I just asked a couple of questions, I thought the response was interesting...
Particularly the 2nd answer.
I just asked a couple of questions, I thought the response was interesting...
Particularly the 2nd answer.
What an excellent letter, as a source of good information! Thank you for sharing it here.
There is a reference to the January 21, 1971 decision which is the basis for considering redeemed lawful money as US notes in the form of Federal Reserve notes. Look at the last paragraph.
United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971.
The best part of the letter is the admission, and the extant belief/understanding by the FED, that U.S. notes (redeemed lawful money) are NOT to be used as a reserve - U.S. notes are inelastic currency.
The significant part of making the demand per 12USC411 is the desire to direct one's converted energy and labor (via the FIRST MIDDLE LAST transmitting utility) toward the public good and NOT toward the increase of the interests of the private and foreign bank known as the Federal Reserve via ordering up more debt credit by conventional signature endorsement. This is an honorable and peaceful stance amidst the commercial war being waged.
The other part of the equation is to make it clear that one makes NO claim of ownership/title to ANYTHING in the FIRST MIDDLE LAST; pursuant to 12USC95a(2), ALL reversionary interest in the NAME is assigned, conveyed, transferred to and for the account of the United States. The profit and gain from ALL use of the FIRST MIDDLE LAST is realized solely by the United States as beneficial owner; we are third party beneficiaries through this agreement and we exercise special interest in the beneficial use of the FIRST MIDDLE LAST (and any rights, property or accounts therein) as special ministers for the public trust. We desire to assist the injured and wounded on the battlefield of commerce by facilitating discharge/set-off via the designated U.S./State/County/local City municipal trustee who is obligated to administer the affairs of the FIRST MIDDLE LAST in honor and according to the law(s) they serve.
Credit Unions are not and can not be Federal Reserve Banks?
Are they not holding and using Federal Reserve Notes?
"...for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose..."
What else can they be then?
Just caught this bit at the end:Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph
"…and since 31 U.S.C. 5119 requires the Secretary of the Treasury to destroy any United States notes that may be presented to the Treasury, there is no basis for concern that any United States note that you might deposit would be "used as a reserve."
This is very interesting. I will investigate 31 USC 5119.
An attempt to destroy remedy by destroying lawful monies as they are returned to Treasury? How might this square with the declaration of the duality of Fed notes quoted by David Merrill above? Based on that, it would seem that even though all physical US notes might be destroyed, lawful money would have to live on, regardless. Unless, perhaps, that nature of Fed notes were to be changed by legislation, perhaps due to another (seemingly imminent, at least to me) bankruptcy?
What in the current remedy would prevent this? Saving to suitors itself? I must admit that full comprehension of that clause and it's application to current remedy eludes me.
I hope the greater minds than mine here will speak to this.
Last edited by Robert Henry; 08-02-13 at 08:39 PM.
Question for AJ: What is the purpose of redemption of your estate out of the usufructuary trust created by the Bankruptcy Act of 1933 if not to take legal title to your estate, ie, to remove it from the bankruptcy trust created for the benefit of the Secretary of the Treasury (who is not a US govt official), as trustee? The banks set up this debt money trap to control the assets of the citizens, who stupidly allowed themselves to be trapped into a presumptive contract with the Federal Reserve, which contract makes them liable for income taxes as an excise tax on the amount of Federal Reserve private credit used (dealing in securities of the Fed is the excised act). By accepting the trust relationship with the Sec of the Treasury, citizens give up legal title to their estate and accept equitable title in its stead. But by demanding lawful money, you break the contract with the Fed concerning debt money: your demand rebuts the presumption that you wish to deal in Fed securities, ie, FRN's. This demand is also an appearance, so it also rebuts the presumption that you are dead, a necessary condition for the cestui que vie trust to exist. This collapses the trust, and the res reverts to the rightful owner. By these steps, your property is now no longer 'subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,' making the rest of 12USC95a(2) irrelevant. You have a perfect right to own your name, and to own your estate. Why do you refuse to acknowledge this right?
I think it clarifies that state banks are credit unions of the Fed.
Very well put Freed! To explicitly rebut the presumption of death, I also recorded a "Proof of Life" in the county.
Perhaps the UCC-3 entitled "UCC Doc # 2012088865 - Secured Order For Reconciliation" at the link below, since it demands "LAWFUL MONEY" in item #2, is something that successfully reclaims that right and estate for each living being on this planet.
See https://drive.google.com/folderview?...Vk&usp=sharing
Perhaps one needs to explicitly accept this "Order for Reconciliation" via one's own UCC-1 and then assign on a UCC-3 some of its Returned Value to a bank upon execution of a private contract with the bank who would create a drawing account for a discount fee of 10% of the deposited amount of lawful money.
See more on this topic at http://www.quicktopic.com/50/H/VNAL6Qbi9kNe
Last edited by doug555; 08-04-13 at 02:44 AM.
I and others have been having great success when receiving an account statement indicating an amount due. With this verbiage placed on the statement and mailed back, I haven't heard another peep;
This name and account number are property of the UNITED STATES
Please forward to the owner in care of the Treasury of the United States
(Sign) Authorized Representative (Date)
The success hasn't just been with one or two instances but many.
This could use some amplification:
Redeemed Coupon.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote