Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 175

Thread: Say Goodbye to Property Taxes?

  1. #11

  2. #12
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    You can get that link to work I bet. Click Here.
    Thanks, David. First time uploading to Google docs. I tried uploading the file directly but I got a message that the file was to big for the "file type". It is only 49K and the limit is 19K. Maybe we can change that; the Word doc is only 5 pages of text.

    Anyway, try this out; I changed the share settings to "people with a link can view without signing in". If that doesn't work, I will change it to full public sharing.

    Payment Coupon Authorization

  3. #13
    Senior Member motla68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    Thanks, David. First time uploading to Google docs. I tried uploading the file directly but I got a message that the file was to big for the "file type". It is only 49K and the limit is 19K. Maybe we can change that; the Word doc is only 5 pages of text.

    Anyway, try this out; I changed the share settings to "people with a link can view without signing in". If that doesn't work, I will change it to full public sharing.

    Payment Coupon Authorization
    Thanks, that worked.

    I took a quick look through and it looks very similar to a document I seen many years ago that started the whole AFV dogma error, just people kept adding to it until it got to be a ridiculously long stamp for redemption. It mentions some statutes too. This is why I said to myself there has to be a better way to do this and started piecing things together, one of those things hit me when I found a definition of " statutory employee " in the IRS 1040 instructions form and that is when it hit me that them statutes are for statutory employees and that we just have to express intent of what is to be done with the instrument( more simpler approach) then get out of the way and let them do their job, let them public trust employees worry about the AFV statements.
    This is where Coresource Solution became the beginning sparkle in the eyes of our original group that started it all.
    makes sense?

  4. #14
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by motla68 View Post
    Thanks, that worked.

    I took a quick look through and it looks very similar to a document I seen many years ago that started the whole AFV dogma error, just people kept adding to it until it got to be a ridiculously long stamp for redemption. It mentions some statutes too. This is why I said to myself there has to be a better way to do this and started piecing things together, one of those things hit me when I found a definition of " statutory employee " in the IRS 1040 instructions form and that is when it hit me that them statutes are for statutory employees and that we just have to express intent of what is to be done with the instrument( more simpler approach) then get out of the way and let them do their job, let them public trust employees worry about the AFV statements.
    This is where Coresource Solution became the beginning sparkle in the eyes of our original group that started it all.
    makes sense?
    I don't subscribe at all to the "AFV dogma" as it relates to what I have read about utilizing and stamping the BC as a way to gain access to a fund account in the LEGAL NAME. From what I read, this method is then used on any bill, charging instrument, etc. while referencing the AFV'd BC to pay or discharge from that pseudo account. I don't buy that at all and I do not employ any part of that method whatsoever.

    The doc is a slight variance of the original "Coupon Offer" document which has been circulating around for awhile. If you read it through, it is a basic instruction to the account owner as to how to settle their own account internally. The statutes cited are specifically for their own benefit only as a friendly reminder of the laws that bind them. Also, as another gesture of good faith, the coupon provided by them is included and returned as an instrument of payment which they MUST recognize and accept according to the laws of their realm of operation and commerce. This coupon is essentially as valid a form of payment as is an envelope full of FRNs acording to thier own law. I kindly provided that law for them to read, for their own benefit only, to make it easier for them to settle the matter quickly on their books.

    It is actually a very simple document when you extract all the statutes, codes and definitions. I do not want or gain any benefit from their "laws"; I provide it to them only as a friendly reminder and as a gesture of good faith from the standing and character of a competent living soul who chooses to be a non-jurisdictional peaceful inhabitant on the land who can offer assistance to others when needed. This is from the position of suae potestate esse, sui juris, jure divino.

  5. #15
    Senior Member motla68's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Within the confines of my own skin.
    Posts
    752
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    I don't subscribe at all to the "AFV dogma" as it relates to what I have read about utilizing and stamping the BC as a way to gain access to a fund account in the LEGAL NAME. From what I read, this method is then used on any bill, charging instrument, etc. while referencing the AFV'd BC to pay or discharge from that pseudo account. I don't buy that at all and I do not employ any part of that method whatsoever.

    The doc is a slight variance of the original "Coupon Offer" document which has been circulating around for awhile. If you read it through, it is a basic instruction to the account owner as to how to settle their own account internally. The statutes cited are specifically for their own benefit only as a friendly reminder of the laws that bind them. Also, as another gesture of good faith, the coupon provided by them is included and returned as an instrument of payment which they MUST recognize and accept according to the laws of their realm of operation and commerce. This coupon is essentially as valid a form of payment as is an envelope full of FRNs acording to thier own law. I kindly provided that law for them to read, for their own benefit only, to make it easier for them to settle the matter quickly on their books.

    It is actually a very simple document when you extract all the statutes, codes and definitions. I do not want or gain any benefit from their "laws"; I provide it to them only as a friendly reminder and as a gesture of good faith from the standing and character of a competent living soul who chooses to be a non-jurisdictional peaceful inhabitant on the land who can offer assistance to others when needed. This is from the position of suae potestate esse, sui juris, jure divino.
    Good thoughts to brew on, thank you.

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    The doc is a slight variance of the original "Coupon Offer" document which has been circulating around for awhile. If you read it through, it is a basic instruction to the account owner as to how to settle their own account internally. The statutes cited are specifically for their own benefit only as a friendly reminder of the laws that bind them. Also, as another gesture of good faith, the coupon provided by them is included and returned as an instrument of payment which they MUST recognize and accept according to the laws of their realm of operation and commerce. This coupon is essentially as valid a form of payment as is an envelope full of FRNs acording to thier own law. I kindly provided that law for them to read, for their own benefit only, to make it easier for them to settle the matter quickly on their books.

    It is actually a very simple document when you extract all the statutes, codes and definitions. I do not want or gain any benefit from their "laws"; I provide it to them only as a friendly reminder and as a gesture of good faith from the standing and character of a competent living soul who chooses to be a non-jurisdictional peaceful inhabitant on the land who can offer assistance to others when needed.
    Thanks for the amended link, Anthony. It worked.

    As I suspected, the document you provided is essentially the same response I sent to the county treasurer where I live, virtually word for word, although in a slightly different form. When I have more time available, I will return to document what I did.

    About two weeks after having sent my response to the county treasurer regarding the property tax statement he sent, I received a correspondence from the County Attorney's office which was short and basically not very substantive in content (meaning that it didn't address any of the legal issues at stake). It did seem to be cordial, however.

    The only passage in which he seemed to address anyone's concerns was encapsulated in the following brief statement: "...having been advised by the Anywhere County Treasurer that the property taxes on the above parcel have not been paid, I wanted to remind you that the taxes will be delinquent if not paid in full by January 3, 2011. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions regarding this matter."

    Needless to say, I have no questions regarding this matter as the correspondences I sent to the county treasurer have outlined the law quite clearly, as well as any consequences he will encounter should he decide not to take advantage of the offered presentment.

    I have not heard back from either one of these two government officials since that time.

    As I say, when I have time, I will return to this thread to document the action I took.

    Be well everyone, and fight the good fight.

  7. #17
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by KnowLaw View Post
    Thanks for the amended link, Anthony. It worked.

    As I suspected, the document you provided is essentially the same response I sent to the county treasurer where I live, virtually word for word, although in a slightly different form. When I have more time available, I will return to document what I did.

    About two weeks after having sent my response to the county treasurer regarding the property tax statement he sent, I received a correspondence from the County Attorney's office which was short and basically not very substantive in content (meaning that it didn't address any of the legal issues at stake). It did seem to be cordial, however.

    The only passage in which he seemed to address anyone's concerns was encapsulated in the following brief statement: "...having been advised by the Anywhere County Treasurer that the property taxes on the above parcel have not been paid, I wanted to remind you that the taxes will be delinquent if not paid in full by January 3, 2011. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions regarding this matter."

    Needless to say, I have no questions regarding this matter as the correspondences I sent to the county treasurer have outlined the law quite clearly, as well as any consequences he will encounter should he decide not to take advantage of the offered presentment.

    I have not heard back from either one of these two government officials since that time.

    As I say, when I have time, I will return to this thread to document the action I took.

    Be well everyone, and fight the good fight.
    That would be most appreciated; the more experiences and trials at a certain method that we can be exposed to may assist in manifesting a successful outcome. I view the "response" by the county treasurer to be yet another presentment; an offer to accept his conclusions which are obviously imposing in nature and not even according to their own laws and rules. A proper record of R4C of that "response" is also in order so as to avert any assertion that you "understand" or accept it.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    I view the "response" by the county treasurer to be yet another presentment; an offer to accept his conclusions which are obviously imposing in nature and not even according to their own laws and rules.
    I haven't had any contact with the county treasurer, only the county attorney's office, which is seeming to see if it can lure me into some kind of discussion or controversy. Since I'm in the private realm, I don't view his response as anything more than a weak attempt at "scare tactics." He's at a disadvantage because he doesn't know who he is dealing with, whereas I know the ammunition he has in his arsenal (which is limited in this case).

    I have made my tender of payment (together with notarized and recorded a letter of credit) and remain in a position of honor. There is no controversy, just as you stated in your Coupon Authorization.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    A proper record of R4C of that "response" is also in order so as to avert any assertion that you "understand" or accept it.
    I don't see anything on the table to refuse for cause. Perhaps you are reading something into his response that is not there?

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    Thanks, David. First time uploading to Google docs. I tried uploading the file directly but I got a message that the file was to big for the "file type". It is only 49K and the limit is 19K. Maybe we can change that; the Word doc is only 5 pages of text.

    Anyway, try this out; I changed the share settings to "people with a link can view without signing in". If that doesn't work, I will change it to full public sharing.

    Payment Coupon Authorization
    That setting will work well for most people. However Google is so dominant a search engine there will be a lot of people who have registered for a free gmail.com email address and have forgotten. Those are the class who will not be able to access your docs on that setting AJ. If they do not remember their password, they will be called upon to login to see the document. I am using Public to anybody on the Web.

    You have done an excellent job of refining the Coupon Redemption document. Assuming you worked on it. Which is like with me; people think that is my work but I heard the suitor who hired me got it from Rick ERTYL. I heard Rick wrote up the first draft and apparently, not to criticize, his word processing skills were just plain poor. Assuming Rick has a mastery of spoken English, he may be a high-school dropout. I am not saying that to be insulting - it is just that the suitor needed to hire me; or anybody with grammar and word processing skills just to finish the Coupon Redemption technique on paper. It is Rick's intellectual property as I understand it.

    It would be a masterpiece in its original form if there were in fact funds setting in the mythical Treasury Direct or STRAWMAN SSN accounts based in HJR-192 or whatever. It would be terrific if there were because you could literally pay any bill simply by referring the bill collector to the Treasury like that. Go get your money over at my back-room account with the Treasury!

    There is a consistent money-mechanism related to the creation of credit though, that can arise from this coupon redemption method though. Setoff. The bill collector will consistently acknowledge that the debt has been setoff to zero - that the account has been zeroed out.

    This setoff must be combined with the techniques of being a suitor, proper record-forming and knowledge of money, responsibility and proper timely response, or the bills continue and your credit rating will be affected, and possibly liens may arise affecting your property. In other words, the zeroing of your account is fleeting. It is a requirement of law that you get that setoff in writing in the process, it would seem. I recall when playing with the technique, the attorneys for the debt collectors would play several different games; the most common one was to zero the account for "Ten Days" awaiting your response. This way Refusal for Cause could be interpreted that you were refusing Setoff, not that they would begin billing again in ten days...

    One suitor was going to develop the document into a business plan and so we set him up for a firmly documented setoff for his Example. But he had some health troubles that caused him to drive to the wrong city for filing, a misjudgment caused by pain and at a timing in his crisis that he never got the plan back on its feet. He is better now though.

    The suitor should be able to spot the Setoff and get that into an evidence repository, forming the Record around it. Then one can use it to keep liens from developing or being enforced. One can use the Setoff to clean up the credit report but most take my addition (the last paragraph added to Rick's work) seriously. If you say what you say on the Coupon Redemption remittance, then you can no longer get credit under the influence of fraud anyway. If you sign for credit, even endorsement on the back of your paycheck you go in eyes wide open. Your confession about understanding to be the secured party to any credit is now on paper! In other words, this process changes your credit life permanently.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 03-21-11 at 02:54 PM.

  10. #20
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    That setting will work well for most people. However Google is so dominant a search engine there will be a lot of people who have registered for a free gmail.com email address and have forgotten. Those are the class who will not be able to access your docs on that setting AJ. If they do not remember their password, they will be called upon to login to see the document. I am using Public to anybody on the Web.

    You have done an excellent job of refining the Coupon Redemption document. Assuming you worked on it. Which is like with me; people think that is my work but I heard the suitor who hired me got it from Rick ERTYL. I heard Rick wrote up the first draft and apparently, not to criticize, his word processing skills were just plain poor. Assuming Rick has a mastery of spoken English, he may be a high-school dropout. I am not saying that to be insulting - it is just that the suitor needed to hire me; or anybody with grammar and word processing skills just to finish the Coupon Redemption technique on paper. It is Rick's intellectual property as I understand it.

    It would be a masterpiece in its original form if there were in fact funds setting in the mythical Treasury Direct or STRAWMAN SSN accounts based in HJR-192 or whatever. It would be terrific if there were because you could literally pay any bill simply by referring the bill collector to the Treasury like that. Go get your money over at my back-room account with the Treasury!

    There is a consistent money-mechanism related to the creation of credit though, that can arise from this coupon redemption method though. Setoff. The bill collector will consistently acknowledge that the debt has been setoff to zero - that the account has been zeroed out.

    This setoff must be combined with the techniques of being a suitor, proper record-forming and knowledge of money, responsibility and proper timely response, or the bills continue and your credit rating will be affected, and possibly liens may arise affecting your property. In other words, the zeroing of your account is fleeting. It is a requirement of law that you get that setoff in writing in the process, it would seem. I recall when playing with the technique, the attorneys for the debt collectors would play several different games; the most common one was to zero the account for "Ten Days" awaiting your response. This way Refusal for Cause could be interpreted that you were refusing Setoff, not that they would begin billing again in ten days...

    One suitor was going to develop the document into a business plan and so we set him up for a firmly documented setoff for his Example. But he had some health troubles that caused him to drive to the wrong city for filing, a misjudgment caused by pain and at a timing in his crisis that he never got the plan back on its feet. He is better now though.

    The suitor should be able to spot the Setoff and get that into an evidence repository, forming the Record around it. Then one can use it to keep liens from developing or being enforced. One can use the Setoff to clean up the credit report but most take my addition (the last paragraph added to Rick's work) seriously. If you say what you say on the Coupon Redemption remittance, then you can no longer get credit under the influence of fraud anyway. If you sign for credit, even endorsement on the back of your paycheck you go in eyes wide open. Your confession about understanding to be the secured party to any credit is now on paper! In other words, this process changes your credit life permanently.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.
    That's right, no NEW signature loans or credit cards should be applied for after such a declaration is made. I have decided to no longer pursue any NEW agreements or contracts of that sort.

    The point is that the creation and the issuance of a coupon by the entity in question is for the purposes of non-disclosed double enrichment; they actually may get paid twice: by your check and by the filled out coupon which is decribed IN THEIR OWN LAW as being an obligation of the United States just like a stack of FRNs. Since they generated this instrument, they must have knowledge of its nature and utilization. Handing in a stack of FRNs is still not actually PAYING the debt until the United States makes good on that paper; it is a United States' obligation to fulfill that promise to PAY. In the meantime debts are discharged with the hope that God will restore the balances (In God We Trust) and the United States will satisfy its responsibility in the future.

    According to their own law, a coupon is no different than an FRN. If it was generated by an entity with authority to do so, then that entity is the obligatory party which must accept it for what it is (legal tender of payment) and the United States is the debtor with the obligation to make good on it. I just refuse to offer my substance behind their scheme and instruct them to utilize their instrument to settle their account; an account I no longer lend my energy to, now that I have become aware of the truth.

Posting Permissions

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