Should we be stamping every presentment with "Demand is made for Lawful Money?"

After reading Molta88(s) post on the returned traffic citation and/or other presentments (one of which was stamped with a "demand for lawful money") it got me thinking.

Since the Government only sees "commerce" in all that we do to interact, would it be prudent for all applications, returns, R4c's, filings, demands, orders, etc. to be stamped with a "Demand is made for Lawful Money" on the face and possibly the back?

I am feeling this demand stamp would remove any presumption of "Federal allegiance" or "pledge offering" in our commercial activities with DC/METRO affiliates.

I would love to see the reaction to a bunch of 1040 forms sent in with a "Demand is made for Lawful money" stamp on them come April 19 this year!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martin earl

After reading Molta88(s) post on the returned traffic citation and/or other presentments (one of which was stamped with a "demand for lawful money") it got me thinking.

Since the Government only sees "commerce" in all that we do to interact, would it be prudent for all applications, returns, R4c's, filings, demands, orders, etc. to be stamped with a "Demand is made for Lawful Money" on the face and possibly the back?

I am feeling this demand stamp would remove any presumption of "Federal allegiance" or "pledge offering" in our commercial activities with DC/METRO affiliates.

I would love to see the reaction to a bunch of 1040 forms sent in with a "Demand is made for Lawful money" stamp on them come April 19 this year!

---

That was kind of the whole point, there is a term seldom used any more called:

" Lawful Protest " or " Lawful Excuse "

I help in de-constructing this for better understanding,

Lawful; That in which is allowed by law

and another legal term:

Notice of Protest: A notice of protest is given by the holder of the instrument to the drawer or endorser of the instrument.

Combine these terms together and you have them an offer in which cannot be refused, it also protests the use of FRNS any more. You should have enough tools now to de-construct the word " Excuse" on your own.

It would not remove any presumption to Federal Allegiance but, it would remove the presumption of you holding a foreign currency and being viewed as for the better lack of terminology a enemy combatant. Why? because the use of frns is a taxable event and robs the nation of it's wealth and ability to be self sustainable. You start doing this though and you have to stop using credit cards, loans, lines of credit, most all that is bank money. A bank debit card is ok as long as it is non-interest bearing because that would be a taxable event, there is a lot of them out there, the green dot/walmart ones seem to be the cheapest on fees though if you happen to be charged for use.

Some day out of all this I hope to see a treasury debit card associated with Lawful Money and no penalty for actually being a holder of the paper form.
The next step in the journey of life and love, no money at all, resource based economy.

A citation is akin to a "writ of summons".
Your appearance in their forum is being "requested" for an offense ex delicto. :)

As to other presentments, I think it depends on the court. If we are dealing with administrative courts, there may be basis.
I can't think of anything better then to conclusively prove on record that there is a commercial nexus with regard to that administrative court.

Leave the demand for lawful money to banking through the Federal Reserve Act.
Courts are a different beast in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

A citation is akin to a "writ of summons".
Your appearance in their forum is being "requested" for an offense ex delicto. :)

As to other presentments, I think it depends on the court. If we are dealing with administrative courts, there may be basis.
I can't think of anything better then to conclusively prove on record that there is a commercial nexus with regard to that administrative court.

Leave the demand for lawful money to banking through the Federal Reserve Act.
Courts are a different beast in my opinion.

---

10-4 on that, admin courts to help settle hostilities:

Hague Convention - Laws and Customs of War on Land

Article 55

The occupying State shall only be regarded as administrator and usufructuary of the public buildings, real property, forests, and agricultural works belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must protect the capital of these properties, and administer it according to the rules of usufruct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by motla68

10-4 on that, admin courts to help settle hostilities:

Hague Convention - Laws and Customs of War on Land

Article 55

The occupying State shall only be regarded as administrator and usufructuary of the public buildings, real property, forests, and agricultural works belonging to the hostile State, and situated in the occupied country. It must protect the capital of these properties, and administer it according to the rules of usufruct.

---

Rules of usufruct sounds Roman Civil Law-ish ....

With regard to presentments, I would classify the presentments as to the forum in which typically administered.

There is a lot of history peripheral to this but Martin Earl is elaborating on my initial reaction to some of the examples from Motla68.

That is to say possibly the stamp alone is enough for setoff. There are no birth certificate accounts with the Fed (at least that anybody can prove) but this fellow is speaking symptomatically* of Remedy. Click here and listen for about one minute.

We already paid though. But we paid for the security of the person. That is why we saved the Fed in 1933; to pay for security (of the Person).

In other words, the instrument, whatever it is - the presentment - is being demanded in Federal Reserve Notes - redeem in lawful money by demanding it on the face of the instrument.



http://www.merchantcircle.com/busine...2.719-635-0943

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/6...eemedbills.jpg

* I say symptomatically because the fellow is suffering social pseudonomania. There are no birth certificate bonds. They have been fabricated as a mental model to explain the remedy effects created by the true remedy, which this group of people under this particular guru because they have sensed some successful effects and desparately wish to explain them.

In that same token though we are returning the instruments back to the state to fulfill their duty as trustee. Statutes are no more then " color of law ", a company policy if you will:

North Carolina General Statutes § 78A-64 Statutory policy
This Chapter shall be so construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact it and to coordinate the interpretation and administration of this Chapter with the related federal regulation. (1973, c. 1380.)

If you look above here where it speaks of administration, combine that with the Article 55 on the original post of this thread " and administer it according to the rules of usufruct ". It is not that we are applying it to us then it is applying to to their duty. Forcing us to act as trustee is a Malfeasance of Office, when you start standing up to a bully most of them will start backing off.

UNITED STATES CODES
TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 242
§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

TITLE 46, APPENDIX App. > CHAPTER 12 > § 322
§ 322. Penalty for malfeasance
Every person, authorized and required by title 50 of the Revised Statutes to perform any act or thing as an officer, who willfully neglects or refuses to do and perform the same, according to the true intent and meaning of title 50 of the Revised Statutes, shall, if not subject to the penalty and disqualifications prescribed in section 321 of this Appendix, be liable to a penalty of $500 for the first offense, and of like sum for the second offense, and shall, after conviction for the second offense, be rendered incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under the United States.

Title 50 War and National Defense

I am not a statutory employee, are you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

A citation is akin to a "writ of summons".
Your appearance in their forum is being "requested" for an offense ex delicto. :)

As to other presentments, I think it depends on the court. If we are dealing with administrative courts, there may be basis.
I can't think of anything better then to conclusively prove on record that there is a commercial nexus with regard to that administrative court.

Leave the demand for lawful money to banking through the Federal Reserve Act.
Courts are a different beast in my opinion.

---

i disagree. If that would be the case then there would be no bill for pains and penalty. Yet at the bottom of every ticket there is typically a fine value. Which in my mind is an attempt to re-venue one into the Federal Reserve Districts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

i disagree. If that would be the case then there would be no bill for pains and penalty. Yet at the bottom of every ticket there is typically a fine value. Which in my mind is an attempt to re-venue one into the Federal Reserve Districts.

---

That I had not considered. Fair enough. :)

Agreed, there is a commercial value (or $ value) fine attached to nearly every statute violation, because they are Copyrighted property of the Legislative branch that publishes and passes them.

Even additional "court costs" are spelled out in the statutes. It is my opinion, if the ALL CAPS trust is involved, every single signature of the living man or woman creates value for the system, which is cashed out and added to the ledger as profit.

the only way to win is not to play the game

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

the only way to win is not to play the game

---

Yeah so do not have exciting relations with that WOPR, you might get infused with something you would rather not be, LOL.

It would not remove any presumption to Federal Allegiance but, it would remove the presumption of you holding a foreign currency and being viewed as for the better lack of terminology a enemy combatant. Why? because the use of frns is a taxable event and robs the nation of it's wealth and ability to be self sustainable.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rc*Helicopters|cheap rc parts|Mini Rc Helicopters|Remote Control Helicopters