Coresource Solution - attempts to disclose from man on the land since 1968

I come from the same trenches as many of you all came from, the deep fields of patriot banter holding on to the U.S. flag and the constitution and that common law was going to save our country, got in a little trouble along the way. Eventually learned commercial redemption and had a little success, learned some more and eventually came to the conclusion that I did not need a guru to give me mental sanity, started creating my own stuff from nothing having even more success with it. New years 2006 I came to the conclusion that there had to be a better way instead of using mountains of paperwork to accomplish a task, the research started.
Never been to jail before so I decided to get myself in a situation to get put in there so I could do my research, funny how lawyers pay thousands of dollars to get this education. I tested the waters on a lot of things and long story short I was out in 10 hours after being put in.
Next I had made some challenges to corporations based upon my findings, one thing I did was use the Liberty Dollar silver rounds to pay vehicle taxes, even did some exchanges with a couple people in line waiting to do the same thing, sure enough 2 weeks later the account was zeroed out.
Towards end of 2008 I had put a lot of pieces of the puzzle but it did not get more simplified until I talked to a private group up in canada about what they were doing with similar information and success. Very, very exciting to see it all put together on a whole different level with success, so our study group who was following this up came to the conclusion that we had to find the American version of all this and start finding the parallels within U.S. codes, regs alike, we had to create a group so that everyone had access to the same information and that is how Coresource Solution started. I was the one to have the first success and many others followed, most of the core people who started that group have moved on to create their own groups and spread the seed of knowledge.

One of the first things we found is that in every states birth statutes it stated that the Registrar is the one to register the birth and it was not the parents, their role was basically just a witness to the event. An then we found the Mortgage to National Debt pdf document that showed the currency was backed by the mortgages on the homes to where the currency was really not needed. Continuing with thoughts now, The Louisiana Purchase, if the land was already purchased what the hell are we doing paying for it again?
Then came the Senate Resolution #62 that all ownership of property was by way of the state. Also the way the money system was setup disabled are way to really " pay " for anything, the use of these coupons was very TAXING if you know what I mean.
We had known the real story behind the civil war and a couple of us had heard something about a Liber Code so we went to investigate and found a couple answers to questions in our minds.
One being this video we seen from canada showing the words " Revenue Receipt " on the back of a canadian birth certificate, so between the liber code and this and the SR #62 that the concuring army had everything for it's benefit of necessity. Also that when inhabitants give receipts for certain expenses they are indemnified. From that we also understood from the days of commercial redemption that the remittance was actually a check, an exchequer to be exact.
So now when I did that first remittance from all what we gathered and wanted to make it simple I said to myself why not just make it very simple and just call it what it is? " not my property"
and why should I put the ssn on it if they already have it in their computer? We should not have to do an AFV thing, these people know what needs to be done just tell them what needs to be done:

" This account name and number is property of the United States of America, please deposit to the owner in care of Treasury of the United States ".
by; {sign in all caps} Date:

That is all it was for the first one, later one to other we started putting " Authorized Signatory" below the name because we felt Signatory was better then Representative, we were not trying to represent it like a defendant in court, just empower the trustees to do their jobs.
Never stopped with the research though, we then found that the Liber Code had been adopted into the Hague Convention declaration on human rights 1953 Article #55 per the documents of the Hague.
Our first court successes were based upon a Jack smith audio combined with the knowledge we had already put together, paper slide of the Birth Certificate, then some dude named Batman on the internet we came across was winning in court without paperwork so then we learned from him and had some court successes. Now me personally get emails from all over the world, every now an then of study groups i never knew existed and telling me that had a success and this without asking me 101 questions of how do you get there?

So there it is, how we got to the knowledge we know now. We just need the help of knowledgeable people on trusts to get to the next level where we do not have to mess with remittances and all that any more, everything is just taken care of. If all man including woman are equal then why should we be any different then the Queen of England or the Pope for that fact? She just points to things an they are done. BUT as knowledgeable Peaceful Inhabitants we know if everyone were like this how would anything get done, so we have to work together just as they did before there was any currency like a resourced based society.
A wise man once said if there was not need for oil then the Gulf Crisis would not have happened, well could we not say the same thing about a monetary system?
Return everything in Lawful Money and be indemnified, just like the old woman did in the biblical story of who gave everything she had to the temple for the benefit of all.

I give as the spirit directs me to give, not by the demands of others who are unwilling to do for themselves.

Direct link to Hague - Article #55 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/hague02.asp#art55

Modified=705925685F6DCB01EE

Thanks for adding the graphics. I see that two are associated and gather that the woman discharged the remittance on her Buick and they zeroed out the balance. Did they send her renewal stickers? Or plates?


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...2&d=1300133333


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...3&d=1300133308

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Thanks for adding the graphics. I see that two are associated and gather that the woman discharged the remittance on her Buick and they zeroed out the balance. Did they send her renewal stickers? Or plates?

---

This was vehicle taxes not registration renewal, so no stickers or plates. Just refunded for the check she wrote and the 2nd image showing what she printed off the internet after receiving that refund.

I have this reoccurring thought that those that receive an Ivy League education (the rich) already know this information. It's only we, the people, the peeons who can't afford a Classical education, who waste our time learning enough to sit in a cubicle.

Thanks for the pieces to the puzzle...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sovereignty

I have this reoccurring thought that those that receive an Ivy League education (the rich) already know this information. It's only we, the people, the peeons who can't afford a Classical education, who waste our time learning enough to sit in a cubicle.
Thanks for the pieces to the puzzle...

---

You got it man, but they do it a little differently which is creating a couple separate trusts, one for the private(equity) and one for the public(monetary), instead of having a Birth Certificate to live through they live through the Trust Certificate on the private side, the public side makes bond investments or sometimes is a foundation. The private trust contracts out to the Public trust their time as Manager of the Public Business Trust. Public makes payments for that time not monetarily but in equitable goods that can be used, gas, food, clothing, housing e.t.c.
By learning trust law we are working at closing the gap between all of these schools of thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motla68

This was vehicle taxes not registration renewal, so no stickers or plates. Just refunded for the check she wrote and the 2nd image showing what she printed off the internet after receiving that refund.

---

That explains it!! In that State the taxes are not interwoven with registration and plates. In Florida and Colorado they are.

Look at this example of the same thing. This supports that there is no substance in the Treasury Direct Account - or whatever you choose to call it. The taxation was nullified because she owns the car, designated by the Demand for Lawful Money - non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes in red ink. On her stamp though she designates US Notes in the form of FRNs by saying - non-redeemable (already redeemed).

It probably takes more techniques applied at once to qualify for what I think is "shotgun" style application. What I am saying though is that she tried two things on the remittance, of which only one was actually substantial in law.


http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...8&d=1300133333

P.S.

I should add though, in defense of Anthony Joseph's stance that the way you have described this, the woman could have simply sent a check or money order and produced the exact documents as "evidence" you present here. To appease both of you I implore all readers to consider Rules of Evidence as we hear whatever anybody wants to write here. And AJ was proper to call a fellow member on declaring the documents presented as "evidence" - it just stirred up a fit that required mopping up by Admin.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...4&d=1300133333

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...5&d=1300133308

From what I am reading Motla68, the woman sent a check, and would have gotten a zero setoff from that alone, which we see here. What we need to see for evidence would be the same amount on the refund check sent back to her by the State of NC. You have left us, who know about Rules of Evidence to believe she got a Refund for her tax money and I think what AJ was saying is that We Don't. It is not calling you a liar or fraud, it is that you have to accept that we are courts of competent jurisdiction. While I find it plausible, it is useless.

Here is an example of the Treasury Direct Account in a process-to-results evidence package. However, read how the Result page reserved the right to resume billing. I hear they did. We (a suitor) tried this on a nearly identical situation - even better in that it was the Government Student Loan program for $5K. We put it in front of the US Clerk for evidence repository only, who made legal decisions and other inappriate flaws in the Record, so much so that it indicated that the account should have been Setoff, and it was at one point in the reporting. However, after the clerk of court fudged it up, the billing resumed and we had to call the experiment inconclusive.

The next two images are only tangentially related, in my opinion.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...6&d=1300033458

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...9&d=1299868479

A newspaper article and even Senate Reports are only explanatory material at best.

This last image of yours:

I am familiar with that image from ThinkFreeForums - Continued...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

P.S.

I should add though, in defense of Anthony Joseph's stance that the way you have described this, the woman could have simply sent a check or money order and produced the exact documents as "evidence" you present here. To appease both of you I implore all readers to consider Rules of Evidence as we hear whatever anybody wants to write here. And AJ was proper to call a fellow member on declaring the documents presented as "evidence" - it just stirred up a fit that required mopping up by Admin.

---

Correct. Anecdotes are fine to present in that vain; absent real and actual "evidence". However, if someone wishes to tout "success" using a specific "XXXX method" or "XXXX way", then the supporting documentation attachments should reveal that success convincingly rather then a sanitized receipt which could have been easily been gotten by paying the fee as well. We can't determine that from what was offered.

Convincing someone in cyberspace is not what we're after here; but if you wish to promote a specific method of reproducible success, then the responsibility which follows is to fully disclose it and provide attachments and documents which cannot be easily explained away or refuted.

I think that requirement is more than fair and, as I said, we welcome everyone's opinion and anecdotes if they are presented that way.

P.S. Continued...

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...0&d=1299827206

I worked quite a while to get that backside matched up with the front.

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/6...strationre.jpg

There is a registration receipt with the Provincial government in Canada, but there are no funds associated with that just because it is registered with the Department of Revenue.


http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7...certnobond.jpg


At the time it was venomously argued, What do you expect them to say?

I of course expect them to say the truth - being on a government letterhead! However suppose it is a lie... The lie makes any supposition about Treasury Direct STRAWMAN Redemption (by whatever name) moot. You will have to correct the corruption in government before the mythology about the birth certificate as a stock certificate in Canada to be practicable.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

That explains it!! In that State the taxes are not interwoven with registration and plates. In Florida and Colorado they are.
This supports that there is no substance in the Treasury Direct Account - or whatever you choose to call it. The taxation was nullified because she owns the car, designated by the Demand for Lawful Money - non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes in red ink. On her stamp though she designates US Notes in the form of FRNs by saying - non-redeemable (already redeemed).
It probably takes more techniques applied at once to qualify for what I think is "shotgun" style application. What I am saying though is that she tried two things on the remittance, of which only one was actually substantial in law.

---

I have played around with some wording on a couple of remittances of trial an error, this does not seem to be the case, I think it has more to do with the part that says "Deposit for credit on Account" and combined with the written language " Deposit to the owner " . So it seems to be the owner Attachment 109(the state where registration took place) is the issuer of the credit to settle the account in the county records.Attachment 110

Additionally the 2 tickets I settled out of court recently, on the second one instead of putting " account name and number is owned by the United States of America" I then put " account name and number is owned by the State of North Carolina " and had the same effect. We are working on something else too based on some information we got from a private group in canada that has has some success just sending the bills to the local Finance Minister to settle, we have determined that position here is somewhere in the birth state where the COLB came from, either the registrar or the chief of justice for the county court where the birth took place. Canadian statutes say the registrar general, but we have uncovered stuff relating to bankruptcy where it is the chief of justice in some states for the county the matter derived from.