Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
Anthony Joseph;


We all filter our perceptions through various conditioned sound bytes. I will concede that value is imprinted through trust and so one is easily drawn into the delusion (abomination) that debt is money (of value). Michael Joseph puts it quite elegantly in that one can only lease what is Leased. I prefer the same mental model in that debt can only have value to the lender, and cannot sustain any value to others leaching value off that lender - or in other words you cannot lease the same room or apartment to multiple parties (families for example).

I recall how we attended a National Common Law Grand Jury in Wichita - way back when.


Eugene SCHROEDER testified about War and Emergency Powers and I am afraid that the Economist's name escapes me but he testified about the Federal Reserve and used a great example of 'fractional leasing' let's call it - fractional lending. He compared it to a great race horse but you would lease this fine horse on a particular day. Then boasting in the bar Tuesday challenges Friday to a race...

So FDR steps in and makes horse racing (or even possessing a horse) illegal and closes down the track for a Horse Racing Holiday!

And since these are so evolved around the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act you might comprehend how this all relates allegorically to Title 12 USC §95 - especially as applied to the next run on the Fed, which is the same run and seizure on gold, the next Bankers' Holiday.

I am going to refrain from comment about the dynamic emerging simply because it is unbecoming and people jockey their mouses toward what they enjoy reading and participating in. I will feed that when it is unpleasant, as little as I can. Rather I will try approaching this with logic.



At this timing in the thread you would seem to be trying to summarize and espouse what you are learning from Boris. I am not impressed. There are some aspects within clauses that portray reality as I perceive it but connecting all the clauses and sentences together actually does need you to verify that the birth certificate is directly in the CUSIP sense valuable as some kind of a security. And there you have it - that if it takes a process that requires me to accept secret markets then I categorize that illegal, an abomination and requiring a syndicalism to maintain the illusion of sustainability and even functionality. Quite often these are called bubbles because they are designed to pop.

As with Boris, I never spend too much time on these things so I will concede that if this is an example of Boris and his doctrine, I am somewhat ignorant. I have a $20M lien that ties directly to the oaths and lawful money (look on the coins) being bonded by the IN GOD WE TRUST Trust. I hold a lot more confidence in my lien than any negative averment or IN THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE WE TRUST Trust.



Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. My education about Boris and whatever he teaches is almost entirely off a UCC-3 I viewed a couple weeks ago linked from here on StSC. I started a thread hoping that somebody might start shedding some light for me, rather than spending my time reading through what is coming off as insubstantial from the start.
Thank you for admitting your ignorance and that your "education" about Boris is almost entirely off a UCC-3 you viewed.

You feign yourself as someone who wishes to "protect" others from "dangerous" doctrines; hence your dismissing and condescending attitude toward the supposed 'bunny hole" you feel is being promoted. This is why you continue making erroneous presumptions about my belief or dependency upon 'CUSIP number process' or that I am being "...easily drawn into the delusion (abomination) that debt is money (of value)." These comments are still being made at best in ignorance and at worst as intentional to undermine a theory which may effect your "remedy process" beliefs.

Your confidence in your '$20M lien' and 'Title 12 U.S.C. §411' is no better or worse than confidence in the philosophy behind executing assignment pursuant to 'Title 12 U.S.C. §95 a (2)'. It is all just theory since you have NEVER verified that your "remedy process" succeeds in a courtroom setting. If we go strictly by "internet yarn"; your process kept you in jail for 2 weeks and 'Boris' approach' avoided a certain jail sentence at the eleventh hour.

My point is that I do not care about any of that; it is the underlying philosophy of "render unto Caesar..." in the FULLEST WAY that makes sense to me and "tests well" against my biblical/theological beliefs. Others here also find this approach has the same worthiness.

In the absence of someone directly asking for your "parental guidance", please restrain from presuming to "protect" those who are "beneath" your level of education, vocabulary and "enlightenment". I do not believe there are any children "jockeying their mouses" around here; we are fully capable of thinking, researching, verifying and learning without an automatic "protection-mechanism" provided by you.

Again, I do not espouse ANY "CUSIP" process, 'negative averment' technique or that there is "value" to be gained by some "IN THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE WE TRUST" approach. These are ALL presumptive notions erroneously put forth by your admitted ignorance.