If 12 USC 411 "Demanding Lawful Money" is effectively-connected to the "good faith" clause in 12 USC 95a(2) [excerpted below] and the "liability" clause in 50 USC App 7(e) [excerpted below] granting IMMUNITY from liability in any court, then what is there to worry about?
And isn't said 12 USC 411 LAWFUL MONEY truly effectively-connected to 50 USC App 7(e), the Trading with the Enemy Act, and to its corresponding statute 12 USC 95a(2), BECAUSE ONLY LAWFUL MONEY (not an IOU FRN) can effect the true asset-based PAYMENT that is needed for a "full acquittance and discharge"?
See Lawful Money Demands - IMMUNITY & DUTY (copied from http://iuvdeposit.blogspot.com)