Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: "Lawful Money" definition? attn:David

  1. #1

    "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

  2. #2
    stoneFree
    Guest
    What happens if we disobey
    ?
    Last edited by stoneFree; 01-21-15 at 05:22 PM.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by stoneFree View Post
    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.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by george View Post
    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.

    Name:  401cWb.jpg
Views: 510
Size:  191.4 KB

    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.

    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.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by David Merrill; 01-21-15 at 10:26 PM.

  5. #5
    hi David,

    hmmm... OK (sigh)

    thought the timing was better this time.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by george View Post
    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.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    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.)

    Name:  Warren_Buffet_US_citizen.png
Views: 489
Size:  168.0 KB
    Last edited by allodial; 01-22-15 at 03:13 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    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:

    "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

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post
    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.)

    Name:  Warren_Buffet_US_citizen.png
Views: 489
Size:  168.0 KB

    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.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by george View Post
    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'.

    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).

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

    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
    Last edited by allodial; 01-22-15 at 05:37 AM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

Posting Permissions

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