Persuasion & PSYOPS: The Elaboration Likelihood Model

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

Are you paying attention? What I am bringing to attention here are fundamental theories and techniques behind psychological operations, psychopolitics (same thing?), marketing, persuasion and the like--even to attitude change on a political or societal level. We've heard of "mind control" and so on but how many of us have actually looked into the academic theories and details behind it all? Isn't it interesting how much thought has gone into not only how you think but how to change your mind --and if not yours the minds of others to accept something or another?

Quote:

---

The Elaboration Likelihood Model (source: Wikipedia)
The elaboration likelihood model (ELM) of persuasion[1] is a dual process theory of how attitudes are formed and changed, which was developed by Richard E. Petty and John Cacioppo during the early 1980s. The model examines how an argument's position on the "elaboration continuum", from processing and evaluating (high elaboration) to peripheral issues such as source expertise or attractiveness (low elaboration), shapes its persuasiveness. ELM resembles the heuristic-systematic model of information processing developed about the same time by Shelly Chaiken.

---

Related: (*) Modern Persuasion Theory]The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) (Source: Selling Homosexuality to America, By Paul E. Rondeau (ENTIRE BOOK AVAILABLE ONLINE HERE) and here (PDF));

(*) The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion (PDF), Richard E. Pettty, John T. Cacioppo;

(*) Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations;

(*) Social Judgment Theory.

How might the above have been used to sell scrip over gold/silver specie over lawful money? How might the above have been used to push the Federal Reserve Act?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

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

Are you paying attention? What I am bringing to attention here are fundamental theories and techniques behind psychological operations, psychopolitics (same thing?), marketing, persuasion and the like--even to attitude change on a political or societal level. We've heard of "mind control" and so on but how many of us have actually looked into the academic theories and details behind it all? Isn't it interesting how much thought has gone into not only how you think but how to change your mind --and if not yours the minds of others to accept something or another?



Related: (*) Modern Persuasion Theory]The Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) (Source: Selling Homosexuality to America, By Paul E. Rondeau (ENTIRE BOOK AVAILABLE ONLINE HERE) and here (PDF));

(*) The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion (PDF), Richard E. Pettty, John T. Cacioppo;

(*) Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations;

(*) Social Judgment Theory.

How might the above have been used to sell scrip over gold/silver specie over lawful money? How might the above have been used to push the Federal Reserve Act?

---

************************************************** ********************
Hmmmm... try applying "Central Route Processing" to HJR 192 of June 5, 1933... and see if you see what I see... the 2 options...

and how the 2nd option is cleverly hidden...

Looks like it worked out quite well for the Fed, huh?

Everyone starting using private credit scrip... and did not realize the 2nd option existed.

But it does exist, IMO... and we should begin demanding FULL DISCHARGE accordingly today, provided, however, one has first established a substantive record of demanding lawful money for all transactions.

Lawful Money Demands make Full Discharge Payments possible!

But besides the wordcrafting of the content of HJR 192, what about the possibility of it being divinely orchestrated to provide a "way of escape" for the people? Consider the dates, the timing of events, the numbers involved, and what those numbers signify as they are commonly seen from a biblical perspective. This will take very focused "Central Route Processing"!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

************************************************** ********************
Hmmmm... try applying "Central Root Processing" to HJR 192 of June 5, 1933... and see if you see what I see... the 2 options...

and how the 2nd option is cleverly hidden...

Looks like it worked out quite well for the Fed, huh?

Everyone starting using private credit scrip... and did not realize the 2nd option existed.

But it does exist, IMO... and we should being demanding FULL DISCHARGE accordingly today, provided, however, one has first established a substantive record of demanding lawful money for all transactions.

Lawful Money Demands make Full Discharge Payments possible!

---

It has been suggested that they go after the easy prey. In the wild, it is said that even lions and leopards target the prey that are sick and old, are very young or are injured--the danger of getting a hoof in the head from a strong, mature prey is avoided. So it is interesting as you put it, there was an option available for those using "central processing" and perhaps also one for those who might be regarded to have taken the lazy approach.

Quote:

---

The hand of the diligent [Central Route Processing? -> Redeem / Use Lawful Money ] shall bear rule: but the slothful [Peripheral Route Processing? -> Endorse / Use Private Credit or Scrip ] shall be under tribute. (KJV - Proverbs 12:24)

---

So whether it has to do with scrip or some other matter, perhaps there are techniques "they" utilized for getting at those who have an affinity for Peripheral Route Processing or who are not diligent in investigating or the like? Here's a video that touches upon the Elaboration Likelihood Model but also gets into how emotion factors in (the drawings seem to be a bit off ...but what she says makes sense).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUNJ5ez10OU

This is another video on the same topic that reiterates the first a bit more succinctly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XNAPiZMgPQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

************************************************** ********************
Hmmmm... try applying "Central Route Processing" to HJR 192 of June 5, 1933... and see if you see what I see... the 2 options...

and how the 2nd option is cleverly hidden...

Looks like it worked out quite well for the Fed, huh?

Everyone starting using private credit scrip... and did not realize the 2nd option existed.

But it does exist, IMO... and we should being demanding FULL DISCHARGE accordingly today, provided, however, one has first established a substantive record of demanding lawful money for all transactions.

Lawful Money Demands make Full Discharge Payments possible!

But besides the wordcrafting of the content of HJR 192, what about the possibility of it being divinely orchestrated to provide a "way of escape" for the people? Consider the dates, the timing of events, the numbers involved, and what those numbers signify as they are commonly seen from a biblical perspective. This will take very focused "Central Route Processing"!

---

The work of those of us who choose to utilize "Central Route Processing" regarding the demand of lawful money, and full discharge, is perhaps being unfulfilled due to lack of accuracy/correctness relating to the proper manner and method of notifying the appropriate public trustee of our performance requirement of said demand(s).

By your synopsis, any credit instrument (bill) should be fully discharged when forwarded to an appropriate public trustee in the proper manner and method. There are those of us who are proactive, making good faith efforts to notify the proper party of our choosing the "2nd option", and yet are met with silence.

Does anyone claim to have repeated success with the FULL DISCHARGE "2nd option" for bills and for any type of "purchase"? This would mean no need for "money", either coming in or going out, since the "paper" and "digits" are solely bookkeeping and administrative in nature specifically for those who are obligated to perform said FULL DISCHARGE - the public trustees.

Perhaps the correct verbiage should be:

i; a man, require lawful money and full discharge for all transactions [See 12 USC 411, 95a(2) as your law in this regard]

If you consider the typical mortgage or loan transaction. The buyer and his wife with SSN's sit down and make out a promissory note payable in "lawful money of the United States of America" and which is repayable* in such and such terms. A bank or credit union is either state chartered or federally chartered as to the banking powers. They most always have a state charter of some kind as relates to their corporate existence. In any case the financial institution has:

1] A federal taxpayer identification number (Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury)
2] a state corporate charter or certificate of authority number or the like (State Secretary of State)
3] an account with some Federal Reserve Bank (that applies to credit unions and state banks even though they may not be FRB members)
4] state tax ID (State Revenue Director)
5] state or federal banking license or the like (State Banking Commissioner; U.S. Comptroller of the Currency)

The buyers:

1] checking account account with a bank
2] accounts with credit card company
3] social security numbers
4] residential addresses (post office, state circuit courts, U.S. district court associated)
5] tax payer ID numbers (file taxes and thusly have accounts with IRS) --not the same as the account with the SSA
6] drivers licenses (account with the state)
7] birth certificate.

If an SSN is involved: it might be worth knowing that the Social Security Administration itself has an ABA routing number and is set up like a financial institution.

Even with check cashing, one can do an analysis like this you can write down the chief state or federal officers involved in the oversight or issuance of those licenses, accounts, tax IDs or the like and that should give quite a solid fix as to what State officers might be pertinent. This might require a study of the structure or organization of the pertinent State. Also consider that Attorney Generals and Sheriffs tend to have a duty to see that other officers perform their duties. The National Guard also a similar function in case of staunch dereliction of duty or the like (i.e.rebellion or insurrection).

My point here is it might be truly helpful if one sits back and analyzes the nature of the parties to say a mortgage or "loan" or check cashing transaction it should reveal a lot.

For your convenience:

[1] List of U.S. Attorney's General
[2] List of Secretaries of State.(PDF also attached)
[3] State Treasurers, Comptrollers & Auditors

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

If you consider the typical mortgage or loan transaction. The buyer and his wife with SSN's sit down and make out a promissory note payable in "lawful money of the United States of America" and which is repayable* in such and such terms. A bank or credit union is either state chartered or federally chartered as to the banking powers. They most always have a state charter of some kind as relates to their corporate existence. In any case the financial institution has:

1] A federal taxpayer identification number (Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Treasury)
2] a state corporate charter or certificate of authority number or the like (State Secretary of State)
3] an account with some Federal Reserve Bank (that applies to credit unions and state banks even though they may not be FRB members)
4] state tax ID (State Revenue Director)
5] state or federal banking license or the like (State Banking Commissioner; U.S. Comptroller of the Currency)

The buyers:

1] checking account account with a bank
2] accounts with credit card company
3] social security numbers
4] residential addresses (post office, state circuit courts, U.S. district court associated)
5] tax payer ID numbers (file taxes and thusly have accounts with IRS) --not the same as the account with the SSA
6] drivers licenses (account with the state)
7] birth certificate.

If an SSN is involved: it might be worth knowing that the Social Security Administration itself has an ABA routing number and is set up like a financial institution.

Even with check cashing, one can do an analysis like this you can write down the chief state or federal officers involved in the oversight or issuance of those licenses, accounts, tax IDs or the like and that should give quite a solid fix as to what State officers might be pertinent. This might require a study of the structure or organization of the pertinent State. Also consider that Attorney Generals and Sheriffs tend to have a duty to see that other officers perform their duties. The National Guard also a similar function in case of staunch dereliction of duty or the like (i.e.rebellion or insurrection).

My point here is it might be truly helpful if one sits back and analyzes the nature of the parties to say a mortgage or "loan" or check cashing transaction it should reveal a lot.

For your convenience:

[1] List of U.S. Attorney's General
[2] List of Secretaries of State.(PDF also attached)
[3] State Treasurers, Comptrollers & Auditors

---

In your opinion, who is the appropriate man or woman, acting in public trust capacity and office, who must perform payment by discharge when i; a man, require it?

by specific example: a charge instrument (bill) from 'VERIZON FLORIDA LLC'

who must perform the discharge when properly noticed?

Jacob J. Lew - Secretary of the Treasury
Rosa G. Rios - Treasurer of the United States
Jeff Atwater - State of Florida Chief Financial Officer
Thomas J. Curry - U.S. Comptroller of the Currency
Ken Detzner - Florida Secretary of State
John F. Kerry - U.S. Secretary of State
Rick Scott - Governor of Florida

(NOTICE: More Central Route Processing required!) ;)

Regarding the Bill Itself
There is the perspective that the bill from VERIZON is a draft and the drawee is the addressee (drafts are associated with charges. Per commercial law, drafts are either: [1] accepted/honored; [2] dishonored; [3] refused for cause without dishonor. The underlying commercial law is important in order to see remedy because it elucidates the nature and cause of the liability. Also, in connection with the agreement in opening the account was likely some promise or agreement to pay the bills. Thusly, to honor them.

If your person is TONY P SMITH SSN 123-45-6789 or TONY P SMITH 20 MAYBERRY LN TALLAHASSEE FL 12345 -> likely they are sending the bills to that person the owner on the account.

Indemnity & Liability
So let's consider car insurance: if TONY P SMITH 123-45-6789 / FL license # 123456789012345678 or TONY P SMITH 20 MAYBERRY LN TALLAHASSHEE FL 12345 gets into a car accident and incurs liability, he could divert the liability to the person that has provided that person coverage vis-a-vis selling that person a indemnity contract called "insurance policy. Consider, if that is covered by 3 insurance policies, who the matter is directed to would be a matter of choice in any given situation.

***

So, a question might be, have you or anyone else provided the person liable on the VERIZON bill with any kind of coverage? Has the State or Fed provided any guarantees or insurance policies to cover liabilities for that specific drawee that you are aware of? Did you file any bonds or purchase any policies for covering that person--if so then with who or with what agency/officer/organization/company?

At a fundamental level, I would tend to consider the significance of:

* the biller;
* State Revenue Officers (Executive Director of the Florida Department of Revenue);
* Federal Revenue Officers (Commissioner of Internal Revenue);
* Secretary of the U.S. Dept. of the Treasury (heads IRS, FMS, etc.).

If there is an SSN involved then likely there are links to both State Revenue, Federal Revenue and possible also to the Social Security Administration.

Big hint: what does the person billed and Verizon have in common? Do they hold any accounts at the same organization, financial institution or the like?

Central Route Process is important here. Although, it can be quite detail oriented. I'd say that once you figure it out: its pretty easy from there--its like habitually discernable.

I would not tend to include the following in a "the list" unless you have learned and good reason:

Thomas J. Curry - U.S. Comptroller of the Currency
Rosa G. Rios - Treasurer of the United States.

I would consider the following in special and appropriate situations:

Jeff Atwater - State of Florida Chief Financial Officer
Ken Detzner - Florida Secretary of State
John F. Kerry - U.S. Secretary of State
Rick Scott - Governor of Florida.

The Florida AG might also be worthy of considering where appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

************************************************** ********************
Hmmmm... try applying "Central Route Processing" to HJR 192 of June 5, 1933... and see if you see what I see... the 2 options...

and how the 2nd option is cleverly hidden...

Looks like it worked out quite well for the Fed, huh?

Everyone starting using private credit scrip... and did not realize the 2nd option existed.

But it does exist, IMO... and we should begin demanding FULL DISCHARGE accordingly today, provided, however, one has first established a substantive record of demanding lawful money for all transactions.

Lawful Money Demands make Full Discharge Payments possible!

But besides the wordcrafting of the content of HJR 192, what about the possibility of it being divinely orchestrated to provide a "way of escape" for the people? Consider the dates, the timing of events, the numbers involved, and what those numbers signify as they are commonly seen from a biblical perspective. This will take very focused "Central Route Processing"!

---

RE: Thread: Persuasion & PSYOPS: The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Perhaps http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/hjr-192/ and HJR 192 - Indorsement is Payment will help bring this issue into clearer focus...

Then compare this to the IRS position on payments at http://www.irs.gov/Payments and see if they are violating the terms of HJR 192 by only allowing only one "kind" of coin or currency, namely liability currency.

See my "Conditional Acceptance" of said position.

Does this help increase the ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD for this issue?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE for CENTRAL ROUTE PROCESSING at this point in America today with its debt ceiling and deficit crises?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE to bring before a COMMON LAW GRAND JURY (http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/grand-jury) in each county?

Doesn't compelled use of liability instruments in direct violation of HJR 192 constitute the imposition of involuntary servitude/slavery by perpetual indebtedness?

Does't this provide probable cause to bring forth claims of harm and injury to every man and woman so compelled?

Once one returns an indorsed bill along with a Notice and Demand and this payment is dishonored without cause?

THINK/ELABORATE on this...

PM me if you want to discuss this privately. We need to form a private FOCUS GROUP on this issue ASAP.

Attachment 1529

An interesting take on the "unexplained silence" by government officials receiving instruments tendered for discharge.

Again they might not on the whole know as much as you might suspect. You both are now hot on the trail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

RE: Thread: Persuasion & PSYOPS: The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Perhaps http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/hjr-192/ and HJR 192 - Indorsement is Payment will help bring this issue into clearer focus...

Then compare this to the IRS position on payments at http://www.irs.gov/Payments and see if they are violating the terms of HJR 192 by only allowing only one "kind" of coin or currency, namely liability currency.

See my "Conditional Acceptance" of said position.

Does this help increase the ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD for this issue?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE for CENTRAL ROUTE PROCESSING at this point in America today with its debt ceiling and deficit crises?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE to bring before a COMMON LAW GRAND JURY (http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/grand-jury) in each county?

Doesn't compelled use of liability instruments in direct violation of HJR 192 constitute the imposition of involuntary servitude/slavery by perpetual indebtedness?

Does't this provide probable cause to bring forth claims of harm and injury to every man and woman so compelled?

Once one returns an indorsed bill along with a Notice and Demand and this payment is dishonored without cause?

THINK/ELABORATE on this...

PM me if you want to discuss this privately. We need to form a private FOCUS GROUP on this issue ASAP.

---

I am surprised how many folks are so frustrated about the issue of bills of exchange, money and notes but hardly take the time to read a legal treatise on them. Not referring to anyone that posts to this forum. By comprehending bills/bills/billets of exchange, notes, instruments, bonds, contract law it all makes so much more sense.

Re: Payment = Indorsement
Not quite. Even a US Postal Money Order isn't technically payment until you deliver it to the payee. Before and without delivery to the payee it would be considered to be incohate. It might be helpful to know that bills of exchange and promissory notes are types of contracts. Specifically they are contracts for delivery of money only. Unlike typical surety bonds which have a condition, they are unconditional as to the obligation of the party liable on the bill or note or instrument to pay money. There is a difference between a promise to pay and an order to pay. HINT: the person writing a check drawn on a typical bank is making an order (i.e. commanding) the bank to perform (i.e. delivery of money). A check is a very small "business letter".

Quote:

---

On June 28, 2013, debt held by the public was approximately $11.901 trillion or about 71.43% of GDP.[6][5] Intragovernmental holdings stood at $4.837 trillion, giving a combined total public debt of $16.738 trillion.[6]
The national debt can also be classified into marketable or non-marketable securities. As of March 2012, total marketable securities were $10.34 trillion while the non-marketable securities were $5.24 trillion.[8] Most of the marketable securities are Treasury notes, bills, and bonds held by investors and governments globally. The non-marketable securities are mainly the "government account series" owed to certain government trust funds such as the Social Security Trust Fund, which represented $2.7 trillion in 2011

---

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._1981-2010.png
Re: Public Debt.
Perhaps that is how much money they owe me? Or how much the public side owes the private side. It might be that the primary source of debt in for GoTUS pertains to the issuance of Treasury Bills/Notes. (P.S. Avoiding matching GDP is probably a good idea!) (P.S. It might be that the U.S. Government borrows trillions from the Social Security Administration every year.)

Re: IRS and Lawful Money.
The IRS takes payment in lawful money. You might find a better perspective in reading the Internal Revenue Manual (In particular: Part 21 - Customer Account Services, Chapter 1 - Accounts Management and Compliance Operations, Section 7 - Campus Support (Cont. 1) (i.e. 21.1) [in particular-> sections 21.1.7.4, 21.1.7.9, 21.1.7.9.17, 21.1.7.9.18, 21.1.7.9.21, 21.1.7.9.22)].

***

You'd be surprised how much of the problem is really in that many folks could care less to make a habit of deep Central Route Processing! It might be worth noting that the public education system in the USA has been strongly dumbed down since the 1950s or so.

By that train of logic...

A "bill" (negotiable instrument) drafted by a payee and presented to the 'owner' of the credit ('amount due') indicate on said bill, should be signed on the face by said owner (releasing the credit) with orders and instructions to present said instrument to the U.S. Treasury for "payment".

Much like writing a check from a bank account; except, the credit amount is extended to the United States by the man (creditor), the credit is deposited in the account of the United States (debtor), and the "bill" (check) is sent to the payee to endorse and deposit into its account.

Attachment 1531

Or....

maybe the voucher is a check from Verizon Florida LLC (59-0397520) that you are supposed to make payable to Verizon somehow? If I wanted it to be in lawful money I might write: "one hundred and twenty-five and nine one hundredths dollars lawful money" somewhere on the face of the bill. The idea of a bill of exchange or check being sent incomplete with it being left to the recipient to fill it out is discussed in perhaps countless court cases and legal treatises. :)

Also, why release it to the United States Treasury unless you are paying your own taxes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

Or....

maybe the voucher is a check from Verizon Florida LLC (59-0397520) that you are supposed to make payable to Verizon somehow? If I wanted it to be in lawful money I might write: "one hundred and twenty-five and nine one hundredths dollars lawful money" somewhere on the face of the bill. The idea of a bill of exchange or check being sent incomplete with it being left to the recipient to fill it out is discussed in perhaps countless court cases and legal treatises. :)

Also, why release it to the United States Treasury unless you are paying your own taxes?

---

Because the "bill" represents public debt amidst the "commercial war" stemming from the United States government bankruptcy; and, also represents the amount of credit requested for settlement which can only be released by the source of all credit - the living man who makes up part of the whole public. The U.S. Treasury is the public pool belonging to the people. The account of the United States is the property of the people and, when properly utilized, one of the people directs the drawer/payee of a "bill" to the "Drawee" (U.S. Treasury) for payment processing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

Because the "bill" represents public debt amidst the "commercial war" stemming from the United States government bankruptcy; and, also represents the amount of credit requested for settlement which can only be released by the source of all credit - the living man who makes up part of the whole public. The U.S. Treasury is the public pool belonging to the people. The account of the United States is the property of the people and, when properly utilized, one of the people directs the drawer/payee of a "bill" to the "Drawee" (U.S. Treasury) for payment processing.

---

YES !!! That is why I assert and maintain that the "bill" is truly a "credit voucher" sent to us for us to approve it by indorsing/acknowledging that one of the people did actually receive the good/service in order to legitimately reduce the national debt owed to the people by the United States by the sum certain amount stated on said "bill".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

YES !!! That is why I assert and maintain that the "bill" is truly a "credit voucher" sent to us for us to approve it by indorsing/acknowledging that one of the people did actually receive the good/service in order to legitimately reduce the national debt owed to the people by the United States by the sum certain amount stated on said "bill".

---

If it is a "credit voucher", then what account might the credit be in? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

Because the "bill" represents public debt amidst the "commercial war" stemming from the United States government bankruptcy; and, also represents the amount of credit requested for settlement which can only be released by the source of all credit - the living man who makes up part of the whole public. The U.S. Treasury is the public pool belonging to the people. The account of the United States is the property of the people and, when properly utilized, one of the people directs the drawer/payee of a "bill" to the "Drawee" (U.S. Treasury) for payment processing.

---

But...what if... maybe ... Verizon has been doing all of that.. 'processing' and such inside ...

Verizon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

If it is a "credit voucher", then what account might the credit be in? :)



But...what if... maybe ... Verizon has been doing all of that.. 'processing' and such inside ...

Verizon.

---

You mean 'double enrichment"?

It is a bonus when people send in the 'coupon' "with their payment". But what process is utilized if only the amount is filled out on the coupon, conventionally speaking? Can 'Verizon' negotiate that instrument on its own? Is receiving the signed check enough to also release the credit on the coupon by attaching them together?

That would mean 'Verizon' knows how to handle such instruments in commerce and must accept the 'coupon' only as "payment in full" when tendered properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

If it is a "credit voucher", then what account might the credit be in? :)



But...what if... maybe ... Verizon has been doing all of that.. 'processing' and such inside ...

Verizon.

---

Good questions!

Loan Accounting gives us a clue...

Lawful Money Full Discharge Instrument-ACCOUNTING does too...

But we, as Beneficiaries, do not need to know that... we specify the WHAT ("I authorize payment"), the Trustee's duty is to know and do the HOW ("discharge upon payment").

IMO, all they really need is our signature across the face of the "bill".

But, to SHOW WE HAVE ELABORATED, this STAMP is recommended (K.I.S.S.).

And isn't every corporation really acting as an Agent of the Treasury/Trustee anyways, as a sub-corp of the US Corp?

So, as agents of the principal/trustee, they should know HOW to handle getting a credit from the trustee, right?

So, let's hold them accountable, and if they fail to perform, that is outside the scope of their principal/agent agreement, and then can be held liable. This is where a CLAIM comes into play in a Court of Record, for harm to a man.

See this Conditional Acceptance for BILL that has worked for me in the past in that regard... with several entities...

PM me for private details...

I'm having a challenge with these links Loan Accounting*gives us a clue...Lawful Money Full Discharge Instrument-ACCOUNTING*does too...

Suggestions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by froze25

I'm having a challenge with these links Loan Accounting*gives us a clue...Lawful Money Full Discharge Instrument-ACCOUNTING*does too...

Suggestions?

---

Thanks for the feedback... they should work now... refresh your browser to reload that page, if needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

You mean 'double enrichment"?

It is a bonus when people send in the 'coupon' "with their payment". But what process is utilized if only the amount is filled out on the coupon, conventionally speaking? Can 'Verizon' negotiate that instrument on its own? Is receiving the signed check enough to also release the credit on the coupon by attaching them together?

That would mean 'Verizon' knows how to handle such instruments in commerce and must accept the 'coupon' only as "payment in full" when tendered properly.

---

Again, Central Route Processing + being single minded. If you truly believe the voucher is a check or has value as a check, then perhaps it might be best to dismiss any contrary thoughts or beliefs so as to avoid wavering? If it is to be a payment of some kind then it must be unconditional whether payable to order or not, right? What can the recipient of an incomplete bill do with it? If you truly believe that is a check basically then who or what is it to be made payable to? If you don't know how to complete the coupon, presuming there is some value or sense in doing so, is that Verizon's fault?

Re: "Double Enrichment"
Related: "double taxation", "double jeopardy".

Attachment 1533

Alright then.

Then this would be the method which VERIZON would be able to "clear" payment.


Attachment 1534

Consider: One hundred and twenty-three and 45/100ths dollars lawful money. I am convinced they even taught people to write amounts in words wrong. "One thousand fifty dollars" would mean $1,000 x $50 compared to "one thousand and fifty dollars" in the same way fifteen hundred dollars is resolved that "fifteen" acts on "hundred dollars" giving you 1500. Consider "one thousand twenty five dollars" vs "one thousand and twenty-five dollars" vs "one thousand and twenty five dollars" (interpret-able two ways $1025 or $1,020 x $5). American football player vs American-football player (American modifies football and is a singularity modifying 'player'). Amounts in words is said to trump numbers. Handwriting trumps typewriters which trumps print.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

Alright then.

Then this would be the method which VERIZON would be able to "clear" payment.


Attachment 1534

---

If the voucher is of any value, it would seem that what Verizon wants is to have the credit they have set aside taken from the account and paid into their general ledger, no?

Well, is it a

Voucher

or

Coupon

Most often, somewhere in the presentment, it is referred to as a 'coupon'.

That means it is a "certificate of interest due on a bond"; and, a "piece cut off" to present for payment.

A 'thing certified' (paper memorial of a claim requiring verification) of a 'legal claim or right' due on a "something that binds" (debt).

So, "cut it off" and present it for payment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

RE: Thread: Persuasion & PSYOPS: The Elaboration Likelihood Model

Perhaps http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/hjr-192/ and HJR 192 - Indorsement is Payment will help bring this issue into clearer focus...

Then compare this to the IRS position on payments at http://www.irs.gov/Payments and see if they are violating the terms of HJR 192 by only allowing only one "kind" of coin or currency, namely liability currency.

See my "Conditional Acceptance" of said position.

Does this help increase the ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD for this issue?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE for CENTRAL ROUTE PROCESSING at this point in America today with its debt ceiling and deficit crises?

Shouldn't this be the KEY ISSUE to bring before a COMMON LAW GRAND JURY (http://iuvdeposit.wordpress.com/grand-jury) in each county?

Doesn't compelled use of liability instruments in direct violation of HJR 192 constitute the imposition of involuntary servitude/slavery by perpetual indebtedness?

Does't this provide probable cause to bring forth claims of harm and injury to every man and woman so compelled?

Once one returns an indorsed bill along with a Notice and Demand and this payment is dishonored without cause?

THINK/ELABORATE on this...

PM me if you want to discuss this privately. We need to form a private FOCUS GROUP on this issue ASAP.

---

NOTICE: See the new TOPIC for this focus at: The KEY ISSUE for a COMMON LAW GRAND JURY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

Well, is it a

Voucher

or

Coupon

Most often, somewhere in the presentment, it is referred to as a 'coupon'.

That means it is a "certificate of interest due on a bond"; and, a "piece cut off" to present for payment.

A 'thing certified' (paper memorial of a claim requiring verification) of a 'legal claim or right' due on a "something that binds" (debt).

So, "cut it off" and present it for payment.

---

http://farzinphoto.com/wp-content/up...G_6541_HDR.jpg
(law library)--To raise the bar...

I reiterate a key point: in their eyes, you are likely expected to be an expert concerning the laws, principles, customs and the like pertaining to promissory notes, contracts, bills of exchange, guarantees and the like--not anyone else. The point is important because it really gets at the heart of the solution.

P.S. I figure anyone that is truly serious about the topic would eagerly and gladly make their way through even a stack of 700 page law books on the matter. This is a very specialized and technical topic.

http://www.lawbookexchange.com/pictures/54358.JPG

I tend to figure that anyone alleging interest in this topic that is utterly unwilling to read a book like that from covert to cover or even the most important parts isn't at all serious and just wants to blame someone else for their dismay. You want to best Ninja and Samuris? Hmmm I suspect you'd do best to be training somewhere...somehow. What is amusing, there books covering the likes of vouchers and coupons in beautiful detail and that have been available online for over ten years and I've yet to see any site related to A4V or 1099-OID or the like even so much as mention them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

..So, "cut it off" and present it for payment.

---

If that is what it is, unless someone has studied the law of bills of exchange, promissory notes how would they know how to present it for payment? An angry article about the alleged demise of America isn't probably going to help much without the motivation to actually get into the practical. This stuff isn't locked away in some Vatican library. Although it just happens to *not* be tattooed to Nikki Min*j's, Br*tney Spe*r's or Myley Cyr*s's breasts.

10 seconds of G***gle searching and clicking I found this. Saved me from having to pull a book from my shelf. I got to stay in my comfy chair.

Attachment 1544

Attachment 1545

http://images6.fanpop.com/image/phot...-1920-1200.jpg

Downloaded both texts by CANNON and STORY from achive.org.

Began reading CANNON and now will cross-reference STORY; hopefully I can glean practical information and put it into practice. Both are lengthy and intensive reads, but well worth it if one gains practical knowledge of these instruments and their proper application/use.

There is a free 24-page primer on negotiable instruments called "Law of Negotiable Instruments" by a (US Army) Major D.H. Boughton. It is worth nothing that promissory notes and bills of exchange or subsets of contract law. Non-negotiables are important too. Promissory notes that are not negotiable might be best considered in light of "Statutes of Anne" referred to in the Boughton book. If Joseph Story's writing stile isnt working for you, you might consider Chitty's work of which I would consider Chapters I, II and III to be mandatory reading.

Some "central route processing" has provided me with two scenarios regarding handling the instrument:

1) The remitter (whoever sent it to you) owes your account (the acct. number on the 'bill') and sends the coupon/voucher ('bill') for your indorsement (signature creates the positive credit) and will deposit said instrument into the account when you send it back properly indorsed. They are the printer of the "check" and the "teller" who will deposit the funds in said account once the instrument is indorsed.

2) The person (entity/vessel created by the United States - name on the account of the 'bill') owes the account and the sender of the 'bill' seeks an authorized signature for credit transfer from the source of all credit; 'man'. The 'man' authorizes the credit transfer, through the person (transmitting utility) and the 'biller' receives the funds and indorses for deposit into the account.

Number (1) scenario would require the 'man' to sign the back of the instrument (no other markings anywhere) with his authorized signature and send in for deposit into the account.

Number (2) scenario would require the 'man' to fill out the front of the instrument (like a conventional check) and send it in for the receiver to indorse the back and deposit.

What say you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug555

And isn't every corporation really acting as an Agent of the Treasury/Trustee anyways, as a sub-corp of the US Corp?

---

If the organization has a IRS tax ID, its a revenue agency. If the organization does anything in the name of "the IRC requires it" or in the name of "the Treasury regulations" require it, it is an agency of the IRS or the Treasury Department to the applicable extent. There was an old case where a private water company contractor was collecting information in connection with its billing practices or something like that and the court ruled that because the organization was doing allegedly in connection with a Federal law, the organization was acting as a Federal agency in doing so and was to be treated like a government agency in that specific act.

If a banker says he or she wants information to fulfill Treasury Regulations or any government this or that even because of the PATRIOT Act then the banker is a State or Federal agent and anything about it being their bank policy is sophistry--they are liable as if a public Federal or State agency for any breech of the law or injury, loss or harm they cause in the same manner as a Federal agency would be. If they claim greater powers than the statute, law or regulation then they could be liable for fraud. However, they might try to sell you "its bank policy" Koolaid before you walk out the door.

Quote:

---

So, as agents of the principal/trustee, they should know HOW to handle getting a credit from the trustee, right?

---

If they don't know or do know and pretend not to then they might be subject to criminal or civil liability and might also be subject to ouster, revocation or suspension of licensing or the like for incompetence or the like (you know kinda like how they suspend driver licenses?). Fraud, maybe?

Quote:

---

So, let's hold them accountable, and if they fail to perform, that is outside the scope of their principal/agent agreement, and then can be held liable.

---

The Treasury Department or a State or Federal Attorney General might be able to help with that.

central too banking and the legal paper are BILLS papal Bulls the paper is registered trademarked serialized formed & # in concordance to consent cohesion and at our own contempt for the practitioner means what if water is drawn legally from a central well the buckets are spiked [a wet sign]. lawfully re- dig yourself a well and de -centralize it .on lawful paper a notice with the adversed contempt claimed . u order a thing and bills are due when u finish dinning the cheque is presented after will there be anything else was everything satisfactory u cash claim the cheque 0 its balance bill paid hydro bill is due claim Cheque 0 the balance bill paid a bill is blank until the order and account is given can u demand a smaller bill not till u change the order. Banks payee to the order off u own the paper set off debt or settle debt offers. owe or assume a debt owning up is differed once ante Tailgating has two parties ones invited ones not.when phone call house is on fire hang phone up dial 911 or who is this how the fire start and totally ignore the fire getting the message means hanging up the phone if i cant explain it simple i don't understand it Einstein.The fact this forum has a tailgate party is why not to follow what not to follow [ye folla]

xparte I have a bit of a trouble following your grammar. For some reason I'm reminded of NLP. No offense.