How did you get into the destructive practices of the Fed, the IRS, etc to begin with?
How did you get into the destructive practices of the Fed, the IRS, etc to begin with?
That's a pretty broad question -- one answer is by identifying with a physical body on this planet.Originally Posted by Chex
Would you like to respond to my post?
Non est factum (Latin for "it is not [my] deed") is a doctrine in contract law that allows a signing party to escape performance of the agreement. A claim of non est factum means that the signature on the contract was signed by mistake, without knowledge of its meaning, but was not done so negligently. Does that apply?
Again, based upon what I have looked at so far, it seems to me that, as I've written before, this remedy would, if it is valid and if it is broadly applied, eliminate the current destructive practices of the Fed, the IRS, etc.
It also appears that there is no simple and easy way to understand it enough to establish a certainty as to whether or not it is valid.
Am I correct in that?
That is correct. When you redeem lawful money you are telling the Fed, IRS and the Federal Government that you want no part in it's game of deception.Again, based upon what I have looked at so far, it seems to me that, as I've written before, this remedy would, if it is valid and if it is broadly applied, eliminate the current destructive practices of the Fed, the IRS, etc.
Lawful money is outside the scope of the IRS, and what you do is you force the FED to pay off the national debt and not you. Because the FED has to go to the treasury to request lawful money. When you endorse private credit the treasury goes to the fed and says I need more private credit creating a national debt which the fed happily agrees too because they get to incur more interests on worthless linen printed from thin air.
I prefer the fed holding the bag for the debt instead of me and my fellow Americans. So I'll do my part and stop endorsing private credit.
Thank you, Ares, for addressing that part of my response -- that is certainly an extremely desirable result.
But, as I also wrote, it appears that there is no simple and easy way to understand this enough to establish a certainty as to whether or not it is valid.
Am I correct in that?
Reply With Quote
