Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 54

Thread: Generic Notice and Demand - $350 civil suit

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Who is using your SSN Card for identification purposes besides you? That a very good question.

    At 14, one cannot voluntarily enter into contracts http://law.yourdictionary.com/contract

    What Is the Legal Age to Contract? http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-...o-contract.htm

    Generally speaking a minor cannot enter into a legally binding contract. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Are_contra...rs_enforceable

    "A birth certificate is not a form of identification"
    The state agency that issues birth certificates will share your child's information with us, and we will mail the Social Security card to you. http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answ...-for-a-newborn

    A birth certificate is not a form of ID it is only used to establish a Social Security number. http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answ...tail/a_id/2285

    The Social Security number was originally devised to keep an accurate record of each individual’s earnings, and to subsequently monitor benefits paid under the Social Security program. However, use of the Social Security number as a general identifier has grown to the point where it is the most commonly used and convenient identifier for all types of record-keeping systems in the United States. http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answ...ecurity-number

    Specific laws require a person to provide his or her Social Security number for certain purposes. While we cannot give you a comprehensive list of all situations where a Social Security number might be required or requested, a Social Security number is required or requested by the following organizations: http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answ...ecurity-number

    Bank of America: Your Birth Certificate is NOT valid as ID!, page 1 http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread470440/pg1

    Section 312: Special Due Diligence for Correspondent Accounts and Private Banking Accounts. This Section amends the Bank Secrecy Act by imposing due diligence & enhanced due diligence requirements on U.S. financial institutions that maintain correspondent accounts for foreign financial institutions or private banking accounts for non-U.S. persons.

    Section 326: Verification of Identification. Prescribes regulations establishing minimum standards for financial institutions and their customers regarding the identity of a customer that shall apply with the opening of an account at the financial institution. http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/...r=1&id=326#326

    The appropriate “Identification Number” is determined by an institution’s CIP and will depend upon whether the customer is from the United States. http://www.bankersonline.com/aml/326whitepaper.pdf

    For U.S. customers (both individuals and entities) a CIP should require a Taxpayer Identification Number, such as a Social Security Number, Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, or Employer Identification Number.

    As for non-U.S. customers, a CIP should require one or more of the following: a Taxpayer Identification Number, such as a Social Security Number, Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, or Employer Identification Number; passport number and country of issuance; alien identification card number; or number and country of issuance of a foreign government-issued document evidencing nationality or residence and bearing a photograph (or similar safeguard).

    See 31 C.F.R. 103.121(b)(2)(I)(A): http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...s/bankrule.pdf

    There are two exceptions to the above rule. A CIP may include procedures that accommodate a customer who has applied for, but not yet received, a taxpayer identification number. Such procedures must confirm that the tax ID application was filed before the customer opens the account and require the bank to obtain the tax ID within a reasonable period after the account is opened. A second exception allows credit card issuers to obtain the identifying information from a third-party source prior to extending credit to the customer.

    31 C.F.R. 103.121(b)(2)(i)(B) http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/103-121-cust...nions-19739609
    Last edited by Chex; 04-03-13 at 06:55 PM.

  2. #2
    "A birth certificate is not a form of identification or is it?" http://www.cookcountyclerk.com/vital...s/default.aspx

    Primary Evidence of U.S. Citizenship (One of the following):*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar's signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes. http://travel.state.gov/passport/get...first_830.html

    We can accept only certain documents as proof of identity. An acceptable document must be current (not expired) and show your name, identifying information (date of birth or age) and preferably a recent photograph. A birth certificate is not a form of identification. As proof of identity, Social Security must see one of the following primary evidence documents: http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answ...tail/a_id/2281

    then the 'entity' formerly known as the IRS steps in and intimidates the employer into not accepting it, in violation of said regulation.

    TREASURY ORDER: 150-06 http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuth...s/irsbegin.htm

    TREASURY ORDER: 150-06 http://foundationfortruthinlaw.org/P...-for-ORDER.pdf

    REVENUE PROVISIONS, Subtitle E - (amendments to the U.S. Code)"SEC. 742 , TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS REQUIRED AT BIRTH Link http://www.google.com/search?q=TAXPA...e7&rlz=1I7MEDA

    SSA - POMS: RM 00201.040 - Void Social Security Numbers (SSNs) - 03/26/2008 https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.NSF/0/4c...ocument&Click=

    "The Social Security Act does not require a person to have a Social Security number (SSN) to live and work in the United States, nor does it require an SSN simply for the purpose of having one." http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxe...htsAndSSNs.htm

    According to the Social Security Regulations, a person must use a SSN if they apply for public benefits. An applicant for government benefits who does not have, or does not use, a SSN will be denied. Some people have sent letters to the Social Security Administration stating that they were "rescinding" their social security number. They publicly "give it back" so to speak. However, the Social Security Administration continues to maintain a record pertaining to each person using their social security account number. It's sort of analogous to the theme of "Hotel California" by the Eagles "you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave." We are not aware of any cases where the SSA agreed to expunge an adult’s record. Neither are we aware of any occasion where the SSA refunded any amount of contributions.

    Applying to Have the SSN Application Removed From an Adult: Some people argue that when they applied for a SSN, they "unknowingly" entered into a "contract" with SSA and that by rescinding their number they absolve themselves of any commitment they may have unknowingly made.

    But the simple fact is, Social Security is not a contract. This very important point is clearly brought out by Larry Becraft in his brief entitled "Comment Upon Voluntary Nature of Social Security." Therein, he states:

    "Is Social Security a contract? A private insurance policy is clearly a contract because the policyholder makes a promise to pay money to the insurance company, which in turn agrees to likewise pay the policyholder if certain contingencies arise. These "promise to pay" elements are essential for a contract, but they simply are not present with Social Security. First, Social Security "payments" are not premium payments, but are taxes instead.

    "Secondly, there is no corresponding and enforceable 'promise to pay' from the Social Security Administration to its 'beneficiaries.' [G]overnment contracts are very special and require an appropriation from Congress before money can be expended and a contract made. Regarding Social Security, the only 'beneficiaries' who have any claim against the public treasury are those for whom Congress has already made an appropriation, which can last no longer than a year. The rest of the Social Security claimants in America have no enforceable claim on public funds, and all they possess is a 'political promise,' upon which Congress can renege at any moment. If Congress decided tomorrow to cut off all Social Security, nobody would have any claim for payment. Thus, Social Security has never been and is not now a contract."
    Simply applying for (and receiving) a Social Security number does not constitute the making of a contract. And additionally, the Social Security Administration has never asserted that Social Security was a "contractual" agreement. http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxe...SSNs.htm#1.5.2

    Sec. 208. [42 U.S.C. 408] (a) Whoever—
    (1) for the purpose of causing an increase in any payment authorized to be made under this title, or for the purpose of causing any payment to be made where no payment is authorized under this title, shall make or cause to be made any false statement or representation (including any false statement or representation in connection with any matter arising under subchapter E of chapter 1, or subchapter A or E of chapter 9 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939[95], or chapter 2 or 21 or subtitle F of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954[96]) as to—

    (A) whether wages were paid or received for employment (as said terms are defined in this title and the Internal Revenue Code), or the amount of wages or the period during which paid or the person to whom paid; or http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title02/0208.htm

    If you are not a (government) employee as defined above and now that you’ve read the law, ask yourself, “Am I liable for income tax? Am I even an employee? In review, there is only one law that establishes liability, (§3403) for income tax withheld (§3402) in Title 26. In searching all 50 Titles of U.S. Code, it is the only law that the congressional search engine identified as pertaining to ‘income tax collected at source.’ How can Line 43, “TAXABLE INCOME” of the 2009 (or current year) 1040 form contain a true value?

  3. #3
    Would anybody know whether , “…the Nomen family” would be your Middle name(true name) or LAST NAME (legal name)? to me it shows capital –small case letters so it has to be true name)paragraph 1.
    On paragraph 2 below , it shows “Nomen” and “NOMEN” ? Would that be “Nomen” Middle name, ‘NOMAN” ? MIDDLE NAME? OR “Nomen” Last Name, or “NOMEN” LAST NAME?
    1. “Comes now Petitioner of the Nomen family making a special visitation by absolute ministerial right to the district court, "restricted appearance" under Rule E(8)….”
    2. “The district courts have "exclusive original cognizance" of all inland seizures and
    this includes vessels in rem (Rule C(3))
    such as trust organizations and legal names (abbreviated name.
    Nomen, PETITIONER NOMEN, Respondent, Henry Paulson, John Snow etc.)”
    Above why Nomen, then PETITIONER NOMEN ?
    Sorry can’t grasp it, here. All opinions appreciated Franco

  4. #4
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Cognomen = FAMILY NAME.

    Christian Name or Given Name or Baptismal Name = what most would call First Middle although that is incorrect in my opinion = True Name.

    True Name + Cognomen [Family Name] = Legal Name

    Some folks refer to the FAMILY NAME as the Business Name. I tend to Agree. Just ask Mr. Smith.

    Respondent, Henry Paulson? - seems like Henry PAULSON is out of office these days - I'll wager he is enjoying a private capacity.

    If I was you, and you are considering a Libel of Review pursuit, I would make myself very aware of EVERYTHING that is written in that LoR - BECAUSE once you issue it, it is your process, your issue and your liability. I "somewhat" modified mine within the confines of its intent.

    It is an easy thing for a judge to look up a plagiarism :

    1. Free Plagiarism Checker

    2. The Plagiarism Checker

    Oh yeah because I love to tie things back to Scripture:

    Job 32:21 Let me not, I pray you, accept any man's person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man.

    1. Notice this verse specifies MAN
    2. And Man's PERSON

    Furthermore lets check out the Hebrew for Flattering Titles: I wonder what the Hebrew says:

    H3655
    ka?na?h

    A primitive root; to address by an additional name; hence, to eulogize: - give flattering titles, surname (himself).


    Now then Mr. SMITH do you feel flattered?

    Lets see what Johnny B. has to say about Cognomen and Family Name, shall we?

    COGNOMEN. A Latin word, which signifies a family name. The praenomen among the Romans distinguished the person, the nomen, the gens, or all the kindred descended from a remote common stock through males, while the cognomen denoted the particular family. The agnomen was added on account of some particular event, as a further distinction. Thus, in the designation Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, Publius is the proenomen, Cornelius is the nomen, Scipio the cognomen, and Africanus the agnomen. Vicat. These several terms occur frequently in the Roman laws. See Cas. temp. Hardw. 286; 1 Tayl. 148. See Name; Surname.


    Shall we see what Johnny B. has to say about Surname?

    SURNAME. A name which is added to the christian name, and which, in modern times, have become family names.

    2. They are called surnames, because originally they were written over the name in judicial writings and contracts. They were and are still used for the purpose of distinguishing persons of the same name. They were taken from something attached to the persons assuming them, as John Carpenter, Joseph Black, Samuel Little, &c. See Name.

    Comment: So Johnny B. tell us that Family Name = Cognomen = Surname.

    Shall we see what Johnny B. has to say about Name?

    NAME. One or more words used to distinguish a particular individual, as Socrates, Benjamin Franklin.

    2. The Greeks, as is well known, bore only one name, and it was one of the especial rights of a father to choose the names for his children and to alter them if he pleased. It was customary to give to the eldest son the name of the grandfather on his father's side. The day on which children received their names was the tenth after their birth. The tenth day, called 'denate,' was a festive day, and friends and relatives were invited to take part in a sacrifice and a repast. If in a court of justice proofs could be adduced that a father had held the denate, it was sufficient evidence that be had recognized the child as his own. Smith's Diet. of Greek and Rom. Antiq. h. v.

    3. Among the Romans, the division into races, and the subdivision of races into families, caused a great multiplicity of names. They had first the pronomen, which was proper to the person; then the nomen, belonging to his race; a surname or cognomen, designating the family; and sometimes an agnomen, which indicated the branch of that family in which the author has become distinguished. Thus, for example, Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus; Publius is the pronomen; Cornelius, the nomen, designating the name of the race Cornelia; Scipio, the cognomen, or surname of the family; and Africanus, the agnomen, which indicated his exploits.

    4. Names are divided into Christian names, as, Benjamin, and surnames, as, Franklin.

    5. No man can have more than one Christian name; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; Bac. Ab. Misnomer, A; though two or more names usually kept separate, as John and Peter, may undoubtedly be compounded, so as to form, in contemplation of law, but one. 5 T. R. 195. A letter put between the Christian and surname, as an abbreviation of a part of the Christian name, as, John B. Peterson, is no part of either. 4 Watts' R. 329; 5 John. R. 84; 14 Pet. R. 322; 3 Pet. R. 7; 2 Cowen. 463; Co. Litt. 3 a; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; , Vin. Ab. Misnomer, C 6, pl. 5 and 6: Com. Dig. Indictment, G 1, note u; Willes, R. 654; Bac. Abr. Misnomer and Addition; 3 Chit. Pr. 164 to 173; 1 Young, R. 602. But see 7 Watts & Serg. 406.

    11. When a person uses a name in making a contract under seal, he will not be permitted to say that it is not his name; as, if he sign and seal a bond " A and B," (being his own and his partner's name,) and he had no authority from bis partner to make such a deed, he cannot deny that bis name is A. & B. 1 Raym. 2; 1 Salk. 214. And if a man describes himself in the body of a deed by the name of James and signs it John, he cannot, on being sued by the latter name, plead that his name is James. 3 Taunt. 505; Cro. Eliz. 897, n. a. Vide 3 P. & D. 271; 11 Ad. & L. 594.


    Comment: For all of you who believe so strongly in names - get a good read of 11. A name is simply a TOOL - a wrench in which one makes a Use.


    Shalom,
    MJ
    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!

  5. #5
    Michael Joseph thank you for the education. I am glad I asked, I had no idea. If I need to further research I have a starting point now. I had not even heard the word ,”Cognomen, Nomen, pronomer”, until you wrote about it in your document. By the way it was still customary in some of my older families to give the son the name of the grandfather. I did it when I gave my son , my father’s name. However I am the last of the mohicans , it is not followed anymore by the new generations. (progress and change must go on)
    I have come to believe that suitors on this cite are professionals in some profession or are very well educated people. By the way I understand what I needed to know. Thank you my friend , it was much appreciated.
    Oh and thank you for the heads-up on the plagiarism checker.
    Franco

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    Job 32:21 Let me not, I pray you, accept any man's person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man.

    1. Notice this verse specifies MAN
    2. And Man's PERSON

    Furthermore lets check out the Hebrew for Flattering Titles: I wonder what the Hebrew says:

    H3655
    ka?na?h

    A primitive root; to address by an additional name; hence, to eulogize: - give flattering titles, surname (himself).

    Excellent post and use of scripture!

    Here is another; http://www.biblestudytools.com/prove...8-compare.html
    A man lacking in judgment strikes hands in pledge and puts up security for his neighbor.

    ...I believe this also includes allowing one self to become surety for the FIRST MIDDLE LAST.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by EZrhythm View Post
    Excellent post and use of scripture!

    Here is another; http://www.biblestudytools.com/prove...8-compare.html
    A man lacking in judgment strikes hands in pledge and puts up security for his neighbor.

    ...I believe this also includes allowing one self to become surety for the FIRST MIDDLE LAST.
    Thank you.



    Pro_22:26 Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts.


    and notice the curious language the the Army Captain uses:

    Isa 36:5 ....I have counsel and strength for war: now on whom dost thou trust, that thou rebellest against me?

    Isa 36:6 Lo, thou trustest in the staff of this broken reed, on Egypt; whereon if a man lean, it will go into his hand, and pierce it: so is Pharaoh king of Egypt to all that trust in him.

    Isa 36:7 But if thou say to me, We trust in Yehovah our Elohim: is it not He, whose high places and whose altars Hezekiah hath taken away, and said to Judah and to Jerusalem, Ye shall worship before this altar?

    Look how the enemy speaks of TRUST. I ask today where do people place their Trust - in Egypt because of its strong Military - that's where.

    Isa 36:8 Now therefore give pledges, I pray thee, to my master the king of Assyria, and I will give thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them.

    Isa 36:9 How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master's servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen?



    Now then the Enemy goes to far - just like today:

    Isa 36:14 Thus saith the king, Let not Hezekiah deceive you: for he shall not be able to deliver you.

    Isa 36:15 Neither let Hezekiah make you trust in the LORD, saying, The LORD will surely deliver us: this city shall not be delivered into the hand of the king of Assyria.

    Isa 36:16 Hearken not to Hezekiah: for thus saith the king of Assyria, Make an agreement with me by a present, and come out to me: and eat ye every one of his vine, and every one of his fig tree, and drink ye every one the waters of his own cistern;


    Did you notice the enemy speaks of a Fee Simple estate - own vine and own fig - BUT the enemy shows himself - notice the curious word CISTERN. Wouldn't you prefer a well - a Cistern is only as good as the water in it. Once empty it must be refilled.

    I like this song.

    "They took all the trees, and put em in a tree museum
    And they charged the people twenty five dollars just to see them"


    That to me friend is an example of a cistern! But to the Spiritual Man - one who does not need Pastor to refill his cistern may rivers of waters - Spirit - flow out of his belly. That my friend is a well. Have you ever studied the city of Jerusalem. Did you ever notice that the Virgin Pool - is without the city? Consider what I am saying. So then the king built a conduit that would allow the water to flow into the city to the Pool of Siloam. Consider now what a cistern is and a well. I prefer the well.

    Sign here and here and here and here and here.......

    Shalom,
    MJ
    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!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    I prefer the well. Sign here and here and here and here and here.......
    So I should just get up and walk away from the things I signed for? I had trust in you, and you raped me.

  9. #9
    Let's try to identify some of Chex's pronouns. Perhaps he is referring to the US Treasury, which tricked him into debt servitude with words of art and legal presumptions. Suppose you make a demand for lawful money to the Federal Reserve; it is their money, so they have to redeem it. Now register your legal name in your state as a dba (a Ficticious Name, ie, a legal 'person'). Now you (the natural person declarant) have rebutted the presumption that you want to traffic in FRN's, and pay 'income' taxes on those. He (declarant) has also redeemed his estate out of the US Government's bankruptcy, thus removing the liens held by the Treasury due to the use of debt money, so now he has legal title to his estate, held under the legal name dba, registered and recognized by a state of the union. Thus he is no longer under the Treasury usufructuary trust, as he is no longer 'in the US,' but is now dba in a state. Since a trust only has validity when it has assets in it, by redeeming his estate he has collapsed the Treasury's trust, ie "I have no trust in the US Treasury." He now resides in the material world, in a trust granted to Man by God, where he again has unalienable rights, including the right to own property (this is still a usufructuary trust, but God gives better terms than the US govt). Thus he has chosen (which is a First Amendment right) to put his trust in the republic founded under the Constitution, which has accepted that the material world is in a trust granted by God ('In God We Trust' approved by US Congress in 1861), and forswears the trust granted by the US corporate govt on the presumption that he is dead (which has also been rebutted). Now there can be no constructive trust presumed by the courts since there is no original trust in the corporate government; there are only contracts, and those only entered knowingly and voluntarily. This would not be walking away from what you signed. It would be intentionally rebutting the presumptions by which the corporate government is trying to control you, since you volunteered. Call it unvolunteering.

    Freed G

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Freed Gerdes View Post
    Let's try to identify some of Chex's pronouns. Perhaps he is referring to the US Treasury, which tricked him into debt servitude with words of art and legal presumptions. ...
    Was it the Treasury or Congress which created the FRB?
    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.

Posting Permissions

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