1st Return Redeeming Lawful Money

[froze25]

I also received publication 3498-A

[froze25]

Continued here

[JohnnyCash]

I appreciate that you gave us the heads up this was coming

[Chex]

80 Members have read about this, and that does not include surfers and other readers. This thread has also caught the attention of a malicious website that has a way of prodding the IRS to harass suitors too. Then again, occasionally there are IRS agents who do not understand and it would seem, IRS attorneys who are hoping to discourage people before this actually becomes the inevitable run on the Fed.

http://www.losthorizons.com/phpBB/vi...php?f=2&t=3168

Steven M. Beresford, Ph.D. at http://yannone.blogspot.com/2005/10/...ord-v-irs.html .

To the Governor Christine Gregoire (can she answer the question on lawful money Facebook fans?) from http://www.losthorizons.com/tax/taxi...fordLetter.htm

How times did you think going to LH under a different name would change their minds about lawful money?

[froze25]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm ) and provided me with a return as filed?
The Supreme Court has adjudicated on this and has determined that Federal Reserve Notes can act as Lawful Money if such a demand has been made. My demand has been made (shown on each paycheck's endorsements that I included with the 1040) to be given Lawful money so my return should reflect that I have only received Lawful Money for those paychecks that show that a restricted endorsement was made and should not be treated as Private credit extended by the Federal Reserve Banking System known as Federal Reserve Notes.
To be clear I am NOT asking for gold or any other metal considered to be precious.
I am asking that my income be treated as if it were US Treasury Notes (Lawful Money) and have the Tax Liability applied to my earnings as if I received US Treasury notes and/or Lawful money as I have indicated on my IRS 1040 that I submitted. It has always been my intention to use Lawful Money.
If you look at Title 12 USC 417 found here http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm In section 7 of the webpage, it is clear that there is a distinction between Federal Reserve Notes and Lawful money.

Please include me in any correspondence that you have with the US Treasury Department on my behalf.
I wish only to have the Tax Liability, if any applied to me that is Lawfully required for receiving Lawful money in exchange for my labor and would like my original questions answered, not ignored and my demand under 12 USC 411 honored.

Truly Yours,

Steven Edward

[Chex]

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm ) and provided me with a return as filed?
The Supreme Court has adjudicated on this and has determined that Federal Reserve Notes can act as Lawful Money if such a demand has been made. My demand has been made (shown on each paycheck's endorsements that I included with the 1040) to be given Lawful money so my return should reflect that I have only received Lawful Money for those paychecks that show that a restricted endorsement was made and should not be treated as Private credit extended by the Federal Reserve Banking System known as Federal Reserve Notes.
To be clear I am NOT asking for gold or any other metal considered to be precious.
I am asking that my income be treated as if it were US Treasury Notes (Lawful Money) and have the Tax Liability applied to my earnings as if I received US Treasury notes and/or Lawful money as I have indicated on my IRS 1040 that I submitted. It has always been my intention to use Lawful Money.
If you look at Title 12 USC 417 found here http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section16.htm In section 7 of the webpage, it is clear that there is a distinction between Federal Reserve Notes and Lawful money.

Please include me in any correspondence that you have with the US Treasury Department on my behalf.
I wish only to have the Tax Liability, if any applied to me that is Lawfully required for receiving Lawful money in exchange for my labor and would like my original questions answered, not ignored and my demand under 12 USC 411 honored.

Truly Yours,

Steven Edward

Dear Mr. Bishop,

Why have they not treated my "income" as "Lawful Money" as per my demand made on my paycheck's endorsements?

Truly Yours,

Steven Edward

[froze25]

Dear Mr. Bishop,

Why have they not treated my "income" as "Lawful Money" as per my demand made on my paycheck's endorsements?

Truly Yours,

Steven Edward

Simple and to the point

[walter]

Dear Mr. Bishop,

Why have they not treated my "income" as "Lawful Money" as per my demand made on my paycheck's endorsements?

Truly Yours,

Steven Edward

Love it.
keep it simple.

[Michael Joseph]

Love it.
keep it simple.

I had a similar story this year we were amazed that the State responded so quickly but the IRS is still dragging their feet. So be it. We already have the victory the rest is just us witnessing the proceedings. A couple of letters should remedy the situation. However, years back we had a situation that actually went to collections but when it made it to collections we wrote a letter to the local agent and the account was zeroed.

We don't argue that we do not have any income -that would be untrue. However we received fundage absent certain obligations. We will let the trustees perform their obligations upon the fundage issued on the bonds of the United States. So we possess the fundage absent surety, liability, joinder, etc. Therefore we benefit but lack the legal title.

Shalom,
MJ

[EZrhythm]

We don't argue that we do not have any income -that would be untrue. However we received fundage absent certain obligations. We will let the trustees perform their obligations upon the fundage issued on the bonds of the United States. So we possess the fundage absent surety, liability, joinder, etc. Therefore we benefit but lack the legal title.

GENIUS AND CONGRATULATIONS in expressing this position!

[David Merrill]

Yes, thank you Michael Joseph;


I heard from an otherwise quiet suitor today. As you might expect I am getting a lot of success stories this time of year. I only take special note of the demonstrations that portray contemplation.

This is a couple with the husband receiving full refunds for some time now. His wife started redeeming lawful money with direct deposit about May, 2013 on her Signature Card and for whatever reason, when filing they just filed for a full refund of all her withholdings. I imagine this is because the 1040 Form does not really accommodate special conditions. The IRS has recalculated her Refund accordingly - that is to say to Refund only for two-thirds the tax year!

They are giving her some time before sending the Refund Check for her to contest their reevaluation of her liability but the suitor is sanitizing a file for me to share and will let me know if there are any snags in getting the Treasury Check.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[walter]

We don't argue that we do not have any income -that would be untrue.

I was wondering the use of that word 'income" but after looking it up you are absolutely right.

[Michael Joseph]

I was wondering the use of that word 'income" but after looking it up you are absolutely right.

Would anyone argue that a house can be constructed absent a foundation?

Usufruct is based in Rights. But what is Right? Right is Property. But Property begs a legal relationship and that begs a TRUST.

So one cannot contemplate Usufruct without first contemplating the Trust.

INCOME. The gain which proceeds from property, labor, or business; it is applied particularly to individuals; the income of the government is usually called revenue.

OF denotes progeny. A child is OF [its/his] parents. Therefore a child can be even an incorporeal concept [legal identity] established by a settlor.

Just as YHVH desires worship and love [homage and service] so too does the State/Kings of their persons. The terms blind a man because said man cannot see CAPACITY. He acts in and for an established business entity OF some government.

Consider Law to be a Thing for a moment. Then to make a Use of a Thing that belongs to another would subject the user to the Terms of Use established by the one who created the Thing. So then to make a use of Law is to gain a benefit. Sort of like sitting under a shade tree in the desert is to gain a benefit.

The end user by his own deed implies his/her trust as one uses a thing/law established by another. If one does not take shade under a particular tree, then one might be an OUTLAW in my foregoing analogy.

Jdg 9:8 The trees went forth on a time to anoint a king over them; and they said unto the olive tree, Reign thou over us.

Jdg 9:14 Then said all the trees unto the bramble, Come thou, and reign over us.

Jdg 9:15 And the bramble said unto the trees, If in truth ye anoint me king over you, then come and put your trust in my shadow: and if not, let fire come out of the bramble, and devour the cedars of Lebanon.

Comment: Clearly in the foregoing analogy Trees are Men. The bramble is the Thorn Bush - which is The Satan. The shadow is the governments established by the "Prince of this World". This is clearly one trust. Reference Jeremiah 17:5

Jer 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.

Comment: However another trust exists that is just outside the door of most peoples comprehension. I find it amazing that the Bible is the most readily available book on the face of this planet and yet, most never get around to truly studying it. It holds the keys. And for those who will seek the Righteousness of The Way - they will find them. And now the 2nd trust: Ref Jeremiah 17:7

Jer 17:7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD, and whose hope the LORD is.

Psa 91:1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the MOST HIGH Shall abide under the shadow of THE ALMIGHTY.

Psa 91:2 I will say of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress: My God; in Him will I trust.

Comment: Have you been Re-Venue-ed? For the great fisherman put everything in perspective - in the Great book of Acts: The apostles who in and of themselves are a Parable within a Parable - Peter being a symbol of the Church in the latter two days [2k years]:

Act 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said,It is necessary to obey God rather than men.

Comment: And replacing the 450 Baal priests that Elijah withstood with 450 lawyers - one begins to gain perspective. For just as their was TWO Enochs, there are TWO Simons, and one understanding will see TWO Jesus'. One lawless anti-Christ [Jesus] and one Righteous Jesus.

Now then, is their any need of gold? The princes of this age trade in the trust of their subjects. Said subjects establish themselves in their estate in their DEEDS. Said deeds are registered to keep an accurate accounting. So that judgment can be issued.

Now do not misunderstand me - government is good! But the debtor is slave to the lender. So then what of government that has to pledge its citizenry as surety for the mortgage? Look around what do you see?

I see a people that willingly enslave themselves for absolutely NOTHING in exchange! Yep that too reminds me of this:

Isa 52:3 For thus saith the LORD, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed not with silver

Isa 52:4 For thus saith the Lord GOD, My people went down aforetime into Egypt to sojourn there; and the Assyrian oppressed them for nothing.

Isa 52:5 Now therefore, what do I here, saith the LORD, that My People hath been taken away for nought? they that rule over them make them to howl, saith the LORD; and My name continually every day is blasphemed.

Isa 52:6 Therefore My People shall know My name: therefore they shall know in that day that I am He That doth speak: behold, it is I.

Isa 52:7 How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!

Comment: There is nothing new under the Sun. Look around you are in Egypt. But El Elyon is on the Throne and Yehoshuah is the Prime Minister [High Priest] working in the Government of Elohim which rules the Universe. So we are left with CHOICE whom we shall serve [worship/love].

Paul understood....

Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves servants for obedience, ye are servants to him whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Comment: Stretch the tent chords of the mind a bit to understand Romans 6:16. What was the sin in the garden? Ultimately The Man and his wife Loved and took Shadow under another Lawgiver [the Created]. So what is new under the Sun? They served the created instead of the Creator!

Now re-read Romans 6:16 and see the created as the devices of man [sin] and the Creator as the Righteousness of Elohim [The Word] whereupon the Word establishes The Way.

Have your been Re-Venue-ed? Did you do it to yourself?

Hos 6:9 And as troops of robbers wait for a man, so the company of priests murder in the way by consent: for they commit lewdness.

Comment: "Murder in the way" - a methodology established by Balaam, the priest, to entrap an ignorant people by placing a choice before them. Therefore in their ignorance they curse themselves.

Hos 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.

Comment: Enjoy those billion statutes - be sure to read them all. Finding I have no standing in the heavenly court as I am naked in my transgression, I appeal to my Advocate before the Throne [Yehoshuah]. For the D.A. [Satan] is right, I have transgressed the Law and, I am guilty. I am left without recourse, I brought this on my own head.

Consider carefully with the hat of a King placed upon your head. Those who transgress the Trust Agreement are now without the camp [Kingdom]. Each office has bylaws that govern its performance - and those undertaking in office are then subject to the Terms of its Use.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.



Shalom,
MJ

[doug555]

I was wondering the use of that word 'income" but after looking it up you are absolutely right.

It does not matter what "income" is... "Income" is only a factor used in calculating the "usage fee" (aka "tax") IF one is using FRNs (private credit of FED).

The billions of U.S. codes and statutes are only a smokescreen to divert attention from this truth. And are quite effective.

[David Merrill]

It does not matter what "income" is... "Income" is only a factor used in calculating the "usage fee" (aka "tax") IF one is using FRNs (private credit of FED).

The billions of U.S. codes and statutes are only a smokescreen to divert attention from this truth. And are quite effective.

It always matters, the nature and character of anything. Understanding, perceiving things incoherent to their nature is delusion - a world of illusions. Perceiving things according to law, like Michael Joseph points out is knowledge.

That pointed out I can certainly agree with your points about usage fee. As I work with older suitors who were claiming a refund on FICA and Social Security "Tax" your point is amplified Doug. Discussion demanded we ascertain why these obvious insurance policies are considered a "tax" at all? [Federal Insurance Contributions Act and Social Security Insurance.]

Answer: Because the amount you pay by way of Premiums is not set in a standard way but rather in proportion to how much "income" you bring in during the tax year.



Regards,

David Merrill.