IMO, Boris's paradigm is based on the reality of the
military occupation of the united States of America that started on
April 15, 1861 when President Lincoln by the power vested in him (as Commander in Chief) summoned both Houses of Congress to convene on July 4, 1861. For more information about this "reality" see
http://www.stevegartin.com/legalshisory.htm. Here is a good excerpt:
The "
law of usufruct" is part of military law (
Lieber Code - part #38 implements the
usufruct principle).
But I believe our people's captivity under "military rule" truly began MUCH earlier, in 721 BC when the Assyrian Empire conquered the Northern 10 Tribes of Israel. The implications of this perspective is
posted here for those who are interested in that dimension.
So, if military rule is the "reality" of our current situation here in Amercia, then, IMO, we need to develop a remedy based on starting from that reality.
Using the UCC is honoring a system used by our captors. If the UCC is used to "surrender" and make "peace" with our captors, then it may in fact be the escape clause that the Creator promised to provide for "His people" in
1 Cor 10:13.
Was not Daniel blessed and protected while serving the King of Babylon?
Isn't the "daughter of Zion" (true church today) told to "Go to Babylon. There you will be rescued."? (
Mic 4:10)
I believe Boris's paradigm using usufruct and 12 USC 95a(2) has merit. Just as much as using 12 USC 411.
However, I believe that using
UCC 3-603(b) about a dishonored payment would make more sense than using UCC 2 about a "protected purchaser" as far as
enforcing this remedy is concerned.
Perhaps we can focus on building upon this "military rule" based paradigm, and integrate it with the "lawful money" paradigm.
See Boris's
OUTLINE to learn more...