Originally Posted by
Publius
Notes to two people follow:
Note to David Merrill, In regard to your post #108, Thank you for posting that document. I do believe I had seen it elsewhere on the site.
Also, I offer my appologize to you if you felt that I was challenging the veracity of any claim you had made or evidence you had proffered relative to the claims of others. Your use of the word "lying" disturbed me. It is because of your presentations on the sui juris site and the occasional poor behavior of others on that site in response to your writings that I participate in this forum. I respect your opinions and value the extraordinary efforts you have made to provide us information and evidence that we may consider in arriving at our own decisions. Thank you for trusting us, essentially anonymous people, to know your thoughts and share in your discoveries. We are enriched by one anothers' sharing.
My calling for evidence was not a challenge to flush out liars, it was just a call for those who are holding bricks to came forth and offer them for us all to use to build a strong house. I believe that the very existence of this site and its sustained use indicates that not one of us can solve the challenges alone and that the concept and function of a brain trust, brain bank, brainstorming is fundamental to our success. Whether one labels it as a brotherhood or just a bunch of independents hollering into the valley doesn't really matter. The important matter is that we share what we find when it is known to us, by our best ability to determine, that it is truthful. Each is at his own risk to decides what he will depend on.
Note to Freedave, Regarding post#109; I have heard the name Winston Shrout but I know nothing more about him. I am aware of but have not studied Tim Turner's program either.
I have been using the "Deposited for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES of face value" for three or more years. I have used it since whenever it was that I first became aware of it by way of D.M.'s posts elsewhere. And now I am close to changing what I stamp because of the refinements I have found on this site.
Regarding your post #110, If one can posture themselves so to not interact with the taxing entitles, I think is far superior to giving them something and then looking for a way to get it back. That "they" seem to be able to do, or simply go ahead and do, whatever they wish, makes them so corrupt that one cannot comfortably act in good faith with them. My father lost a nice home to "them" despite an excellent attempt at defense. I witnessed their lying and denial of good sound defenses. Their actions are plain old theft.
And, yes, it could seem as if some process "worked" now, only to find in a year or some years later that "they" then consider the relied upon process as improper, frivilous, protest. . . (and any other of the many villainizing prejudices they apply) and they move against you in a big way. Anything and all things which are connected with an SSN are at risk, whether you play by the rules or not (my belief). It is the SSN and all the regulations adherent to its use which entangle us in their revenue farming process. Best to stay off the farm if you don't wan't to be milked and brought to slaughter. or some, that means a great change in lifestyle. The outcome of their occupation of our halls of govermnent, institution of banking and schools is that America has become, functionally, a conquered nation.
So, do we recognize an enemy and attempt to fight, or do we recognize an enemy and lick its boots in the hopes of staying in its good graces ?
One's conscience and concern for our future generations might be the brightest guiding light. The cost of the fight, for many, outweighs any cost they might have coughed up to "them" in voluntary compliance. So, it must be that a greater prize is sought by those involved.
The occasional back bighting and bickering disturbs me. It is destructive beyond the intended target. I am pleased to have seen little of that on this site.
Reply With Quote
