Page 15 of 17 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 168

Thread: Resistance and Refusal by Banks

  1. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post
    OK, here are my thoughts...

    Let's try this PARADIGM shift:

    The FRONT of a check is PUBLIC (people). We can place our demand there and it is being honored by the IRS as a lawful reduction. Isn't this all we need?

    The BACK of a check is PRIVATE (Federal Reserve). In order for their private system to work,

    ALL TRANSACTIONS are initially presumed to be private credit by their system. The is the "default" currency of their system.

    However, this PRESUMPTION can be rebutted (by lawful money demands), and thereby make all of these transactions LAWFUL MONEY, per 12 USC 411.

    NOTICE that 12 USC 411, by its very wording ("they shall be redeemed"), implies that private credit is initially presumed, and therefore needs "redeeming", but only "on demand". If the FRN's were NOT the default currency, then 12 USC 411 would not have been needed.

    I believe this choice of which currency is to be used stems from Mt 22.21, and is DIRECTLY RELATED to TAXES.

    There are two images on the FRNs. The LEFT side is Caesar's (Fed Reserve seal); the RIGHT side is God's (The Dept of Treasury seal). Look at the One Dollar Bill. Also notice the 2 different signatures.

    I also believe that once this Mt 22.21 "red line" is crossed (by LM demand reductions no longer being honored by IRS on 1040), then involuntary servitude/slavery begins through compelled use of liability instruments, which can never truly "pay"/discharge obligations.

    We have not yet reached that point... on a significant scale...

    But when it does begin, then it will set in motion a prophesied chain of events that lead to the fulfillment of the archetype set by our ancient Israelite ancestors, with us formally petitioning (Ex 3:7-9, 16-17) our Creator for deliverance from FINANCIAL ECONOMIC SLAVERY, and those petitions, if we indeed wake up enough of His People to realize that this archetype is for US TODAY, will be answered by the Creator with a miraculous deliverance, as planned for and revealed by the Creator's Second Annual Holyday.

    So until that day comes, I believe we need to heed the Messiah's warning in Mt 13:30 to let both the tares and wheat grow together, "until the Harvest" (the Spring Harvest typified by Holyday 3 - the Feast of Firstfruits - Pentecost).

    This means, I believe, in practical terms regarding how we make lawful money demands, to NOT TRESPASS onto the BACK/PRIVATE SIDE of a check, or LEFT SIDE of a FRN. Let them monetize the checks, by keeping restrictive endorsements off of the back of a check. Let them continue to "grow" their debt by presuming it to be the default currency. God tells us the keep our hands off their system.


    But, likewise, they must also let us "grow" in the use of lawful money, by letting us make our demand for same on the FRONT/PUBLIC/PEOPLE side of a check, and redeeming FRNs, and letting us claim tax reductions for doing so, because that money is God's!

    Hope this make sense... It has been a long day, and I am getting pretty tired...

    Peace.
    This deserves some thought. Above you said:

    It does NOT say one only needs to do it ONCE. In fact ever since 9/15/2011, I have handwritten my exact specific declaration on the FACE of every check and deposit slip I issue.... just to make it CLEAR by a PREPONDERENCE of substantive evidence under their FRE Exception to Hearsay Rule 803(6)(B) that from that date onward "lawful money and full discharge is demanded for all transactions 12 USC 411, 95a(2)" applies to ALL transactions even if it is missing thereafter on transactions like direct deposits, debit/credit cards, EFTs, etc, where it is hard to make a record of one's demand.
    So as I understand it, you are rethinking marking the backside of a paycheck with your lawful money demand. Fine. I am always looking for new perspectives as long as they are based in valid information.

    Your perspective on the new post - based in the Bible smacks of Futurism. Almost all Christians, and I have a good sampling here in Colorado Springs, are Futurists. So I have difficulty disqualifying it by any popular posture. I am however more prone to the Kingdom of Heaven being modeled after the kingdom of King David in biblical context.

    However I am happy to assert that the Kingdom of Heaven is the sensation you receive whenever you radiate it - the Kingdom of Heaven.

    Therefore I am prone to believe that God is working His plan through me as I am in the present moment. He is already answering my petitions for justice against elastic currency (abomination Proverb 11:1) by pointing me to the remedy and providing me a ministry - a voice - like here, the brain trust and soon even better more amplified lesson plans.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.


    P.S. I think the front side of the check is private to the issuer. For example you can strike through the Pay to the Order of : _______________ on your own checks that you issue but not on a check written to you.
    Last edited by David Merrill; 12-19-13 at 04:49 PM.

  2. #142
    If you deem "Futurism" to mean that the fullness of the Kingdom of Heaven is not yet completely and entirely manifest in this present consciousness and that there is more to come, then call me a "Futurist".

    However, do not lump me in with the "Rapture" crowd or those who see no manifestation of the Kingdom of Heaven in this present consciousness. I believe the majority of "Christians" you label as "Futurists" fall into that 'no manifestation' category.

    You must see that there is a significant difference there and that the term "Futurism" should not be used as a broad brush to paint these two together.

  3. #143
    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    This deserves some thought. Above you said:



    So as I understand it, you are rethinking marking the backside of a paycheck with your lawful money demand. Fine. I am always looking for new perspectives as long as they are based in valid information.

    Your perspective on the new post - based in the Bible smacks of Futurism. Almost all Christians, and I have a good sampling here in Colorado Springs, are Futurists. So I have difficulty disqualifying it by any popular posture. I am however more prone to the Kingdom of Heaven being modeled after the kingdom of King David in biblical context.

    However I am happy to assert that the Kingdom of Heaven is the sensation you receive whenever you radiate it - the Kingdom of Heaven.

    Therefore I am prone to believe that God is working His plan through me as I am in the present moment. He is already answering my petitions for justice against elastic currency (abomination Proverb 11:1) by pointing me to the remedy and providing me a ministry - a voice - like here, the brain trust and soon even better more amplified lesson plans.



    Regards,

    David Merrill.


    P.S. I think the front side of the check is private to the issuer. For example you can strike through the Pay to the Order of : _______________ on your own checks that you issue but not on a check written to you.
    Sorry for any confusion about this... But, NO, I am not re-thinking how I demand lawful money for all transactions. I have always just made said demands only on the FACE/FRONT side of the checks and deposit slips that I issue.

    Nothing else has changed. And it is working for me... BUT I have also made declarations of my status in the local county record, so that may also support this, for example, Declaration of Proof of Life, Declaration of Beneficiary, Solemn Act & Deed, etc.

    Hope this clears it up...

    BTW, I am NOT a "Futurist"... In fact, I believe this world's focus on the future "Millennial Kingdom" (starting with the 4th Holyday) is a MAJOR MISTAKE today, even as it was in Christ's day. It blinded His People to what was happening THEN, (the fulfillment of the 1st Holyday - Passover), just as much as it blinding His People NOW to the IMMINENT fulfillment of Holydays 2 & 3 concerning a literal MIRACULOUS DELIVERANCE and a literal kingdom of priests existing/reigning on Earth BEFORE the Messiah's return.

    Perhaps you can call me a "Literalist"... taking the 7 Annual Holydays as literal BIG EVENTS (Milestones) leading to the final full Manifestation in Rev 22.

    I believe that you and the BT are on that path to that ministry...
    Last edited by doug555; 12-20-13 at 12:02 AM.

  4. #144
    Some Crosstalk:

    Name:  non endorsement without recourse.jpg
Views: 503
Size:  31.5 KB


    With XX’s tag line I feel that you basically nullify your signature entirely. Ergo you make no commitment at all. Which is fine because the commitments are all made on the bills by the US Treasurer and Secretary. However this leaves your bank in a position where they are earning no money in any of your transactions. So you may encounter resistance, especially if you are earning any “interest” on any of the accounts.

    [This suitor noticed on the website for issuing checks.]


    I plan on utilizing my Credit Union's "Snap Deposit" smartphone app to take a picture of my checks and deposit them that way. Interestingly, I found this bit of apparent legal advice in the app's FAQ:

    "Be sure your checks have no evidence of alteration or contain a restrictive endorsement."

    On that Note:

    I deal with Citibank in NYC. I have been using the non endorsement for 3 years now. They always hold part of the funds for 5 days or so. They send me a letter everytime. I get charged 15(service fee) and 8 (atm fee) dollars every month to have an account there that is 0% interest bearing. They even turned away the irs a few years back when they attempted to levy the account saying they did not have any of their property in that account! I really enjoy using lawful money. Thanks David for cracking that nut!
    So it looks as though absolute protection costs a little less than $300/year.

  5. #145
    Re: Citibank and IRS it might be helpful to know that the IRS is typically an account holder like any other account holder at a bank. The FRB/State Bank Charter system exists in a separate realm from the IRS and State Revenue systems. Thusly the bank's custodial roles are separate. Citibank could not in good faith transfer funds from one account holder (the attempted levy target) to another (IRS) without proper justification without Citibank incurring liability. AFAIK the bank simply within the same bank transfers from the target account to the IRS's account along with proper memoranda (particulars) and that is how the IRS gets its money--tax depositaries and such.

    Re: $15 service fee. That sounds like a typical inter-institutional transfer fee. However, such is also a typical "service charge".

    However this leaves your bank in a position where they are earning no money in any of your transactions.
    Perhaps the banks can only issue or multiply clearinghouse credit rather than lawful money.
    Last edited by allodial; 12-21-13 at 11:56 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.

  6. #146
    Quote Originally Posted by allodial View Post

    Perhaps the banks can only issue or multiply clearinghouse credit rather than lawful money.

    Processing....


    No, processing Deep.

  7. #147
    To further the paradigm shift, I would like to share with the group where are my thoughts more than the LM issue.

    After several years of studying, I have found myself resonating with the Peaceful Inhabitant Process as opposed to Redemption, Common Law, Equity, UCC, etc. The PI process parallels spiritually and mentally where I am at in my life.

    With this said. I am a living breathing self-aware soul, AND not a fictional Name or Property. That Name, I USE, IS property belonging to the State. Under the rules of usufruct, the owner [the state] of that property receives not only the benefits, but also is liable for any liabilities on behalf of that property, estate, end legis, name, individual, whoever, trust, etc.

    Moreover, the reason why I like the LM endorsement is for mainly one reason: The use of FRN, by presumption, automatically increases the national debt. Any harm, whether intentional or not, is seen by the PTB as a belligerent act, meaning you are an enemy of the state. If I wish to live in harmony and peace with all men [and women], I would not want to create any public harm, as a "foreigner" under the current "war on the land" bankrupt state of emergency therefore the demand for LM actually is consistent with the status of peaceful habitation

    I have been writing the endorsements on the back of the checks demanding lawful money. My comment really has to do with private and public. If you are using a Name, the Name is public. Everything [meaning all property, house, car, bank accts, etc] placed in the name automatically vests to the United States. You can not own it since the state holds the original title to that property or Name. You only are sent a "certified copy" of that property for your use, thus anything and everything you do in that Name, ultimately the state benefits from. This all has to do with the bankruptcy of the US.

    Though I am far from an "expert", as long as that endorsement is on the back, I suspect the "intent" is all that matters. Its all public. Anyway, if Barry does not like it, he can just put a new law in the federal register and it shall become law [administrative public policy, that is, under bankruptcy].

    Furthermore, I am sorry to disagree with you. God has nothing to do whatsoever with Caesar's money. It all Gods anyway, the error or sin of man is claiming property as his own that belongs to the Creator which was given FREELY to all men to be used, to have dominion over, possession and control but NOT ownership.

    Update on the bank and the demand for LM on the bank signature card. I have no heard from the bank - but I am very ready. thanks David for

    Tony

    Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post
    OK, here are my thoughts...

    Let's try this PARADIGM shift:

    The FRONT of a check is PUBLIC (people). We can place our demand there and it is being honored by the IRS as a lawful reduction. Isn't this all we need?

    The BACK of a check is PRIVATE (Federal Reserve). In order for their private system to work,

    ALL TRANSACTIONS are initially presumed to be private credit by their system. The is the "default" currency of their system.

    However, this PRESUMPTION can be rebutted (by lawful money demands), and thereby make all of these transactions LAWFUL MONEY, per 12 USC 411.

    NOTICE that 12 USC 411, by its very wording ("they shall be redeemed"), implies that private credit is initially presumed, and therefore needs "redeeming", but only "on demand". If the FRN's were NOT the default currency, then 12 USC 411 would not have been needed.

    I believe this choice of which currency is to be used stems from Mt 22.21, and is DIRECTLY RELATED to TAXES.

    There are two images on the FRNs. The LEFT side is Caesar's (Fed Reserve seal); the RIGHT side is God's (The Dept of Treasury seal). Look at the One Dollar Bill. Also notice the 2 different signatures.

    I also believe that once this Mt 22.21 "red line" is crossed (by LM demand reductions no longer being honored by IRS on 1040), then involuntary servitude/slavery begins through compelled use of liability instruments, which can never truly "pay"/discharge obligations.

    We have not yet reached that point... on a significant scale...

    But when it does begin, then it will set in motion a prophesied chain of events that lead to the fulfillment of the archetype set by our ancient Israelite ancestors, with us formally petitioning (Ex 3:7-9, 16-17) our Creator for deliverance from FINANCIAL ECONOMIC SLAVERY, and those petitions, if we indeed wake up enough of His People to realize that this archetype is for US TODAY, will be answered by the Creator with a miraculous deliverance, as planned for and revealed by the Creator's Second Annual Holyday.

    So until that day comes, I believe we need to heed the Messiah's warning in Mt 13:30 to let both the tares and wheat grow together, "until the Harvest" (the Spring Harvest typified by Holyday 3 - the Feast of Firstfruits - Pentecost).

    This means, I believe, in practical terms regarding how we make lawful money demands, to NOT TRESPASS onto the BACK/PRIVATE SIDE of a check, or LEFT SIDE of a FRN. Let them monetize the checks, by keeping restrictive endorsements off of the back of a check. Let them continue to "grow" their debt by presuming it to be the default currency. God tells us the keep our hands off their system.

    But, likewise, they must also let us "grow" in the use of lawful money, by letting us make our demand for same on the FRONT/PUBLIC/PEOPLE side of a check, and redeeming FRNs, and letting us claim tax reductions for doing so, because that money is God's!

    Hope this make sense... It has been a long day, and I am getting pretty tired...

    Peace.

  8. #148
    thanks David for

    Tony

    I think I understand. We experience. God experiences.

  9. #149
    I have come to believe that the Name (First Middle Last) is my property (right of use; that which is proper to i; a man, and exclusive of all others). The 'State' may have TITLE and OWNERSHIP in the legal world, yet said claim of property is made by a man. Having TITLE or OWNERSHIP is what makes one liable and obliged. I make no claim of TITLE or OWNERSHIP; only to property. Only a man can make a claim; so, another man must challenge your claim in open court on the record. The 'State' has no rights and cannot make claims. Those who act in capacity as officer for the State have no rights either, while in that capacity; they have privileges, duties and obligations. One of the most important duties and obligations is to secure, protect and restore property. Who are they oath-bound to perform this for? For men and women who make claims and have inherent rights which come from the Creator, Most High God. The standing and capacity of 'man' is higher that that of 'State' or 'officer' or 'judge' or 'president' or 'pope'.

    Only 'man' is unlimited in his capacity; he can and may choose to be anything he wishes at any given moment in time. Which means, if it is of benefit to me, i can choose to be 'First Middle Last' in a particular situation. As soon as i choose not to be 'First Middle Last' then, i am not. These two choices can occur within minutes of each other. Who has the right to interfere with a man's right to self-determine and self-govern? Do you know of anyone? Only a terrorist interferes with a man's right to self-govern (terrorism is interfering with the proper function of government). The chief public servant BARACK OBAMA himself admitted recently in a speech, that we all have the gift of self-government (albeit he is confused as to who ultimately 'gave' that capacity to us).

    The key to all this is to properly move, hold and keep our court(s) when someone (not a fictional entity) robs our property or interferes with our right to property. The 'State' doesn't do a thing, ever. The 'IRS' never robs any man's property, ever. Ultimately, it is ALWAYS a man or woman who robs property from another 'man' and it is that man or woman who robbed said property that must be held liable for that wrong. It matters not what capacity he or she claimed to be in at the time or what 'legal' basis was claimed; no man or woman has a right to rob another man's property, ever. Any attempted justification of the wrong from the 'legal' world (codes, statutes) is a further wrong committed against the man.

    We must learn to act as men and women, bring our competent court(s) and know how to keep it when wrongs, harm or injuries are committed against us and/or our claimed property. Forgiveness is essential, and yet, restoration must be provided by those who have willingly placed themselves in a lower office/capacity than 'man' with the voluntary burden of duties and obligations toward 'man'. It was their choice to enter into that capacity and, to stay in honor, they must perform accordingly.

  10. #150
    Paisan,

    I do not mean to disagree with you but the right of use, possession and control is something different than ownership. The name is property, according to law. If you make a claim to that property, then you consent, by operation of law to act as surety as executor, administrator or trustee for that Name, or property, title estate, trust, ens legis, individual, person, whoever, infant, etc. When you say “I make no claim to title or ownership” how to you think property is claimed? It is through title. Through a piece of paper. The paper is fiction. It is in an image of the real; however, it is Caesar’s. You are correct only man can make a claim. I would prefer to let them challenge that I am their property, as TPTB would have to prove that claim that I am State property. The state can make claims and has rights because the people believe that and have CONSENTED to that. We agree that the government has an obligation to restore and protect property. Where we disagree is you think you own that property or claim that property – NAME as yours. It ain’t. It is yours to use but not own. When you claim that Name as your property, you are claiming a reversionary interest in property belonging to the State [legal title holder] where the US holds equitable title as protected purchaser under UCC 8-102D, through the purchase, paid to the state of said titles by the SSA.

    I would like to comment further on the fact should you walk into any court or legal situation and you claim that Name and then decide to change your mind, it will be too late. You have already consented to act as surety for that property. You must not make any claim at all from the beginning. The only ones that do have the right to interfere with man’s right to self-determination is the man that consents to TPTB. Spiritually speaking, the devil has the right to deceive all men. The devil does not have the right to force you to consent to be deceived. Folks do this more than willingly. This is a subject to be further discussed in detail.

    If you believe you are going to tell the court what to do, good luck to you. The court can only recognize its fictional property. Once personal jurisdiction has been consented to, you are playing in their sandbox. It is their rules that will govern you. The court can not hear a man’s claim. The man must use the fictional property name to being a claim into their “temple of Just-Us”. If the court has no juridiction over a man, then a man has no business being in court. Think about this. You can not be half-pregnant.

    If whatever you are doing is working for you, great. I wish you the very best. I do not see how though.

    If you want the public officials to do their oath-bound jobs of protecting the pubic as outlined in 63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §241, then I would stop intermeddling with the infant’s estate, making false claims to fictional property that you do not own, but have every right to use, possess, and control but NOT OWN, and let those public officers acting in their official capacity as trustee, administrator or executor do their jobs and protect state property by discharging all claims against said property.

    You had been sent a copy of a usufruct compliant certified certificate for your use. The owner of said property reaps all the benefits and therefore must accept all the liabilities. United States v. Pewee Coal Co., Inc. - 341 U.S. 114 (1951), in part, “Like any private person or corporation, the United States normally is entitled to the profits from, and must bear the losses of, business operations which it conducts. When a private business is possessed and operated for public use, no reason appears to justify imposition of losses sustained on the person from whom the property was seized”. Furthermore, “that the Government chose to intervene by taking possession and operating control. By doing so, it became the proprietor and, in the absence of contrary arrangements, was entitled to the benefits and subject to the liabilities which that status involves.”

    If anyone is interested in more of this “thinking”, you can start with www.notacitizen.com

    Tony



    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    I have come to believe that the Name (First Middle Last) is my property (right of use; that which is proper to i; a man, and exclusive of all others). The 'State' may have TITLE and OWNERSHIP in the legal world, yet said claim of property is made by a man. Having TITLE or OWNERSHIP is what makes one liable and obliged. I make no claim of TITLE or OWNERSHIP; only to property. Only a man can make a claim; so, another man must challenge your claim in open court on the record. The 'State' has no rights and cannot make claims. Those who act in capacity as officer for the State have no rights either, while in that capacity; they have privileges, duties and obligations. One of the most important duties and obligations is to secure, protect and restore property. Who are they oath-bound to perform this for? For men and women who make claims and have inherent rights which come from the Creator, Most High God. The standing and capacity of 'man' is higher that that of 'State' or 'officer' or 'judge' or 'president' or 'pope'.

    Only 'man' is unlimited in his capacity; he can and may choose to be anything he wishes at any given moment in time. Which means, if it is of benefit to me, i can choose to be 'First Middle Last' in a particular situation. As soon as i choose not to be 'First Middle Last' then, i am not. These two choices can occur within minutes of each other. Who has the right to interfere with a man's right to self-determine and self-govern? Do you know of anyone? Only a terrorist interferes with a man's right to self-govern (terrorism is interfering with the proper function of government). The chief public servant BARACK OBAMA himself admitted recently in a speech, that we all have the gift of self-government (albeit he is confused as to who ultimately 'gave' that capacity to us).

    The key to all this is to properly move, hold and keep our court(s) when someone (not a fictional entity) robs our property or interferes with our right to property. The 'State' doesn't do a thing, ever. The 'IRS' never robs any man's property, ever. Ultimately, it is ALWAYS a man or woman who robs property from another 'man' and it is that man or woman who robbed said property that must be held liable for that wrong. It matters not what capacity he or she claimed to be in at the time or what 'legal' basis was claimed; no man or woman has a right to rob another man's property, ever. Any attempted justification of the wrong from the 'legal' world (codes, statutes) is a further wrong committed against the man.

    We must learn to act as men and women, bring our competent court(s) and know how to keep it when wrongs, harm or injuries are committed against us and/or our claimed property. Forgiveness is essential, and yet, restoration must be provided by those who have willingly placed themselves in a lower office/capacity than 'man' with the voluntary burden of duties and obligations toward 'man'. It was their choice to enter into that capacity and, to stay in honor, they must perform accordingly.

Posting Permissions

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