Outside the Box

[David Merrill]

I grabbed this from the Welcome Thread because I would like to have a lively conversation for all the members about it.

If we are not the person on the COLB/BC and especially if using currency with intent of lawful money there is no promise of performance. No oath of office or appointment of duty to perform acts for the public trust. More on that to come soon in later posts.

I am presuming COLB/BC is for Certificate of Lading/Billing and Birth Certificate.

My research tells me that the bond never materializes past SDR's - Paper Gold - which is the UN's IMF Trust Fund created in 1976 from the Amendments to the Bretton Woods Agreements through the Secret Jamaica - Rambouillet Accord; Public Law 94-564. Page 1, Page 2.

I believe the passage I quoted above implies that there are accounts set up around SSNs and Birth Certificates, maybe Treasury Direct or Private Side Accounts, maybe even representative of stock in the UN's IMF - Bank and Fund etc. Discharge Direct obligations of government...

Well, I think you can already see why I am hoping to remove this from the Welcome Thread - this certainly deserves its own space to develop! But I have a link for people to click there, to get directly here.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[motla68]

Thank you for continuing the discussion, I agree it needs more time to manifest in peoples minds, for most of the people i invited here it took them a while to for wrapping their head around the concept. I agree that their system is a layered onion of accounts using the name, not doubting that, but take a look through my lenses for a moment:

- Certificate of title is the authentication that a title exists somewhere, the only one that knows is the one who represents the name on the paper with their seal upon it.
They recorded the event so now they own the survey that took place. NOT the baby.

- When you went to work on a job, whom's name did you use, your true name or the estate name(person) with the ssn attached to it?
So from this who is the real Taxpayer, is it you or the Person? Then if a refund who does that go to, you or the Persons account at the treasury?

- How will the accounts of the Person be indemnified if everything is not returned to treasury, including the bills?

Attached is a clip taken from a pdf file because the pdf would not load on here for some reason:


- Also what I mean by the interest from a bank account being a benefit, one referencing about the name above and two most all banks are chartered by the state, so then who's account is it and if someone takes the interest and dividends from that account who becomes the one with a beneficial interest?

Final thoughts, can you really claim anything unless you have a trust with an estate that you created and not them?


One thing we are looking at is creating this private trust that we live through using the Trust Certificate instead of their Birth Certificate/COLB because it is quite a battle to get them to be in abeyance the rules of usufructuary for all accounting.

[David Merrill]

Thank you for continuing the discussion, I agree it needs more time to manifest in peoples minds, for most of the people i invited here it took them a while to for wrapping their head around the concept. I agree that their system is a layered onion of accounts using the name, not doubting that, but take a look through my lenses for a moment:

I have my doubts these days. One thing great about this method of brain trust as a backbone, is that as the new information comes in, I can modify my belief sets. In this case it is about two decades of a lack of information.

There is nothing to support the use of 1099-OID-style or Treasury Direct accounts. There is nobody banking on my birth certificate. The SEC does not keep a registry of FRN S/N's. I say these things because people have been making all that stuff up over the years and building on each other, not on the facts. But you can look in the State Department Bulletin and see the facts, and that says that SDR's, a fictional basket of currency is built upon confidence and security building measures that are quite whispy. This is the beauty of redeeming lawful money. It silently pulls the bricks from the zigurat. It is an illusion that everybody keeps by signing the endorsement in ignorance.

- Certificate of title is the authentication that a title exists somewhere, the only one that knows is the one who represents the name on the paper with their seal upon it.

They recorded the event so now they own the survey that took place. NOT the baby.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...tification.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ification2.jpg

There are no bank note markings! There have been no transactions on the original.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ification3.jpg

See there at the bottom though? I created DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT, the constructive trust when I was twelve. I remember doing that but it took a long time to notice when the trust was created. That was when I was maintenance man at the Carriage House Apartments, that burned to the ground many years later.

- When you went to work on a job, whom's name did you use, your true name or the estate name(person) with the ssn attached to it?
So from this who is the real Taxpayer, is it you or the Person? Then if a refund who does that go to, you or the Persons account at the treasury?

The refund would go into my pocket. Then I would spend it. I do not have an account at the Treasury, nor my person (when I form one).

- How will the accounts of the Person be indemnified if everything is not returned to treasury, including the bills?

I think that I am recognizing your theories; at least parts of them. That is twice you are saying that there is a Treasury Account of some kind based in birth certificates and that instead of Refunds coming back to the taxpayer, they somehow go to the Treasury. [The advocates of the 1099-OID Form would admonish people to send the two parts of the process to two different IRS campuses - which is to say to trick the IRS into sending you your Refund!]

Attached is a clip taken from a pdf file because the pdf would not load on here for some reason:

I think Admin will raise the size limit on doc and pdf files to 200kB soon.

- Also what I mean by the interest from a bank account being a benefit, one referencing about the name above and two most all banks are chartered by the state, so then who's account is it and if someone takes the interest and dividends from that account who becomes the one with a beneficial interest?

Now you are talking about interest. Before you said the Refund was a benefit.

I address that in my second video. After a full refund you might address this to your boss/employer. If anybody is gaining interest from the Withholdings it should be you!

Final thoughts, can you really claim anything unless you have a trust with an estate that you created and not them?


One thing we are looking at is creating this private trust that we live through using the Trust Certificate instead of their Birth Certificate/COLB because it is quite a battle to get them to be in abeyance the rules of usufructuary for all accounting.

I think their lack of compliance is you making constructions that do not exist. I honestly do.

Robert Arthur MENARD made such a statement in his video; Security of the Person. Look at the 5:00 Minute Mark and the 1:00 Hour Mark. I pushed on the point for a couple months and had Rob spinning and gyrating all about that. It turns out that he is wrong:



There is no substance to this birth certificate being a revenue receipt. There is no return or refund. There is nothing in that registration number because it is not an account.

[Michael Joseph]

I like to think of Legal Name and it Certificate of Title as an "access easement" into the State - making the transactions with the State - Legal. And everything done with Legal name, never leaves the State as Legal Name is the creation of the State. Based on Survey of an EVENT. The COLB is just a trust certificate - with certain user privileges.

These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.

Yet, if one has a Trust Account in Legal Name - then everything within that account is subject to Administration. And can be siezed if necessary. Therefore, you will NEVER open a banking account these days absent a LEGAL NAME, a DL, a SSN, and an address within the State.

I like to think of the State like a computer's memory. Each location has a specific Address. The only way to access that address is to be WITHIN the computer. Or to be granted access from within. Yet, we are given zip drives - LEGAL NAME w/SSN which allows us to interact with the "closed system" - computer; Yet we are given mere "User privelege" and never "Admin". Said another way, the grant is restricted.

The Posterity and the Heirs are for whom the Trust was made. These are the Sovereigns from the perspective of the State [Within]. If you engage the State via CQT, then you are acting in capacity as citizen or subject.

[Treefarmer]

I like to think of Legal Name and it Certificate of Title as an "access easement" into the State - making the transactions with the State - Legal. And everything done with Legal name, never leaves the State as Legal Name is the creation of the State. Based on Survey of an EVENT. The COLB is just a trust certificate - with certain user privileges.

These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.

Yet, if one has a Trust Account in Legal Name - then everything within that account is subject to Administration. And can be siezed if necessary. Therefore, you will NEVER open a banking account these days absent a LEGAL NAME, a DL, a SSN, and an address within the State.

I like to think of the State like a computer's memory. Each location has a specific Address. The only way to access that address is to be WITHIN the computer. Or to be granted access from within. Yet, we are given zip drives - LEGAL NAME w/SSN which allows us to interact with the "closed system" - computer; Yet we are given mere "User privelege" and never "Admin". Said another way, the grant is restricted.

The Posterity and the Heirs are for whom the Trust was made. These are the Sovereigns from the perspective of the State [Within]. If you engage the State via CQT, then you are acting in capacity as citizen or subject.

Thank you Michael Joseph for this plain and straight-forward explanation.
It makes sense to me.
The things you are describing, I can see them at work around me.

Blessings

[David Merrill]

I like all of MJ's mental models! Even the ones that I have to work at a while.

[doug-again]

These days they jump on mom and dad at hospital to make sure the TAXPAYER is perfected ==> LEGAL M. NAME w/ SSN. Of course, one can make the choice to effect a demand for lawful money and then the TAXPAYER would not owe any tax. And if one just gets paid in cash, well there is no trust there.

i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.

[motla68]

i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.

Hey Doug, you might want to start putting the lawful money statement on your timesheets and then make copies of them, this will show original intent all the way through in which IRS or State DOR would have difficulty scrutinizing, at least this is what i do after sending them a copy and explaining my intent in response to their last 2 letters, have not heard a peep from them since early '2009.

[David Merrill]

i could have just gotten paid several hundred dollars in cash. The guy is likely gonna need a ssn to be able to continue to send work my way. He does not pay in redeemed lawful money. He will not pay me future, reported-on-his-tax-return cash if it's gonna bump him up into a higher tax bracket, unless he can 1099 me. He needs to show that that excess $ coming in, is not his.

i have him cut me checks, so that i can non-endorse them, and do my part in redeeming them. i don't plan on filing, but if IRS does come a knockin', i have evidence of my redemptions of the checks pertaining to any possible 1099 of that vendor.

Cash payments to sub contractors like myself, over $600, are to be 1099'd; so i'm not sure about this statement of yours, Micheal.

It is confusing to me, whether or not you are being paid in cash or by check. I have highlighted the sentence in red though.

The only way for him to pay you in redeemed lawful money is to hand you cash. If he wants you to sign for the cash - that is your opportunity to make your demand instead of endorsement.

If you are reporting to the IRS, fine. You would be reporting zero taxable income if you non-endorse all your paychecks (and of course keep a record). The only purpose to reporting is for you to get your Withholdings Refunded. If you are not sending in Withholdings then your purpose is to be heard (with a few copies of your non-endorsement) over the reports by 1099 with your "boss" - who hires you as a contractor.

Sometimes when contractor suitors (self-employed) are silent, the IRS agent will assess them on the 1099 Reporting. They R4C and keep an evidence repository but it gets stickier than if the IRS attorney has already adjudicated him to be outside the scope of contracting with the Fed. Once they start their paperwork, they might continue badgering.

[Michael Joseph]

"As below so above and beyond I imagine," - get a look at that Avatar



it's simple man




I am sure that I have learned more from you than you from me.

Thank you.