Coresource Solution - attempts to disclose from man on the land since 1968

[Frederick Burrell]

It is my contention that you matla are fake and fraud. You have posted experiences of others as your own. That is the reason you don't post paper work to support you so called successes. I challenge you to post the contents on the documents in the blue paper you say you presented in court. No need scan or image, just a verbal statement of what was written will do for now. Prove me wrong if you can. But you and I both know you can't. fB

[David Merrill]

It is my contention that you matla are fake and fraud. You have posted experiences of others as your own. That is the reason you don't post paper work to support you so called successes. I challenge you to post the contents on the documents in the blue paper you say you presented in court. No need scan or image, just a verbal statement of what was written will do for now. Prove me wrong if you can. But you and I both know you can't. fB

That is what I have been after. It does not exist, as indicated by Sheriff HARRISON - in private. It is just junk he is too polite to throw away and the city attorney cannot convince him to report it to the AG.


It is my contention that you matla are fake and fraud.

I figured you were referring to his own indictment:

For all who are interested one of Coresource Solution's methods works like the idea of the Privy Purse. Some people [David Merrill] cannot wrap their head around the indemnification process of depositing receipts which causes and increase of assets in the Treasury thus one becomes indemnified of the expenses. Let look at it from another angle, when on increases the assets of a Privy Purse then one becomes indemnified of expenses, such as depositing a house into it then the Privy Purse takes care of the expense of things such as Leaky Roofs.
Read about the Privy Purse here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Purse

The next article you will read here is about a Windsor Estate whom is still under Siege much like here in the states under Lincoln's Army was able to get their Leaky Roofs repaired:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/bu...pagewanted=all

If you take an interest in this to want to learn more about it, then PM me and I can give you some additional resource to research the subject.

What he directs is indeed fraud - to direct the roofer to go get the coupon/bill paid from the Treasury. This is the Strawman Redemption all over again, by a different name. The Darrell FRECH HJR-192 scam is there too. This is nothing new. You can only acquire a Setoff from a coupon redemption (Anthony Joseph is helping the readers process this) from government agencies. The government is not going to send a roofer.

The simple fact is that I sit in Colorado in comfort typing because that money was spent, overcoming a Great Depression by saving the Fed [Secret Service is Treasury]. If you pull a coupon redemption on a government agency, they give you a setoff* to avoid disclosing that; that's all. You bought a lifestyle - voluntarily - a quality of life. The Secret Service is Treasury! Look at the driver's left hand. Watch him inspect, discern, draw, aim and fire. Use your layman sense of physics to determine which direction the slug striking JFK's head came from too. William GREER, the driver, was a Treasury Agent.

I have experienced this though, through suitors. If you send the roofer to the Treasury for redemption of the bill, presuming he trusted you to start work on your credit, he will get a letter back saying, Sorry, the Treasury cannot help you with this debt.

Whether Motla68 is intentionally misdirecting readers here or not is as yet unclear to me. I can say this much with certainty. He keeps trying to draw readers here off to other places by link while it would be a lot more convincing if he just showed us here. If he could convince fB here for example, he would get a lot further at convincing me!


Regards,

David Merrill.


* Misunderstanding at the time, I tried to set up an account for parking tickets in advance and the DA prosecuted me for forgery - that the POMC (Public Office Money Certificate) was shaped too much like a check.

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/9008/pomc.jpg

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3385/letterofcredit1.jpg

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/4481/letterofcredit2.jpg

The prosecution failed and instead I prosecuted the DA. He cleared out his desk the next morning.


P.S. It is not past me Monday, to call Sheriff HARRISON and ask him to please email me a copy.

[motla68]

I challenge you to post the contents on the documents in the blue paper you say you presented in court. No need scan or image, just a verbal statement of what was written will do for now. Prove me wrong if you can. But you and I both know you can't. fB

I did and you missed it, even was on this forum so your challenge is mute:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1256

[David Merrill]

I did and you missed it, even was on this forum so your challenge is mute:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ull=1#post1256

I don't feel like I am challenging you. You have made an assertion and you have the chance to back it up. You say you can cover a roofing bill by pledging the home into the Treasury as your private purse? Show us the Treasury cutting the check to the roofer, who was stupid enough to roof your home on your word btw.

I have heard echo from a couple people who do not believe in Private Law, but we do it all the time, but break it as well. Someone shares with you an amicable agreement in private, now that is law, somehow in your dealing with each other you cannot not agree on a particular thing so you bring it to a third party, you could have chose one man in confidence as a mediator in private, BUT you bring it into a Public Court instead. When private matters are brought into the public it is telling the court that you are not competent enough to settle this in private so now you are here and have to deal with our rules of how this will turnout.

I always insist on handling things in the private first and I let them (the DA and court know it), before coming down to meet the appointment of summons I announce my visit and for what purpose I am there by notice through the mail, then when I arrive it is just then a simple matter of doing what I said i was going to do in asking them to settle honorably " in private " before it is brought into public where they could be exposed to public scrutiny as well as i. If you really operate as a peaceful inhabitant and have this intent, things go much more smoothly.
So none of this has to do with public court room rules or procedures, it is a private amicable
agreement settled in private for some ticket a dumb ass cop made a public matter to put it bluntly.

PRIVATE. Not general, as a private act of the legislature; not in office;
as, a private person, as well as an officer, may arrest a felon; individual,
as your private interest; not public, as a private way, a private nuisance.
- 1856 Bouviers Dictionary

I cannot show you what i had wrapped in that paper, but I can tell you about it again.

- Robin-egg blue paper, wrapped 4 fold.

- Inside what was wrapped:

1. printout from online showing the certified mail previously delivered by notice of my visit and purpose for me being there.

2. copy of presentment (ticket) that had CS language written upon it that was sent in with the notice by certified mail.

3. copy of instrument printed out from the DMV that the vehicle was registered with the state.
( nothing i wrote on it)

4. copy of Birth Certificate

- All 4 sheets were stapled together.

The CS language written on the presentment is mentioned several times in the audio files on our talkshoe group, go there to hear "why" you would put this on the presentment.

Does this help any at all? If not then I guess we are done.

I have highlighted in red what I want to see and be able to read. Redact the personal information if you want. I usually do. I am not missing anything Motla68! I really think I am catching it all here. You are interesting but while you arrogantly claim that you used to be where I am at now, I think it far more likely the other way around.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Frederick Burrell]

Ok motla you have come this far now its time put up the proof. I want to see it also. That is virtually the same thing another person said on an audio. I have heard you speak and I heard this guy and you are not the same person. fB

[motla68]

That is what I have been after. It does not exist, as indicated by Sheriff HARRISON - in private. It is just junk he is too polite to throw away and the city attorney cannot convince him to report it to the AG.


It is my contention that you matla are fake and fraud.

I figured you were referring to his own indictment:




What he directs is indeed fraud - to direct the roofer to go get the coupon/bill paid from the Treasury. This is the Strawman Redemption all over again, by a different name. The Darrell FRECH HJR-192 scam is there too. This is nothing new. You can only acquire a Setoff from a coupon redemption (Anthony Joseph is helping the readers process this) from government agencies. The government is not going to send a roofer.

The simple fact is that I sit in Colorado in comfort typing because that money was spent, overcoming a Great Depression by saving the Fed [Secret Service is Treasury]. If you pull a coupon redemption on a government agency, they give you a setoff* to avoid disclosing that; that's all. You bought a lifestyle - voluntarily - a quality of life. The Secret Service is Treasury! Look at the driver's left hand. Watch him inspect, discern, draw, aim and fire. Use your layman sense of physics to determine which direction the slug striking JFK's head came from too. William GREER, the driver, was a Treasury Agent.

I have experienced this though, through suitors. If you send the roofer to the Treasury for redemption of the bill, presuming he trusted you to start work on your credit, he will get a letter back saying, Sorry, the Treasury cannot help you with this debt.

Whether Motla68 is intentionally misdirecting readers here or not is as yet unclear to me. I can say this much with certainty. He keeps trying to draw readers here off to other places by link while it would be a lot more convincing if he just showed us here. If he could convince fB here for example, he would get a lot further at convincing me!


Regards,

David Merrill.


* Misunderstanding at the time, I tried to set up an account for parking tickets in advance and the DA prosecuted me for forgery - that the POMC (Public Office Money Certificate) was shaped too much like a check.

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/9008/pomc.jpg

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/3385/letterofcredit1.jpg

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/4481/letterofcredit2.jpg

The prosecution failed and instead I prosecuted the DA. He cleared out his desk the next morning.


P.S. It is not past me Monday, to call Sheriff HARRISON and ask him to please email me a copy.

Now your editing my posts in your quotes to make it look like it is what i typed, who be fraudulent now?
Deu 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

You also are going to attempt to interfere in something that was private? That in which I shared with you privately is a sample, names have been changed in it so I doubt he is going to know what you are even talking about because you do not have the names that were on the original. If he respects the privacy of his agreements is another reason he may not give you anything.

Seems you have a history in interfering in others private business, but are clueless to what they are trying to tell you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGCY3HabGz0

I do not go into those courts any more, at least not past the check in counter. Even settled a case through certified mail so I would not have to travel there in another state, that is testimony and not I am not going to show the paperwork for it, because most of it was not mine, it belonged to the court.

Note that the post says " if someone is interested " , I am not holding a gun to some ones head who are you to keep them in?

Call matla fake and fraud, whatever makes you happy, these are just labels you give because I do not give you all the red carpet treatment and cut the meat for you so you can chew it. I do not serve knowledge up for you on a silver platter therefore I am a fake and fraud? for someone who boasts about knowing court room procedure, would have to say that I am disappointed.

[motla68]

No need scan or image, just a verbal statement of what was written will do for now. Prove me wrong if you can. But you and I both know you can't. fB

Ok motla you have come this far now its time put up the proof. I want to see it also. That is virtually the same thing another person said on an audio. I have heard you speak and I heard this guy and you are not the same person. fB

We are just changing up the rules as we go along here I guess? Even after I told you that I cannot show you the actual documents because they were private you still persist, I assume your in the same contention as David that you do not believe in Private law, but this is not my contention and belief so still not going to show the actual documents. I respect others privacy, do you not?

[motla68]

I don't feel like I am challenging you. You have made an assertion and you have the chance to back it up. You say you can cover a roofing bill by pledging the home into the Treasury as your private purse? Show us the Treasury cutting the check to the roofer, who was stupid enough to roof your home on your word btw.

I have highlighted in red what I want to see and be able to read. Redact the personal information if you want. I usually do. I am not missing anything Motla68! I really think I am catching it all here. You are interesting but while you arrogantly claim that you used to be where I am at now, I think it far more likely the other way around.

I gave no accusation that I personally had a roof fixed, go back and read it again, it was just a example, an article that was not on me. Just where do you think money goes when you pay taxes anyway?

CS language written upon it = "This account name and number is property of the United States Of America, please deposit to the owner care of Treasury of of the United States of America. Thank you." Below this was " Authorized Signatory; X per: NAME OF PERSON " below that wrote the words " Persona Non Grata ".
The letter X is a name which can be found in a lot of dictionaries, this is the Marque of the ancients. Some recognize this as a time when people could not write they would just put their marque.
Persona Non Grata reads by definition as an unwanted person and for our own definition is Jurisdiction Unknown, why would we use this? see this verse:
Mat 22:16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

There is several versus in the bible that say " regardest not the person " so this we do.

[Frederick Burrell]

Operative word in my statement "for now"

Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell post #31
No need scan or image, just a verbal statement of what was written will do for now. Prove me wrong if you can. But you and I both know you can't. fB

No change. Now is past in the present I want to see the paper work, or it didn't happen at least for you. Funny how all your paper works gets miss placed somehow or another. fB

[motla68]

Funny how all your paper works gets miss placed somehow or another. fB

Nope, mostly just that I keep private in the private and public I can show or provide a link to it.

[David Merrill]

That in which I shared with you privately is a sample, names have been changed in it so I doubt he is going to know what you are even talking about because you do not have the names that were on the original. If he respects the privacy of his agreements is another reason he may not give you anything.

I think it would be better to get the original from Sheriff HARRISON, you being like this. Now you are calling me a fraud!

You wrote that the Coresource Solution will pay the roofer and now you are calling me a fraud for indicting you with your own words?

You did not give me anything in private. That does not exist. If I read it, then I will have a bunch of secret information in my head and will constantly be trying to get you to divulge what I already have in my head for everybody here. I never agreed to keep it private. You sent it to me with an advisement that it is private/secret. That is why I did not read it. I did save it to disk adding the word "secret" after the file name so that I do not pull it in a year forgetting what it is. So I am under no obligation to keep it from the members here Motla68; you sent that to me for my use, without me even requesting it.

You are useful as far as I am concerned. You bring a lot of proof out of me with your nonsense. I was not going to mention that you have sent me a template of the Sheriff Agreement you sent to Sheriff HARRISON. You did. When you refuse to disclose it I probably will, provided Sheriff HARRISON is reluctant to send me the original.

Call matla fake and fraud, whatever makes you happy, these are just labels you give because I do not give you all the red carpet treatment and cut the meat for you so you can chew it. I do not serve knowledge up for you on a silver platter therefore I am a fake and fraud? for someone who boasts about knowing court room procedure, would have to say that I am disappointed.

You have indicted yourself for fraud, telling people they can use the Coresource Solution to pay the roofer.

[David Merrill]

We are just changing up the rules as we go along here I guess? Even after I told you that I cannot show you the actual documents because they were private you still persist, I assume your in the same contention as David that you do not believe in Private law, but this is not my contention and belief so still not going to show the actual documents. I respect others privacy, do you not?

It is obvious that there is something very wrong with your teachings. For one thing you are unwilling to teach.

Nope, mostly just that I keep private in the private and public I can show or provide a link to it.

From my perspective you are wasting the readers' time here. I suggest you keep it to your own threads. I don't like you trying to get members from here spending time with your theories - you said you can get a roofer paid from the Treasury with the Coresource Solution. I will give you some time to show your theory works here before I produce at least one letter from the Treasury in response to a service provider (roofer for example) trying to collect on such instructions.

[motla68]

Back in 2005 I sent in a letter requesting any evidence the state had interest in the vehicle that was registered, here is what they sent me back:



I do not have a good scanner so I took a picture on a old digital camera I have which I use for copying documents. The top is cut off so as to get in close enough so that you all can read the text. MJ has seen this document too, but without the editing and can probably testify to it's authenticity.

[David Merrill]

Back in 2005 I sent in a letter requesting any evidence the state had interest in the vehicle that was registered, here is what they sent me back:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]213[/ATTACH]

I do not have a good scanner so I took a picture on a old digital camera I have which I use for copying documents. The top is cut off so as to get in close enough so that you all can read the text. MJ has seen this document too, but without the editing and can probably testify to it's authenticity.

Sweet! The state is just a repository for registration. After two years they throw away the Bill of Lading. That same function can be exercised by operation of law through the district courts of the US too.

[motla68]

I think it would be better to get the original from Sheriff HARRISON, you being like this. Now you are calling me a fraud!

You wrote that the Coresource Solution will pay the roofer and now you are calling me a fraud for indicting you with your own words?

You did not give me anything in private. That does not exist. If I read it, then I will have a bunch of secret information in my head and will constantly be trying to get you to divulge what I already have in my head for everybody here. I never agreed to keep it private. You sent it to me with an advisement that it is private/secret. That is why I did not read it. I did save it to disk adding the word "secret" after the file name so that I do not pull it in a year forgetting what it is. So I am under no obligation to keep it from the members here Motla68; you sent that to me for my use, without me even requesting it.

You are useful as far as I am concerned. You bring a lot of proof out of me with your nonsense. I was not going to mention that you have sent me a template of the Sheriff Agreement you sent to Sheriff HARRISON. You did. When you refuse to disclose it I probably will, provided Sheriff HARRISON is reluctant to send me the original.


You have indicted yourself for fraud, telling people they can use the Coresource Solution to pay the roofer.

Here is the original post, do you see the words David Merrill in it as you so conveniently edited in, or does anybody?

For all who are interested one of Coresource Solution's methods works like the idea of the Privy Purse. Some people cannot wrap their head around the indemnification process of depositing receipts which causes and increase of assets in the Treasury thus one becomes indemnified of the expenses. Let look at it from another angle, when on increases the assets of a Privy Purse then one becomes indemnified of expenses, such as depositing a house into it then the Privy Purse takes care of the expense of things such as Leaky Roofs.

Read about the Privy Purse here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privy_Purse

The next article you will read here is about a Windsor Estate whom is still under Siege much like here in the states under Lincoln's Army was able to get their Leaky Roofs repaired:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/bu...pagewanted=all

If you take an interest in this to want to learn more about it, then PM me and I can give you some additional resource to research the subject.

Also Check out where it first mentions Privy Purse, it says LIKE the idea of Privy Purse.

The evidence on fraud speaks for itself, here much like what happened in court you constructed an argument to create controversy.