Motla68's Coresource Solution Agreements

A while back Motla68 started explaining his Coresource Solution with his agreement with Sheriff HARRISON from four years ago as an example of how he had immunity from certain kinds of arrest.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...9&d=1301858014

I had to get away from my keyboard for a few hours and describe accurately in my mind what is agitating me about Motla68's presence and style here on StSC. To summarize, he came to us presenting a 'silver bullet'-style remedy all based around the Trust he had formed with the Sheriff and has been developing this, even intentionally getting tickets for violations, so that he can get privately into the public and make this agreement based in canon law (robin egg-blue wrapper) and sometimes never even have to say a word.

But he will not reveal even a generic template of the Agreement.
That in a nutshell is the real reason I am disturbed with his posting here. On top of that though, he exhibits earmarkings of patiot mythologies that I can prove clearly faulty, fraudulent or false; but went on a deleting spree shortly after starting his first threads here. This weekend though, he brought one up in plain view, and is now saying that I am misinterpreting his post:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...1&d=1301849887

I regret inserting the implication he meant me in his comment.

I think it is obvious he will soon regret addressing the issue this flippantly:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motla68

I did not say Coresource Solution can pay a roofer for his work, you have misinterpreted this and keep throwing it back in my face as I have explained already among your fascinations with Sheriff Harrison.

Ok, what have you not addressed the links I have provided information to in the context of consideration? A lot of that information is how the documents happened in the first place directly linking to what I consider private and it would be of dishonor to those who own the property. So links is all that I can give on it.

Please explain to me how misjudments is playing nicely both in quoting of posts and what was mentioned above?

---

He is trying to make out like I am in error when he posted here that he has an Agreement with Sheriff HARRISON that he has special immunities from arrest. So after clearing my head I recall what it is that is agitating about that...

He will not describe the key part of the whole presentation! He will not show us even a generic copy of the Agreement so that we have a chance of understanding what if anything is functional about it in operation of law - public or private!

Something interesting happened a few days back. Many of you reading Motla's post will figure who, one of the suitors here who knows Motla forwarded me, in confidence a copy of the Sheriff Agreement - a sanitized rendition. I did not read it but I did save it to disk. I am not sure why, but then I think this is the first time I have had to deal with that kind of crosstalk between critical information that is 'public' for members and readers here, and what came to my email uninvited but described as private/secret. Because the intermediary is respectable I wrote back that is exactly the annoying thing going on with Motla and myself - the secrecy around this document. My feelings about this are primarily that you folks should be a lot more agitated than me, that Motla is boasting of process that he will not share. And maybe even more agitated with him now that he has disclosed that it is okay because he sent me a copy in private that I am not supposed to share with you all. And then, maybe even moreso, that he makes a direct connection to Setoff extending to paying off a roofer out of the Treasury as a privy purse.

While there is some merit to that with coupons and government/banking agents I think what really set me to be very disturbed was that Motla posted a need to lure you all away from here/me in order to... what? Be more convincing? Collect money first? What is he registering on a website to promote Coresource Solution about if he will not show us? The only logical evaluation I can make is that if he can get you over to his linked sources, blogs and websites - he intends to show you over there. Some of you have done your homework and mostly I agree with fB - that Motla is a fake and a fraud.

I am okay with all that; we are each entitled to our opinions. The misdirection and distortions of my accusations are a defense mechanism as far as I am concerned. We are all entitled to our belief sets. The main problem I have with Motla's secret agreement papers is that if they are so secret he should not be teasing us and especially me with them. He apparently knows that because he has shared his secret papers with me in secret already. I had to mull it over what is so wrong with that - and it is that he is saying now, that I agreed to keep them secret. I did no such thing! I have not agreed to keep them secret.

Nextly he is holding to my comment that I do not believe in private law. And that is a distortion because I believe the entire court system is private to the Bar Associations. Public and Private Debts are acknowledged on the Dollar. What I am talking about is just the kind of secrecy he seems to forming with me in trust - that I cannot share the Sheriff Agreement with all of you. Maybe you are understanding why I will not read it, until maybe I have already posted it openly here. If he cannot share it here, then why lure people away to not share it there too? Do you start to see it? I trust you all much more than I trust Motla, behaving the way he is.

My temptation is to call Sheriff HARRISON and beg for a moment of his time to discuss this private Agreement and maybe even have him email me a copy of it if that is agreeable. But all the earmarkings are that the reason Motla will not share it is because we will all be very irate that we waited through his 200-post melodrama all to get a look and see it. Half of us will be calling for his banishment and the other laughing. In other words I do not want to bother HARRISON about it, especially when it may be a very disturbing phone call for him to answer or even hear about.

My suggestion Motla is that you quit being so mysterious and post the contents of your Coresource Solution Agreement - the old Sheriff Agreement template; and the newest rendition with all the improvements for us to discuss. I think many of us are in agreement that you have been wasting a lot of our reading time by not doing so.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Yes, you are missing a lot, even when I flat out tell you.

Now hear this everyone I never touted the agreement with Sheriff Harrison as Immunity from anything and never claimed it worked on anything, how could I when I have never had to use it? Anyone who thinks this has manifested it in their own mind, I have share a lot of what I have done and it can be confusing, this is why I have to put it in bold at times so it is more obvious recently, I challenge anyone here to prove otherwise. I even specifically said this was done BEFORE Coresource was even thought of.
What David does not see here is that when he starts shooting his mouth off to Sheriff Harrison he will have damaged any amicable relationship I have had with him outside of any contract agreement if David is able to make any connection to me through him. It is your intent to discredit, destroy, cause blasphemy on any credibility even with people outside of this forum?

I never specifically touted that Coresource Solution was a Silver Bullet solution, I have even spoke against it being a Silver Bullet and I challenge anyone here to prove otherwise WITHOUT counterfeiting posts.

I did not point out the misjudment flippantly, if anything these accusations against me here are flippant, because they cannot "prove" that I am fraud or fake. Is it not human nature to always want what you cannot have? I tell them they cannot have something then I am terrorized over it to produce it even if it dishonors someone else who I have agreement on. This in itself proves that Certain people in here do not believe in Private Law.

Have I asked anybody for money in this forum, if so then prove it?

Did I make any claims to owning a website, if so then prove it?

The post that started this thread is Malicious and Vindictive and is the very reason why I had been on the Sui Juris forums but had to leave, picking out things to argue upon without basis, it was very loveless forum as certain people have made this forum out to be!

I will probably not be posting much after this but I will be watching for anyone who cares to step up to the challenges above with a BONA FIDE PROOF OF CLAIM without manipulation, taking a way or adding words that never existed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motla68

Yes, you are missing a lot, even when I flat out tell you.

Now hear this everyone I never touted the agreement with Sheriff Harrison as Immunity from anything and never claimed it worked on anything, how could I when I have never had to use it? Anyone who thinks this has manifested it in their own mind, I have share a lot of what I have done and it can be confusing, this is why I have to put it in bold at times so it is more obvious recently, I challenge anyone here to prove otherwise. I even specifically said this was done BEFORE Coresource was even thought of.
What David does not see here is that when he starts shooting his mouth off to Sheriff Harrison he will have damaged any amicable relationship I have had with him outside of any contract agreement if David is able to make any connection to me through him. It is your intent to discredit, destroy, cause blasphemy on any credibility even with people outside of this forum?

I never specifically touted that Coresource Solution was a Silver Bullet solution, I have even spoke against it being a Silver Bullet and I challenge anyone here to prove otherwise WITHOUT counterfeiting posts.

I did not point out the misjudment flippantly, if anything these accusations against me here are flippant, because they cannot "prove" that I am fraud or fake. Is it not human nature to always want what you cannot have? I tell them they cannot have something then I am terrorized over it to produce it even if it dishonors someone else who I have agreement on. This in itself proves that Certain people in here do not believe in Private Law.

Have I asked anybody for money in this forum, if so then prove it?

Did I make any claims to owning a website, if so then prove it?

The post that started this thread is Malicious and Vindictive and is the very reason why I had been on the Sui Juris forums but had to leave, picking out things to argue upon without basis, it was very loveless forum as certain people have made this forum out to be!

I will probably not be posting much after this but I will be watching for anyone who cares to step up to the challenges above with a BONA FIDE PROOF OF CLAIM without manipulation, taking a way or adding words that never existed.

---

What was your handle on the sui juris forums?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph

What was your handle on the sui juris forums?

---

Too long ago to remember really, maybe Jeagas68 since I have used that one before as well. MJ had recommended that too, but said this time it would be different, the jury is still out on that one and I am not going to base it on the amount of people which cannot be counted on one hand.

Sharing the information you have been teasing us with would have been so much more graceful.

Quote:

---

What David does not see here is that when he starts shooting his mouth off to Sheriff Harrison he will have damaged any amicable relationship I have had with him outside of any contract agreement if David is able to make any connection to me through him.

---

Your contract agreement expired after a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Sharing the information you have been teasing us with would have been so much more graceful.



Your contract agreement expired after a year.

---

There is 2 choices here, pic the one your most compelled to:

1. You are unaware of this part of contract law and how the " Expiration to terminate performance" works.

or

2. You are taking advantage of the naiveness of others on this forum about private contract law in attempts to your continuance of your behaviour that started this thread.

Any half witted man having knowledge of private contract law should know a termination is not in effect unless it is specified in the contract or one of the parties gives notice to terminate.

Below is a sample to help educate how simple this is, in it you put the serial number of the money order. Once you get receipt of the money order has been cashed that is what secures the transaction, not by signature.
Attachment 224

This contract agreement is NOT, I REPEAT NOT part of Coresource Methods.

What I did have this for is held on reserve only 1 time as a backup is when the first time I got pulled over in the event I had to go to court and Coresource method did not work there either, THE FIRST TIME i was not sure Coresource Method would work either, but I had enough talent to make it work so NO BACKUP was necessary. I do not even carry it in the vehicle anymore after that. Any questions i can answer? Notice: NO guarantees that this will work for you, this is not legal advice. If you need such advice seek a competent attorney if such beast exists. NO claims here that this will work for anything!

I have bigger fish to fry. The mystery you propose is really why did you write 200 posts here on this forum, most of them about Coresource Solutions, when you knew all along the contents of the envelope are a secret you would never disclose?

You have known all along that the key to making the process function - the contents and text of the agreement would never be revealed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I have bigger fish to fry. The mystery you propose is really why did you write 200 posts here on this forum, most of them about Coresource Solutions, when you knew all along the contents of the envelope are a secret you would never disclose?

You have known all along that the key to making the process function - the contents and text of the agreement would never be revealed?

---

I had tried to explain so many times that it had nothing to do with what I could teach you as did MJ. How that would be revealed is through your own efforts to learn the material from what was provided, click on links and go to sites e.t.c. as exampled below. I gave you the consideration going to links and file downloads from other site posts. If you had no interest in learning it then why even post comment? Why even create the controversial behaviour that started this thread? You demand me to answer your questions, but there is many I had for you that you would not answer, avoided all together and went on some tangent of the same that started this thread.
You do not like me, so what, I have had worse said to me, why even make such an opinion Public? Is it that you cannot stand it when someone might know 1 or 2 things that you do not? <-- that is a question, NOT a statement of character just to make it clear of distinction so you do not interpret it as you did when you thought i directly called someone Troll


- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...-and-Insolvent

- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1269

- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...full=1#post726

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motla68

I had tried to explain so many times that it had nothing to do with what I could teach you as did MJ. How that would be revealed is through your own efforts to learn the material from what was provided, click on links and go to sites e.t.c. as exampled below. I gave you the consideration going to links and file downloads from other site posts. If you had no interest in learning it then why even post comment? Why even create the controversial behaviour that started this thread? You demand me to answer your questions, but there is many I had for you that you would not answer, avoided all together and went on some tangent of the same that started this thread.
You do not like me, so what, I have had worse said to me, why even make such an opinion Public? Is it that you cannot stand it when someone might know 1 or 2 things that you do not? <-- that is a question, NOT a statement of character just to make it clear of distinction so you do not interpret it as you did when you thought i directly called someone Troll


- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...-and-Insolvent

- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1269

- http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...full=1#post726

---

You propose an effective formula for handling traffic tickets and claim that you do not have to speak one word now that the contents of this envelope are perfected. Yet you will not disclose to us even a generic template of the process itself. The accusation you skirt around is that you knew this all along - that you would not be revealing this to us.

The accusation is that you have wasted a hell of a lot of our time with something that we need to find the key (money?) to unlock from you. You have failed to convince me that the contents of the envelope, in a sanitized or generic template form, need to stay secret from the readers here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You propose an effective formula for handling traffic tickets and claim that you do not have to speak one word now that the contents of this envelope are perfected. Yet you will not disclose to us even a generic template of the process itself. The accusation you skirt around is that you knew this all along - that you would not be revealing this to us.

The accusation is that you have wasted a hell of a lot of our time with something that we need to find the key (money?) to unlock from you. You have failed to convince me that the contents of the envelope, in a sanitized or generic template form, need to stay secret from the readers here.

---

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1256

Show us this.

Quote:

---

2. copy of presentment (ticket) that had CS language written upon it that was sent in with the notice by certified mail.

---

You have been shown a instrument that has similar language on it that was also writen on the ticket previously:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...full=1#post533


I also have said many times that the EXACT INSTRUMENTS CANNOT BE SHOW BECAUSE THEY WERE SERVED IN THE PRIVATE. It is NOT because am playing games by hiding it from you, it has to do with HONORING someone else's private property, the EXACT notice as well was wrapped in that paper, but the language is spoken many time in the Coresource Audios, it is simple what is on your heart of what you are there for an what you plan to do, I cannot show you this because what is on your heart is certainly not what is on mine. Do you know what honor is ?
If not, here let me teach you:

HONOR;
In England, when a peer of parliament is sitting judicially in that body, his pledge of honor is received instead of an oath; and in courts of equity, peers, peeresses, and lords of parliament, answer on their honor only. But the courts of common law know no such distinction. It is needless to add, that as we are not encumbered by a nobility, there is no such distinction in the United States, all persons being equal in the eye of the law.
- 1856 Bouviers Dictionary

Being equal if one person considers something private and the other person puts such instrument in the public then the other person is in DISHONOR of the playing field.

There is certain rituals within courts that you may not be aware of, but they are not that secret, some of it is just common sense in assimilating common honor and pleasantries itself. For example when you are a guest in someone else's house you do not dishonor their utensils you eat with, you do not go in their house dragging muddy shoes on all their floors. Before even arriving you announce your visit and the purpose of being there, if you act in interest of the common good for all then you do not need affidavit's, averments, motions, liens in the interest of greedy addiction to money or something you think is yours, your mileage goes much further with them.
Unfortunately I cannot teach common sense, you either have it or you do not.

Peace be upon you.

You can show us. That has nothing to do with honor or dishonor by any definition. Your explanation falls short of making any sense. Just show us an example, or we are done.

You have demonstrated blatant dishonor with your Sheriff Agreement with Sheriff HARRISON. You calculated the price of payment off the CAFR - that's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. In other words you paid him for a one year term. Then you have pretended that bound him for, what now? Six?

You sent me that Agreement in template uninvited. Then you created an agreement that I have agreed to keep it secret? Untrue. I have made no such agreement.

Quote:

---

Being equal if one person considers something private and the other person puts such instrument in the public then the other person is in DISHONOR of the playing field.

---

You don't know what you are talking about. I am asking for a template or sanitized version. Not the specific Agreement. You can share the Agreement without telling us of the parties. What you keep saying is just untrue. You can share the information and disclose and describe the process and explain why and how it is effective to the point where you can hand it to the ADA in robin egg-blue paper and never have to say a single word; and make the cause go away!

Your not understanding that, or your reluctance to do that - either way, really causes me to doubt your own confidence and competence. I am really starting to detest how much time you have caused me to dedicate to your style of obfuscation and misdirection. But then again, your style of trolling is unique as far as I have experienced so I am not bashing myself over the head. I have learned a lot and will prevent you or another troll like you from detracting from my learning enjoyment again.



Regards,

David Merrill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2n1r5xmCXg