"Lawful Money" definition? attn:David

hi,

Im still struggling with the very basics.. actually Ive given up on this (several times) but something always leads me back.

David, if you would.. can I please get your definition of "Lawful Money"? at this time I am not interested in anyone else s so to others, I ask that please refrain until (if) David responds with his definition.

I have other questions (zillions) but they all hinge on this one. and yes Ive tried this before with different words on other threads but maybe this time is different?

also, Im not upto no good as I see some of you here seem to think of other members like that. not too stupid or mentally disabled either, just have a somewhat mechanical logic process. I think I already know the answer but I need it confirmed by The Man himself!

thanks

What happens if we disobey
?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoneFree

What happens if we disobey
?

---

hi stonefree,

disobey what? great flick though.. maybe you reply to the wrong topic by mistake. doesnt seem to fit here unless you took my request as an order or demand somehow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

hi,

Im still struggling with the very basics.. actually Ive given up on this (several times) but something always leads me back.

David, if you would.. can I please get your definition of "Lawful Money"? at this time I am not interested in anyone else s so to others, I ask that please refrain until (if) David responds with his definition.

I have other questions (zillions) but they all hinge on this one. and yes Ive tried this before with different words on other threads but maybe this time is different?

also, Im not upto no good as I see some of you here seem to think of other members like that. not too stupid or mentally disabled either, just have a somewhat mechanical logic process. I think I already know the answer but I need it confirmed by The Man himself!

thanks

---

I suppose that the ritual magick is to blame you for not getting it because your hair is wrong and you have too much weight on your left foot... - it's all in how you hold your tongue.

Let's imagine though that the reason you keep getting back here is that you desire the Truth.

For twenty-five years now I have enjoyed the access to a repository of archives and records here. So my definition for "lawful money" is only what Congress and the courts feel is the definition. Congress apparently wont define lawful money further than what you find in the Federal Reserve Act. The courts describe what the Federal Reserve Act defines it as...

To summarize though, Federal Reserve notes are redeemable in gold. Gold has been replaced in the terminology by lawful money. Therefore gold is lawful money. The gold seizure depended on the Emergency - which activated the Trading with the Enemy Act against the people, the citizenry of endorsers. That emergency ended in and around 1976 but left provisions that when the Federal Reserve is no longer desired (endorsed) there will be another Bankers' Holiday and the Amendments to the Bretton Woods Act stipulate that international gold that will go back into the system will do so at $42.22/troy ounce.

Therefore the only thing extending the Emergency is conditioning (between your ears).

A lot of people get that. Some naturally; for example James Roland built this castle, so you would not expect him to be fluent about money and law.

Attachment 2178

DONATE HERE - The Tabernacle for the Redemption of God's Lawful Money!


So what you are after lacks definition only because Congress is in breach of trust. The Constitution entrusted Congress with authority to regulate the value of money. Congress entrusted the Federal Reserve as the US central bank in 1913 and the Fed has since run the value of the US dollar into the ground. That leaves the resulting trust open for the trustee to become the beneficiary.

Quote:

---

And the bookkeeper can be king if the public is kept in ignorance of the methodology of the bookkeeping. All science is a means to an end.

The means is knowledge. The end is control. Therefore the only issue remaining is who will be the beneficiary.

---

I am quoting from memory - Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars by Hartford VAN DYKE.

hi David,

hmmm... OK (sigh)

thought the timing was better this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

hi David,

hmmm... OK (sigh)

thought the timing was better this time.

---

The courts say, United States notes shall be lawful money.

By law, US notes are still redeemable in gold. The Treasury, not Congress, has stopped issuing US notes and because of the breach of trust by Congress and the Fed, the non-reserve currency is attached in value to the reserve currency, Federal Reserve notes.

I am sorry if that is not very clear yet. I tried to make it as succinct as I could. Federal Reserve notes were redeemable in gold from 1913 to 1933.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

The courts say, United States notes shall be lawful money.

By law, US notes are still redeemable in gold. The Treasury, not Congress, has stopped issuing US notes and because of the breach of trust by Congress and the Fed, the non-reserve currency is attached in value to the reserve currency, Federal Reserve notes.

I am sorry if that is not very clear yet. I tried to make it as succinct as I could. Federal Reserve notes were redeemable in gold from 1913 to 1933.

---

It might help to consider that the gold traded on the general market is part of the goods, labor and services underwriting currency (along with petroleum, titanium, myriad pharmaceutical products, Uranium ore, coal, Starburst and Pez). (Even Warren E. Buffet is probably a U.S. citizen.)

Attachment 2182

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

The courts say, United States notes shall be lawful money.

By law, US notes are still redeemable in gold. The Treasury, not Congress, has stopped issuing US notes and because of the breach of trust by Congress and the Fed, the non-reserve currency is attached in value to the reserve currency, Federal Reserve notes.

I am sorry if that is not very clear yet. I tried to make it as succinct as I could. Federal Reserve notes were redeemable in gold from 1913 to 1933.

---

part of my problems (for instance) blacks4th defines "lawful" as not contrary to law, it defines "money" with several examples but indicates this:

Quote:

---

"Money" has no technical meaning, but is of ambiguous import, and may be interpreted having regard to all surrounding circumstances under which it is used

---

see why I asked? and, if they say FRNs shall be lawful money then that could mean that they are NOT because (also according to blacks4th) "shall" also implies an element of futurity.


I get it, I really do but I need to be certain, beyond the shadow of any doubt. this is serious stuff. if one were to risk his skin on a certain job where a mistake would be more costly than he could correct, he needs very precise information. this is what I do.. I wont even begin actual work until I have gone over the details/diagrams/instructions/etc. (FACTS IN EVIDENCE) and have a 100% understanding of what exactly needs to be done. this makes me not only competent but also confident.

I take on some of the most complicated projects and often they are ones that others have botched or given up on and even when the manufacturer authorized tech cant solve the issue at hand.

seriously.. when I cant figure something out, then the only explanation I have for that is that it was encrypted by design. that seems to be what we have here and why I have so much trouble with it. but other men (yourself and others) seemingly have figured it out but how can that be?

if one man can do it, then so can I. sometimes its not easy but trying to break the encryption of law has been the toughest challenge Ive ever faced.

sad thing is that its not about the money, but your whole philosophy hinges on it! I feel I have quite a bit beyond the lawful money part sorted out, somehow Im stumbling on what should be the simplest part of it all.

I dont think your on the right track David, you have proven it! you know Ive been following you for many years now. I followed your actions in real time over on SJC in that 300+ page thread. I have observed others on similar paths too but you have something special, its obvious but you have such a unique mindset that it has actually made thing more complicated for me, I think because I find all the tangents you go off on so interesting. sometimes I wish I could ignore those. actually I have tried that too but I feel I mis some important pieces.


so now Im thinking, to figure this out I need to figure out at least partially how your mind works. I know it sounds crazy but yep..

so thats why I asked for your definition. but try and look your reply from a different perspective. somehow lawful money returned a castle and ritual magic among other things.

I say this not to point out flaws of your, its not your flaw at all, or anyone elses, only mine but its a big one and I might need some help with it.

so if anyone has some constructive criticism, lay it on me. I thrive on the stuff but I realize most dont have the guts for it. incoming or outgoing.

what else can I say here?


thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

It might help to consider that the gold traded on the general market is part of the goods, labor and services underwriting currency (along with petroleum, titanium, myriad pharmaceutical products, Uranium ore, coal, Starburst and Pez). (Even Warren E. Buffet is probably a U.S. citizen.)

Attachment 2182

---

hi allodial,

I am reminded of the Beverly Hillbillys Bankers secretary. must be related? I havnt watched TV in over 10 years but that still pops up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

I get it, I really do but I need to be certain, beyond the shadow of any doubt. this is serious stuff. if one were to risk his skin on a certain job where a mistake would be more costly than he could correct, he needs very precise information. this is what I do.. I wont even begin actual work until I have gone over the details/diagrams/instructions/etc. (FACTS IN EVIDENCE) and have a 100% understanding of what exactly needs to be done. this makes me not only competent but also confident.

---

It might be worth considering the type of authority being wielded as to the 'shall' be lawful money of FRNs--likely it was territorial / plenary power but not organic lawful authority. As in they mean 'they shall be lawful money' in the sense of 'legal' but not necessarily in the sense of organic law. If you want to be specific about lawful money you can say that you mean lawful money per the Coinage Act of 1792 or per some other act to remove doubt--instead of borrowing words from ambiguous places. Also, it might be that 'shall' can mean 'may' or 'should'.

Quote:

---

People living in territories are technically U.S. citizens, but their governments do not have the same range of rights and powers as full-fledged states do. On the broadest level, states are part of the union, while territories are owned by it. Territories like the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico are self-governed to an extent, but they are ultimately beholden to the federal U.S. government.

Read more : http://www.ehow.com/info_8080703_dif...territory.html

---

The jurisdictional and type of authority issue is important. For example, D.C. 'residents' aren't regarded as having the same 'rights' as, say, those of Massachusetts. DC is essentially a territory or a territorial government--thusly Congress is akin to its 'board of aldermen'. D.C. folk don't have senators or representatives in the Senate or the House respectively. Consider that U.S. Congress can pass 'laws' to make napkins money on a military base and it would be 'lawful' (i.e. legal) in the sense of lawful meaning legal in the inorganic sense of the word but in Massachusetts it might both illegal and unlawful. Thus another issue: the distinction between lawful and legal or unlawful and illegal.

Another question is are they using the word lawful to mean legal (ergo: legal tender).

Quote:

---

The terms lawful and legal differ in that the former contemplates the substance of law, whereas the latter alludes to the form of law.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSEY6VCxrxw

Quote:

---

Mayor: As Mayor of the Munchkin City, In the County of the Land of Oz, I welcome you most regally.
Barrister: But we've got to verify it legally, to see
Mayor: To see?
Barrister: If she
Mayor: If she?
Barrister: Is morally, ethic'lly
Father No.1: Spiritually, physically
Father No. 2: Positively, absolutely
Munchkins: Undeniably and reliably Dead

Coroner: As Coroner I must aver, I thoroughly examined her. And she's not only merely dead, she's really most sincerely dead.
Mayor: Then this is a day of Independence For all the Munchkins and their descendants
Barrister: If any.
Mayor: Yes, let the joyous news be spread The wicked Old Witch at last is dead!

---

Re: The Difference Between a State & a Territory

Quote:

---

I dont think your on the right track David, you have proven it!

---

That caught my attention. Thank you!

I will import a skeptical comment from a probable attorney,

Quote:

---

Marty said: If I go into any bank or credit union and endorse for lawful money, can I cash the check? Do they have lawful money to give me right then? What if the check is drawn on another bank, can it be cashed or deposited? Do I have to surrender the check cashing charge? Can an LLC account endorse for lawful money??

Quote:

---

J. Elliot said: Sure, Marty. You can go to a bank or credit union and endorse for lawful money and cash your check. You'll get FRNs. If you redeem FRNs for lawful money, you get FRNs. There's no special account. There's no discharge of tax obligation. Nothing happens but the receiving of newer, crisper Federal Reserve Notes.

The US government doesn't even carry US Notes anymore. They discontinued them more like 15 years ago. Go to one of the Federal Reserve Banks and ask for US Notes...and they'll direct you to their museum where they keep lone examples of all the discontinued currency.

Don't take my word for it. Call them and ask them yourself.

---

David Merrill said: Looking at J. Elliot's response it comes to mind that you have prompted what you got. Do not endorse private credit from the Fed at all. Demand lawful money and if you deposit your paycheck, or any part of it that is a special deposit - not a special account. Your money sets in the bank's vault and cannot be used for fractional lending or to increase the national debt.


Get a look - http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/160...40/hINHdm.jpg?

---

My point on that commentary is that by posting the precept incorrectly, the reflection was incorrect.

It is about my thinking all right!

Congress says:

They (Federal Reserve notes from two sentences earlier) shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...

The courts say:

US notes shall be lawful money.
Federal Reserve notes may be redeemed in lawful money.

Also,

Federal Reserve notes are not money per se...

And...

Private credit notes have a residual lien... There is a distinction between a debt discharged and a debt paid.

The Gospel of Pragmatism might help you understand how my mind operates. From my perspective above, the courts do what courts do and that is always to define and describe terms like "lawful money" for Congress or the State General Assembly, accurately.

Finding of fact.

You might be familiar with my process - Diminished Money Counterclaim. The judge could not recognize value of US notes being diminished by being pegged to the value of FRN's as an actual injury.

A good first step would be to admit to ourselves that we don't really want solutions; what we want is magic:

Attachment 2184

This is a synopsis of the FRB http://www.richardcassaro.com/how-th...s-enslaved-you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

J. Elliot said: Sure, Marty. You can go to a bank or credit union and endorse for lawful money and cash your check. You'll get FRNs. If you redeem FRNs for lawful money, you get FRNs. There's no special account. There's no discharge of tax obligation. Nothing happens but the receiving of newer, crisper Federal Reserve Notes.

---

Attorney word confusion..."endorse for lawful money", "cash the check" ...instead... we redeem for lawful money ("Casino exit strategy"), we present draft drawn on the bank rather than "cashing". Cashing a check is what you do when you present a draft to a bank that is drawn on a different back and want cash.

U.S. notes might be in book entry form nowadays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You might be familiar with my process - Diminished Money Counterclaim. The judge could not recognize value of US notes being diminished by being pegged to the value of FRN's as an actual injury.

---

It might also be worth considering the notion of the gold in the general market as being leased into the market by the U.S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chex

A good first step would be to admit to ourselves that we don't really want solutions; what we want is magic....

---

There was a guy who posted on one of the older sites who suggested the FRB to be a system for working black magic.

I'm sorry you haven't found a solution nor success. No magic needed. The clues & keys are all over this website. Just start redeeming lawful money and the rest will likely fall into place. Look for posts by David Merrill & Michael Joseph and you're assured of value. Look, if someone as whimsical and crazy as me can become an 8-year success then there's hope for you too.

You might consider that what it means to YOU is more important that what it means to THEM.

Glad to see others coming to comprehension and the word spreading.

This might help: http://www.morningliberty.com/2014/0...y-slave-notes/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

It might be worth considering the type of authority being wielded

---

always, and a major subject that requires more study. "authority"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

If you want to be specific about lawful money you can say that you mean lawful money per the Coinage Act of 1792

---

thats good!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Congress says:
They (Federal Reserve notes from two sentences earlier) shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...[/I]

---

about that part in parenthesis, I recall that you had previously indicated that the "They" is the people and not the paper?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

There was a guy who posted on one of the older sites who suggested the FRB to be a system for working black magic.

---

depending on the definition of black magic he could be right, seems to me its much worse than that though. the whole system/matrix seems to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnnyCash

I'm sorry you haven't found a solution nor success. No magic needed. The clues & keys are all over this website. Just start redeeming lawful money and the rest will likely fall into place. Look for posts by David Merrill & Michael Joseph and you're assured of value. Look, if someone as whimsical and crazy as me can become an 8-year success then there's hope for you too.

---

hi JohnnyCash thanks but your success is seemingly only a small part of David's philosophy/methodology. like I said before, its really not about the money but the "money" is the key.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robert Henry

You might consider that what it means to YOU is more important that what it means to THEM.

Glad to see others coming to comprehension and the word spreading.

This might help: http://www.morningliberty.com/2014/0...y-slave-notes/

---

hi Robert Henry,

that is most important but only to me and it doesnt translate.


thanks

This might help put things in perspective: Concentration camp money.

Related:

• Concentration Camp Money: 'Lagergeld' used to Pay Prisoners for Their Work
• lagergeld (definition)
• Theresienstadt (Terezin) Ghetto (World and Military Notes website)
• New World Banking Order?
• Star of Remphan/Ramadan?

Attachment 2185
Attachment 2186

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

but only to me and it doesnt translate.

---

This sentiment, perhaps, expresses the root of the trouble.

All the "research" only yields the opinions of others. I believe that one can only come to comprehension through experience.

Are the few people here that are having success with the redemption method, sending cover letters with their year end tax forms and stating their beliefs and explaining what they're doing??

I imagine that the "few people here" would answer that best.

My response is that there are many people now, who are not suitors in brain trust redeeming lawful money and receiving full refunds of withholdings. There is an innate sense of self preservation so that this will continue year after year and so they do not promote their success over the Internet.

I know this because as they get into other legal messes of various kinds they call on me about the other legal messes. So I walk them through becoming the court of record and we investigate oaths of office and examine the Register (summary) of Action and look for fatal flaws in process to put on the record so that the prosecutor/judge backs down for being a court not of record/vacant office whatever...

This is as it should be. I find it much more engaging to salvage children from Protective Services and such.

In answer to your question however, I think that some paychecks demonstrating non-endorsement are attached but I have long quit advising trying to explain law to attorneys. You waste your breath. The evidence repositories are almost exclusively for the testimony of the attorneys, mainly the ones wearing black robes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

It is about my thinking all right!

Congress says:

They (Federal Reserve notes from two sentences earlier) shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand...
.

---

and/or:

quoted from this thread:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ll=1#post12340

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

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

---

can you clarify this David, you seem to say/write in one quote its the notes then in another from a different thread they is the people?

please just expand on this very specifically and as much as possible.

I wont be able to get past this so please explain.

thanks

We could throw a Pity Party for you. Would that help?

“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.”
- Winston S. Churchill

Attachment 2247

Refused for Cause see:http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ll=1#post16398) post #18)


Doug555's compilation on this was helpful: http://lawfulmoney.blogspot.com/p/la...efinition.html

but it would still be helpful to me if David would respond to post #21 above. I think I got it now but that still puzzles me.

thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by george

but it would still be helpful to me if David would respond to post #21 above. I think I got it now but that still puzzles me.

thanks

---

found this older post again from David where he goes into they as people more.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ll=1#post13802


why the confusion?