Redeemed Lawful Money

[Jaro]

Here's how redeemed lawful money looks like. If you don't have one of these, you ain't got real money. They're regular FRN's, but since they were given by Fed. Reserve bank upon a demand for lawful money (pursuant to 12USC411), you can depend on their expertise to know what lawful money is. If a FR bank says it's LM, who are we to argue?



And that should stop the minions of the corporate Beast from presuming that you only have private scrip FRN's, and so are insolvent/debtor, subject to their corporate statutes, which gives them jurisdiction. And that's because lawful money PAYS OFF debts, it doesn't just discharge them as FRN's do.



BTW, that's the problem with most sovereignty docs; you can declare whatever you want, but if you're carrying FRN's which are evidences of debt, then that's a proof that you're a DEBTOR, 'law merchant', subject to their corporate Matrix, b/c you ain't got any real money.

You can get rubber stamps like that here:











And the story of how I redeemed lawful money is here:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?342-I-redeemed-1000-in-Lawful-Money-today!

[hvncb]

"And this is the rubber stamp I'll be getting to stamp all my lawful money with, since carrying around regular FRN's is evidence that you're a law merchant, Matrix slave, since FRN's aren't real money, only obligations (IOU's) of United States. Sovereigns have lawful/real money, corporate slaves use FRN's."

I am new at this...I have deposited two checks from my business /w 12usc411 notice; however, I don't understand why you stamp the FRNs you receive from your deposited check. Appears to me the meat of this process is in the deposit of your check into the bank w/ the redemption clause along w/ the front and back photocopy. Why do you stamp your FRNs?...Second question...I had no contact w/ teller (as you did) my deposit was via automatic teller machine, so, when I get FRNs (from the ATM and from my ATM deposit) why would I (why should I) stamp those FRNs?...don't know. Finally, aren't you open to some sort of trouble from the Feds for 'tampering' or defacing their notes..? Still learning!

[Jaro]

"And this is the rubber stamp I'll be getting to stamp all my lawful money with, since carrying around regular FRN's is evidence that you're a law merchant, Matrix slave, since FRN's aren't real money, only obligations (IOU's) of United States. Sovereigns have lawful/real money, corporate slaves use FRN's."

I am new at this...I have deposited two checks from my business /w 12usc411 notice; however, I don't understand why you stamp the FRNs you receive from your deposited check. Appears to me the meat of this process is in the deposit of your check into the bank w/ the redemption clause along w/ the front and back photocopy. Why do you stamp your FRNs?...Second question...I had no contact w/ teller (as you did) my deposit was via automatic teller machine, so, when I get FRNs (from the ATM and from my ATM deposit) why would I (why should I) stamp those FRNs?...don't know. Finally, aren't you open to some sort of trouble from the Feds for 'tampering' or defacing their notes..? Still learning!

You stamp them to make it clear that they're lawful money. Otherwise FRN's are evidences of debt, making you an insolvent DEBTOR who has NO UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, b/c he's bankrupt. Carrying such evidences of debt is one of the ways you get under the jurisdiction of the corporate State. And stamping FRN's is legal unless you have intent to make the bills unfit to issue, or you make it unfit for circulation. Here's the statute:



"Defacement of Currency

Defacement of currency is a violation of Title 18, Section 333 of the United States Code. Under this provision, currency defacement is generally defined as follows: Whoever mutilates, cuts, disfigures, perforates, unites or cements together, or does any other thing to any bank bill, draft, note, or other evidence of debt issued by any national banking association, Federal Reserve Bank, or Federal Reserve System, with intent to render such item(s) unfit to be reissued, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.

Defacement of currency in such a way that it is made unfit for circulation comes under the jurisdiction of the United States Secret Service. The United States Secret Service web address is www.secretservice.gov."

BTW, there's a whole game of stamping and tracking such bills at http://www.wheresgeorge.com/

On top of that, once you redeem, they're no longer FRN's, evidences of debt, but lawful money which are REAL MONEY, not evidences of debt. Which would mean the above statute wouldn't even apply to them.

[David Merrill]

I have found it worth pondering - now that I see somebody blatantly declaring the Demand and Intent across GRANT's face, What is it exactly that renders a bill unfit for circulation?

Since 1861 America has been justifying fiat with Emergency. I think of US notes in the form of FRNs as one step closer to Real Money - but the official position is that gold is not money at all - it is an asset against TAIL Risk.

That means management of the conditioning of the PROGRAM - SDR's. TAIL risk management is simply keeping the people thinking that it is somebody else who is Beneficiary.

BRICS becomes BRICI (Indonesia replaces South Africa for the fictional currency basket).

Energy

Energy is recognized as the key to all activity on earth. Natural science is the study of the sources and control of natural energy, and social science, theoretically expressed as economics, is the study of the sources and control of social energy. Both are bookkeeping systems: mathematics. Therefore, mathematics is the primary energy science. And the bookkeeper can be king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.

All science is merely a means to an end. The means is knowledge. The end is control. Beyond this remains only one issue: Who will be the beneficiary?

I think to clearly see my point you have to get perspective of the two discussing this in the video. You have a US Senator allowed for a moment, to acquire the official position of the Chairman of the Federal Reserve. With that in mind play it through at least twice.

My point being that defacing currency might just be a matter determined by the Fed bank/shopkeeper saying he does not like to see the stamp across GRANT's face. I do not believe that US notes, in whatever form, are true money when the Chairman of the Federal Reserve does not even believe that gold is money.



Regards,

David Merrill.



P.S. Notice the young woman to BERNANKE's right enjoying what a crackpot that Ronald Ernest can be...

[hvncb]

Ok, but appears to me (as per below) lawful money is (used to be) issued by US Treasury in the form of US Notes (no longer issued). If this is the case what Jaro received, then, is not (strickly) lawful money in the "traditional sense" and stamping such does not make them lawful.
__________________________________________________ ___________________

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lawfulmoney.asp

What Does Lawful Money Mean?
Any form of currency issued by the United States Treasury and not the Federal Reserve System, including gold and silver coins, Treasury notes, and Treasury bonds. Lawful money stands in contrast to fiat money, to which the government assigns value although it has no intrinsic value of its own and is not backed by reserves. Fiat money includes legal tender such as paper money, checks, drafts and bank notes.

Also known as "specie", which means "in actual form."

Investopedia explains Lawful Money
Oddly enough, the dollar bills that we carry around in our wallets are not considered lawful money. The notation on the bottom of a U.S. dollar bill reads "Legal Tender for All Debts, Public and Private", and is issued by the U.S. Federal Reserve, not the U.S. Treasury. Legal tender can be exchanged for an equivalent amount of lawful money, but effects such as inflation can change the value of fiat money. Lawful money is said to be the most direct form of ownership, but for purposes of practicality it has little use in direct transactions between parties anymore.
__________________________________________________ ____________________
Appears US Notes (red seal) are lawful http://stormthunder.com/ but are no longer issued. Also see Fed Res Site: http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...al-tender.aspx

"United States notes serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes. As a result, the Treasury Department stopped issuing United States notes, and none have been placed into circulation since January 21, 1971. "

So, how can we (a) be asked to use Red Seal US Notes(http://stormthunder.com/) and (b) if US Notes "..serve no function that is not already adequately served by Federal Reserve notes" and as such, appears FRN are already (somehow) lawful money, then what exacly are we redeeming. BUT, on the other hand, how do we explain 12.411?

Well, I can only explain: "SIX OF ONE 1/2 DOZEN OF THE OTHER" in other words, redeeming Fed Res notes is merely an "Alice in Wonderland" exchange of one Fed Res note for another. Nonetheless, what they give you IS NOT issued by the Treasury, and, are, magically, somehow "lawful money" indistinguishable.

Question remains, why stamp the exchanged notes at all when the significant TECHNICAL operation appears to be the demand stamped on a deposited check and NOT the notes themselves. ....don't know.

[Michael Joseph]

P.S. Notice the young woman to BERNANKE's right enjoying what a crackpot that Ronald Ernest can be...

Ronald Ernest to me seems like a Magician for the FRS - look over here. Consider that the "Cestui Que Trust" in the Public Arena is the Bankers. I mean really, am I to believe that the members of Congress are sooooooo stupid that they themselves do not know what money is? Especially IF and I do mean IF the FRS is supposed to be Agent for Trustee. How absurd.

Why would Ronald Ernest be asking such a question of his Agent? If Congress truly is with the Power of Direction and/or Trustee, then Congress decides what is money and, as such, why again the "nasty" question regarding gold.

Perhaps it's just a show for the masses - good versus evil - or so it seems.

Notice what Ronald Ernest did not ask. In terms of Probate - why is the Public Arena - Mort? I mean Bernacke went straight to it like a tick on a hound dog, ASSET in TAIL risk.

And he [Bernacke] is right - In the Public - gold is just a rock. But in Private International Law - he [Bernacke] knows differently. I specifically write to the Public/Private face of State [Trust].

If Bernacke attempts CONVERSION, in equity, he must first prove his CLAIM.

[David Merrill]

Hvncb;



Assuming you are as new to studying this as your posting here on StSC, I really admire your retention and collection of related materials. Good mind there! You have spotted some of the most important cruxes of the matter. - Selected critical details among an elaborate mosaic.

I think MJ spots it also;

Ronald Ernest to me seems like a Magician for the FRS - look over here. Consider that the "Cestui Que Trust" in the Public Arena is the Bankers. I mean really, am I to believe that the members of Congress are sooooooo stupid that they themselves do not know what money is? Especially IF and I do mean IF the FRS is supposed to be Agent for Trustee. How absurd.

Why would Ronald Ernest be asking such a question of his Agent? If Congress truly is with the Power of Direction and/or Trustee, then Congress decides what is money and, as such, why again the "nasty" question regarding gold.

Perhaps it's just a show for the masses - good versus evil - or so it seems.

Notice what Ronald Ernest did not ask. In terms of Probate - why is the Public Arena - Mort? I mean Bernacke went straight to it like a tick on a hound dog, ASSET in TAIL risk.

And he [Bernacke] is right - In the Public - gold is just a rock. But in Private International Law - he [Bernacke] knows differently. I specifically write to the Public/Private face of State [Trust].

If Bernacke attempts CONVERSION, in equity, he must first prove his CLAIM.

I believe the word you should have used is CORRESPONDENCE, not CONVERSATION.

He was BRACKETED [captured under his oath/curse] and I agree that Ronald Ernest could have taken much, much more advantage about exposing truth. You make me wonder if I have also been swept up in a wonderful comedy act by a bankster puppet in the Senate too!

Wow!

You actually said something against Ron Paul?

I am letting that sink in...

With at least three bills to abolish the Fed, none of which survived his uttering it, maybe I am starting to see the sense of it all.

Such an honest face and sincere smile though, I am still pursuaded he is unaware of the strings manipulating him, or that there is a puppeteer above for the Bank and Fund laughing away at how much mileage they get from an obstetrician gone political.

I like to take a nap after such a thought.




Regards,

David Merrill.

[Michael Joseph]

I believe the word you should have used is CORRESPONDENCE, not CONVERSATION.

He was BRACKETED [captured under his oath/curse] and I agree that Ronald Ernest could have taken much, much more advantage about exposing truth. You make me wonder if I have also been swept up in a wonderful comedy act by a bankster puppet in the Senate too!

Wow!

You actually said something against Ron Paul?

I am letting that sink in...

With at least three bills to abolish the Fed, none of which survived his uttering it, maybe I am starting to see the sense of it all.

Such an honest face and sincere smile though, I am still pursuaded he is unaware of the strings manipulating him, or that there is a puppeteer above for the Bank and Fund laughing away at how much mileage they get from an obstetrician gone political.

I like to take a nap after such a thought.




Regards,

David Merrill.

CONVERSION, in equity, The considering of one thing as changed into another; for example, land will be considered as converted into money, and treated as such by a court of equity, when the owner has contracted to sell his estate in which case, if he die before the conveyance, his executors and not his heirs will be entitled to the money. 2 Vern. 52; S., C. 3 Chan. R. 217; 1 B1. Rep. 129. On the other hand, money is converted into land in a variety of ways as for example, when a man agrees to buy land, and dies before he has received the conveyance, the money he was to pay for it will be considered as converted into lands, and descend to the heir. 1 P. Wms. 176 2 Vern. 227 10 Pet. 563; Bouv. Inst. Index, h. t.


LAND. This term comprehends any found, soil or earth whatsoever, as meadows, pastures, woods, waters, marshes, furze and heath. It has an indefinite extent upwards as well as downwards; therefore land, legally includes all houses and other buildings standing or built on it; and whatever is in a direct line between the surface and the centre of the earth, such as mines of metals and fossils. 1 Inst. 4 a; Wood's Inst. 120; 2 B1. Com. 18; 1 Cruise on Real Prop. 58.

2. Land, as above observed, includes in general all the buildings erected upon it; 9 Day, R. 374; but to this general rule there are some exceptions. It is true, that if a stranger voluntarily erect buildings on another's land, they will belong to the owner of the land, and will become a part of it; 16 Mass. R. 449; yet cases are, not wanting where it has been decided that such an erection, under peculiar circumstances, would be considered as personal property. 4 Mass. R. 514; 8 Pick. R. 283, 402; 5 Pick, R. 487; 6 N. H. Rep. 555; 2 Fairf. R. 371; 1 Dana, R. 591; 1 Burr. 144.



CESTUI QUE TRUST, A barbarous phrase, to signify the beneficiary of an estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he shall choose, and the trustee (q. v.) is bound to execute them: he may defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 Cruise, Dig. tit. 12, c. 4, s. 4; vide Vin. Ab. Trust, U, W, X, and Y 1 Vern. 14; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.: 1 Story, Eq. Jur. 321, note 1; Bouv. Inst. Index, h. t.


Commentary: An ESTATE held in Trust is interesting indeed. In light of mere PROPERTY. Estate being an assemblage of PROPERTY.

PROPERTY. The right and interest which a man [MJ's comment "or Person"] has IN lands and IN chattels to the exclusion of others. 6 Binn. 98; 4 Pet. 511; 17 Johns. 283; 14 East, 370; 11 East, 290, 518. It is the right to enjoy and to dispose of certain things in the most absolute manner as he pleases, provided he makes no use of them prohibited by law.

THINGS. By this word is understood every object, except man, which may become an active subject of right. Code du Canton de Berne, art. 332. In this sense it is opposed, in the language of the law, to the word persons. (q. v.)

2. Things, by the common law, are divided into, 1. Things real, which are such as are permanent, fixed and immovable, and which cannot be carried from place to place; they are usually said to consist in lands, tenements and hereditaments. 2 Bl. Com. 16; Co. Litt. 4 a to 6 b. 2. Things personal, include all sorts of things movable which attend a man's person wherever he goes. Things personal include not only things movable, but also something more, the whole of which is generally comprehended under the name of chattels. Chattels are distinguished into two kinds, namely, chattels real and chattels personal.

----------------------------

Regarding Ronald Ernest - People enjoy a good show - they love to Cut all they know Right in Two - Us and Them.

Most don't consider that they created their own Prison. with Words Darker than their Wings.

Now, back to our regular scheduled PROGRAMMING.

[Jaro]

I have found it worth pondering - now that I see somebody blatantly declaring the Demand and Intent across GRANT's face, What is it exactly that renders a bill unfit for circulation?

David, defacing currency won't be a matter determined by the Fed bank/shopkeeper, it'll be decided in a court. I wonder if there were any cases about that before. And like I said, the statute is about evidences of debt, which lawful money AREN'T. They're real money. And gold is not money. Congress defines what lawful money is, and the definition of gold coins being LM was repealed. The court also said that while you're entitled to redeem FRN's in LM, gold is not LM.

Now gold is only a commodity just like platinum or diamonds. And like all commodities, it's presumed to be bought with FRN's, so you don't even own it, only possess it, so it can't be LM, and is subject to confiscation. So in order to overcome the presumption that you bought the gold with FRN's, you'd have to prove that either you were paid with that gold or that you bought it using LM. Only THEN you'd have right of ownership (NOT subject to confiscation), and could use it as real money, i.e. to PAY OFF debts, rather than just discharge them.

And while FRN's are subject to confiscation (like when used in drug dealing), I don't think Lawful money can be confiscated, since it's REAL money, not an IOU like FRN's. And since LM is real money, not an IOU, it's in the real world/common law, which is foreign to the corporate Matrix we're now in, so the statutes DON'T APPLY to it, like they don't apply to stuff you buy with it. And ONLY if you got paid with gold could you use gold as money to pay off debts, rather than just discharge them.

[KnowLaw]

Redeemed Lawful Money

Now gold is only a commodity just like platinum or diamonds. And like all commodities, it's presumed to be bought with FRN's, so you don't even own it, only possess it, so it can't be LM, and is subject to confiscation. So in order to overcome the presumption that you bought the gold with FRN's, you'd have to prove that either you were paid with that gold or that you bought it using LM. Only THEN you'd have right of ownership (NOT subject to confiscation), and could use it as real money, i.e. to PAY OFF debts, rather than just discharge them.

And while FRN's are subject to confiscation (like when used in drug dealing), I don't think Lawful money can be confiscated, since it's REAL money, not an IOU like FRN's. And since LM is real money, not an IOU, it's in the real world/common law, which is foreign to the corporate Matrix we're now in, so the statutes DON'T APPLY to it, like they don't apply to stuff you buy with it. And ONLY if you got paid with gold could you use gold as money to pay off debts, rather than just discharge them.

Your thinking in this is so convoluted and misguided that it would probably take a psychotherapist to straighten it out. And even then I wouldn't be betting on the psychotherapist to succeed.

It would help if you knew something about the law rather than just spouting opinionated hearsay.

[David Merrill]

Albeit KnowLaw is coming off a bit snarky in the delivery, I was thinking of a retort.

David, defacing currency won't be a matter determined by the Fed bank/shopkeeper, it'll be decided in a court.

That court trial could start with the shopkeeper. The shopkeeper could easily become the prosecution's prime witness to convince a jury that you indeed defaced the currency to a point where it is unacceptable.

[allodial]

Perhaps it might be helpful to remember that what is now called a "treasury" was before called a "goldhorde" or "gold-hold" or "gold hoarde" or the like.

That means management of the conditioning of the PROGRAM - SDR's. TAIL risk management is simply keeping the people thinking that it is somebody else who is Beneficiary.

ENERGY...

And perhaps not to mention conditioning into believing that alchemy or transmutation hasn't all been figured out. People do it er' day.

Paper (enegy) to tampons (enegy) to paper (enegy) to gold (enegy) to paper (enegy) to freshly-cut lawn (enegy) to paper (enegy) to silver (enegy) to paper (enegy) to new hairdo (enegy) to paper (enegy) to ice cream (enegy) ..transmutation...alchemy--and people do it all the time and still hang on to the hope that "one day..they'll figure out how to turn lead or even paper into gold." Psst...they already have.

Photo of 'transmutation station' (with cleric...oops...or..rather clerk) follows.

Alchemy is one of the most evocative subjects in the history of science. Alchemy made important contributions to the development of modern science while firing popular imagination so strongly that portrayals of the alchemist at work pervaded the arts. The more celebrated goals of alchemy, like transmutation of base metals into gold, still tease and tantalize. Transmutations offers a thoughtful look at the role of the alchemist in the 17th and 18th centuries, as depicted in a selection of paintings from the Eddleman and Fisher Collections housed at the Chemical Heritage Foundation. This beautiful full-color book reveals much about the beginnings of chemistry as a profession.

Chemical Heritage Foundation
315 Chestnut St, Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215) 873-8258
www.chemheritage.org

[allodial]

Since 1861 America has been justifying fiat with Emergency. I think of US notes in the form of FRNs as one step closer to Real Money - but the official position is that gold is not money at all - it is an asset against TAIL Risk.

Is it their position that gold is not money in any form or one of gold being money only when stamped /minted?

[shikamaru]

Treasury was, in the past at some time, a room filled with treasures.

A treasure room.

[Michael Joseph]

Treasury was, in the past at some time, a room filled with treasures.

A treasure room.

I think it was Zedekiah that showed off his treasuries to the king of Babylon; to wit, the king of Babylon marched on Jerusalem seized the spoils [treasury] and eventually killed Zedekiah and his sons for their treachery.

Some things are better kept secret.