Check Non-Endorsement Verbiage

[ag maniac]

Stephen -- it has been said many times here......REMEDY is between your ears

So knowing to your very core that what you are doing is right & true, "sticking to your guns" [in a defense] would be a no-brainer.

[Stephen]

Stephen -- it has been said many times here......REMEDY is between your ears

So knowing to your very core that what you are doing is right & true, "sticking to your guns" [in a defense] would be a no-brainer.

There are countless Patriots who thought they had found remedy in law, stuck to their guns, and lost regardless of how legally correct their case actually was. Examples are Lindsey Springer, Sherry Peel Jackson, Joseph Bannister, William J Benson, etc. Many of them went to jail. Tom Cryer was one of the outlier exceptions, and he won not on proving his position on tax law, but by proving lack of criminal intent.

It does not matter what written law says. We have seen it does not matter in non tax related court decisions such as those that have upheld Eminent Domain abuse (Kelo), and upheld tainted Asset Forfeiture before a conviction (the Fourth and Fifth Amendments do not make any exceptions regarding assets made tainted by suspicion or mere accusation). All that really matters is operating law.

And so I ask again: Have any of these non-endorsement verbiages prevailed in operating law? I want to avoid finding out it won't by ending up in jail, or by being forced into an expensive tax penalty deal that will impoverish me for the rest of my life.

[Michael Joseph]

There are countless Patriots who thought they had found remedy in law, stuck to their guns, and lost regardless of how legally correct their case actually was. Examples are Lindsey Springer, Sherry Peel Jackson, Joseph Bannister, William J Benson, etc. Many of them went to jail. Tom Cryer was one of the outlier exceptions, and he won not on proving his position on tax law, but by proving lack of criminal intent.

It does not matter what written law says. We have seen it does not matter in non tax related court decisions such as those that have upheld Eminent Domain abuse (Kelo), and upheld tainted Asset Forfeiture before a conviction (the Fourth and Fifth Amendments do not make any exceptions regarding assets made tainted by suspicion or mere accusation). All that really matters is operating law.

And so I ask again: Have any of these non-endorsement verbiages prevailed in operating law? I want to avoid finding out it won't by ending up in jail, or by being forced into an expensive tax penalty deal that will impoverish me for the rest of my life.

If one doesn't know his/herself and one seeks justification from another, then that one had best not seek any remedy to their current condition. Thusly, that one will receive unto himself exactly what he believes. That is Divine Law. And no law of man will ever change the Divine Law. Essentially this one does not comprehend the causes which manifest the current effect. One cannot change the effects immediately for that would break Divine Law. One must first put into action causes which will manifest a different effect. Thusly the status quo cannot be changed immediately.

Thou shalt have no other Gods before Me.

A double minded man is unstable in all of his ways. Thusly if one seeks justification and judgment from a court, then that one submits to that Court. Meaning that one has placed his/her trust in a system. As such, generally speaking if one places a trust in another one should obey. That too is Divine Law.

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey;...

Therefore one must first define REMEDY. Remedy from what exactly? How can one define remedy if one does not understand the causes which brought the effects that one seeks remedy. If one has no understanding of the Law Boundary which closes the effects, then one is unable to obtain remedy. Why? Because one is relying upon a Survey which one lacks knowledge.

And as always the answer keeps coming back over and over again to: Remedy truly is just from one's self. For if I truly believed then I would do that which was necessary. And that which is necessary is to frame remedy in context so that a plan might issue from my MIND. Then my Will and my Thought would align in Love as I move in Faith upon my Honor seeking the good for Me and other men and women of Honor. Which is to say I have given my Word - so be it done.

I hope you find that which you seek. Ultimately that which your mind dwells upon will manifest.

Best Regards,
MJ