Remedy - lawful money solution

[Chex]

Weird never heard of that, thumb prints maybe? But you can always ask.

[NONOFED]

Some responses from BOL for lawful money

http://www.bankersonline.com/forum/u...Number=1695080
http://www.bankersonline.com/forum/u...Number=1930563

comments?

[Michael Joseph]

Some responses from BOL for lawful money

http://www.bankersonline.com/forum/u...Number=1695080
http://www.bankersonline.com/forum/u...Number=1930563

comments?

Well, my friend, I just happen to have direct experience with arrogant fools such as these. Three of them lost their job when the bean counter showed up.

It just goes to show that OJT in no way teaches people how to think. Not true of everyone but most clerks are no better than trained monkeys. Monkey see monkey do.

It is a waste of time to try to teach a 15 dollar per hour clerk $100/hr stuff. This is above their pay grade. They chose banking not me. The only question I have for a clerk is do you have plenty of $100's today?


This is precious. Thanks for sharing. This is like ignorant children making fun of grown ups. Too funny.


"I tell ya son, ya gotta keep your eye on the ball. Get it? Eyeball?" - Foghorn Leghorn

Regards
MJ

[NONOFED]

Well, my friend, I just happen to have direct experience with arrogant fools such as these. Three of them lost their job when the bean counter showed up.

It just goes to show that OJT in no way teaches people how to think. Not true of everyone but most clerks are no better than trained monkeys. Monkey see monkey do.

It is a waste of time to try to teach a 15 dollar per hour clerk $100/hr stuff. This is above their pay grade. They chose banking not me. The only question I have for a clerk is do you have plenty of $100's today?


This is precious. Thanks for sharing. This is like ignorant children making fun of grown ups. Too funny.


"I tell ya son, ya gotta keep your eye on the ball. Get it? Eyeball?" - Foghorn Leghorn

Regards
MJ

Do you have specific information regarding the job losses?

[ag maniac]

When I take a check to the financial institution for which it was drawn....

Just a friendly reminder, as "allodial" has mentioned several times in this particular scenario, you are "presenting a draft for payment"....not cashing a check.

the teller likes to put my Driver License Number in my endorsement area. Does this have some effect on endorsement and shouldn't they be writing in their area instead?

....are you sure about whose number that is?? Be careful what you lay claim to --> surety-ship applies !

[NONOFED]

Just a friendly reminder, as "allodial" has mentioned several times in this particular scenario, you are "presenting a draft for payment"....not cashing a check.



....are you sure about whose number that is?? Be careful what you lay claim to --> surety-ship applies !

so the mere fact i'm who i say i am should suffice.. even with presentment of id.. then i shouldn't say who i am as i shouldn't be who they claim me to be.. then no checks, no payments.. money is wrong.. property is wrong.. possession is wrong. Either way your participator with the money and jobs, the daily business. For what, where does it end.

[Michael Joseph]

Do you have specific information regarding the job losses?

I could tell you anything and you would argue - it is your nature NONOFED. Proof - what's that? Especially in this venue. You seek that which is impossible and thus you shall always be at war - within and without yourself.

Let me be as blunt as I possibly can be - Everything you read at this site is HEARSAY - every bit of it. That was a very hard lesson for me to learn so I will say it like this: Don't trust this man or any other man - do your own work. Hearsay is not admissible in my court. Thus experience replaced hearsay.

We all look forward to hearing from you and your adventures - until then - the proof you seek will elude you. You keep your own court.

What most people do not realize is that the IRS is convening a common law court when they send you all of those notices. In total blindness one will argue - as they always do in their ignorance - but that is exactly what is happening. A scared animal is very predictable and that is what most men are - scared. So it is not to difficult to understand the psychology of the response of most men once they receive a proposal from the IRS or for that matter any member of the so called "system". Fact is most men think all the rides are free and it is a shock to their system when their hand gets smacked - why Johnny police officer back in the 1st grade said "if you are in trouble you can call 911" - and now you are in trouble and it is Johnny that is hunting you.

A measured response is understood and so the "fear programming" is inserted time and again with sustained results. Who can deny these FACTS?

Rev_21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.


Seems the fearful is number one - for good reason. Something about that Societal Womb.



Regards,
MJ

[allodial]

If you are presenting a demand against a bank for payment then their check cashing policies should go out the window. One can threaten to call the State AG, regulators or the like if necessary. They are supposed to honor drafts drawn against them. IF YOU SAY YOU ARE CASHING THE CHECK EVEN THOUGH ITS DRAWN ON THAT VERY SAME BANK THEY WILL LIKELY GO INTO THE MODE OF PROVIDING THE SPECIAL SERVICE OF "CHECK CASHING" AND TREAT YOU LIKE YOU ARE PRESENTING A DRAFT DRAWN ON A FOREIGN BANK (I.E. THEY WILL PLAY AS DUMB AS YOU WANT DUMB TO BE BECAUSE IN THEIR VIEW YOU ASKED FOR IT)! WHEN ONE STOPS WITH THE SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS THE LESSER THE BLOOD LOSS AND THE GREATER THE STRENGTH.

If you have the maker of a check made out to "{name} or bearer" it can make your life easier (but beware of keeping the check securely because its much like cash).

I recall posting a technique whereby the person issuing the check and verify the signature of the payee by signing under the non-endorsement/endorsement on the back and writing something like "Signature OK". But seems the Googlenetweb has been SANITIZED of all other references to such even textbooks. The point is that it was a method useful in case one lost one's ID.

[NONOFED]

If you are presenting a demand against a bank for payment then their check cashing policies should go out the window. One can threaten to call the State AG, regulators or the like if necessary. They are supposed to honor drafts drawn against them. IF YOU SAY YOU ARE CASHING THE CHECK EVEN THOUGH ITS DRAWN ON THAT VERY SAME BANK THEY WILL LIKELY GO INTO THE MODE OF PROVIDING THE SPECIAL SERVICE OF "CHECK CASHING" AND TREAT YOU LIKE YOU ARE PRESENTING A DRAFT DRAWN ON A FOREIGN BANK (I.E. THEY WILL PLAY AS DUMB AS YOU WANT DUMB TO BE BECAUSE IN THEIR VIEW YOU ASKED FOR IT)! WHEN ONE STOPS WITH THE SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS THE LESSER THE BLOOD LOSS AND THE GREATER THE STRENGTH.

If you have the maker of a check made out to "{name} or bearer" it can make your life easier (but beware of keeping the check securely because its much like cash).

I recall posting a technique whereby the person issuing the check and verify the signature of the payee by signing under the non-endorsement/endorsement on the back and writing something like "Signature OK". But seems the Googlenetweb has been SANITIZED of all other references to such even textbooks. The point is that it was a method useful in case one lost one's ID.

When I yield a check I say "I would like this paid in coin". Haven't used statues or what not on check yet cause not in position to play games as money is needed and this declaration is apparently a grey area. Recently check was brought to same bank as drawn and I signed. Teller took ID# and wrote in my endorsement area, also took right index fingerprint on face of check. Teller acted like only had quarters so I took them, but seems like they refer to themselves not having larger denomination coins, but i'm thinking next time I will be more specific about what I want and refer to the bank instead of the teller and if there is a problem I will ask for manager.

Also does the following from HJR192 mean I cant ask for specific denominations of coin and even entitled to get coins? Or is it referring to gold and silver? Legalese is, well difficult to understand.

"every provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports to give the obligee a right to require payments in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in an amount in money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy; and no such provision shall be contained in or made with respect to any obligation hereafter incurred."

[NONOFED]

When I yield a check I say "I would like this paid in coin". Haven't used statues or what not on check yet cause not in position to play games as money is needed and this declaration is apparently a grey area. Recently check was brought to same bank as drawn and I signed. Teller took ID# and wrote in my endorsement area, also took right index fingerprint on face of check. Teller acted like only had quarters so I took them, but seems like they refer to themselves not having larger denomination coins, but i'm thinking next time I will be more specific about what I want and refer to the bank instead of the teller and if there is a problem I will ask for manager.

Also does the following from HJR192 mean I cant ask for specific denominations of coin and even entitled to get coins? Or is it referring to gold and silver? Legalese is, well difficult to understand.

"every provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports to give the obligee a right to require payments in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in an amount in money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy; and no such provision shall be contained in or made with respect to any obligation hereafter incurred."

Are they just referring to silver and gold certificates and gold standard clause?

[shikamaru]

Are we aware that house joint resolutions have no force of law?

[NONOFED]

Not aware. How is that?

[shikamaru]

Not aware. How is that?

If you look up the term 'resolution' in Black's Law Dictionary, it states that a resolution is an opinion. It even gives two paragraphs on the distinction between a resolution and a law.

If you are talking about the confiscation of gold in 1933, you are talking about government's power of eminent domain, seizure, and condemnation. I'll have to fish out my write up on this from another forum if interested.

Here is a little bit from this forum with a court case that is tangent to the seizure of gold in 1933, eminent domain.

[allodial]

In the United States, such Resolutions could have greater weight than any Opinion of the U.S. Attorney General. It might be that opinions affect the conduct, suggestions or advice of counsel/attorneys to their clients (governmental or otherwise). Laws would effect conduct of the executive. Whereas opinions might effect the conduct or counsel or advice attorneys, bar members or judges might have. For example a District Attorney would throw a case out of the window on the basis of interpretation through the lens of such Resolutions. It might be worth noting that a lot of FBI agents and Federal agents are said to be trained attorneys.

[David Merrill]

You make me wonder how when an opinion has widespread effect, is it not law?