Banishment on Motla68 Lifted.

[David Merrill]

The reasoning being that my reason for banishing Motla68 has been explained clearly several times. Motla68's explanation of the functioning verbiage on the Presentment, when he finally explained it, excluded the remedy that this Website, in my opinion is founded on.

However, Motla68 said many interesting things and brought a lot of stimulating conversation about canon law and 1861 vestigial martial law, so if he will have us, great. I do not expect things to be pleasant with the dynamic already between us but I do expect the reading to be more edifying and entertaining around here than without him.


With that said...

[motla68]

Hello everyone, I was just informed today that the banned was lifted. I missed it in my busy schedule somehow. I would like to thank all of you who supported this decision, quite pleasing to hear that the seeds I planted before had such great impact in conversation here. Hope you all can accept my apologies if I have offended anyone in here personally. A couple of you did have some very intelligent thought put into your posts.

I hope you all can understand that my reappearance here for many reasons will not be in representation of Coresource Solution or any success as a group so please do not throw back in my face anything posted in the past, if you want to know more about this group then contact me privately at your own free will. With that my replies will just be to give of pure knowledge and experience to share, I am not here to teach anyone, you must accept full liability for what is received, if you learn something it is your fault, if you do not learn something it is still your own fault, please keep criticism at bay and I will do the same. Ask a question or make comment on that thread or post directly, not for some post on another thread somewhere else, stay focused.
Also on my part will try to respect the rules of brain trust here and give further explanation and the "show me" style of posting.

Have a blessed day and thanks again.

[Michael Joseph]

welcome back. Now get to work!

[motla68]

welcome back. Now get to work!

yes sir, lol

[Treefarmer]

Good, I'm glad we've been able to come to a mature solution here.
I believe we can all get along fine.

I look forward to intelligent discussions.

Blessings

[David Merrill]

I am glad you have come back Motla68. While I found your teasing about the verbiage on the presentment infuriating I can live with that. It was when you left off the - or exchanged for [lawful money] - that I felt you were being harmful to the teaching of remedy written into the Fed Act and banished you.

I have yet to be convinced that the martial law and canon law processes have effect when they are applied with the financial remedy. That is why I reacted the way I did when you excluded §16 of the Fed Act (Title 12 U.S.C. §411). This thread is probably as good a place as any to explain that in more detail.

The Emergency was lifted in 1976. However on the second page we find stipulations restricting that lifting. The stipulation provides that the President or Secretary can declare a Bankers' Holiday should people threaten the Fed by redeeming lawful money again - just like the 1913 20-year Charter was threatening the Fed in 1933. Look closely at Title 12 U.S.C. §§95a and 95b. That pre-approved power given the President and Secretary is the manifestation of the 1861 martial law, now martial rule but present only in banking and over citizens of the US in contract with the Fed through endorsement; effectively people as Fed banks.

The only scientific method to prove canon law - robin egg-blue paper wrappers and the application of peaceful envoy, removing yourself from the battlefield so to speak by citing Lieber Code are effective is to avoid using the more applicable remedy - found in current law. As long as you use both, then I say it is the modern remedy found in current law at play.

[motla68]

The past is history and I come back trying to start back with a clean slate here, bringing all this up sure does not make that easy.
There was a couple times where things stopped working for some reason, so we searched for a new strategy to get the ball rolling again and it did, so we changed some things, that is all I am going to say about that.

I am not going to Teach, make claims of what made it work or try to prove anything any more, my theory is going to remain my private business. All am going to do is Show what was done and how we did it, from there you can make your own interpretations and conclusions, what one learns or does not learned, what is followed up on with due diligence or not is in the eye of the beholder. I find it fruitless to try and break through some peoples EGO when they have already made up their own mind of how something played out.

There has been some new developments lately that I heard of where the only thing put on the presentment was the name type written in capital letters was put on the presentment followed by a colon and then just put " Property of the State". This was allegedly done on hospital bills, I will spare any details until we can get a sanitized version of the presentment and results.
Also I am waiting on replies my self from a couple state registrars of some direct questions pertaining to the name held in trust and the usufructuary that appears to be in place.

[David Merrill]

The past is history and I come back trying to start back with a clean slate here, bringing all this up sure does not make that easy.
There was a couple times where things stopped working for some reason, so we searched for a new strategy to get the ball rolling again and it did, so we changed some things, that is all I am going to say about that.

I am not going to Teach, make claims of what made it work or try to prove anything any more, my theory is going to remain my private business. All am going to do is Show what was done and how we did it, from there you can make your own interpretations and conclusions, what one learns or does not learned, what is followed up on with due diligence or not is in the eye of the beholder. I find it fruitless to try and break through some peoples EGO when they have already made up their own mind of how something played out.

There has been some new developments lately that I heard of where the only thing put on the presentment was the name type written in capital letters was put on the presentment followed by a colon and then just put " Property of the State". This was allegedly done on hospital bills, I will spare any details until we can get a sanitized version of the presentment and results.
Also I am waiting on replies my self from a couple state registrars of some direct questions pertaining to the name held in trust and the usufructuary that appears to be in place.

Yes. My banishing you was a painful decision to make. I have moved this over to your thread - http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1987

As Treefarmer pointed out - my banishing you was shameful on the face of this new website. The Quatlosers took the expected advantage of it too - to make me sound like a tyrant. Like I have said above, it is both edifying and entertaining to have you back. I am certain I will get to the bottom of your fixation that the effective remedy is pre-1913, as you indicate in the above quoted post. My journal to getting there will in itself be edifying; which of course, upon the Thank You posts, bolsters my ego even more!



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. You all should be aware that while I enjoy being thanked - doing it on a PM is mildly annoying as if I want to share it, removing your name, that just makes me look even more narcissistic. Please; if you want to thank me, do it in front of everybody. Otherwise I honestly don't need the ego boost.

[Mark Christopher]

Guten Morgen mein Fuhrer,
Danke schon David, sorry had to do it seeing the tyrant comment! (BTW David your genuine commitment to the material and subject shows through and I believe no shame has been brought...it is all a process) We all make mistakes that is one of the great things of being human. But it appears we came out of it being bettter for it. The balance is restored.

Welcome back Motla68, its a beautiful new day.
Be Well
Mark

[David Merrill]

I am still having trouble accepting it as a mistake. Hopefully Motla68 is confident enough to keep posting even with my rigorous evaluations of his attachments. That is very edifying for me anyway.

If he cannot handle my evaluation then I accept that as confirmation I am correct. I hope that people are reading my posts carefully enough to understand my perspective in light of the namesake of the Website - that the 1913 Congress had to write remedy in to the Fed Act because of the 'Saving to Suitors' Clause of 1789.