe is happening with A4V and BPNs is that the private credit is created into circulation - those are the credit notes FRNs that can be redeemed by demand.

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8702/bondedpromissorynote.pdf
http://img806.imageshack.us/img806/4604/bondedpromissorymemoran.pdf
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/5941/bondedpromissorynotepay.jpg
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/5941/bondedpromissorynotepay.jpg
http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/6421/bondedpromissorynotewit.pdf


Among those:


http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/5941/bondedpromissorynotepay.jpg


With the IRS coming to US court for a writ of enforcement, getting it, and RUSSELL entering a BPN to pay it in full, with notice of being payed in full I would expect the judge to comment and even take exception. Sure enough! We have a misfiled docket entry - Doc 20 - scrubbed from the docket report.

So it may have taken 90 days for even a US District Judge to finally figure out what I mean. RUSSELL and McDOWELL had been generating private credit currency their entire careers by endorsing their paychecks. That private credit was out there, in circulation and RUSSELL was demanding redemption of $14,100 of it. They most certainly had endorsed that much currency creation (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_Story_of_Money.zip) during their careers so it is their for the purposes of Setoff.

Chex
07-27-11, 05:13 AM
It's just a state (http://205.166.161.12/oncoreV2/ShowDetails.aspx?id=46881167&direct=1)of mind (http://205.166.161.12/oncoreV2/showdetails.aspx?id=46881168&rn=0&pi=0&ref=search)

zealous101
07-27-11, 07:08 AM
found it: http://books.google.com/books?id=6Tc29qnfjtgC&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=%22if+a+legal+remedy+was+available,+and+the+peo ple+chose+not+to+or+failed+to+secure+their+remedy% 22&source=bl&ots=1EbFHIG2qQ&sig=1La4w7VVskGKy2Pq1RP8_w4ce2o&hl=en&ei=8LgvTpW2DqrL0QH_qJyyAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

David Merrill
07-27-11, 01:13 PM
It is difficult to make sense of my post above this morning without considering another BPN carefully.

Bonded Promissory Note (http://img804.imageshack.us/img804/7883/bondedpromissorynotesni.pdf).

The reason I say difficult is that the SSN is the basis of a tax too. I consider it an insurance policy - but the Supreme Court ruled early in the New Deal that it is a valid income tax. Ergo note that the basis of the BPN is that the Defendant's SSN is spoken as an account number upon which to establish Setoff. Also, that you cannot open a bank account without a Social Security Number.

To catch on to my point I should share a couple experiences from the brain trust. One suitor mastered R4C with the LoR evidence repository and kept the advances of the IRS seizure on his $1M home for eight years, at bay. It took its toll on his marriage and health - he took to drinking and often would call me up rambling and ranting about having to R4C constant presentments, I am not going to play their game anymore! When he had been drinking he got emotional and alluded to suicide by cop and taking a brave last stand when they came for his home but then he would sober up and continue R4C and using the LoR for his evidence repository.

As the years went by though, he went on SSI. He was a millionaire but that wealth was tied up in his lifestyle and he wanted to cash his $1K Social Security Checks. He marked his Demand for Lawful Money on the first one and took it to his bank. They refused to cash it for him with the restricted endorsement. It seemed to me that was illegal and he tried and tried. Finally the bank apparently had arranged for him to pay a percentage with the Checks Cashed Here store down the road. He went there, and upon paying the 2% or whatever the clerk took a Sharpie to his Demand - right in front of him and behind the bulletproof Plexiglas. The fellow was heartbroken, quit R4C and lost his home - it was seized and he had to sell it off for $200K and pay that all to the IRS...

In the 1984 Article (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/convincing.html) in my first video (https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1EaV_bU7VImYmZlMTU5ZGQtYTIyZi00NjZjLWIyM zctOWFkZjhhZDM1MGEy&hl=en_US)we find citation:


So, what changed? Two years after H.J.R. 192, Congress passed the Social Security Act, which the Supreme Court upheld as a valid act imposing a valid income tax: 'Charles C. Steward Mach. Co. v, Davis' 301 U.S. 548 (1937).


Demanding lawful money on a Social Security check puts the bank in a dichotomy. Is the check for a settlement on an SSI insurance claim? Or is it a valid income tax that has formed a socialist system of rewards for the elderly?

This did not sink in though until a suitor was told to close down his Signature Card Demand account (not the bank closing it, mind you) and he mentioned that this happened as he arranged for his SS checks to be deposited there!




The manager of the bank has informed me that her legal dept has advised her not to continue the account I opened, even though I told her I would sign another signature card without stipulation for receipt of lawful money (to allow me time to change banks if necessary, after I had further researched the bank's refusal --- for what Cause in other words). That is the bank from which Suitor's Spouse obtained the redeemed $350 for our LoR filing in 2008, so there is even more reason for me to be concerned about the Cause of refusal.

I responded:

One way that is usually effective - refuse to close out the account.

It will come to them creating the illusion they are closing your
account but then it all depends on you signing the paper. Refuse to if
you want the bank to continue the account.

They may close it down anyway but I doubt it.

It helped to snap into place - from Jaro's website (http://sovereignwarriors.ning.com/forum) - on the topic of A4V (http://sovereignwarriors.ning.com/forum/topics/a4v-questions?page=65&commentId=6194679%3AComment%3A91916&x=1#6194679Comment91916) I walk in without reading some 60 Pages and start asking for graphic examples of a successful A4V - especially of the current vocal pundit Neal Lesley who was claiming to keep the electric company paid off by secret Treasury checks. He is quite irked instead of putting his A4V process to a scanner and showing us...

But what he was saying - whether he has been keeping copies or not - was that the government has taken all the gold and is therefore responsible to pay our bills. Simple. On Page 62 (http://sovereignwarriors.ning.com/forum/topics/a4v-questions?x=1&id=6194679%3ATopic%3A1511&page=62#comments) you might get his gist:


Dude A4V is a promise to pay the debt when they devise a way to pay it with a lawful money like gold and silver everything was paid back then when they developed all of this and the A4V was the remedy, this is basically how it works, Pretend the Treasury is your bank and they issue you credit well when you get you light bill you see it's $250 but you have no money but you have a credit account (a charge account) so you charge it,

Yes they give a coupon on the end of the electric bill , it's not a Money Order, however your going to use it as so to notify the Treasury you need $250 in credit, as you accept the bill for value...

This fellow has full confidence that some of the A4V process functions and extended the theory to an ongoing service. That was a bit too much for me to swallow because the Electric Company will shut you off. There is no funded account with the Treasury.

There is no funded account with the Treasury.

Therefore it is difficult to follow my recent revelations because I just tied the SSN into this and I am old enough to have evidence that the SSN trust constructs the STRAWMAN when you initiate the contract. I was twelve - you have to look at the date on the bottom:

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification2.jpg


http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification3.jpg

That was when I got my first real job. Anymore, pregnant Mom gets a SSN assigned to THE FETUS for the STRAWMAN (Constructive Trust (http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/3411/nameconstructivetrust.jpg)).

But I am assuring you at the same time that there is no funded bank account to draw from, from either one of these sources - the SSN or the Birth Certificate. It would appear that it took three months to sink in to a federal judge:


http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/5941/bondedpromissorynotepay.jpg

And a year of research for RUSSELL to get cold feet (http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/6421/bondedpromissorynotewit.pdf), when he discovered the above for himself:


http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/5941/bondedpromissorynotepay.jpg

The money is out there circulating already!

Click Here (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_Story_of_Money.zip).

Call it a circulating account if you want. Both RUSSELL and McDOWELL have been generating private credit as Fed banks all their careers. It is out there on their approval as private bankers' fractional lending practices ready to be called in as lawful money on demand. Ergo, under the right conditions; Setoff.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. Be certain you demand setoff for the exact amount of the charges. If you round up even a penny that "change" might be considered fraud - like with Drew Allen RAYNER (http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&rlz=1R2GGLT_enUS440&source=hp&q=drew+allen+rayner&rlz=1R2GGLT_enUS440&aq=0p&aqi=p-p2&aql=&oq=drew+allen+rayner&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=f8fc01b48e0a6d93&biw=1117&bih=554). - Now the article (http://www.sunherald.com/static/insite/login.html?goto=http%3A//www.sunherald.com/2011/07/22/3291768/speeding-ticket-led-to-fraud-charges.html) is unavailable unless you register? Drew Allen wrote his BPN for $175 on $171.50 and is apparently suffering for the $4.50 he presumed "keep the change".

Chex
07-27-11, 02:52 PM
You were twelve; I was fifteen, I have a copy of my application.

Somewhere along the line of age; contracting with a minor doesn’t seem right to me.

Where is that law that made contracting with a minor legal?

After my parents (born in 1914) passed I called ssa and ask them where are my parents contributions at? They wanted to know why. Told them I want my family to have what my parents never had a chance to use returned. Gone was the reply.

Years later I called them and said I wanted to stop with contributions and start my own OADI and they talked about the credits, my credit have been there for years; the end result was I need permission form the irs.

Such a great program gone bust (http://www.ssa.gov/history/ottob.html).

David Merrill
07-27-11, 03:53 PM
You were twelve; I was fifteen, I have a copy of my application.

Somewhere along the line of age; contracting with a minor doesn’t seem right to me.

Where is that law that made contracting with a minor legal?

After my parents (born in 1914) passed I called ssa and ask them where are my parents contributions at? They wanted to know why. Told them I want my family to have what my parents never had a chance to use returned. Gone was the reply.

Years later I called them and said I wanted to stop with contributions and start my own OADI and they talked about the credits, my credit have been there for years; the end result was I need permission form the irs.

Such a great program gone bust (http://www.ssa.gov/history/ottob.html).


Thanks for the link Chex!


You just explained to me why there is no funded account available through SSA. Did the IRS give their permission?

allodial
07-27-11, 05:21 PM
But yet the SSA has a routing number and is a member of the Federal Reserve Bank. Consider also the alleged 3 year limit on refunds, the law of escheats, federal/State/DC law on unclaimed property and societal asset pooling. Perhaps the accounts remain at zero balance until there is activity?


Where is that law that made contracting with a minor legal?

Perhaps its to do with a kind of "ratification" that might result from continuing with "the Game" past the age of infancy (21 years) that might be worth considering? That is, if John Henry reaches attains twenty one years of age and continues holding himself out as accommodation party for JOHN HENRY DOE... well likely you get the idea.

Chex
07-27-11, 07:08 PM
Did the IRS give their permission? Nein

David Merrill
07-27-11, 07:42 PM
But yet the SSA has a routing number and is a member of the Federal Reserve Bank.

I want your source for these two assertions please.


Did the IRS give their permission? Nein


Did you ask, or just presume their answer?

allodial
07-27-11, 11:44 PM
I want your source for these two assertions please.

Per your request and for general edification.

586

From one of many bank routing number databases.

Note the Service Number corresponds with FRB RICHMOND (ala BALTIMORE, MD). And the 65 also corresponds to FRB RICHMOND for ELECTRONIC TRANSACTIONS.

http://www.dallasfed.org/images/frsmap2.gif

The following is from a publication of the Federal Reserve of St. Louis called "Payments Quarterly" (snippet is from 1996).
588589

allodial
07-27-11, 11:58 PM
590

The above should clarify the '65' and difference between ELECTRONIC and other routing numbers. Again both 05XXXXXXX and 65XXXXXXX correspond to FRB RICHMOND which corresponds to BALTIMORE, MD 21235. To knowledge, the SSA is prohibited from originating paper checks and must go through the U.S. Department of the Treasury when doings so. Caveat: while it could be possible that the SSA is not technically a member of the FRB--however it is clear that the SSA has been assigned an ABA routing number. The link between the SSA and the FRB is detailed somewhat at Title 31 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations.

allodial
07-28-11, 01:18 AM
There is no funded account with the Treasury.

True. The account established for the entity named on a birth certificate is an account at the Social Security Administration in Baltimore, MD. It is not an account at the US Department of the Treasury. The social security account at the SSA in Baltimore, MD is not the same as the account at the US Department of the Treasury. Matter of fact, even that account is more precisely at the IRS (a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury) rather than at the the US Department of the Treasury.

Account -> SSA
Account -> IRS
http://www.militaryplaques.com/images/Government/Social-Security-Administration-Plaque%20L.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Internal_Revenue_Service_logo.png
Two different accounts. Just because they have the same digits doesn't mean they are the same account. Note also the subtle difference between: "social security number" (if recollection is correct according to Treasury Regulations this could even be a passport #) and "social security account number". Could it be that passports, green cards, visas and State IDs are all types of "social securities"?

P.S. From observation upon a deletion of taxpayer record from the IRS, an account still remained at the SSA. TO REITERATE: If the SSN is never used for filing taxes or for getting a DL or State ID an account with the same digits as the SSAN and the NAME on the SS card should not appear at the IRS. Furthermore IRS agents have been quoted as saying that they only deal with TINs and do not see any distinction between EINs and ITINs and SSNs for their purposes.

On that note... (just to clarify and stave off "Internet confusion"):


Would

Account # 123456789
Regions Bank

and

Account #123456789
Citibank

be the same account?

motla68
07-28-11, 10:11 PM
I think that mental model is faulty. At best, faulty.

The birth certificate is good for a driver license and that will tell a creditor who you are, for credit purposes. That and a good job, with a good credit history used to get you a nice loan... Now you don't need much more than being alive though.

That is what a birth certificate is worth; how much you can convince the car dealer or loan officer that is what it is worth - that you are good to pay back the loan plus the interest.

Of course you do, because you probably think i am speaking from the debtor side, but no I am speaking from a creditor side, the conditional agreement is that it will be carried but not for my benefit in terms of equitable law, not my seal, not my property, I have no claim upon it that it gives any rights to do anything else but for the benefit of their road officers.

It works for me, probably not going to work for you though. It requires out of the box thought process, not practical for the greenhorns in the movement for more freedom in their lives. You tell me in all of your practical science, how did the three men walk through the firy furnace that KIng Neb ordered to walk through and they survived?

motla68
07-28-11, 10:16 PM
I believe it dangerous to consider the birth certificate as a monetary instrument. (Referring to the cute video.)

It is however the basis for identification which grants a credit rating. The birth certificate is therefore worth exactly what the banker, car dealer or credit union is willing to loan you, based in your identity (credit rating). Things like your career, and payment history play into that too. - Or at least they used to.

The SDRs are a measure though, of the social pseudonomania along those lines. People conditioned to protect their credit, and therefore the bankers, and even become as bankers involved in the national debt through endorsement of private credit from the Fed etc...

It helps to realize that until recently, gold had no value but being pretty and staying shiny while other metals lose lustre when they oxidize. Gold is heavy and too soft for weapons for example. The original monetization of sin is modeled in the Golden Calf Imagery as we find the gold cover there so distracting that Fire on the Mountain was ignored over it.

In the words of George Bush " nothing but a Damn piece of paper ".

David Merrill
07-28-11, 10:54 PM
Allodial;


Thank you for delivering. I went though it carefully and understand. You also said:


Could it be that passports, green cards, visas and State IDs are all types of "social securities"?



I believe they relate to SDR's but other than that, have no accounts. For example BRICS, now BRICI - Indonesia replacing South Africa [me thinking that there are some rare earth metals there used in hi-tech, and diamonds are just vanity]. My favorite is a circulating account. This is why POMCs, BPNs and A4V can be counted on to work but only with the right forms of government and system parameters. In other words get the Setoff at the initial contact for services or goods:

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/4189/novation2010.jpg
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/5531/ctsmileyfacesmall.jpg
http://img683.imageshack.us/img683/9118/novation2010clavical.jpg

Otherwise, the calculation would be like with RUSSELL (http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/8702/bondedpromissorynote.pdf) - find every paycheck he has ever endorsed in his life. Multiply it times the reserve rate at that time and the total amount of loans (figuring per capita-income at that bank) and you start to figure that RUSSELL created (http://Friends-n-Family-Research.info/FFR/Merrill_Story_of_Money.zip)more than $14.1K during his career. This is how much private credit RUSSELL has generated in his career and how much private credit he is entitled to redeem in lawful money.

But you have to be careful who you tender the instrument to. - And never, tender more than what is on the coupon/remittance or that will probably be considered theft by fraud, even if you say, Keep the change.

David Merrill
07-28-11, 10:59 PM
The reason you come off so arrogant and snarky Motla68, is that you never show anybody how or why it works for you. All you tell us is that since you are so high above us all in understanding, we cannot possibly aspire to your level where it might work for us.

motla68
07-28-11, 11:18 PM
The reason you come off so arrogant and snarky Motla68, is that you never show anybody how or why it works for you. All you tell us is that since you are so high above us all in understanding, we cannot possibly aspire to your level where it might work for us.

Have you ever analysed your own posts? Nobody in here can have a conversation without you coming in with your cookie and pizza cutters in the middle of it therefore not many can have their own right to self determination. If one does not think and act like you they are automatically advertised by you as some anarchist or with some organization trying to overthrow the group.

I keep telling you all this is not the intent, look we all have a right to self determination, correct? Are you a government employee? if not, then why are you always using someone else's law for your own determination? There is nothing binding you to government statutes, regulations and policies but you. Other then for Capital crimes because you injured someone else who also has a right to life, liberty and happiness. People think it is so complicated that you need a huge stack of paper work so you can have your own right to self determination, not true, a major part of it is how you live and approach situations.

There is many distractions all around us to throw our attention away from where we really came from. It starts out with a service offered and a legal determination made " the number 3 " when all it is just paper and ink for all three, you might kind of get lost in the middle a little bit, but the end it with a bang where most
of you should be able to see the distinction between our connection with the land and the other " milking services " offered.
http://youtu.be/QI0RiqK3XJc

Don't get caught in the traps that thrown you off your creators estate given to you as a gift. I have shown plenty, but then again even the bible says not all will survive the end times, just a few and it may not even be me for that is not my call.

David Merrill
07-29-11, 12:22 AM
There you go again. Not showing us anything.

I take samples of the important components and sanitize them, then I explain them plainly and carefully. I know this because it is true. I seldom write a post without showing by attachment or link something by way of explanatory material, usually from source documentation.

One thing for sure though, I have given up on you explaining anything to us but how ignorant we are compared to you so I will not be spending any time quarreling with you.

motla68
07-29-11, 12:33 AM
One thing for sure though, I have given up on you explaining anything to us but how ignorant we are compared to you so I will not be spending any time quarreling with you.

Promise you can do that, is it in you?

allodial
07-29-11, 02:01 AM
But you have to be careful who you tender the instrument to

One would have to consider the circumstances and be wise enough to know "what time it is" at any given moment. A key point to keep in mind is that: (i) not every public official has authority to receive things from the private side; (ii) not every public official has authority to take something from the public and hand it over to the private. It might help the reader to greatly comprehend that some transactions require both of those functions to occur simultaneously. Therefore if one is perceived as coaxing a public official to convert something from public to private without authority/license then one might be perceived to be involved in unlawful conversion! Some people want to get in a hizzy when it just comes down to simple principles.

A reader might do well to consider the notion of taking a publicly-owned traffic light and putting it in their back yard in contrast, say, to the notion of the City Dept. of Traffic & Lights taking a reader's disco lights out of their basement and using them to light up a dark, public intersection. As in: converting from public to private vs converting from private to public.

http://www.silentthundermodels.com/wall_plaques/images/DOT14_1.jpg
http://www.kytreasury.com/NR/rdonlyres/DF1768D0-EF07-4E5C-B185-C9A3ED1761E8/0/treasuryBranding_01.jpg
A Govt. Treasurer or Govt. Receiver likely would be of the few public officials that would have authority to convert something public to private or to convert something from private to public.


And never, tender more than what is on the coupon/remittance or that will probably be considered theft by fraud, even if you say, Keep the change.

When one is dealing with a public charge/tax situation, say for a bill that is worth $20 perhaps one could say that $20 is backed by the issuer of the bill and is backed by the person from which $20 is demanded should they accept. Would anything over $20 would have insufficient bonding if its only bonded from one side of the deal? Afterall, the bill suggests that the only thing the demander has authority to obtain is $20 and is only putting themselves at risk of $20. Also, if I were to cancel the $20 bill, how could I cancel it for more than its worth? As for introducing new money into a system, that is another matter--though likely related.

***
For further edification, consider something as infamous as "eminent domain". It might be helpful to note the relationship between eminent domain and a "Treasurer" of some sort. Gee..why would it involve a Treasurer rather than just cops with lot of guns?


Eminent domain is the power of the government to purchase private property for a "public use" so long as the property owner is paid "just compensation." Whenever possible, Inglewood Redevelopment Agency tries to avoid the use of the eminent domain power, exercising it only when it is necessary for a public project. The decision to acquire private property for a public project is made by the Inglewood Redevelopment Agency only after a thorough review of the project, which often includes public hearings. (Source: City of Inglewood (http://www.cityofinglewood.org/depts/commdev/redevelopment/eminent_domain_faqs.asp))

David Merrill
07-29-11, 02:53 AM
Promise you can do that, is it in you?

Absolutely not!

The post at the top of this page and the bottom of the last both start with quotes from me. So until you start showing examples and explaining on a lever that I and others can easily interpret and apply, you are a target. Squabbling with you will be like shooting fish in a barrel.

David Merrill
07-29-11, 03:23 AM
One would have to consider the circumstances and be wise enough to know "what time it is" at any given moment. A key point to keep in mind is that: (i) not every public official has authority to receive things from the private side; (ii) not every public official has authority to take something from the public and hand it over to the private. It might help the reader to greatly comprehend that some transactions require both of those functions to occur simultaneously. Therefore if one is perceived as coaxing a public official to convert something from public to private without authority/license then one might be perceived to be involved in unlawful conversion! Some people want to get in a hizzy when it just comes down to simple principles.

A reader might do well to consider the notion of taking a publicly-owned traffic light and putting it in their back yard in contrast, say, to the notion of the City Dept. of Traffic & Lights taking a reader's disco lights out of their basement and using them to light up a dark, public intersection. As in: converting from public to private vs converting from private to public.

http://www.silentthundermodels.com/wall_plaques/images/DOT14_1.jpg
http://www.kytreasury.com/NR/rdonlyres/DF1768D0-EF07-4E5C-B185-C9A3ED1761E8/0/treasuryBranding_01.jpg
A Govt. Treasurer or Govt. Receiver likely would be of the few public officials that would have authority to convert something public to private or to convert something from private to public.



When one is dealing with a public charge/tax situation, say for a bill that is worth $20 perhaps one could say that $20 is backed by the issuer of the bill and is backed by the person from which $20 is demanded should they accept. Would anything over $20 would have insufficient bonding if its only bonded from one side of the deal? Afterall, the bill suggests that the only thing the demander has authority to obtain is $20 and is only putting themselves at risk of $20. Also, if I were to cancel the $20 bill, how could I cancel it for more than its worth? As for introducing new money into a system, that is another matter--though likely related.

***
For further edification, consider something as infamous as "eminent domain". It might be helpful to note the relationship between eminent domain and a "Treasurer" of some sort. Gee..why would it involve a Treasurer rather than just cops with lot of guns?

Thanks for revising that one!

At first the figures were throwing me for a loop.


But you have to be careful who you tender the instrument to. - And never, tender more than what is on the coupon/remittance or that will probably be considered theft by fraud, even if you say, Keep the change.

I think that may fit.

David Merrill
07-29-11, 01:01 PM
However you should all know something.

I have a good memory and have read a lot of books and absorbed a lot of direct and vicarious experience. I think of myself smart enough that if I cannot understand Motla68 I feel safe to assume that those of you who have not read about trust law do not understand him too. Therefore I request that he use his scanner and get a bit graphic - which he can do - and plainly refuses to. He will not tell us the specific verbiage on some premise that we may hurt ourselves with esoteric knowledge - being that we are not proper initiates...

If it cannot be easily understood then in my opinion I will sound like Motla68 when I try to explain it to somebody. I don't want to sound like Motla68.

motla68
07-29-11, 04:27 PM
One would have to consider the circumstances and be wise enough to know "what time it is" at any given moment. A key point to keep in mind is that: (i) not every public official has authority to receive things from the private side; (ii) not every public official has authority to take something from the public and hand it over to the private. It might help the reader to greatly comprehend that some transactions require both of those functions to occur simultaneously. Therefore if one is perceived as coaxing a public official to convert something from public to private without authority/license then one might be perceived to be involved in unlawful conversion! Some people want to get in a hizzy when it just comes down to simple principles.

A reader might do well to consider the notion of taking a publicly-owned traffic light and putting it in their back yard in contrast, say, to the notion of the City Dept. of Traffic & Lights taking a reader's disco lights out of their basement and using them to light up a dark, public intersection. As in: converting from public to private vs converting from private to public.

A Govt. Treasurer or Govt. Receiver likely would be of the few public officials that would have authority to convert something public to private or to convert something from private to public.



When one is dealing with a public charge/tax situation, say for a bill that is worth $20 perhaps one could say that $20 is backed by the issuer of the bill and is backed by the person from which $20 is demanded should they accept. Would anything over $20 would have insufficient bonding if its only bonded from one side of the deal? Afterall, the bill suggests that the only thing the demander has authority to obtain is $20 and is only putting themselves at risk of $20. Also, if I were to cancel the $20 bill, how could I cancel it for more than its worth? As for introducing new money into a system, that is another matter--though likely related.

***
For further edification, consider something as infamous as "eminent domain". It might be helpful to note the relationship between eminent domain and a "Treasurer" of some sort. Gee..why would it involve a Treasurer rather than just cops with lot of guns?

Yes, the lines between natural law and public policy are very blury sometimes, but there is some key words you mentioned there, " public good ". The old origination of public is publicus;

Adjective

pūblicus m (feminine pūblica, neuter pūblicum); first/second declension

of or belonging to the people, State, or community
public, general
(substantive) a public officer, magistrate

This shows you that it is suppose to be an upside down triangle so to speak, but depending on how people perceive it is how it is going to manifest in ones mind.
Trying to claim a natural law right within an entity governed by public statutes can seem pretty self defeating. There is suppose to be public council meeting for such things in which there is , but today these public areas are no longer being held by a people, they are being held by the state in a usufructuary manner, the military conquered public domain, it says this in the United Nations law;

Pertaining to rules of usufruct:

Classification of property according to ownership
1. public dominion, owned by the Government.

When the old indian tribes inhabited this country they did not have paper, sometimes animal skins they wrote on but their official tribal documents were the totem poles, now if you look at each document birth, title, public decree, who's seal is at the tope of the document? Usually the state

"And they painted on the grave posts
Of the graves, yet unforgotten,
Each his own ancestral totem
Each the symbol of his household;
Figures of the bear and reindeer,
Of the turtle, crane, and beaver. --Longfellow.
[1913 Webster]"

Whether given as a gift or taken by force they are the beneficial owner to which has some pretty serious liabilities.
I do not claim ownership of anything upon this earth for it is just a temporary place to inhabit which we should preserve for the next generation, when you claim the material things that is where they got you for lack of understanding that we are still under Military Occupation here. I try my best to stay away from taking commercial stock in things, we came from the land, we are part of the land, just like the gold and silver, not in commercial form but for it's natural resource for the benefit of the body such as using silver to assist in disinfecting water to make it drinkable and other uses untapped yet and not mentioned.
The old indian philosophical cultures called all other living things their relatives, I believe the closer we get back to those traditions it will have a re-active effect and turn the tables of how we live today, already see some of that happening, courts getting less crowded, post offices closing, federal government eating each other up over fictitious deficits, it is a beautiful thing.

allodial
07-30-11, 09:10 AM
Unsure as to where the term 'public good' was utilized along the thread. Regarding 'military conquest' or 'martial law' or 'military rule' its rather widely known that 'military imperium' has a source.

Regarding United Nations, such is a military and economic alliance similar to NATO.

What does any of this have to do with 'natural law' when neither NATO nor the United Nations actually exist in nature?

P.S. No offense but your post seems to make no sense in the context of the thread.