New Promissory note

[mikecz]

I suppose you are right - but it cannot be assigned. Many times when I don't feel like visiting a bank, I just take the check made out to me and assign it to another party. An Allonge comes in handy to show chain of title.

Look it up. You will be pleased with what you find.

Shalom,
MJ

So a check is basically transferring title to money from one individual to another. When you endorse it, you are agreeing to the terms of the title transfer. Unless you cash it, really, it still is just a contract. The bank, after it is endorsed in blank, "cashes" it from the drawing bank, and now holds title to it. You loan them the check the second you give it to the teller. Really, outside special circumstances, the payee is the only one that can agree or endorse it. When it is endorsed, the "contract" is enacted, correct?

You can sign over a check to someone else by just putting "pay to the order of... "name"" then signing it below. One assignment can fit on the back of a check, other further assignments may require an allonge. The receiving party, the one you signed it over to, has to provide an endorsement in order to cash/deposit it.

I'm actually dealing with a chain of title on my property now, so it's interesting to think of checks in this context. I can't trace my property assignments yet back to the original Land patent, I'm actually working on this now. It's also interesting to think of a receipt as proof of a transfer of title. At a homestore, you may purchase a hammer. The title sits with "Lowe's", the retailer. You give them money or credit card, whatever, and they give you a receipt, or proof of title transfer. You now have the hammer, and have a receipt to prove a legal transfer of title happened.

How can one endorse a check as to accept the terms of the contract, but not sign legal title over to the bank. I think this is why the signature card makes sense. You can endorse all day, and put cash into your account, but, any "money" deposited in that account is construed to transfer title to the bank. Correct?

[Michael Joseph]

A check is NOT legal tender. It is a private issue. But it is evidence of title transfer. Therefore, you can write one check and assign it an unlimited number of times before any bank receives the deposit. An alonge is just evidence of chain of title. So then an Alonge is a Trust Indenture - passing title from a Grantor to a Grantee.

Each party will either make a demand for lawful money or not.


Demand is made for Lawful Money per 12 USC 411 by: Signature
PAY TO THE ORDER OF : Name of Business Entity or Person


Shalom,
MJ

[Anthony Joseph]

back to promissory notes...

here is an interesting in-depth explanation as to what transpires when one goes to the bank for a "loan"



i do not agree with the "court approach" toward the end as it invokes a jurisdiction other than common law

however, the bank mechanics explained is spot on in my opinion and it nearly parrots the oath-sworn testimony of the man (banker rep); Lawrence V. Morgan [Morgan... hmmm] in the Credit River case (i read the actual transcript testimony once but i can't find it anywhere now if anyone has a source to that transcript i would be much appreciative to receive the info)

which goes back to what i wrote earlier; the only amount rightfully due to the bank at a "closing" are the "closing costs"; to prepare and submit the paperwork for the transaction to go through

the bank does not risk a penny of its own assets when a "loan" process is done

no lawful consideration, no valid contract

no voice, no claim

[mikecz]

Ok so let me get this straight.

1. I create a new for of currency with my mortgage. Basically I sign a mortgage for 150,000, and boom, that is now currency. (Do they deposit the mortgage or the promissory note, because these are 2 separate things.)

2. The bank recognizes the 150,000 as currency, and opens a checking account in my name, and puts 150,000 into that account. The exchange from mortgage currency to real money occurs here.

3. The bank then cuts a 150,000 check to me, which in most cases are forwarded to the seller. Lets just say for this case I own my home free and clear. So they get the equity in my home by changing the mortgage to a check which they cut.

4. They now have equity, and I owe them lawful money. For this money changing service, they charge an interest rate.

This is where I'm stuck. What gives the mortgage value as "legal tender", or the ability of the bank to simply place it in a deposit account is the collateral in the house PLUS the ability to pay it back. Basically I'm creating money out of thin air by writing up the mortgage and giving it to the bank. What this is saying is the bank shouldn't be able to place it in a deposit account. They should figuratively pull money out of their bank vaults, deplete their cash, and wait for repayment on their note they bought. I get that. But they don't do this. They take the mortgage, and issue you a bullshit bank check, or promise to pay, and keep the mortgage as real cash in a deposit account. The liability, or "balancing" transaction is a liability to pay the check they just cut you. They can sell the mortgage, whatever..

What happens when that 150k bullshit check given to you by the bank is placed in the sellers bank. What does that entry look like.


***Edit Really the correct way to look at this would be if I wanted to buy someone's house. I would issue them a mortgage note, assume legal tender, and they would take it as payment for their house. The seller would then go to the bank, and sell the mortgage for CASH. A direct conversion of legal tender for legal tender.

With the mortgage you gave them a promise to pay with interest and collateral, which is cash in their vaults, a sellable item. For it they gave you a promise to pay, a liability in the form of a bullshit bank check. Thats a pretty good deal for the bank. I gave them an asset/cash or legal tender with interest backed by collateral, they gave a negotiable promise to pay. By the way, they refuse your promise to pay "bank checks" back. You have to give them lawful money.

[Anthony Joseph]

fancy bookkeeping is the nature of "banking"

the point is that the source of the credit "loaned" is the man who put pen to paper

the "bank" did not risk $150,000 from its own assets

the "bank" gained the equity (value of $150,000 by converting/deposting the signed note); and, a lien on property through processing of paper and fancy bookkeeping

the man lost the value of the note; and, owes a debt plus interest with a lien on property if debt is not paid

[Keith Alan]

Isn't the loan application processed first, getting pre-approved by the Fed to issue the credit? And when the note is executed, isn't it the US that ends up being obligated, in case of default?

So isn't what really happens that bookkeeping entries are made, and the credit is deposited into an account in the bank, to be disbursed at closing?

So while the note maker actually issues his note, and is the source of the credit, the credit is secured by the deed and backed by the full faith and credit of the US?

It would be great to really get this figured out.

[mikecz]

Isn't the loan application processed first, getting pre-approved by the Fed to issue the credit? And when the note is executed, isn't it the US that ends up being obligated, in case of default?

So isn't what really happens that bookkeeping entries are made, and the credit is deposited into an account in the bank, to be disbursed at closing?

So while the note maker actually issues his note, and is the source of the credit, the credit is secured by the deed and backed by the full faith and credit of the US?

It would be great to really get this figured out.

Nope, the US really doesn't have anything to do with it. The man signs the mortgage note, which is deposited into the bank as an asset. The bank writes a "bank check" for the value of that note, really, they usually write a check for less because of closing expenses. They keep the asset, mortgage note, and issue an IOU, bank check, that is backed by that asset. Whet the IOU, bank check backed by the mortgage, is received by the seller and deposited in his bank, I believe that "bank check" is taken in as an asset. The IOU isn't redeemed, the mortgage asset doesn't have to be sold and the actual funds moved, the sellers bank just accepts the buyers bank check. It's now a deposit in the sellers bank. This I suppose is assumed to be another asset that the sellers bank can now lend upon. Money has been created. Let inflation begin.

[Keith Alan]

Nope, the US really doesn't have anything to do with it. The man signs the mortgage note, which is deposited into the bank as an asset. The bank writes a "bank check" for the value of that note, really, they usually write a check for less because of closing expenses. They keep the asset, mortgage note, and issue an IOU, bank check, that is backed by that asset. Whet the IOU, bank check backed by the mortgage, is received by the seller and deposited in his bank, I believe that "bank check" is taken in as an asset. The IOU isn't redeemed, the mortgage asset doesn't have to be sold and the actual funds moved, the sellers bank just accepts the buyers bank check. It's now a deposit in the sellers bank. This I suppose is assumed to be another asset that the sellers bank can now lend upon. Money has been created. Let inflation begin.

Okay, but say there is a default by a borrower, and he seeks protection in bankruptcy court. The court orders the property to be sold, and the balance on the outstanding debt still owing be charged off the borrower's account. Isn't the Fed sustaining a loss, since it's currency (book credit) is wiped out? And isn't the debt originally created - even though discharged - still circulating in the economy, damaging everyone through inflation?

My understanding is that the US is the ultimate creditor. Ostensibly, there will one day be an accounting, and all these accounts will be settled. But in the meanwhile, the borrower has been unjustly enriched by US credit.

The point of all this is to demonstrate that even though it appears that the US has nothing to do with the creation of credit, it actually does, since all debt is backed by the full faith and credit of the US.

Edit -- It occurs to me that every issue of credit by a living man from the dawn of time is still in circulation. In the case of the US being obligated to make all debt good, it is assuming the role of creditor that rightly belongs to Almighty God.

Edit Again lol -- After reading my edit, now I think the US is appearing as the ultimate debtor, because it is obligated to underwrite our credit! So Almighty God Is still in the driver's seat.

[mikecz]

back to promissory notes...

here is an interesting in-depth explanation as to what transpires when one goes to the bank for a "loan"

[ATTACH]1558[/ATTACH]

i do not agree with the "court approach" toward the end as it invokes a jurisdiction other than common law

however, the bank mechanics explained is spot on in my opinion and it nearly parrots the oath-sworn testimony of the man (banker rep); Lawrence V. Morgan [Morgan... hmmm] in the Credit River case (i read the actual transcript testimony once but i can't find it anywhere now if anyone has a source to that transcript i would be much appreciative to receive the info)

which goes back to what i wrote earlier; the only amount rightfully due to the bank at a "closing" are the "closing costs"; to prepare and submit the paperwork for the transaction to go through

the bank does not risk a penny of its own assets when a "loan" process is done

no lawful consideration, no valid contract

no voice, no claim

Can I refuse a bank check? If I get a loan, I give them an asset. I give them a mortgage. They give me a negotiable instrument, and Bullsh$t bank check. Can I demand they give me lawful money? I can cash it as lawful money, but, in a sense, I would love the protest... If so, how would I demand it.

[Anthony Joseph]

Can I refuse a bank check? If I get a loan, I give them an asset. I give them a mortgage. They give me a negotiable instrument, and Bullsh$t bank check. Can I demand they give me lawful money? I can cash it as lawful money, but, in a sense, I would love the protest... If so, how would I demand it.

If you wish the transaction to go through, why refuse it?

If you wish to declare your intent to be upon lawful money, then add your demand to the agreement. It is ALL Bullsh$t, your signature creates money??? If that is how the system works, fine; however, i will be novating the contract significantly.

If you do not wish the transaction to go through but wish to learn more about the process, ask to speak with the "big cheese" at the bank because you have some questions that only he may know the answer to. You will probably be asked to leave.

At the closing table, gather all the papers together before you sign and inform the "witness" (attorney, notary, title agent, etc.) that you will let them know when you are done. Novate the contract according to the terms you wish. Keep the originals (have them notarized) and hand the witness the copies. One must know how to handle the breach which will most likely incur when one does this (do you think the bank will perform under the new terms?).

Notice how your signature is the only one on the mortgage closing "contract" (besides witness). When you begin "paying" the contract becomes valid because you believe it is as evidenced by your actions. Otherwise, a valid contract requires BOTH parties to sign.

[Michael Joseph]

It's alright ma, I can make it.


Now lets bring this back FULL CIRCLE - shall we so that we can stop playing games as children! If you ain't holding Property then you are SUBJECT to the ADMINISTRATION of those who DO HOLD PROPERTY. And those who make certain claims might ASSIGN their Claims to a Kingdom - Reference Unam Sanctum - and the triple crown of Testamentary Trusts.

Because one who claims does certainly become beneficiary of that claim, yes? Of course. now just learn trust law and the rest is simple. If you did not setup the Trust then the only position for you is that of subject UNLESS you are invited into the government of the Trust! So lets now return to the bank.

that money you handle - OH CRAP - that money is a CREATION of the State of North Carolina. No wait I mean the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA - another overlay claim of the central banking system. So those notes might be redeemed into the State of North Carolina returning substance to the Estate held in Trust for the benefit of the WIFE [citizens] for the HUSBANDMAN [leaders] work for the service in Love. Or they should - but you see the Operation of Trust Law nevertheless. And one who understand knows.


Money is substance of [E]State. Now you make a USE of money; but it never dawns on anyone that the USE has duties associated with its acceptance. Terms have specific meaning - Words are too vague. So One person of State [Resident held in WARD] gives a loan to another person of State [Resident in WARD] - what is left - and where is Law? There is ONLY Equity. For one person credits another in a BUSINESS TRANSACTION - not a trust relationship.

You operating as Grantor/Trustee of your ESTATE in LEGAL NAME loan intangible Property of the State to a bank [trust, corporation, etc = Person]. Charatible Remainder Trust - for how can you now be the sole beneficiary - aren't you a member of a Society in Trust? You say no, too bad - you prove it with your DEEDS.

If the bank goes bankrupt well THE RULES OF THE ROAD will decide how the creditors will receive recompense, if any. Those absent a claim are needs be subject to another. And if your claim is in Yehoshuah as the King of the Commonwealth of Israel, then you are needs be subject to your King. Its black and white here folks. Two paths. Trust in God or Man.

So what now of a Promissory Note? You don't like the rules of the road? Well then why do you play? You say someone got paid twice and it ain't fair? Why do you complain? You are USING someone else's PROPERTY. Let me see if I can't drive this nail home.

Did you setup the Trust? Did you issue the Charter for the North Carolina? Did you? The Declaration of Trust declared free and independent STATES - lets learn to read. North Carolina business venture was not abandoned! in Fact it was defended and how pray tell is a losing King dictating terms to a so called winner? Boxes withing boxes within boxes within boxes. And where is man [a repugnant term to me] where is the living soul?

The living soul is with Choice - Where will he or she place their trust! Just sign here and here and here and here and here....and oh boy that car sure is shiny I gotz to have me that. And that house is so luxurious I needz me a big house. Give me this and give me that....Oh wait - THAT IS EXACTLY HOW TO ENSLAVE AND CONTROL AND PACIFY an ignorant public!

I say ignorant because everyone is looking to get something for FREE. You will NEVER get anything for FREE. And like I said if you don't like the rules of the road and you feel fenced in - well - those that hold the Property PLANNED IT THAT WAY. Haven't you read Genesis 47? What was will be - again and again and again.

And what? Am I so ignorant as to make my claim upon a Pharaoh with closed ears? His heart is hardened! Get back to work SLAVE. Go to and make your bricks and find your own straw! Will I mention Pharaoh's claim? - That NULLIFIES my claim! Pharaoh has a claim based on some GIVENS - my counterclaim MUST be based on the same givens! But I CANNOT mention Pharaoh's claim! I nullify my own action?

Example: Foreclosure case: Why are you here? A: to challenge the debt! Conclusion: You automatically LOSE. You disqualified yourself! What debt? Oh, did you sign an agreement? Why are you here? Are you retarded? You mean you signed an agreement whereby you as TRUSTOR created the terms and then you GRANTED the ESTATE to be held as a Security until you performed YOUR PROMISES and now you show up like a trained dog - for what again? Why are you here? The TERMS of the Agreement have been breached! Did you do that? Is this not your EXPRESS TRUST in signature?

You don't like the game? Then don't play! Don't buy unless you can pay cash. Oh and that cash - it is Property of State - and those State TRUSTEES made an agreement with a Foreign BANK such that the money REPRESENTS a MORTGAGE on all Property held IN THE ESTATE. And your ESTATE in FULL NAME has already been pledged as collaterial as part of the Security Agreement. Therefore you by your own deeds AGREE to be RESIDENT. You are acting in and for the LEGAL NAME, yes? Are you Grantor, Trustee, Executor, or whatever - you by your own CHOICE decided to act for a PERSON OF TRUST - where that trust was setup by others - and you are playing - in their game!

Now it has taken me ten years to finally put this together. Glory be to Yehovah in Yehoshuah.

Now lets go to LOGIC. One person of State loans another person of State - State Property. And pray tell how does Property ever leave the State? Senate Resolution 62 is a matter of Operation of Law. I have heard those who don't understand say it ain't public law. That is humorous!

Of course the HIVE seems to be buzzing in one Conditioned Consciousness - drunk on the wine of Babylon. Yet the Hive is being CONTROLLED by those who setup the game. And the individual bees can't see it due to fear and lack of want.

Therefore the Hive MUST be Pacified!

THE CENTURY OF THE SELF - ADAM CURTIS

1. Happiness Machines (17 March 2002)
2. The Engineering of Consent (24 March 2002)
3. There is a Policeman Inside All Our Heads: He Must Be Destroyed (31 March 2002)
4. Eight People Sipping Wine in Kettering (7 April 2002)

Nazi Socialism ==> Fascism ===> Theosophy and Spiritualism [State and Church]

Ye cannot serve TWO masters.

Shalom,
MJ

[Michael Joseph]

I fulfill the law by making my demand.

If I get electronic credits, a check, cash, or any other legal tender, then that is Lawful Money!

That is the Lesson!

Lets say I am given a debit card, that is Lawful Money. I must make my Claim [demand for redemption].....

But notice if my Claim issues forth regarding an Estate in Property already existing within a Close, then why would I think I have ownership in Property! My Claim is SUBJECT to the Laws that govern. And therefore my claim is subject to the Administration of the Property. Therefore you can say my claim is RESIDENT within a law boundary! A LAW BOUNDARY THAT I DID NOT CREATE! So for me to Claim property Rights is a TORT and I am guilty of Trespass. Consider!

Answer this one: Adam and Eve's sin and for that matter all the sins prior to Jesus' death and resurrection and glorification, were those sins paid for by bulls and goats or were they merely discharged?

Now then:

Heb_10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

1Jn 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

MJ's comment: The one who created mankind [living souls] created the animals too!

What will man give to the Creator that does not already belong to the Creator?


Now take off your citizen hat and put on the hat of a king! Don't you see the foregoing is all within a Law Boundary? Man only has CHOICE - everything and I mean everything else belongs to God. So I again ask what can man give God to atone for man's Lawlessness? See even here man CHOOSE to be lawless. Therefore there is NOTHING man can give. Except service to God and we see that since Man is lawless in regard to God's Law, then man has CHOSEN to be Lawless and is therefore an OUT LAW. See the Paradox? Therefore only God can redeem man! Talk about Love!

Before Jesus, man was tempted into Sin, and there was no hope! Today man is tempted into Debt and Pharoah does not let his Prisoners go free. God had to REDEEM His People with a Mighty Hand! What was will be.


And then:

MJ's comment: For it is not possible that the federal reserve note can pay a debt! BECAUSE the note evidences a Mortgage! THE NOTE IS EVIDENCE OF AN EXISTING DEBT. There for the SIN - TAX is discharged until a later date when the debt must be paid. What is the final outcome? War!

Deu 32:28 For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them.

Deu 32:29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!


And the Security Pledge that the Trustees gave is all the Houses and other Property held within the Trust Law Boundary. This is why Gold is no longer necessary! The RESIDENT ESTATES have been PLEDGED. Pray tell how did you obtain the Use of the Property, was it by Money of State? But that money is EVIDENCE of an EXISTING mortgage! Therefore does not the use of that money only secure interest in the newly created asset? Of course it does! Now you say I redeemed that money - its mine....not so fast friend! It is redeemed to the United States - a more perfect Union. But the United States is in debt up to its eyeballs!

Luk 16:10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

Luk 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

Man only has CHOICE - everything and I mean everything else belongs to God. Now just replace God with The Central Banking System, and ask yourself the same question.

I don't care about man - claims - etc. If you have not made your claim then words don't matter. If you are working within a law boundary that you did not setup, then you are most likely dealing with Estates. And those Original Trust Formations and been bought and sold and assigned...and then some.



Eze 36:1 Also, thou son of man, prophesy unto the mountains of Israel, and say, Ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the LORD:

Eze 36:2 Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because the enemy hath said against you, Aha, even the ancient high places are ours in possession:

Eze 36:3 Therefore prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because they have made you desolate, and swallowed you up on every side, that ye might be a possession unto the residue of the heathen, and ye are taken up in the lips of talkers, and are an infamy of the people:

Eze 36:4 Therefore, ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord GOD; Thus saith the Lord GOD to the mountains, and to the hills, to the rivers, and to the valleys, to the desolate wastes, and to the cities that are forsaken, which became a prey and derision to the residue of the heathen that are round about;

Eze 36:24 For I will take you from among the nations, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you on to your own soil.

Eze 36:25 Then will I throw clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your dirty idols, will I cleanse you.

Eze 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

Eze 36:27 And I will put My spirit within you, and cause you to walk in My statutes, and ye shall keep My judgments, and do them.

Eze 36:28 And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall become to Me a People, and I will become to you a God.


for those who study read the whole chapter Ezekiel 36.


Deu 32:27 Were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy, Lest their adversaries should mistake it, And lest they should say, Our hand is high, And the LORD hath not done all this.

MJ's comment: Man choose himself to Voluntarily submit to this end!

Deu 32:36 For the LORD shall vindicate His People, And repent Himself for His servants, When He seeth that their power is gone, And there is none defended and protected.

Deu 32:37 And He shall say, Where are their gods, Their rock in whom they trusted,






Shalom,
MJ