Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49

Thread: ATM card DEBIT vs CREDIT option

  1. #1
    Member Robert Henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Where ever I may roam...
    Posts
    40

    ATM card DEBIT vs CREDIT option

    Hello all,

    While filling up at the gas station today I realized my habitual use of the CREDIT option, as opposed to the DEBIT option, when using my ATM card.

    I primarily started doing this way-back-when due to the higher limit allowed on withdrawal transactions using the CREDIT option, in my case 5000 vs 500, and it just became habit.

    I'd like to ask the greater minds here to offer their thoughts on the possible ramifications of this vis-a-vis claiming redemption through lawful money.

    My personal take on this is that my demand on the signature card attached to this account, in addition to my NaD served on the FED, should render any assumption of private credit usage moot but as I am yet a novice with this process, and with the recent discussions of making demand on a PER TRANSACTION basis (something I see no way to do with ATM card transactions where no paper signature is required), I'd like this thread to serve as consensus on this issue.

    With gratitude,

    Robert Henry

  2. #2
    Thank you Robert Henry;


    It is your mind that is great!

    If you think about that you might gather that making a demand for lawful money does not actually result in the tender of lawful money. The US note is not a reserve currency yet Congress has finagled things so that the value of the US note is pegged to the diminishing value of the Federal Reserve note, which is not lawful money.

    From there it may seem even more incredible.

    Use the debit option and you will no longer be utilizing Credit from the Fed.

    These habits, I call conditioning. Most times the belief sets we hold are precious and to be defended.

    Your Credit Card as a Debit Card still holds your Credit Information. That should be no problem now that you are no longer using it as a Credit Card but you might let me know about any intrusion by the Federal Reserve System presuming you are still in contract.

    Today's lesson in ACIM (A Course in Miracles) included:

    For to recognize fear is not enough to escape from it, although the recognition is necessary to demonstrate the need for escape. The Holy Spirit must still translate the fear into truth. If you were left with the fear, once you had recognized it, you would have taken a step away from reality, not towards it. Yet we have repeatedly emphasized the need to recognize fear and face it without disguise as a crucial step in the undoing of the ego.

    And from earlier:

    Do not fear the Last Judgment, but welcome it and do not wait, for the ego's time is "borrowed" from your eternity.

    It is your comprehension of truth and your pure trust that will establish the remedy. When it strikes you that you have been making a mistake, like today with the Credit Option simply seek to understand better.

  3. #3
    See post http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ll=1#post12168

    In particular, the blue wording highlghted and underlined below:

    "... I have handwritten my exact specific declaration on the FACE of every check and deposit slip I issue.... just to make it CLEAR by a PREPONDERANCE of substantive evidence under their FRE Exception to Hearsay Rule 803(6)(B) that from that date onward "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" applies to ALL transactions even if it is missing thereafter on transactions like direct deposits, debit/credit cards, EFTs, etc, where it is hard to make a record of one's demand. Remember, by making one's demand TRANSACTION-BASED, it does not matter what the signature card has on it or not. The account does not matter - BECAUSE YOU MADE YOUR DEMAND TRANSACTION-BASED - Please get this point! It is CRITICAL! One does NOT have to send letters to the bank, IRS, FRS, IMF, Treasury or Employer and thereby stir up needless trouble! Okay? IMHO - K.I.S.S."

  4. #4
    Please also try to get my point.

    For example, did you make Notice and Demand before you understood your point above?

    The remedy is between your ears. Making the demand is meaningless to many bankers. One bank made the point of saying "no legal effect" several times. So I get your point.

    The Lesson Plan guides people through a journey to get where you are now. Even so, the Notice and Demand in some form or another has been proven effective to stave off assumptions of endorsement. And another point is that if you make your notice and demand to the Fed Bank, through the federal court, even publish it at the county recorder and serve it on your bank it is not very likely to get to your boss or cause any grief whatsoever.

    In the exploration of grand jury formation for example, we need to raise the consciousness of people in general. The Notice and Demand and Libel of Review processes are great for doing that.


    Regards,

    David Merrill.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Please also try to get my point.

    For example, did you make Notice and Demand before you understood your point above?

    The remedy is between your ears. Making the demand is meaningless to many bankers. One bank made the point of saying "no legal effect" several times. So I get your point.

    The Lesson Plan guides people through a journey to get where you are now. Even so, the Notice and Demand in some form or another has been proven effective to stave off assumptions of endorsement. And another point is that if you make your notice and demand to the Fed Bank, through the federal court, even publish it at the county recorder and serve it on your bank it is not very likely to get to your boss or cause any grief whatsoever.

    In the exploration of grand jury formation for example, we need to raise the consciousness of people in general. The Notice and Demand and Libel of Review processes are great for doing that.


    Regards,

    David Merrill.
    No, I did not make a Notice and Demand before I understood the TRANSACTION-BASED REDEMPTION point above. In fact, the above point did not "congeal" in my mind until AFTER I did my 1040 the way I did it, and when it was honored, it came by way of reverse-engineering to realize that point.

    But you are right, we should know WHY it works BEFORE doing it. And give NOTICE to others "to raise the consciousness of people in general", but not as a requirement because 12 USC 411 has no CFR regulation requiring that.

    And despite claims that it has no legal effect, if the IRS and States honor it who cares what the bankers and their attorneys say?

    Perhaps it only has LAWFUL effect... which only a Common Law Grand Jury can decide as judges of the both the law and facts.

    But the record-forming that I have in this folder may be sufficient for a Common Law Grand Jury "court of record" to establish the date on which I truly began my lawful money demands for all transactions, as Blackstone's Commentaries, Book 3, Chapter 22, pages 4-5, refers to a record, in a "trial by record", as "a monument of so high a nature, and imports in itself such absolute verity, that if be pleaded that there is no such a record, it shall not receive any trial by witness, jury or otherwise, but only by itself".

    If this position is not true today, in common law, then please correct me so I can revise my tactics and save up the money needed to pursue the LOR process.
    Last edited by doug555; 01-05-14 at 05:24 AM.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post

    ....And despite claims that it has no legal effect, if the IRS and States honor it who cares what the bankers and their attorneys say?

    Perhaps it only has LAWFUL effect... which only a Common Law Grand Jury can decide as judges of the both the law and facts.
    Those two bolded above just threw some new light (to me) on the BoA response to the NaD....kinda got to read between the lines.

    =======================

    (Assumption --> BoA is in knee deep with the FED/gov-co)

    BoA did the right thing in "agreeing with thy adversary quickly". Both responses were within 10 business days of suitors notices -- acknowledging receipt of the NaD. They certainly didn't say it was refused.

    Next, the statements "...no legal relevance, no bank action..." & "return documents" on its face may seem like a refusal....but suppose that it's a denial, typical of FED/gov-co....so as not to let the cat out of the bag.....re: David Merril's account about the IRS lady saying somebody in Colorado is doing it right & then clamming up.

    They know they've got to adjust their accounting now.....they're just not going to admit it....especially on paper....to be spread far & wide by a printed sheet. That admission will never see the light of day.....they're not going to give you the ammunition that sinks their ship.

    Without a doubt, that's a really big cat in that bag.

    So in that instance, the suitor was good to go from June 15, the day the demand was executed & witnessed by the notary.

    That's my take .....I could be wrong....

    ==================================

    But doug555 is right here in that a NaD is not really necessary in "legalworld" (but good to go in lawfulworld) with the transaction based demands standing as the record....and as a "rock" it stands....straight & true.
    Last edited by ag maniac; 01-05-14 at 05:37 PM.

  7. #7
    Yes Ag;

    Notice how the bank stressed how the demand had no legal effect? If that were true why bother writing a long letter?

    Doug;

    You have cleaned up process quite a bit. Thank you.

    I believe that we are experiencing a dynamic and I try to be agile and flexible. There is a thread here - Exactly what does the IRS agent think? I have not been updating the Memos and Notices that the IRS agents receive. My point is that they change, like Ag pointed out - with the IRS attorney - interactions change them as well as process.

    The law says we make our demand and maybe the LoR and NaD are becoming outdated? I always go for a more thorough Notice though. The NaD was developed by the LoR becoming so expensive to file. Now with this distinctive diversity of citizenship I am thinking to reevaluate the original Libel in Review. That remand to state court is the common law grand jury we are discussing.

  8. #8
    Member Robert Henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Where ever I may roam...
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Thank you Robert Henry;

    It is your mind that is great!
    Thank you, you are too kind. I am merely here to "stand on the shoulders of giants", as Michael Joseph would say (MJ, oh MJ, wherefore art thou, oh MJ? And why hast thou deserted us? Your words and wisdom are sorely missed in this venue!), and learn as and what I can from those who have gone before and are willing to share their experiences.

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    If you think about that you might gather that making a demand for lawful money does not actually result in the tender of lawful money. The US note is not a reserve currency yet Congress has finagled things so that the value of the US note is pegged to the diminishing value of the Federal Reserve note, which is not lawful money.

    From there it may seem even more incredible.

    Even more incredible
    , indeed! What would happen were the $600 million lotto winner to redeem his/her winnings in lawful money? In fact, could not the suitors sum up our collective redemptions and permanently FORECLOSE on the entire FED SYSTEM, once the $300 million hard ceiling of US Notes is found to be breached?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    ...but you might let me know about any intrusion by the Federal Reserve System presuming you are still in contract.
    You will be the second to know!

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    It is your comprehension of truth and your pure trust that will establish the remedy. When it strikes you that you have been making a mistake, like today with the Credit Option simply seek to understand better.
    That is the very reason for this post!

    Doug, thank you for your thoughts! Is not the appropriate non-endorsement on the back of ALL cashed or deposited checks in addition to NaD, and other formal notices, enough of a PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE to show intent of use of lawful money? Why would notice on the face, a space apparently for reserved for the use of the issuer of said instrument (and could that not, in fact, be seen as TAMPERING with said instrument?), be anything other than a redundancy?

    AG, thank you for you thoughts! I whole-heartedly agree that the banks CAN NOT and WILL NOT, by tacit admission or acknowledgement, verify the veracity of redemption.

    I very much look forward to hearing from others!

    Thank you for your time and care,

    Robert Henry

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Yes Ag;

    Notice how the bank stressed how the demand had no legal effect? If that were true why bother writing a long letter?

    Doug;

    You have cleaned up process quite a bit. Thank you.

    I believe that we are experiencing a dynamic and I try to be agile and flexible. There is a thread here - Exactly what does the IRS agent think? I have not been updating the Memos and Notices that the IRS agents receive. My point is that they change, like Ag pointed out - with the IRS attorney - interactions change them as well as process.

    The law says we make our demand and maybe the LoR and NaD are becoming outdated? I always go for a more thorough Notice though. The NaD was developed by the LoR becoming so expensive to file. Now with this distinctive diversity of citizenship I am thinking to reevaluate the original Libel in Review. That remand to state court is the common law grand jury we are discussing.
    Great news! Thanks!!

    After reading AGs and your comments again, perhaps the NaD had no legal effect because it was NOT acceptable per the Federal Rules of Evidence Exception to Hearsay Rule (FRE 803(6)(B))since it was just a letter outside the normal course of business, or possibly the NaD was already trumped by some non-endorsements on instruments already on record that did fit the exception to hearsay rule... and so then truly it had no legal effect because the demand was already on record!

    Hmmmm... these attorneys are so clever and yet technically truthful at times...

  10. #10
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    The fourth branch of government, the grand jury, is in place for good reason; to check the actions of the other branches and determine whether or not claims brought against people have merit - at law. Legalese, of any kind, should be barred from a true grand jury hearing.

    The "courts" gain jurisdiction over the "jurors" in the selection process who then become puppets for the status quo.

    Everything you do, when you step out of your own domestic authority (the four walls you call home), is illegal. So, any notice stating that there is "no legal authority" or "legal basis" in response to your lawful notice or process is absolutely true. We do not seek "legal" basis or authority - we are concerned only with what is lawful.

    There must be a wrong or harm committed, injury to one's property or a breach of a true contract for there to be an unlawful act. Everything else is "legalities" and those are too numerous to know and are ever changing; therefore, I do not understand and I am not a part of the legal society that claims "legalities".

    Someone must come forward and verify the claim against i; a man, for there to be a case with merit. Make an immediate good faith effort to settle the matter with whoever is prosecuting the case and form the record around said efforts. Fair warning that you will require the accuser to appear, verify the claim/debt/etc. and to cross-examine the accuser must be given to show you are acting in honor.

    Any venue, or "court" can become our realm of common law; we just need to learn how to flip it, move it, hold it and keep it there.
    Last edited by Anthony Joseph; 01-05-14 at 07:56 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •