Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 136

Thread: Remedy - lawful money solution

  1. #21
    I would like to thank itsmymoney, Michael Joseph, ag maniac, JohnnyCash, doug555, David Merrill, and allodial for the information and support that you have provided.
    Last edited by NONOFED; 02-17-15 at 09:25 PM.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by NONOFED View Post
    Im under the impression that the pyramid has to do with the NWO which is the FED is associated with.
    Look carefully at the seal to the left. I see Genesis Chapter 1. There were five foolish and five wise virgins - / +.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by NONOFED View Post
    Im under the impression that the pyramid has to do with the NWO which is the FED is associated with.
    As for "New" World Order...nothing new about ziggurats or step pyramids.
    Last edited by allodial; 02-17-15 at 05:11 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.

  4. #24

  5. #25
    ----------
    Last edited by NONOFED; 02-18-15 at 03:31 PM.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by NONOFED View Post
    For clarification, please respond.

    Can someone take a check to its bank of issue and actually get coins?

    For instance, a $1000 check be redeemed in coin. Are they obligated to pay it in coin if that is what is demanded?
    After further research there seems to be no restrictions on acquiring large quantities of coin. Also I cashed check at drawers bank, and was paid in coin. Using coin in daily purchases now. Am converting all FRN to coin.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    in an intended free America
    Posts
    100
    NONOFED,

    Why did you delete your #25 post today at 9:31 am? If anyone does not remember, NONOFED basically stated (NONOFED, correct me if I'm wrong) that if FRN's are also considered "lawful money", then how does the IRS/Fed know that we are demanding NON-Federal-Reserve "lawful money"? In other words, demanding our pay be redeemed by U.S. Treasury's funds outside any private credit being extended by the Fed either to the Treasury or to the suitors making the demand.

    Here is an interesting notation about lawful money from the FRS website. Most of us know that the true definition of "lawful money" means the U.S Note/coinage variety, i.e. NON-FRN's. This website appears to stretch the true definition of "lawful money", and other than Milam, I don't know what other court cases state that FRN's are "lawful money" as such (meaning, NOT the true definition that we the suitors know it to be)... http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm

    My point is: Why are 'we' not being more explicit in our demand? For example, perhaps something like the following...

    "Lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions explicitly with the U.S. Treasury, per 12 USC 411 and 95a(2)". Or the simpler...
    "Demand in lawful money explicitly with the U.S. Treasury per 12 USC 411".

    D555 (and others) have stated that we should not leave anything to chance, especially with these 'people'. So I'm curious why our current demand methods are not more explicit as to NOT wanting anything to do with the so-called "lawful money" of the Fed. My original demand letter to the Treasury back in 2013 states as such, the excerpt here...

    "This demand is made for the express purpose of exercising my remedy under the law and to rebut the false and presumptive notion that I voluntarily endorse the private credit of the Federal Reserve. I expressly do not endorse private Federal Reserve credit in any form."

    Perhaps I'm missing something here. I'm just surprised that we are not a little more emphatic in our novations.
    Last edited by itsmymoney; 02-19-15 at 12:14 AM.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    The cestui que use is the IRS acting as agent for those who created the Use. The CQT is you acting as Trustee. You received the estate as Grantee and now the IRS wants a return which is basically an accounting of the Estate. Fair enough.

    Now the presumption is that you were engaged in false balances. And it is always the duty of the trustee to prove his/her innocence. Don't make this too difficult with the crap about persons and who you are and all this other stuff. Keep it simple.

    Now they are presuming that you were about credit systems understanding by signature endorsement the FRS. Which is to say a 3rd party to the Constitution by appointment. Since you received the benefit of the estate you have the obligation to file a return if a good faith request is made upon you or if you have a liability.

    But is is ALWAYS presumed you have the liability because 99.999999999 percent of folks use false balances - out of the left side of the boat. Therefore you must prove your innocence. This is easily done by ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS. And your Admin Remedy is achieved by making a written demand on the back of your check - on the signature card - and on any commercial instrument touched. Copies of this record are kept to support your obligations to the CQU.

    One will say I AIN'T GOT NO OBLIGATION - wrong friend - you as Trustee are assumed to be guilty. And you will go to jail if you don't rebut that assumption. It does not matter one hill of beans what is given to you or me. I went to a closing one time where I was trustee and we were selling an easement to a local government. The county attorney upon looking at our deed asked concerning 12USC411 - he said we can't pay you cash - I just laughed realizing that he knew what we were up to - I said we have fulfilled the law [ever hear that one in church] by making our demand - what you give us is of little concern. We will slap a demand on that too.

    Chew on this bone until you are ready but it really is not that difficult. In fact it is too easy. So easy that most if not all just cannot and will not believe. So what is new under the sun? Nothing.

    For you Scripture students who realize what you are looking at:

    Heb_10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


    FRN's can't extinguish a debt. Consider and perhaps you will see why it is so important to fish out of the Right side of the boat.


    Regards,
    MJ

    P.S. The solution is between your ears with knowledge and understanding not in some magical words that you utter and place on a document. Know Thyself and what Thou doest and the rest will fall into place. Else you might stand before a Judge he ask "Woman who gave thee those words?" Can you answer to what is lawful to use and what is lawful money? If not, you had best sit on the sideline a bit longer.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by itsmymoney View Post
    NONOFED,

    Why did you delete your #25 post today at 9:31 am? If anyone does not remember, NONOFED basically stated (NONOFED, correct me if I'm wrong) that if FRN's are also considered "lawful money", then how does the IRS/Fed know that we are demanding NON-Federal-Reserve "lawful money"? In other words, demanding our pay be redeemed by U.S. Treasury's funds outside any private credit being extended by the Fed either to the Treasury or to the suitors making the demand.

    Here is an interesting notation about lawful money from the FRS website. Most of us know that the true definition of "lawful money" means the U.S Note/coinage variety, i.e. NON-FRN's. This website appears to stretch the true definition of "lawful money", and other than Milam, I don't know what other court cases state that FRN's are "lawful money" as such (meaning, NOT the true definition that we the suitors know it to be)... http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/money_15197.htm

    My point is: Why are 'we' not being more explicit in our demand? For example, perhaps something like the following...

    "Lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions explicitly with the U.S. Treasury, per 12 USC 411 and 95a(2)". Or the simpler...
    "Demand in lawful money explicitly with the U.S. Treasury per 12 USC 411".

    D555 (and others) have stated that we should not leave anything to chance, especially with these 'people'. So I'm curious why our current demand methods are not more explicit as to NOT wanting anything to do with the so-called "lawful money" of the Fed. My original demand letter to the Treasury back in 2013 states as such, the excerpt here...

    "This demand is made for the express purpose of exercising my remedy under the law and to rebut the false and presumptive notion that I voluntarily endorse the private credit of the Federal Reserve. I expressly do not endorse private Federal Reserve credit in any form."

    Perhaps I'm missing something here. I'm just surprised that we are not a little more emphatic in our novations.
    I removed post because there wasn't a response to my questions and figured that I had most information I needed to proceed. I concluded that FRNs are FRNs regardless as there is no distinction between it, its printed by the FED, its source issuing authority is corrupt, is already in circulation, you cant change its nature, the deed is done. I want nothing to do with FRNs. Coin is considered lawful money, and the process i'm using to redeem is taking all cash and converting it to coin. In so doing I am redeeming for non-debt currency as coin, it has no association with the FED and is of the US Treasury. The banks can keep their FRN notes and I only do business in coin. Thus putting coin in circulation, creating a "demand", and not supporting FRN currency period. The FED has to purchase coin at face value from the treasury and is obligated to put it into circulation. Thus generating revenue for US Treasury and reversing debt incurred from the FED.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    The cestui que use is the IRS acting as agent for those who created the Use. The CQT is you acting as Trustee. You received the estate as Grantee and now the IRS wants a return which is basically an accounting of the Estate. Fair enough. Keep it simple. .
    Last edited by Chex; 02-19-15 at 02:41 PM.
    "And if I could I surely would Stand on the rock that Moses stood"

Posting Permissions

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