That seventh-grade figure came from my evidence repository in Denver. My objective is to be able to convince a jury that the billing/lien/settlement process is based in a valid security agreement that currently exists between people and government.

One will find that the more open and willing one is to fully disclose what one finds as success, the more accepting and welcoming this group will be.

No. That is what is happening on the Internet all over - elsewhere. As far as my posts go, it is not going to happen. My responses to your STRAWMAN Redemption by any other name will continue to reflect that too. What one finds as success is inadaquate without some scientific testing for reproducible mental models that are actually applicable in the courts and in real life. - Competence.

In other words you keep falling back on the idea that there are more funds, based in the certificate of live birth as a bill of lading on the baby, than would be held in the SSN accounting as a TIN (Withholdings). This is the HJR-192 setting too, utilizing House and Senate Reports but extending the birth certificate as some kind of stock certificate being hypothecated upon like Rob MENARD's theories about Security of the Person. Rob is not the only casualty though. We also find that L.B. BORK's set theories have gone asunder. He wrote a book (The Red Amendment), that like Pete HENDRICKSON's Cracking the Code set him defending incomplete or incorrect hypothesis. That is not what is going on here. Not as far as I am concerned. So you may wish I would be more open minded about your trust theories but where we stand, you and I, is that you have to load your scanner or camera properly so that you might show us some better process-to-results images for me to comment on, rather than to shoot down because you are implying results instead of demonstrating results.

Which brings us to the topic btw.

LB BORK's book and website is about the 14th Amendment (primarily). At the beginning of this thread I threw some historical facts out about the 1865 Amendment too. When I began speaking of this on LB's website he banished me! Then he wanted me back but only if I wrote him an essay about how I would behave...?? Then silence prompted him to accept me back and he would humiliate me and delete my posts to avoid my embarrassing myself there, in front of maybe three active members and ten readers! Then he banished me again. Now he wants me back again. Point being how if you are going to set your theories in stone by writing a book, you better base them in standing law like we do here.

I read your comment, embedded in your paragraph to mean you wish I would let up about you not supporting your variation of the birth certificate hypothecations. I interpret your posts as an attempt to pursuade my thinking and belief sets. Of course! That's exactly what you are doing - as I am to you too. So get on loading that scanner now.


Regards,

David Merrill.