PDA

View Full Version : Outside the Box



David Merrill
03-13-11, 09:50 AM
I grabbed this from the Welcome Thread because I would like to have a lively conversation for all the members about it.


If we are not the person on the COLB/BC and especially if using currency with intent of lawful money there is no promise of performance. No oath of office or appointment of duty to perform acts for the public trust. More on that to come soon in later posts.

I am presuming COLB/BC is for Certificate of Lading/Billing and Birth Certificate.

My research tells me that the bond never materializes past SDR's - Paper Gold (http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/SeizeGold.jpg) - which is the UN's IMF Trust Fund created in 1976 from the Amendments to the Bretton Woods Agreements through the Secret Jamaica - Rambouillet Accord; Public Law 94-564. Page 1 (http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/55/pl945643.jpg), Page 2 (http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/7357/pl945644.jpg).

I believe the passage I quoted above implies that there are accounts set up around SSNs and Birth Certificates, maybe Treasury Direct or Private Side Accounts, maybe even representative of stock in the UN's IMF - Bank and Fund etc. Discharge Direct obligations of government...

Well, I think you can already see why I am hoping to remove this from the Welcome Thread - this certainly deserves its own space to develop! But I have a link for people to click there, to get directly here.



Regards,

David Merrill.

motla68
03-13-11, 04:33 PM
Thank you for continuing the discussion, I agree it needs more time to manifest in peoples minds, for most of the people i invited here it took them a while to for wrapping their head around the concept. I agree that their system is a layered onion of accounts using the name, not doubting that, but take a look through my lenses for a moment:

- Certificate of title is the authentication that a title exists somewhere, the only one that knows is the one who represents the name on the paper with their seal upon it.
They recorded the event so now they own the survey that took place. NOT the baby.

- When you went to work on a job, whom's name did you use, your true name or the estate name(person) with the ssn attached to it?
So from this who is the real Taxpayer, is it you or the Person? Then if a refund who does that go to, you or the Persons account at the treasury?

- How will the accounts of the Person be indemnified if everything is not returned to treasury, including the bills?

Attached is a clip taken from a pdf file because the pdf would not load on here for some reason:
86

- Also what I mean by the interest from a bank account being a benefit, one referencing about the name above and two most all banks are chartered by the state, so then who's account is it and if someone takes the interest and dividends from that account who becomes the one with a beneficial interest?

Final thoughts, can you really claim anything unless you have a trust with an estate that you created and not them?
87

One thing we are looking at is creating this private trust that we live through using the Trust Certificate instead of their Birth Certificate/COLB because it is quite a battle to get them to be in abeyance the rules of usufructuary for all accounting.

David Merrill
03-14-11, 04:03 AM
Thank you for continuing the discussion, I agree it needs more time to manifest in peoples minds, for most of the people i invited here it took them a while to for wrapping their head around the concept. I agree that their system is a layered onion of accounts using the name, not doubting that, but take a look through my lenses for a moment:

I have my doubts these days. One thing great about this method of brain trust as a backbone, is that as the new information comes in, I can modify my belief sets. In this case it is about two decades of a lack of information.

There is nothing to support the use of 1099-OID-style or Treasury Direct accounts. There is nobody banking on my birth certificate. The SEC does not keep a registry of FRN S/N's. I say these things because people have been making all that stuff up over the years and building on each other, not on the facts. But you can look in the State Department Bulletin and see the facts, and that says that SDR's, a fictional basket of currency is built upon confidence and security building measures that are quite whispy. This is the beauty of redeeming lawful money. It silently pulls the bricks from the zigurat. It is an illusion that everybody keeps by signing the endorsement in ignorance.


- Certificate of title is the authentication that a title exists somewhere, the only one that knows is the one who represents the name on the paper with their seal upon it.

They recorded the event so now they own the survey that took place. NOT the baby.

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

There are no bank note markings! There have been no transactions on the original.

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

See there at the bottom though? I created DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT, the constructive trust when I was twelve. I remember doing that but it took a long time to notice when the trust was created. That was when I was maintenance man at the Carriage House Apartments, that burned to the ground (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUdYu2h_b30) many years later.



- When you went to work on a job, whom's name did you use, your true name or the estate name(person) with the ssn attached to it?
So from this who is the real Taxpayer, is it you or the Person? Then if a refund who does that go to, you or the Persons account at the treasury?

The refund would go into my pocket. Then I would spend it. I do not have an account at the Treasury, nor my person (when I form one).


- How will the accounts of the Person be indemnified if everything is not returned to treasury, including the bills?

I think that I am recognizing your theories; at least parts of them. That is twice you are saying that there is a Treasury Account of some kind based in birth certificates and that instead of Refunds coming back to the taxpayer, they somehow go to the Treasury. [The advocates of the 1099-OID Form would admonish people to send the two parts of the process to two different IRS campuses - which is to say to trick the IRS into sending you your Refund!]


Attached is a clip taken from a pdf file because the pdf would not load on here for some reason:
86

I think Admin will raise the size limit on doc and pdf files to 200kB soon.




- Also what I mean by the interest from a bank account being a benefit, one referencing about the name above and two most all banks are chartered by the state, so then who's account is it and if someone takes the interest and dividends from that account who becomes the one with a beneficial interest?

Now you are talking about interest. Before you said the Refund was a benefit.

I address that in my second video. After a full refund you might address this to your boss/employer. If anybody is gaining interest from the Withholdings it should be you!


Final thoughts, can you really claim anything unless you have a trust with an estate that you created and not them?
87

One thing we are looking at is creating this private trust that we live through using the Trust Certificate instead of their Birth Certificate/COLB because it is quite a battle to get them to be in abeyance the rules of usufructuary for all accounting.

I think their lack of compliance is you making constructions that do not exist. I honestly do.

Robert Arthur MENARD made such a statement in his video; Security of the Person (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=436798682226252164#). Look at the 5:00 Minute Mark and the 1:00 Hour Mark. I pushed on the point for a couple months and had Rob spinning and gyrating (http://freemen.freeforums.org/i-am-a-freeman-on-the-land-its-official-t205-20.html#p1051) all about that. It turns out that he is wrong:

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/7078/birthcertnobond.jpg

There is no substance to this birth certificate (http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/6562/birthcertregistrationre.jpg) being a revenue receipt. There is no return or refund. There is nothing in that registration number because it is not an account.

Michael Joseph
03-14-11, 06:14 PM
I like to think of Legal Name and it Certificate of Title as an "access easement" into the State - making the transactions with the State - Legal. And everything done with Legal name, never leaves the State as Legal Name is the creation of the State. Based on Survey of an EVENT. The COLB is just a trust certificate - with certain user privileges.

These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.

Yet, if one has a Trust Account in Legal Name - then everything within that account is subject to Administration. And can be siezed if necessary. Therefore, you will NEVER open a banking account these days absent a LEGAL NAME, a DL, a SSN, and an address within the State.

I like to think of the State like a computer's memory. Each location has a specific Address. The only way to access that address is to be WITHIN the computer. Or to be granted access from within. Yet, we are given zip drives - LEGAL NAME w/SSN which allows us to interact with the "closed system" - computer; Yet we are given mere "User privelege" and never "Admin". Said another way, the grant is restricted.

The Posterity and the Heirs are for whom the Trust was made. These are the Sovereigns from the perspective of the State [Within]. If you engage the State via CQT, then you are acting in capacity as citizen or subject.

Treefarmer
03-14-11, 07:02 PM
I like to think of Legal Name and it Certificate of Title as an "access easement" into the State - making the transactions with the State - Legal. And everything done with Legal name, never leaves the State as Legal Name is the creation of the State. Based on Survey of an EVENT. The COLB is just a trust certificate - with certain user privileges.

These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.

Yet, if one has a Trust Account in Legal Name - then everything within that account is subject to Administration. And can be siezed if necessary. Therefore, you will NEVER open a banking account these days absent a LEGAL NAME, a DL, a SSN, and an address within the State.

I like to think of the State like a computer's memory. Each location has a specific Address. The only way to access that address is to be WITHIN the computer. Or to be granted access from within. Yet, we are given zip drives - LEGAL NAME w/SSN which allows us to interact with the "closed system" - computer; Yet we are given mere "User privelege" and never "Admin". Said another way, the grant is restricted.

The Posterity and the Heirs are for whom the Trust was made. These are the Sovereigns from the perspective of the State [Within]. If you engage the State via CQT, then you are acting in capacity as citizen or subject.

Thank you Michael Joseph for this plain and straight-forward explanation.
It makes sense to me.
The things you are describing, I can see them at work around me.

Blessings

David Merrill
03-15-11, 12:12 AM
I like all of MJ's mental models! Even the ones that I have to work at a while.

Michael Joseph
03-15-11, 01:01 AM
"As below so above and beyond I imagine," - get a look at that Avatar
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS7CZIJVxFY)


it's simple man
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHQ_aTjXObs)

:)

I am sure that I have learned more from you than you from me.

Thank you.

David Merrill
03-16-11, 03:57 PM
"As below so above and beyond I imagine," - get a look at that Avatar
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wS7CZIJVxFY)


it's simple man
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHQ_aTjXObs)

:)

I am sure that I have learned more from you than you from me.

Thank you.

Good point. And thank you.

It has been a while now - since I have discovered the simplicity!

They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

osbogosley
03-18-11, 09:13 AM
Thanks, both of you. The 20 and 30 yr. olds I play disc golf with are slowly soaking up some of this info. One of them started to sign his check with the non-endorsement, then felt funny. He'll do it right next time. Another 20 yr old got arrested, open container, possession. The most meaningful concept I could explain in a half hour was the importance of the word mistake. When he talked to the judge, the first offer was probation, He said there was a mistake, and the next offer was community service at the disc golf course. The judge agreed to let me supervise his service. I've never met this judge and declined his offer of jury duty with a note last year. Getting a 20 yr old to comprehend the nature of the offer was gratifying. The thread on GLP is still going strong. Peace to you both, Larry

David Merrill
03-18-11, 11:53 AM
Thread on GLP? I am trying to decode...

osbogosley
03-18-11, 04:53 PM
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1304915/pg53#lastpost The thread about How to collapse the Fed.

David Merrill
03-18-11, 05:43 PM
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1304915/pg53#lastpost The thread about How to collapse the Fed.

Thank you for reminding me! When GLP glitched a few weeks ago, it slipped from my mind. I do not like the format there much so I don't spend much time there. It seems like just one long string of posts from a whole variety of people carrying on their various conversations in one long thread. Whereas here and most other chat rooms related subject matter at least gets subdivided into Categories first so that if somebody suddenly changes the subject, they might be corrected or redirected.


Perfect Example! (http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1403015/pg1)

Plus if I forget to enter my name the board calls me Anonymous Coward and this means that people can post under various names too. I could actually carry on an interesting conversation pretending to be multiple posters.

doug-again
03-19-11, 08:29 AM
These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.
i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.

motla68
03-19-11, 11:17 AM
i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.

Hey Doug, you might want to start putting the lawful money statement on your timesheets and then make copies of them, this will show original intent all the way through in which IRS or State DOR would have difficulty scrutinizing, at least this is what i do after sending them a copy and explaining my intent in response to their last 2 letters, have not heard a peep from them since early '2009.

David Merrill
03-19-11, 11:18 AM
i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.


It is confusing to me, whether or not you are being paid in cash or by check. I have highlighted the sentence in red though.

The only way for him to pay you in redeemed lawful money is to hand you cash. If he wants you to sign for the cash - that is your opportunity to make your demand instead of endorsement.

If you are reporting to the IRS, fine. You would be reporting zero taxable income if you non-endorse all your paychecks (and of course keep a record). The only purpose to reporting is for you to get your Withholdings Refunded. If you are not sending in Withholdings then your purpose is to be heard (with a few copies of your non-endorsement) over the reports by 1099 with your "boss" - who hires you as a contractor.

Sometimes when contractor suitors (self-employed) are silent, the IRS agent will assess them on the 1099 Reporting. They R4C and keep an evidence repository but it gets stickier than if the IRS attorney has already adjudicated him to be outside the scope of contracting with the Fed. Once they start their paperwork, they might continue badgering.

Michael Joseph
03-19-11, 02:33 PM
The internal private revenue agent does not know how to balance his books if one of the corporations that the US has proprietory interest in issues a 1099 upon LEGAL M. NAME w/SSN. Sure you made a demand for lawful money, but how does the IRS agent know that? If you got paid cash absent a demand for lawful money, then you probably owe a tax refund as you did not fulfill the private law - "they shall be redeemed ON DEMAND...". No demand, no redemption.

Therefore, all of the foregoing is up to you and not your boss. Just because your boss is operating the corporation lawfully and legally and issues a 1099 upon LEGAL M. NAME, does not mean your demand for lawful money has failed. It just means your boss is obeying the bylaws of the trust that created the Corporation. It also means you have some more studying to do. Because it is clear to this reader/writer that you do not comprehend.

Why would not you just go ahead and let the IRS know of your demands in the year? How hard is it to draft a memorandum of truth regarding your affairs. You did get paid in CASH yes? no wait, he pays you in checks so what's the problem again?

doug-again
03-21-11, 06:59 PM
You did get paid in CASH yes? no wait, he pays you in checks so what's the problem again?No, he's willing to pay in cash, but he endorses private credit, so i see everything he pays me as private credit. At 1099 time, i wouldn't know what to do, because he's gonna report all those payments made, as upon nothing more than a verbal demand for lawful money. With a check, i can make my demand, photocopy it, record the serial #s, and so on. i make him cut me checks, for now, and i do so absent the claim that this is the right, or best, way of doing things.

"the problem again," is that the year's total payments will be in excess of $600, which makes the whole thing a taxable event. You triggered my OP. i understood you to be saying that cash payments are absent tax liability. If that is not what you meant, then i need you to clarify. Here...
And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there Please bear in mind, if bossman doesn't get LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN, i do not get the work. i'm learning, and practicing, how not to identify with that name, or number. i find that i need to be using them, for now.

i do need more study - your discernment is correct.

Straight up, i do not know how to demand lawful money, or how to communicate that demand, or how to record that demand, from a little fed res banker - such as the guy i'm working for.

Lemme try to draw an answer from you a different way; say he paid me $1000 cash. How would i record that transaction, without making an appointment with my notary to be present at the time? Why, then i'd have to have my notary present for every payment! Um, reality check? Also, i do not want to argue his being a federal reserve bank, before an irs agent. i "get" the mental model, i think, that in handling private fed res script, one is acting as a banker, really, but i am not now competent enough to discuss that assertion with anyone not already on the same page.

You mentioned affidavits of truth... do those carry any weight in admiralty? Maybe i've read one too many transcripts from quatloo's cherry tree, but i can't recall one of those "styled" docs helping anyone.

To motla68,
Thanks for replying. um, i don't have any time sheets, nor does he.

To David,
i'm paid by check, for now.
Dude's willing to pay in cash.
Lemme explain what i meant by, "He does not pay in redeemed lawful money."
There is no record anywhere of the serial #'s on the bills he'd give me.

Once upon a time, you mentioned in passing, that all services you render are paid for in R'dLM. i imagined that you somehow made sure there was a record somewhere, of those notes having been redeemed, prior to your acceptance of them as payment. i have a feeling that's not the case. In my mind, there is, or should be somewhere, a list of dead FRN serial #s.

As pertains to the IRS, i am silent. i have no idea what to do about the whole 1099 thing. i haven't filed a report or return in 16 years. i'm 36.

To everyone else,
If i was a moderator, i'd cut this conversation out of this thread, as off topic, and start a new thread called, "How do i record a lawful money demand, in a cash transaction?" OR "The nature of a lawful money demand, in a cash transaction, in excess of $600" i have hijacked this thread, somehow. i beg your forbearance.

shikamaru
03-21-11, 11:28 PM
I grabbed this from the Welcome Thread because I would like to have a lively conversation for all the members about it.

I am presuming COLB/BC is for Certificate of Lading/Billing and Birth Certificate.


This does initiate a great discussion.

Certificates were used in England to confirm pedigree as well as issues of successors and heirs.
This one book I was reading says the birth certificate assures rights for the child. I interpreted this to mean it assures privileges for the child.

motla68
03-22-11, 12:33 AM
Corporations can be persons unless the law specifically says natural persons or within the same Article define person as natural persons when used in accordance with rules of statutory construction. Can be pedigree of persons, not necessarily natural persons.

David Merrill
03-26-11, 10:09 PM
This does initiate a great discussion.

Certificates were used in England to confirm pedigree as well as issues of successors and heirs.
This one book I was reading says the birth certificate assures rights for the child. I interpreted this to mean it assures privileges for the child.

Certificate of Live Birth; Certificate of Lading. What's the difference?

Michael Joseph
03-26-11, 10:43 PM
How do i record a lawful money demand, in a cash transaction?"

You record your demand for lawful money on the County Recorder...i know a man who handled something like this: but you are strong enough not to just copy another man's work, yes? You aren't one of those who just follows the leader are you?

184

David Merrill
03-26-11, 11:02 PM
To everyone else,

If i was a moderator, i'd cut this conversation out of this thread, as off topic, and start a new thread called, "How do i record a lawful money demand, in a cash transaction?" OR "The nature of a lawful money demand, in a cash transaction, in excess of $600" i have hijacked this thread, somehow. i beg your forbearance.

No need but if you want to start a new thread fine.

If I hand you cash, then you have lawful money - the redemption or not was up to me in getting that cash. Now if I make you sign any kind of receipt or even an agreement (work contract beforehand) that is when you would make your Demand above your signature.

That is pretty simple but I think a couple pages in a new thread might be fun. The people writing here are great!

shikamaru
03-27-11, 12:11 PM
Certificate of Live Birth; Certificate of Lading. What's the difference?

I didn't know a child was cargo nor a mother a ship ...

Interestingly enough though, on wikipedia in the see also section the term bill of lading is included.

From the wikipedia article concerning a bill of lading, a bill of lading is not a negotiable instrument.

doug-again
03-28-11, 04:06 PM
You record your demand for lawful money on the County Recorder...
184That's great, i get it; publicly record the demand, and the need to keep track of all the serial #s is obviated.

Elegant Micheal, thanks.
When i get around to it, i'll do my own form.
It won't look as nice, but it'll have to cover the same bases as your attachment.
At a glance, i see no way of improving upon that man's work.

David, a new thread's a great idea.
When i start it, i'll return to this post and edit in a link.
And i agree that the writers here are great.