Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 49

Thread: ATM card DEBIT vs CREDIT option

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Chex View Post
    I could not agree with you more

    I could not agree with you more

    This is my question to you Keith How do you know you are the beneficiary of the trust ? What made you the beneficiary of the trust ? You have a contract for that trust?

    What proof do you have stating that there is an account for the trust and you are the beneficiary?
    That's a great question. My first inclination is to say it was the settlor's intention, in my case, my mother. But I will ponder a bit more, since it is self evident that THE NAME as it appears on the instrument is different from my given name.

  2. #32
    The IRS uses YOUR NAME as a Treasury account, to keep track of your use of FRN's, and the taxes you pay on those. They also use it to hold legal title to your estate (in trust) as a surety on the debt money you have endorsed, and to thus establish a lien on your estate, which simplifies seizures. But the trust itself, which is in and holds YOUR NAME, is a cestui que vie trust; the Trustee is holding your assets for you, because you have not appeared to take responsibility for yourself (you are incompetent or suffer civil death). When you make your demand for lawful money, you are rebutting the presumptions that you are dead, and that you choose voluntary debt servitude, loaning your credit and pledging your assets as surety (collateral) for the US govt debt. By refusing to be in contract with the Federal Reserve (a private corporation), you remove these liens on your assets, and take your estate out of the usufructuary trust. This also refutes the implied contract established by SS-5 that you choose to be a 'US citizen,' viz a debt slave employee of the US govt, subject to their jurisdiction, and thus have surrendered all your Constitutional rights. [the words of art used in SS-5 are sophistry or fraud, intended to misdirect you about the purposes of the contract, and thus count as the opposite of full disclosure, as well as being unconscionable, and thus void ab initio]. Your demand, if made ab initio, unwinds the entire relationship which was presumed for you at birth; this is what MJ was referring to when he says the man has an absolute right to change his mind and go back and change his original choice. Had he been fully informed of the consequences of his choice, he would have chosen differently. The Treasury created the trust for you using your NAME. This is because the US govt is a corporation, and can only contract with other corporations, not with real, live people. By creating this trust, they hope to prevent you the natural person from owning anything, thus escaping their jurisdiction. But when you make an appearance (a demand formally served is an appearance), you rebut the presumption that you are dead, and that you want to be a debt slave, and the trustee now has an obligation to return management of the trust to you, the rightful owner of the estate. At this juncture, you take possession of your estate, including the corporate PERSON (YOUR NAME) who owns (holds legal title to) the estate. It is your corporate identity, and you own it. Now a trust has no relevance if there are no assets in it, so this collapses the trust. You can cheerfully say, 'I have no trust in the federal government.' With no contract to make you a US citizen, you are no longer under the jurisdiction of the federal government, with all their rules, codes, and regulations; you now live under common law. The Treasury keeps your treasury account in YOUR NAME (and with your ss#) 'for tax purposes,' but if you do not use FRN's you will not have any taxable income, so the account goes dormant.
    The entire 'New Deal/Great Society' move towards socialism is based on these two rocks: private debt money which creates a lien (debt cannot be paid off with debt), and your implied/presumed agreement to use this debt money and accept liability for the interest on it. When you break the rock of presumed agreement, the entire fraud scheme falls apart, and you see the US government for what it is: a bankrupt corporate front for bankers to use to rob the American public of their substance. End the Fed.

    Freed

  3. #33
    Member Robert Henry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Where ever I may roam...
    Posts
    40
    Simply elegant and concisely to the point Freed. Thank you. The more I hear explanations like this the more it all solidifies in my mind.

  4. #34
    And my mom to. I wonder about her trust and the rest of my families state created trust. What exactly happened to it and who's got it.

    The NAME, everyone fears the name when used/written when we don't like it, why does it matter how it's capitalized or not?

    It's just a part of identification along with other things associated with it.

    People who create trusts don't they use their last name?

    Declaration of Trust

    Is it Tammy Trustmaker, called the grantor or is it called Tammy, called the grantor?

    As long as Trustmaker is spelled correctly I am good with it, its identifiable to establish the identity of, to ascertain the origin, nature etc.

    What I am still looking for is the proof of the relationship of the trust. I want to see it in Constitutions, Statutes, and Legislative Information - By State in writing.

    State Statutes by Topic. http://www.law.cornell.edu/statutes.html#state

  5. #35
    Thank you Freed
    The IRS uses YOUR NAME as a Treasury account, to keep track of your use of FRN's, and the taxes you pay on those.
    by the use of the number you supply by SS-5 and applying is free - lol.

    End the Fed today.

    And it becomes more clearer everytime I read it.

    This is because the US govt is a corporation, and can only contract with other corporations, not with real, live people.
    and so is the state we reside in.
    Last edited by Chex; 01-10-14 at 06:46 PM.

  6. #36
    ONE DOLLAR - TWO IMAGES - MAKE THE RIGHT CHOICE

    Quote Originally Posted by David Merrill View Post
    Those endorsing are expected to tithe into the priestcraft of Mammon (false balances) to save the sacrificial system!
    This is in perfect accordance with the principle set down by the Messiah when confronted about taxes.

    Read Mt 22:15-21 and notice especially that it had to do with the "image" on the currency.

    The One Dollar Bill has 2 images (authorization/ownership seals) on it - Federal Reserve (LEFT) and The Department of the Treasury (RIGHT).

    We are choosing the image on the RIGHT when demanding lawful money for all transactions per 12 USC 411.

    The DEFAULT choice is the image on the LEFT, and requires a usage fee (tax) to the god of mammon (Caesar), and rightly so per Mt 22:21.

    Daniel 4:17 shows "...That the Most High is Ruler over the realm of mankind."

    Consequently, I believe that the true AUTHORITY behind 12 USC 411 is the Most High - not Congress, not even the Executive Branch.

    Mt 4:4 says we are to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord.

    Mt 22:20-21 is THE RULE that all the host in heaven and earth must abide by now.

    The Eternal has always enabled us to make a CHOICE (Deut 30:15,19). Today, that choice is right in front of us on every dollar bill.

    Make the "RIGHT" choice. Choose to Demand Lawful Money for all transactions.

    Put your choice on the record - by substantive evidence on normal business transactions and/or by a public recorded Declaration.

    I am looking forward to your new Lessons at http://www.lawfulmoneytrust.com/, David, so that many more will learn how to make this "RIGHT" choice!

    P.S. This same choice may apply to CREDIT vs DEBIT cards??? Hmmmm...... Is DEBIT card the RIGHT choice too???

    P.S. See this folder for a PDF copy to be used as a flyer/handout.
    Last edited by doug555; 01-10-14 at 10:04 PM.

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Chex View Post
    And my mom to. I wonder about her trust and the rest of my families state created trust. What exactly happened to it and who's got it.

    The NAME, everyone fears the name when used/written when we don't like it, why does it matter how it's capitalized or not?

    It's just a part of identification along with other things associated with it.

    People who create trusts don't they use their last name?

    Declaration of Trust

    Is it Tammy Trustmaker, called the grantor or is it called Tammy, called the grantor?

    As long as Trustmaker is spelled correctly I am good with it, its identifiable to establish the identity of, to ascertain the origin, nature etc.

    What I am still looking for is the proof of the relationship of the trust. I want to see it in Constitutions, Statutes, and Legislative Information - By State in writing.

    State Statutes by Topic. http://www.law.cornell.edu/statutes.html#state
    I think the capitalization is a device used to differentiate the individual from the corporate, and that's all. We know the organization exists because the Birth Certificate declares it. The corporate organization is styled as THE NAME.

    Now I was thinking about the question as to how I know I would be the beneficiary. It seems to me that I could find the Constitution for California (1849 is handy for me at the moment) and read Article 1 Section 2 to discover government's motives for creating a certificate of beneficial interest, the birth certificate. If it's creating something other than a beneficial interest, then it would be imposing an obligation or duty where no duty ought to exist, which is fraud from the beginning.
    Last edited by Keith Alan; 01-10-14 at 08:58 PM. Reason: include image

  8. #38
    You are correct, Keith. The beneficial interest the state has is to presume that you want to be part of the debt ponzi, as this allows the bankers to use your credit, and to lien your assets, to further their money printing scheme. No one can 'claim' another man. And the state is a fictional entity, so it has no power over a live human. Hence their real beneficial interest is to get you the man to take liability for the debt which is assigned to the corporate person they created. But look at the DBA rules: anyone can create a corporate person. You just file a notice with the Secretary of State that you the man intend to do business as a corporate entity; the Sec records it in the public record, and you are in business; 'you' can now contract with other corporations. Now you own that dba entity, and are also fully responsible for its actions. You are the accommodation agent for it; since the corporate person does not exist in the real world, you give it power through your actions. You earn money for it, pay its debts, sign contracts for it, etc. The state has no right to YOUR NAME; remember when grifters used to claim internet web site names, including the names of large corporations? The courts clarified the common law concept that you cannot claim another's name. The state gets around this by setting up a trust; see FDR's creation of the SS Trust: he put all the assets of the US (corporate) government into this trust. Now read Col House's description of the debt slavery scheme he conceived social security to be: we create a trust, put all the (US) citizens' assets into it, and pledge it as collateral for the govt's debts. Now the man is slave to his corporate person's debt, but he has to do this voluntarily, otherwise it is theft/slavery. So the implied contract to become a US citizen, ie a 14th Amendment citizen, with govt-granted privileges rather than Constitutional rights, volunteers you the man to be a debt slave to the YOUR NAME trust. Social Security is the cheese; debt slavery is the trap. The state cannot claim YOUR NAME; they can only claim a beneficial interest in it, because you agreed to assume liability for the US debt. Eliminate the claim by refuting the implied presumption that you choose to be a voluntary debt slave. Refuse to use their debt money: the whole scheme falls apart.

    Freed

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Freed Gerdes View Post
    You are correct, Keith. The beneficial interest the state has is to presume that you want to be part of the debt ponzi, as this allows the bankers to use your credit, and to lien your assets, to further their money printing scheme. No one can 'claim' another man. And the state is a fictional entity, so it has no power over a live human. Hence their real beneficial interest is to get you the man to take liability for the debt which is assigned to the corporate person they created. But look at the DBA rules: anyone can create a corporate person. You just file a notice with the Secretary of State that you the man intend to do business as a corporate entity; the Sec records it in the public record, and you are in business; 'you' can now contract with other corporations. Now you own that dba entity, and are also fully responsible for its actions. You are the accommodation agent for it; since the corporate person does not exist in the real world, you give it power through your actions. You earn money for it, pay its debts, sign contracts for it, etc. The state has no right to YOUR NAME; remember when grifters used to claim internet web site names, including the names of large corporations? The courts clarified the common law concept that you cannot claim another's name. The state gets around this by setting up a trust; see FDR's creation of the SS Trust: he put all the assets of the US (corporate) government into this trust. Now read Col House's description of the debt slavery scheme he conceived social security to be: we create a trust, put all the (US) citizens' assets into it, and pledge it as collateral for the govt's debts. Now the man is slave to his corporate person's debt, but he has to do this voluntarily, otherwise it is theft/slavery. So the implied contract to become a US citizen, ie a 14th Amendment citizen, with govt-granted privileges rather than Constitutional rights, volunteers you the man to be a debt slave to the YOUR NAME trust. Social Security is the cheese; debt slavery is the trap. The state cannot claim YOUR NAME; they can only claim a beneficial interest in it, because you agreed to assume liability for the US debt. Eliminate the claim by refuting the implied presumption that you choose to be a voluntary debt slave. Refuse to use their debt money: the whole scheme falls apart.

    Freed
    Very nice summary. Clean and succinct, yet entertaining to read.

    Edit-- This still doesn't address other obligations imposed on THE NAME, like consenting to process of service.

    Post Edit-- What if - along with making the demand - someone gives notice to his state government that he no longer consents to receive service of process from foreign entities like the corporate federal State? That would complete the separation.
    Last edited by Keith Alan; 01-11-14 at 01:50 AM. Reason: more comments

  10. #40
    The corporate PERSON exists in a world of legalities, equal with all other corporate entities. Being fictional, it exists everywhere; it has no need to hide. You as accommodation agent get to give power to your corporate person, and also to protect it from contracts not to your benefit. So who wants to serve process on your corporate person? Someone in contract with you who claims that you are in dishonor? If you are not in contract, you can refuse for cause. If you are in contract, you must answer for the contracts you have entered. Your natural human person also must live in honor, so this is not just a legality, it is the basis of moral behavior. "Do all you say you will do, and do not infringe on others." This is the whole law. Live in honor and you should have no problem avoiding legalities. As MJ says, everything you do outside your estate is illegal. We do not have to be burdened with all these codes, rules, regulations, and municipal laws (administered under the UCC, Lex Mercatoria, contract law). These municipal laws (laws written by/for the corporation) only apply to the corporation's officers and employees, not to natural persons (Rodriquez v Ray Donovan, 1985). So just keep out of contract with the Federal government. The social security agreement is not a contract; SS is a welfare program and it is voluntary. The words of art used to get free men to volunteer for debt slavery is the definition of 'US citizen,' which through a series of distant and convoluted definitions, means that you have chosen to domicile your corporate person in Washington, DC, the only place in the US where the corporate federal government has exclusive jurisdiction. But the structure of the SS agreement (SS-5) falls under this SC ruling:

    "Any false representation of material facts made with knowledge of falsity and with intent that it shall be acted on by another in entering into contract,
    and which is so acted upon, constitutes 'fraud,' and entitles party deceived to avoid contract or recover damages."
    Barnsdall Refining Corn. v. Birnam Wood Oil Co. 92 F 26 817.

    Since the surrender of unalienable rights must be knowing and voluntary (UCC 1-308), this part of the SS agreement is easily voidable as unconscionable and without full disclosure. You also have a contract (implied) whereby you have accepted the presumption that you want to be a debt slave, want to deal in FR debt securities, and want to loan your credit to the FR. This presumption is rebutted by your demand for lawful money. Since lawful money discharges all debt (12 USC 95 a(2)), your demand basically redeems all prior FRN debt liens against your estate. If there are any residual debts on your account, they are the personal liability of the Trustee, the Secretary of Treasury. You have no interest in whether the Trustee sorts those out, as they do not pertain to you; you have no obligation to support the federal debt, once you sever your contract with the Federal Reserve and quit using their debt notes.

    Thus if officers of the municipal court charge your PERSON with a violation of some legality (municipal code), you simply ask them to produce the contract which binds you to obey these codes. Without any such contract, you are bound only by common law, under which there must be an injured party for the basis of an action, and the state cannot be an injured party within an action adjudicated in their own court (conflict of interest, maybe?). So municipal courts have no jurisdiction over your PERSON without contract. Municipal courts never had jurisdiction over you the natural man, as the court is a corporation, thus it can only deal with other corporate entities. Only a jury of other men can have jurisdiction over you the natural man.

    Freed

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •