Serious question: living in an immoral economic system

[madfranks]

A good friend and I have been having a philosophical debate over the last few days regarding the immorality of our economic system, and how, at various levels of participation, being involved in this economy makes you immoral as well. Let's start with the basic question: if our banking system is based on creating money out of thin air to purchase assets (Federal Reserve), and loaning money out of thin air to assume control of assets and collect interest (the whole banking sector), is this any different than stealing, and if not, why not? Secondly, if one participates in this immoral system by engaging in economic activity with such a bank, as in taking out a home mortgage and paying principal + interest to the bank every month on a loan that they created out of thin air, is that person immoral for participating in and propping up such a system? And if merely participating in the system makes you immoral, would defaulting out of your obligations be considered a worse moral infraction (for breaking your word, or bond), or a higher moral good (for discarding the system from your life)? Following that logic, would "fighting fire with fire", in other words, cheating or lying to rid yourself of immoral financial economic obligations make you just as bad as the banks themselves, or would it be the moral thing to do, by cheating the immoral system to (even a little bit) take it down, and destroy it a bit?

[Serpo]

Well the government has lied too us about inflation for decades now and after compounding the cost of living is what we have now.

My reasoning is that you have to lie back too these people.

[osoab]

I see nothing wrong for playing the system for all it is worth.

[Ares]

A good friend and I have been having a philosophical debate over the last few days regarding the immorality of our economic system, and how, at various levels of participation, being involved in this economy makes you immoral as well. Let's start with the basic question: if our banking system is based on creating money out of thin air to purchase assets (Federal Reserve), and loaning money out of thin air to assume control of assets and collect interest (the whole banking sector), is this any different than stealing, and if not, why not? Secondly, if one participates in this immoral system by engaging in economic activity with such a bank, as in taking out a home mortgage and paying principal + interest to the bank every month on a loan that they created out of thin air, is that person immoral for participating in and propping up such a system? And if merely participating in the system makes you immoral, would defaulting out of your obligations be considered a worse moral infraction (for breaking your word, or bond), or a higher moral good (for discarding the system from your life)? Following that logic, would "fighting fire with fire", in other words, cheating or lying to rid yourself of immoral financial economic obligations make you just as bad as the banks themselves, or would it be the moral thing to do, by cheating the immoral system to (even a little bit) take it down, and destroy it a bit?

That's like asking do you want to starve or earn your pay so you can feed your family.

I only realized recently in my adult life that this system is immoral. Now I do whatever I can to avoid using it. Including redeeming lawful money. I refuse to pay traffic fines with refuse for cause, and I am looking into moving into a lot of land that already has a land patent.

Knowing the system is a fraud and immoral is one thing. Acting with ones belief to avoid that system is something else entirely and not to be taken lightly. But that's a question we all have to ask of ourselves. Do we fight for what we believe in, or do we just go along to get along knowing that it's a complete fraud?

[Ponce]

If you read the article that I posted where 150 bikers told the cop to get FK then you know my feelings about everything that's going on today, only when "We The People" become one (as the bikers did) will we be able to overcome the government and those who are really behind it.

V

[General of Darkness]

Everyday, a little of me whittles away playing into this pile of shit here in L.A. And before the get out of CA starts, every state has their issues.

[Ponce]

General, is more like the issues that you make personnal...... don't take anything as being personnal and wait till it happens, then take care of it and that's it.

V

[madfranks]

Here's one of the questions we were discussing. A couple years ago or so, my uncle had been foreclosed on. His home was repossessed by the bank. But did the bank have a legitimate moral claim on the property? Consider at the time of construction, the bank created money out of nothing to finance the project, and that money was paid to the laborers and materials suppliers to provide the end product, the house. Just because the bank created the money to finance the project, does that make them the legitimate owners of the property? If so, why can't my uncle print his own money to pay off the fictitious loan and "own" the house free and clear? Morally, what's the difference? Or, what if my uncle had participated in a counterfeiting scheme and used the proceeds of the money to pay off the bank loan? Is he as immoral as the bank, or has he liberated himself from a burden that the bank had no right to impose on him in the first place?

[mamboni]

I hate to tell you this but most people are cynical, selfish, unprincipled and immoral. And our fiat money-financed welfare state has rewarded this bad behavior. If just 5% of the public saw the problem as you do and acted with conviction the FED would be toast and the US dollar would collapse in weeks. What does acting with conviction entail:

1. Live within your means and buy only with cash
2. Never use credit - use charge cards only out of necessity
3. pay down all debts and stay out of debt
4. pay down your mortgage as fast as you can
5. never finance a business with bank money - accumulate cash
6. keep only the minimum in the bank to pay expenses
7. convert all surplus savings into physical gold and silver irregardless of the spot price

This is how I live my life. The only loan I own is my home mortgage which I have refi'd into a 15 year at a low 3.5% fixed. I can live with that. I presently have 1 year's worth of expenses in cash. Any money above that gets converted to physical metal.

How many people like me are out there in America, 2013, seriously? Maybe 1%, maybe.

[Dogman]

It is not just the economic system that is immoral in this country anymore. This country's moral decline methinks is in part the reason for our economic mess we are in now.

Imo.

[midnight rambler]

It is not just the economic system that is immoral in this country anymore. This country's moral decline methinks is in part the reason for our economic mess we are in now.

Imo.

Here's my theory: Beginning in 1933 the shift was made where the people were no longer able to *pay* their debts at law (i.e. extinguish the debt), although silver was left in place for another 30 years, however the silver coinage really amounted to very little overall. As law researcher Howard Freeman correctly pointed out, when we lost our money we lost our law (i.e. the common law, "the perfect law of liberty" - where everyone is held responsible and accountable for one's own actions) therefore a new law and new jurisdiction (administrative jurisdiction, wrap your head around that) had to be developed. This new law is the UCC. Under the UCC debts are 'discharged' (with limited liability), NOT *paid*. To discharge debt (with limited liability) is a privilege/benefit of govt. So what we have now everyone running around conducting themselves with limited liability rather than accepting full liability for themselves and their actions. I see this as the very root of the moral decline/decay and the immoral money system.

[madfranks]

Assume that one is burdened with lots of debt when he "wakes up" and realizes it's all a scam devised to feed the elite at the expense of the producers. Is it more moral for that person to work hard, persevere and pay off his debts the honest way, working for 20 years to pay off his mortgage and in the meantime feeding the parasites and contributing to the system, or cheat the system to free himself from the debt burden, be it by tactical default, tactical bankruptcy, use counterfeit money to pay it all off, or even take out bogus loans to pay it off and then declare bankruptcy? In other words, what's worse, living in the system or cheating the system to be rid of it?

[midnight rambler]

Assume that one is burdened with lots of debt when he "wakes up" and realizes it's all a scam devised to feed the elite at the expense of the producers. Is it more moral for that person to work hard, persevere and pay off his debts the honest way, working for 20 years to pay off his mortgage and in the meantime feeding the parasites and contributing to the system, or cheat the system to free himself from the debt burden, be it by tactical default, tactical bankruptcy, use counterfeit money to pay it all off, or even take out bogus loans to pay it off and then declare bankruptcy? In other words, what's worse, living in the system or cheating the system to be rid of it?

There is no honor in keeping up the illusion. The trick is not to end up getting charged criminally for taking positive concrete measures to escape the mine field*.

*someone once accurately described one's awakening to the fraud of this money system as being akin to waking up deep into a mine field and not recalling the steps one took to get there (so as to extricate one's self)

[Silver Rocket Bitches!]

Immorality is a beacon sign of the fourth turning. Look around you at the elementary school aged children. Their generation will be the one to usher in the new virtuous paradigm as they grow into maturity seeing the effect of a society hellbent on material greed and predatory prosperity. Unfortunately, that just means that after them will come a period of plateau and then decline where the immorality will grow once again and repeat ad infinitum. Same as it ever was.

[Ares]

Immorality is a beacon sign of the fourth turning. Look around you at the elementary school aged children. Their generation will be the one to usher in the new virtuous paradigm as they grow into maturity seeing the effect of a society hellbent on material greed and predatory prosperity. Unfortunately, that just means that after them will come a period of plateau and then decline where the immorality will grow once again and repeat ad infinitum. Same as it ever was.

Yeah it sucks being a nomad...... :-/

[madfranks]

So back to the mortgage metaphor then, who truly and morally owns the house if you have a mortgage on it? Since the bank created fictitious money to fund the project, I don't believe they have a moral claim, but then who does? If the homeowner somehow schemes the system to own free and clear a home they didn't pay for (i.e. using the "show me the note" method), who is harmed? Someone has to be. I believe that to the extent that the depreciation of the money affects everyone else holding dollars, those people are the victims, but they are victimized at the moment the bank creates the money out of nothing to get a house out of nothing. The damage is already done, so if the homeowner takes possession of the home after the bank has debased the currency by inflating the money supply to build the house, is the homeowner liable for those damages, or is the bank?

I know, this is deep stuff, thanks for all your posts everyone.

[Dogman]

Hell franks,

Even if the house is payed off and no mortgage, do you truly own the house? I think not, all you own is the value that you put into the property. The gov/state owns the land and you only rent it, with taxes. Fail to pay them and you forfeit everything.

So the moral question is it moral to do upon them as they do to you and keep out of jail.

[Ares]

So back to the mortgage metaphor then, who truly and morally owns the house if you have a mortgage on it? Since the bank created fictitious money to fund the project, I don't believe they have a moral claim, but then who does? If the homeowner somehow schemes the system to own free and clear a home they didn't pay for (i.e. using the "show me the note" method), who is harmed? Someone has to be. I believe that to the extent that the depreciation of the money affects everyone else holding dollars, those people are the victims, but they are victimized at the moment the bank creates the money out of nothing to get a house out of nothing. The damage is already done, so if the homeowner takes possession of the home after the bank has debased the currency by inflating the money supply to build the house, is the homeowner liable for those damages, or is the bank?

I know, this is deep stuff, thanks for all your posts everyone.

The very nature of an immoral system is immoral actions. They have legislated their immorality into numerous laws so that they can do as they wish without repercussions.

Goes back to the very decision we all must ask one self. Do you go along to get along knowing the system is a complete fraud? Or do you fight it every step of the way in line with your beliefs?

[vacuum]

About the mortgage metaphor.

In the first instance where he decides to pay the mortgage off, he's feeding the parasites and supporting the system.

However, in the second instance where he decides to stop paying for the house and instead gets it for free, he's becoming a parasite himself because he's shifting the expenses of building the house to society.

The most moral thing to do would be to sell the house, take whatever equity he put into it/can get out of it, and get a living arrangement where he either buys something outright or rents something until he can buy something. Perhaps it's a lot of land with a travel trailer at first, or staying in a small building on his family's land, etc.

That way you are neither feeding nor being a parasite.

Note that the bank doesn't create money out of thin air, rather any given bank loans out depositor's money (hence they pay a small amount of interest on savings/checking accounts). Only as an aggregate system is money multiplied (created out of thin air), but any one bank has fixed assets (deposits) and liabilities (loans). If you were to default on a mortgage that a small-town bank gave, and if there was no fdic, then what would happen is all the townspeople would lose their deposits because you decided not to pay your loan off.

The way that the banking system sucks out wealth from the economy is not through creating and loaning money at interest, but rather pumping cheap money into the economy (inflation) to get everyone strung out on loans, then withholding the money (deflation) to get everyone to default. This is the wealth transfer mechanism whereby they get real assets.

[madfranks]

The very nature of an immoral system is immoral actions. They have legislated their immorality into numerous laws so that they can do as they with without repercussions.

Goes back to the very decision we all must ask one self. Do you go along to get along knowing the system is a complete fraud? Or do you fight it every step of the way in line with your beliefs?

But what if your beliefs clash? Meaning, it's wrong to cheat, but it's also wrong to participate in an immoral system such as this. Which part ultimately triumphs? Cheating to get out of the system, or staying in the system, willingly participating in the fraud? There was a poster here before, I think his handle was Ruthless Defaulter; did he have a legitimate point?

[monty]

BANK LOAN FRAUD

On page 6 of Modern Money Mechanics, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago tells us that the banks DO NOT "pay out" the funds for loans from money they received from other depositor's accounts.

What they do is "accept" promissory notes in "exchange" for, credits to the "borrower's" transaction accounts - called "liabilities."
Can the bank legally create money? You bet. If anyone ever asks you if it is legal for the banks to create money, the answer is yes. By the transactional method of mere "bookkeeping" entries (debits and credits), the bank is able to create money (or what is called money today.) And here's how they do it.

When the bank receives a deposit of funds, either in Federal Reserve notes (cash) or some other form of a promise to pay, like a "check", or a "promissory note", they will open a "demand deposit account", or make a deposit in an account already opened, in the name of the "depositor."

Once the bank obtains that promise to pay, they own it. It's theirs. It is how they obtained that "promissory note, and how they "create money" with that "promise to pay", that is of special interest to you.

The following is the example from the fed publication, Modern Money Mechanics, and reflects a typical bank deposit transaction.

BANKING TODAY

CHECKING ACCOUNT (Deposit) Assets Liabilities
$9,000 $9,000


For every deposit entry on the "asset" side of the ledger, there must be a corresponding and matching "liability" entry. The liability is there because it is a Demand Deposit Account, which means you could withdraw it all at any time. The two ledgers, "assets" and Liabilities" must always balance out to "zero."

THIS IS KNOWN AS THE "TRANSACTION" CONCEPT OF MONEY
You take it to the bank, deposit it, bank has an asset and a liability, and the bank balance is "zero."

At this point, the new money has been created, but it is not in circulation. The bank has it in a Demand Deposit Account. If you have opened a checking account, you may write checks on that account, and buy goods or services. When the person to whom you wrote the check, deposits that check in their Demand Deposit Account, at their bank, that account is credited for the amount on the face of the check. The check you wrote (your promise to pay), is returned to your bank, and the Demand Deposit Account, that has your name and the Account Number attached to it, will be debited, for the amount you assigned to the check.

Goods and services have been purchased, but no new money has been created.

So how is new money created?

One way is by you applying for a loan. What are the steps a bank uses to handle a loan transaction, and how does that loan create new money?

Modern Money Mechanics tells us, if the banks were to take their own money, or other depositor's money, and loan it to you, they would never be able to create any "new" money and birth it into the economy. So, they are allowed to take your note, (which is new money, based on your promise to pay), and birth it, into the economy through, they're access to the, clearing houses for negotiable instruments, and loan you "credit."

However, let's look at a typical loan transaction today.

You go to the bank and ask to apply for a loan. Can the bank loan you they're own money (assets)? No. Can the bank loan you the other depositor's money (credits in a Demand Deposit Account)? Well, they could, if they requested and received written permission of every single depositor, from whose account they would be using to make the loan. But that would defeat the effort to create new money, since they would just be recycling a certain amount of currency. So, the answer is, no.

.So, here is what they do. For purposes of this example, we will use $100,000, but the principle used in the 'checking" (Demand Deposit Account) above, is the same. Your application for a loan is approved and you begin signing all the paperwork. Once you have signed the Promissory Note, the bank will make a book entry of a deposit into a bank Demand Deposit Account in the amount of your note, and show that amount as an "asset" to the bank. Remember there must be a corresponding and matching ledger entry as a liability. The loan is for $100,000. On the books of the bank, the establishment of the loan transaction would look similar to that of the checking account. There would be a deposit for $100,000 (your promissory note), and a matching ledger liability book entry of $100,000 (the numerical face amount of your note). Now, here is where it gets tricky. Let's track the transactions of a loan, in the following example.

LOAN ACCOUNT

Asset Liability
$100,000 $100,000
Let's say this $100,000 loan was for a mortgage. Here's what happens next:
MORTGAGE

$100,000 $100, 000
Buyer Seller

The Bank still owns asset. [Your Note]

Suppose they discount it 10%. 90,000

TOTAL $190,000

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

First, it becomes very obvious, that the bank raised an asset to itself, when it deposited your note in a bank Demand Deposit Account, and made a book entry of a "asset" and a matching book entry of a "liability." (a T accounting of the account will prove that.)

Second, it becomes very obvious, that the bank wrote a check on the "liability", and paid the seller, while keeping your note in the bank Demand Deposit Account, as an "asset." (An examination of the bank's books will prove that.)

Third, it now becomes very obvious, that in the loan transaction, the bank, exchanged their liability to the seller, for your note. Which means, the bank enriched itself in an amount equal to the face amount of your note. (Call in the Regulatory Examiner.)

Fourth, it becomes very obvious, by standard and well known business practice, that the bank does not hold your note, but will typically sell the note, at a discount, enriching the bank twice over. (Ask to see the original, unmarked and unaltered note.)

But, everybody's happy, right? Everyone got what, they bargained for, right? The seller is happy because he got the house sold. The buyer is happy because he got the house he wanted.

OR DID YOU GET WHAT YOU BARGAINED FOR?

Here are some serious questions that the above scenario of a loan transaction naturally raises.

PRIMARY QUESTIONS:

1. Does the bank raise an asset to itself, in addition to the liability?

2. Was this disclosed in the contract?

3. Was I compensated for the bank using my note, and my signature, to raise this asset to the bank?

4. Was this account containing the asset for the bank, opened before the bank received my note?

5. When I pay off the loan, who gets the asset the bank raised to itself, with my note?

QUESTIONS DERIVED FROM PRIMARY QUESTIONS:

1. Is, there fraud here?

2. If there is fraud here, what are the damages?

QUESTIONS THAT MAY LEAD TO THE DISCOVERY OF FRAUDULENT DAMAGES:

3. Was there inducement? (Advertising, Solicitation)

4. What does the note represent? (Your promise to pay)

5. Where will you derive the funds to pay? (From your labor)

6. Is your labor, your property? (Duh!)

7. How many years will you be paying on this note? (5, 10, 15, 30)

8. What is the interest rate? (8%, 10%, 12%)

9. Is that interest rate compounded annually, monthly, weekly, or daily? (Hint)

10. What is the actual rate of interest? (25-50%)

11. Does this violate the Usury Laws? (12% or higher annual interest rate)

12. Was this disclosed in the contract as required by the Federal Usury Disclosure Act?

13. Did the bank raise an asset to itself on your hand written name? (Without your knowledge and consent)

14. Did the bank use the note first (before) you received your loan, to raise the funds for the loan? (Did they sell it, or use it for collateral for a loan from another institution)

15. Does this make the note a negotiable instrument? (Tendering a future earnings instrument for consideration to a third party and endorsing, "without recourse.") 16. Did the bank properly apply the proceeds from your note to the purported debt?

17. What did the bank do with those proceeds? (Look at the building)

18. Who else is deriving a benefit from your note, (and hand written name) without your knowledge or consent?

19. Have you been damaged?

You will have to decide if there is fraud here.

But, if you get a Complaint to Foreclose your Mortgage and you do not answer and dispute every allegation, then you must counterclaim. What do you think a good counterclaim might be? Or, should you answer and dispute every claim, and deny there was a valid contract, because the contract was constructed by fraud and is void ab initio, and counterclaim for fraud?

ONLY YOU CAN MAKE THAT DECISION.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bankloanfraud.html

Sent from my iPad using Forum Runner

[LuckyStrike]

I haven't read through this entire thread, I'm about to go to bed but I wrote this at my site and figured it applies here.


What we are witnessing today is the logical conclusion of several hundred years of usury. It doesn't matter if it's .01% or 50% eventually those loaning the money own everything.

If Shlomo rides into town which has a total wealth of $100 and makes a loan for $10 at %10 interest, where does the $1 come from? It comes out of circulation of the town and resides in Shlomos pocket. This process is repeated ad infinitum until Shlomo owns everything in the town. So the difference in .01% or 50% is nothing but time, one level accomplishes the goal sooner but nothing more.

This problem is exacerbated because Sholomos cousin has a printing press, and his other cousin owns every radio and TV station, newspaper and movie studio and convinces everyone to buy things because it's so easy with loans from Shlomo. So he never runs out of money to loan nor people thinking they NEED a loan. They didn't start owning every media outlet, or with a government sanctioned printing press of course. They purchased these powers with the money they sucked from everyone via loaning money at interest.



So you want to topple the system? Quit buying their shit, quit taking out loans. If people just understood my simple story I'd like to think they'd begin slitting throats by morning.


Aristotle, Politics, Book I, Part 10:
“There are two sorts of wealth-getting, as I have said; one is a part of household management, the other is retail trade: the former necessary and honorable, while that which consists in exchange is justly censured; for it is unnatural, and a mode by which men gain from one another. The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of any modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.”

[Ares]

But what if your beliefs clash? Meaning, it's wrong to cheat, but it's also wrong to participate in an immoral system such as this. Which part ultimately triumphs? Cheating to get out of the system, or staying in the system, willingly participating in the fraud? There was a poster here before, I think his handle was Ruthless Defaulter; did he have a legitimate point?

That's a decision one will have to make, and one he or she will live with. Me I chose the honest route. I realized the system is a fraud. I do whatever I can to avoid it and looking to get some land that is free and clear of said system and start building a new house on it. I will build it a section or part at a time, whatever my finances and time allow.

Due to the very nature of indentured servitude built into the system, obtaining your freedom isn't going to be a simple task. The questions while philosophical, there are real world repercussions by acting out your beliefs. Be they cheating the system, or working honestly within the system neither really benefit you or society as a whole. It's a catch 22. You work honest, you feed the system. You cheat the system society pays for your loses because we all know bankers don't lose in a game they created.

Every time I get a new clerk at my credit union I have to retrain her or him on what the nature of lawful money is. Having to argue with the guys in blue costumes with tin badges because they don't know law, shocking said guys in costumes when the ticket he just wrote you is thrown out. I was parked in front of a fire hydrant (back story at the bottom of this post) cop wrote me a 50 dollar presentment. I promptly refused for cause and said cop saw me 2 weeks later asking how I was able to get the ticket dismissed. I said because it's just a presentment, I refused it. He goes how can you refuse it? I said because I chose not to do business with you. If I waited for the time to show up in court I would of accepted it because silence is acceptance. You'll notice that I refused it within 8 hours of you giving me it, mailed a copy to the U.S. District court and filed it in my miscellaneous case file and sent the original copy to your court. I notified a 3rd party of my rights for refusal. The local traffic court didn't have a leg to stand on so threw it out. He said that's not right, I said ok then who was the injured party? Whose property was damaged? Whose rights did I violate by parking where I did? He said no one's..... but what if a building was on fire and a fire truck needed access to the hydrant. I said exactly so what you gave me was commercial in nature and is contractual. I wanted no part of it and refused the contract. As for your what if question, there is no such thing as pre-crime if someones property was damaged because of my actions then I can be held accountable. Not before hand.

It's not an easy journey no matter which route you take. It's been fulfilling, terrifying, and amazing all in the same time. I try to plan my actions to have minimal impact on my neighbors and community. I work within the framework provided, most of the time those who are in the legal profession have no idea what you are talking about, so you have to educate them as well.


Back Story: I was working a side job wiring a new business in the downtown area of where I live. There's never any parking and I had about 300 lbs worth of tools and wire. I drove around the block 3 times looking for a place to park "legally" and couldn't find one. So I parked in front of a hydrant just to pack up my tools and leave. Officer friendly comes out of the local donut and coffee house (I shit you not) and says you can't park there. I said it'll just be for 2 minutes, my tools are already sitting waiting to be set into my conveyance and I'll be on my way. There is no where else to park, if I park in the middle of the street I'm blocking traffic. He goes, yeah but you can't park there. I said fine just ticket me then. By the time he pulls up his cruiser to block me in, he's also blocking traffic by the way I have my tools and wire already loaded up. He goes you're lucky I don't hook your ride because I could. I said I'm going to warn you right now, if you impound my conveyance I will place a lien against your home for the amount it takes me to get it out of impound. He goes you can't do that, I said I can in a civil court, I won't go after your department. I'll go after you. So he just issued me a citation (presentment). I wrote refused for cause on it, mailed it in the next day. Hadn't heard anything about it until he saw me down town finishing up the side job 2 weeks later and asked how I was able to get it to be dismissed.

[LuckyStrike]

Here is another article which at least somewhat addresses your moral dilemma

http://www.truthinourtime.com/2010/09/02/can-you-steal-from-the-government/

[Hatha Sunahara]

Thank you LS for posting the Aristotle quote on usury.

This thread goes a bit deeper than morality or immorality in the system. It also deals with the idea of 'honor'. Once you discover you are being cheated, is it honorable to continue in that relationship?

Usury is effectively getting people to agree to being cheated. The bankers not only practice usury by charging interest, but they also require collateral worth more than the value of the loan. In ancient Sumeria if you were a farmer and took a loan, you put up your farm as collateral. It took a few growing cycles for nature to fail the farmers, through floods or droughts, so they could not repay their loans. It didn't take many generations for the lenders to own all the land in Sumeria. The lenders took no risks, and got all the rewards. In a system like that, is it honorable to continue being cheated? Is it honorable to be a slave? Is this the crux of our social order? Or is it only for borrowers?

The lesson I have learned from studying all this is that borrowing money is something you want to avoid like the plague. Save money instead--but don't borrow any.


Hatha

[Serpo]

Everyday, a little of me whittles away playing into this pile of shit here in L.A. And before the get out of CA starts, every state has their issues.

And every state could mean every country and its true ,similar issues everywhere so my observation is that isolated areas pose less of a threat .

[Serpo]

There is no moral dilemma about this.

One side hasnt got any and the other side has.

The side that hasnt has lied,stolen,corrupted,swindled,killed over and over,are attacking us in every which way possible.

My morals are going no where near this because they dont have any they are not getting any of mine.

Morals are only brought in as a subject if they have a close proximity to the truth, these people are so far from the truth,light years in fact.

Its your morals that support your heart and thus our minds to give us conscience.

We can have a consciousness that is alert and free if we can unravel ourselves from ourselves.

This is all pollution affecting us all.


People making heaps suffer from the euphoric energy of ....it feels good to earn this much........

they see the world and people in it thru economic eyes where as the person earning less seems inferior so this becomes like the main focus in life and so the consciousness becomes 3D.

Money is physical when printed and until then its a bit like ghost money,never actually been present in the physical, stored on a computer somewhere.

Everything , you do is connected too the physical word , and that is the sole objective of the 3D world.

4D is getting beyond that and seeing thru it ,seeing thru the lies and bs.

5D brings a happy heart,,,,,,,,,,,,,,whatever happens.

6D its impossible to achieve as the world is a mess and we are all too blame;D

[vacuum]

Thank you LS for posting the Aristotle quote on usury.

This thread goes a bit deeper than morality or immorality in the system. It also deals with the idea of 'honor'. Once you discover you are being cheated, is it honorable to continue in that relationship?

Usury is effectively getting people to agree to being cheated. The bankers not only practice usury by charging interest, but they also require collateral worth more than the value of the loan. In ancient Sumeria if you were a farmer and took a loan, you put up your farm as collateral. It took a few growing cycles for nature to fail the farmers, through floods or droughts, so they could not repay their loans. It didn't take many generations for the lenders to own all the land in Sumeria. The lenders took no risks, and got all the rewards. In a system like that, is it honorable to continue being cheated? Is it honorable to be a slave? Is this the crux of our social order? Or is it only for borrowers?

The lesson I have learned from studying all this is that borrowing money is something you want to avoid like the plague. Save money instead--but don't borrow any.


Hatha

The beautifully evil thing in this example you gave and in the example I gave about inflation and deflation cycles is that usually what happens is that the saver is either forced to take out loans or go out of business.

For example, the farmer who decides not to go into debt, while all the other farmers in town do decide to go into debt, is at a huge disadvantage. Everyone else has as many oxen as they want, as many new tools, they can afford to hire as many laborers as they want, etc, because they're doing it off of credit. How can you compete with that?

That's the main problem. The creditors create cheap money such that responsible businesses are forced to take out loans in order to compete with irresponsible businesses who trust the system/economy and go all-out with loans. After everybody is doing this to compete with each other, they turn off the money spigot and all that sweet secured debt comes back to them.

[Twisted Titan]

Get as much as you can,

as fast as you can,

for as long as you can.


Because you will never get as much from them as they have gotten from you.

[Serpo]

Make it the level playing field ...................


NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO GO INTO DEPT.......make it against the law

[Hatha Sunahara]

Here are 21 elements of the Sumerian Swindle:


#1 All interest on the loan of money is a swindle.
#2 Collateral that is worth more than the loan, is the banker’s greatest asset.
#3 Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender.
#4 Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral.
#5 The debtor is the slave of the lender.
#6 High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the
moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will.
#7 Monopoly gives wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power.
#8 Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; international crime families are
the most successful of all.
#9 Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph.
#10 Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower.
#11 Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers
when the people are impoverished.
#12 All private individuals who control the public’s money supply are swindling traitors to both people
and country.
#13 All banking is a criminal enterprise; all bankers are international criminals, so secrecy is essential.
#14 Anyone who is allowed to lend-at-interest eventually owns the entire world.
#15 Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons.
#16 Labor is the source of wealth; control the source and you control the wealth, raise up labor and you
can pull down kings.
#17 Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be
sacrificed.
#18 When the source of goods is distant from the customers, profits are increased both by import and
export.
#19 Prestige is a glittering robe for ennobling treason and blinding fools; the more it is used, the more it
profits he who dresses in it.
#20 Champion the Minority in order to dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle
the Minority out of that wealth and power.
#21 Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body.

This is from The Sumerian Swindle, a book which you can download here:

http://www.bamboo-delight.com/download/Sumerian_Swindle_v1.pdf

Note particularly points 3 and 5. How moral is is to require only one of the parties to the transaction to be honest? How moral is it to enter into a transaction where you sell your freedom for money? Or you buy someone else's freedom for money?

When people agree to be swindled, the question of morality becomes moot.


Hatha

[palani]

Serious question: living in an immoral economic system

The point is nobody lives in this system. That statement is easy enough to prove. Go to the bone yard (stone city) and check how many tombstones have the name of the occupant in anything other than capital letters. The dead are addressed in all caps. Now go check your mail. See how you are addressed and form your own conclusions.

You can do practically anything to the dead and they don't complain much.

[7th trump]

The point is nobody lives in this system. That statement is easy enough to prove. Go to the bone yard (stone city) and check how many tombstones have the name of the occupant in anything other than capital letters. The dead are addressed in all caps. Now go check your mail. See how you are addressed and form your own conclusions.

You can do practically anything to the dead and they don't complain much.

Hahahahahaha......................!
All cap letters huh?
Hahahahahahaha.............!

Yep...............keep visiting those conspiracy forums palani.
The courts have shot that old and tired "all cap" conspiracy in the ground so many times its pathetic!

I'm surprised you actually brought that conspiracy back from the grave.

[palani]

My words are addressed to the living. Those who are dead need not respond.

[woodman]

Here's the deal: We are in a fight. It is a dirty fight with no quarter given. Every dirty trick in the book was used and is still implemented to keep the slave masters in power. Does anyone really think that you can win against a viscous and immoral opponent without using all their own tricks against them? This does not make one immoral, it just means they have the will to survive and win.

Our financial dealings are the heart of any society. When the heart is rotten, it must be excised, for every action one takes is propelled by and in accordance with and eventually serves to strengthen a rotten heart.

If someone is trying to rape you and you stab them, does this make you immoral? You penetrated them only to prevent them from penetrating you.

[Spectrism]

Here is how I see it. You contracted to make payments. As long as the contract is lawful and they hold up to their part of the agreement, you are bound by your own word. If they default on the contract or you can show that it is unlawful, then it is time to look at a remedy to cut off the wrong.

I see this same argument in Obamacare. Take my money to pay for abortions? Take my money to pay those who won't work? Take my money to fund a corrupt government killing people here and abroad? We are near the time that those of the Church will be called out of this unclean money system. We may become "homeless" but we will need to think about being off their radar entirely.

[palani]

You contracted to make payments.

Perhaps it is a misnomer to call them contracts. Law requires contracts to be based upon some consideration and that was removed in 1933. Along about 1938 to cure the deficiency of lack of consideration contracts were 'restated'. What you today call 'contract' is a communist definition that abolishes private property. If this is what you desire then enjoy because you have arrived.

In my communications with anyone I choose to engage in a contract I place a $1 Fox postage stamp (uncancelled) on the agreement. If the other party chooses to keep my payment then I have a contract in law. The remainder of the agreement might be for $100 million dollars (usually not because of my limited means) but the consideration is $1 and that is all that is necessary.

[midnight rambler]

As long as the contract is lawful

Please elaborate on how a COLORABLE contract (because the consideration is COLORABLE) can be deemed 'lawful'. TIA

[madfranks]

Here is another article which at least somewhat addresses your moral dilemma

http://www.truthinourtime.com/2010/09/02/can-you-steal-from-the-government/

That was a great article, thanks for sharing that.

[Horn]

The system feeds on the young, the immoral thing is that parents let their children go out and get put through the same mortgaged life torture they were put through.

[Spectrism]

Please elaborate on how a COLORABLE contract (because the consideration is COLORABLE) can be deemed 'lawful'. TIA

In the example of a mortgage against a property, the seller is conveyed digits of credit deemed valuable in the legal money system. Your debt to the seller is extinguished in exchange for your promissory note contracted under your free will for the value of satisfying the seller. If you are engaging in exchange of that money, you are an active participant in that money system and a co-conspirator of an unlawful commission, if that is now your argument.

[midnight rambler]

digits of credit deemed valuable

Deemed valuable by whom?!?!?! ??? Lyin' banksters/agents of the Death Cult??

The ONLY way to extinguish debt is VALUE FOR VALUE/SUBSTANCE FOR SUBSTANCE. PERIOD. It is NOT possible to *pay* a debt with a debt. Hello!?!?!

"When you find yourself in a hole the first thing you need to do is stop digging." --Will Rogers

[palani]

your promissory note contracted under your free will

The problem is not that there IS a contract. The problem is that there IS NOT a contract. Yet people continue to perform under a PRESUMED contract. Then you get hauled into or try to take your PRESUMED injury into an administrative court and they get a COPY of the note or mortgage and wave it under your nose while shouting "DID YOU SIGN THIS DOCUMENT?" and you don't have the sense to say "I'll comment on the authenticity of that document when it is entered into evidence." As YOURS may or may not be the only signature on the document in question then YOU are the only one who may authenticate the document for entry into EVIDENCE.

End analysis ... YOU are the one in control but if you are so uninformed that you are going to cave under pressure then you have handed your control over to others.

[Hatha Sunahara]

Is it immoral for wolves to eat sheep?




Hatha

[Spectrism]

Deemed valuable by whom?!?!?! ??? Lyin' banksters/agents of the Death Cult??

The ONLY way to extinguish debt is VALUE FOR VALUE/SUBSTANCE FOR SUBSTANCE. PERIOD. It is NOT possible to *pay* a debt with a debt. Hello!?!?!

"When you find yourself in a hole the first thing you need to do is stop digging." --Will Rogers

I would wager a silver eagle that YOU use debt to buy groceries and gasoline.... and I bet you even pay taxes. I will go out on a limb here, but I figure you also have a social security number, a postal service (mail) box and postal address, and that you are registered to drive a "motored vehicle". How's my guessing?

[midnight rambler]

and I bet you even pay taxes.

No, I exercise my exemption.


I figure you also have a social security number

No, *I* don't 'have' a SS#, the SSA issued a SS# to a 16 y.o. minor in my case, it's unlawful to contract with a minor. It's the SSA's #, not mine.


a postal service (mail) box

I don't have one, but a strawman I control has access to one. BTW, 'mail delivery' is a privilege/benefit, and as such comes with liabilities.


that you are registered to drive a "motored vehicle"

I haven't had a DRIVER LICENSE in 13 years. Additionally I'm not a 'driver', i.e. operating in commerce.

[Spectrism]

No, I exercise my exemption.



No, *I* don't 'have' a SS#, the SSA issued a SS# to a 16 y.o. minor in my case, it's unlawful to contract with a minor. It's the SSA's #, not mine.

I don't have one, but a strawman I control has access to one. BTW, 'mail delivery' is a privilege/benefit, and as such comes with liabilities.

I haven't had a DRIVER LICENSE in 13 years. Additionally I'm not a 'driver', i.e. operating in commerce.

Nice. Hide all the cards that would reveal your hypocrisy. Do you operate an automobile? Do you buy groceries? Do you have any property?

Stop quibbling.

[midnight rambler]

Do you operate an automobile?

The term 'operate' relates to commerce and I already advised you that I don't operate in commerce.

Please tell me that this is an act and you're not really that dense.

And I really don't see how my activities constitute hypocrisy. I haven't 'used' a SS# in over 20 years. Just because you cannot see or fathom any remedy doesn't mean there isn't any remedy. Do you know what anosognosia is?

[Spectrism]

The term 'operate' relates to commerce and I already advised you that I don't operate in commerce.

Please tell me that this is an act and you're not really that dense.

Whatever term you like to use.... what exactly do you do with a car, motorized wheeled conveying machine, horseless carriage, etc. Do you use such a device?

And, do you buy groceries or are you living in the mountains and telepathically sending these messages into the forum?


And I really don't see how my activities constitute hypocrisy. I haven't 'used' a SS# in over 20 years. Just because you cannot see or fathom any remedy doesn't mean there isn't any remedy. Do you know what anosognosia is?


Straw argument.

You are not employed. Do you work?
Any dealings with the government?

[midnight rambler]

You are not employed. Do you work?
Any dealings with the government?

Knowing what I know now I could never, ever be an 'employee' again.

And I avoid ALL 'dealings' with 'the government'.

[dys]

I think Madfranks has hit on the heart of the problem. You see, I'm not sold on the idea that avoiding bank loans and credit cards or even converting most cash to gold and silver somehow alleviates one's personal responsibly in this whole mess. There has to be some culpability in simply using their FRNs, the money is dirty and everyone on this forum knows it. There also has to be some culpability in something as simple as paying market price- for anything- because by extension you are paying the banker's vigorish, which helps to perpetuate the scam.

The movie Usual Suspect comes to mind. Everyone working for Kaiser Sauze, most not knowing it. But those that do know not willing to pay the price to quit.

dys

[Cebu_4_2]

The movie Usual Suspect comes to mind. Everyone working for Kaiser Sauze, most not knowing it. But those that do know not willing to pay the price to quit.
dys

Another movie! Thanks.

[Spectrism]

The problem is not that there IS a contract. The problem is that there IS NOT a contract. Yet people continue to perform under a PRESUMED contract. Then you get hauled into or try to take your PRESUMED injury into an administrative court and they get a COPY of the note or mortgage and wave it under your nose while shouting "DID YOU SIGN THIS DOCUMENT?" and you don't have the sense to say "I'll comment on the authenticity of that document when it is entered into evidence." As YOURS may or may not be the only signature on the document in question then YOU are the only one who may authenticate the document for entry into EVIDENCE.

End analysis ... YOU are the one in control but if you are so uninformed that you are going to cave under pressure then you have handed your control over to others.

It is already entered into evidence as an official document field in the town hall with the lien against the property.

[palani]

It is already entered into evidence as an official document field in the town hall with the lien against the property.
Think again. If copies had any force then I could go down and get a copy of that document and enforce it against you. Originals only and banks seem to have sold those or mislaid them.

For a doc to be admitted into evidence someone has to testify and the only one who can do that is the one who actually signed it. And then you want to look at the original and see if anything has been added or subtracted from the document. If it has been recorded I will practically guarantee you that the recorder added some information and it is now now longer the original you signed.

If you testify that that is your signature on a COPY (even a certified copy) then you just magically proclaimed it to be an ORIGINAL and not a copy. Why would you do that?

[Spectrism]

Think again. If copies had any force then I could go down and get a copy of that document and enforce it against you. Originals only and banks seem to have sold those or mislaid them.

For a doc to be admitted into evidence someone has to testify and the only one who can do that is the one who actually signed it. And then you want to look at the original and see if anything has been added or subtracted from the document. If it has been recorded I will practically guarantee you that the recorder added some information and it is now now longer the original you signed.

If you testify that that is your signature on a COPY (even a certified copy) then you just magically proclaimed it to be an ORIGINAL and not a copy. Why would you do that?

The current state of legally acceptable contracts includes copies. Copies of originals show the agreement of the parties. Faxed copies and now emailed copies of digital agreements are acceptable in court.

While I understand your position and the use of original contracts, it is not what you like that determines acceptability, nor is it law.... but the decision of the courts.

[7th trump]

The current state of legally acceptable contracts includes copies. Copies of originals show the agreement of the parties. Faxed copies and now emailed copies of digital agreements are acceptable in court.

While I understand your position and the use of original contracts, it is not what you like that determines acceptability, nor is it law.... but the decision of the courts.

Yeah but ....you cant tell the nutcase anything. He wont beleive anything that goes against his conspiritive mindset.

What I've found in the past about nutcases who try to use these false premises is that they are selfish and lazy. There by looking at anything to get something for free. Even if they understand they have a contract where they signed on the dotted line like a mortgage or a signiture loan.

[BrewTech]

Ah... a classic Spec/palani/7th trump derail...

Like clockwork!

In all fairness to Spec, he is not required to be involved most of the time... but a 3-way is more interesting!

[Dogman]

Ah... a classic Spec/palani/7th trump derail...

Like clockwork!

In all fairness to Spec, he is not required to be involved most of the time... but a 3-way is more interesting!

Are you referring to a virtual sorta inter web

Ménage à trois? ;D

[palani]

The current state of legally acceptable contracts includes copies. Copies of originals show the agreement of the parties. Faxed copies and now emailed copies of digital agreements are acceptable in court.

While I understand your position and the use of original contracts, it is not what you like that determines acceptability, nor is it law.... but the decision of the courts.

I understand that there are argument hearings and evidentiary hearings and that when you insist upon an evidentiary hearing you will nine times out of ten be railroaded. However it is up to you to set the standards of the court and if you are willing to compromise your standards then you have no standards at all. But then this is obvious because of the reasons you would be there to begin with.

[palani]

Ah... a classic Spec/palani/7th trump derail...

Like clockwork!

In all fairness to Spec, he is not required to be involved most of the time... but a 3-way is more interesting!

I am used to reading others who don't like my messages use any excuse to shift the topic. Frequently they use dupes to aid them. Such is your argument. You are a troll.

[Spectrism]

No intent to derail the thread. In fact, this is a discussion of how to remedy the corrupt system with practical means so that you preserve your conscience and moral sensibilities.

We all agree the system is corrupt. So the next stage is: how do we deal (or not deal) with it?

The problem with Palani's advice is that you cannot be partial "nutcase". You must be all-in. This is why I questioned him on a few points which he avoided answering. I know he is not all-in. And the reclusive, elusive and exclusive answers he provides are not sufficient for any of us to walk that path without getting the absolute crap beat out of us by the thugs in costume. And, to be ridiculed by the "teacher who does not teach" requires some stern blowback.

[midnight rambler]

No intent to derail the thread. In fact, this is a discussion of how to remedy the corrupt system with practical means so that you preserve your conscience and moral sensibilities.

We all agree the system is corrupt. So the next stage is: how do we deal (or not deal) with it?

The problem with Palani's advice is that you cannot be partial "nutcase". You must be all-in. This is why I questioned him on a few points which he avoided answering. I know he is not all-in. And the reclusive, elusive and exclusive answers he provides are not sufficient for any of us to walk that path without getting the absolute crap beat out of us by the thugs in costume. And, to be ridiculed by the "teacher who does not teach" requires some stern blowback.

I submit you don't know what you don't know and you're unwilling to learn (or even recognize/appreciate you being unaware) - IOW I suspect you're an anosognosiac with respect to the issues at hand.

Yes, being apart from the matrix can be hazardous, however I've been able to do it for many years (over 20). And yeah, it's true that many things I've done years ago cannot be duplicated in the current state of affairs, but where there's a will there's a way. One size does not fit all. The question is: how bad do you want it? Apparently for some not bad enough - all they can manage to do is throw stones and a glass house at others.

ETA: FWIW if one is unwilling to go into the lion's den when tasked then one doesn't have what it takes - imo.

[palani]

The problem with Palani's advice ...

I have offered no advice. This is a discussion board. Everything presented is for discussion.

For the sake of discussion ... It appears to me that you are so used to the illusions that you have a difficulty with reality. Until you correct that deficiency be prepared to fail in all your attempts at remedy.

[Spectrism]

A teacher who does not teach is not a teacher. One who chides and corrects the errors of another without offering the correction is not a guide, help, advisor, teacher or friend.

What I have found with those above the fray of this evil system is that they talk alot and manage slippery circular paths and ignore the crucial questions that would reveal their flawed positions. I have seen lawyers like that.


I will exit this system when my Master tells me to. He will provide all my needs. Anyone claiming to be walking upright (outside the system) and not under the Master who is the Lamb of YHWH, the Prince of Peace, the Messiah, are still under deception and ruled by delusion.

[7th trump]

No intent to derail the thread. In fact, this is a discussion of how to remedy the corrupt system with practical means so that you preserve your conscience and moral sensibilities.

We all agree the system is corrupt. So the next stage is: how do we deal (or not deal) with it?

The problem with Palani's advice is that you cannot be partial "nutcase". You must be all-in. This is why I questioned him on a few points which he avoided answering. I know he is not all-in. And the reclusive, elusive and exclusive answers he provides are not sufficient for any of us to walk that path without getting the absolute crap beat out of us by the thugs in costume. And, to be ridiculed by the "teacher who does not teach" requires some stern blowback.

palani avoids everything and thank you for seeing Palani as a "lawyer"....a slick circular talk lawyer at that.
He says a lot of nothing.....much like a politician!

[palani]

A teacher who does not teach is not a teacher. One who chides and corrects the errors of another without offering the correction is not a guide, help, advisor, teacher or friend.


It is already entered into evidence as an official document field in the town hall with the lien against the property. I pointed out that this is a false statement.


The current state of legally acceptable contracts includes copies. As I previously posted contracts were 'restated' in 1938. All legal contract are not lawful contracts no matter how many times they are restated.


This is why I questioned him on a few points which he avoided answering. I know he is not all-in. Seems to me I responded to all of your posts. And I don't know what you mean by 'all-in'.

Was there something else you cared to discuss?

[palani]

palani avoids everything and thank you for seeing Palani as a "lawyer"....a slick circular talk lawyer at that.
He says a lot of nothing.....much like a politician!

Am I to respond to this nonsense without charges of attempting to de-rail this thread?

Why don't you just stay in the land of the dead? The universe starts and ends with social security with you. Your position is nonsense.

[7th trump]

Am I to respond to this nonsense without charges of attempting to de-rail this thread?

Why don't you just stay in the land of the dead? The universe starts and ends with social security with you. Your position is nonsense.

I believe if this is a discussion then those in discussion should be subject to "creditability".

By making this "claim" does this "land of the dead" exist?
If so, can you please show us some proof?
I do not know of this "land of the dead".

I never mentioned "Social Security". Why would you say such a thing about me Palani?

"Position"?
What "position" are you referring to?
And what does this have to do with "nonsense"?
Please define "nonsense"!

[7th trump]

Me thinks palani woke up drunk again.

[palani]

Me thinks....

I sincerely doubt that you bother to think that you are de-railing a serious subject with your nonsense. Ad hominem attacks don't prove anything except to those who reside in the dead zone.

[palani]

I do not know of this "land of the dead".

Then why don't you google it?

[7th trump]

I sincerely doubt that you bother to think that you are de-railing a serious subject with your nonsense. Ad hominem attacks don't prove anything except to those who reside in the dead zone.

I looked up "ad hominem" it does mention anything about "dead" or "zone" or even the two together.


A serious subject huh?........and yet you refuse to answer any questions and want to be part of a discussion.
What......don't you want to claim your creditability?
Or do you refer to separate yourself from creditability?

[7th trump]

Then why don't you google it?

Why should I ...it was you who brought it up.
That's like wanting a paycheck and having someone do the work for you.

[palani]

I looked up "ad hominem" it does mention anything about "dead" or "zone" or even the two together. Did you figure out what it does mean?


yet you refuse to answer any questions and want to be part of a discussion
Where have you desired to discuss? Your mode is attack. Go bury yourself. You are beginning to stink.

[7th trump]

Ever thought your non-answer gibberish is a derailment in and of itself?
Or can you think that far ahead to realize you already derailed this thread by trying to control it?

[palani]

That's like wanting a paycheck and having someone do the work for you.
Do you expect others to do your homework for you?

[palani]

you already derailed this thread by trying to control it?

Pardon me for RESPONDING. If you don't want a RESPONSE why do you bother to address this gibberish to me?

[palani]

With apologies to madfranks for my feeble attempts to respond to criticism here is a remedy for an immoral economic system:

GET OUT OF IT.

Now that I have given the remedy here is how I do it:

I DON'T ACCEPT ANY FIAT MONEY.

Not too difficult of a concept. There is a goal and there is a means to accomplish that goal. The difficult part is to figure out how to accomplish the goal and retain something of a normal life. There must be 50 ways to accomplish this (or more).

[7th trump]

Did you figure out what it does mean?


Where have you desired to discuss? Your mode is attack. Go bury yourself. You are beginning to stink.

Oh no palani you are attempting that trickery "lawyer" stuff again..........I'm a spectator just saying out loud what I see you doing....or lack there of.
You want full control, but there's a problem.
Someone, besides me, has figured you out.....your like that dog that chases after cars..............................once you catch the car you don't have any idea what to do with it.
I think you are one of those guys who just reads the headlines and makes up the small print.

Ohh wait a minute your a homeless guy who gives out legal advice and yet says he cant say how he got out of the system because hes under contract to not say.
For a guy who talks a lot about legal gibberish you'd a thunk you could have seen that contract (lie) coming.
Yep...your so legal smart you got yourself in a pickle of a contract (cough cough........lie).

[midnight rambler]

Anyone claiming to be walking upright (outside the system) and not under the Master who is the Lamb of YHWH, the Prince of Peace, the Messiah, are still under deception and ruled by delusion.

What a crock as well as extremely presumptuous. lol

Refer to James 1:25

Give God what is right, NOT what is left. If 'burning a pinch of incense for Caesar' is what you wish to do, then that's YOUR choice. That is something that I refuse to do.

[7th trump]

With apologies to madfranks for my feeble attempts to respond to criticism here is a remedy for an immoral economic system:

GET OUT OF IT.

Now that I have given the remedy here is how I do it:

I DON'T ACCEPT ANY FIAT MONEY.

Not too difficult of a concept. There is a goal and there is a means to accomplish that goal. The difficult part is to figure out how to accomplish the goal and retain something of a normal life. There must be 50 ways to accomplish this (or more).

Fiat money has absolutely nothing at all to do with being in the system.............period!

Fiat...............didn't make you or anyone sign a W4.
Fiat........is in no way tied to a birth certificate.
Fiat..........is not the reason behind having to apply for a drivers license.
Fiat .... is not behind the selective service act.
Fiat.......is not the reason why you apply for a ssn.

Your reasoning is wrong palani!
You're wrong because you listen to theories and premises from other people because they cant or refuse to read the law and fill in where they fail to understand.

[7th trump]

What a crock as well as extremely presumptuous. lol

Refer to James 1:25

Give God what is right, NOT what is left. If 'burning a pinch of incense for Caesar' is what you wish to do, then that's YOUR choice. That is something that I refuse to do.

Midnight until you FULLY understand who's in charge you are lost as much as palani.

[midnight rambler]

Using FRNs has everything to do with the enslavement, it is the very foundation of the enslavement.

And oh yeah 7th trump, you are sooooooo much more enlightened than the rest of us. lol

[7th trump]

Using FRNs has everything to do with the enslavement, it is the very foundation of the enslavement.

And oh yeah 7th trump, you are sooooooo much more enlightened than the rest of us. lol

Show me where having FRN in my pocket causes being imposed federal taxes?
If you are going to talk about "enslavement" lets talk about the mother load of all enslavement here........federal incomes taxes.
I'm going to start another thread and you midnight have the floor....so lets see what you got!

[palani]

your a homeless guy who gives out legal advice

I don't need to rebut your entire post. I take out one thing that is wrong and point out the fallacy. The fallacy in your post 79 is that I give out legal advice. I have already stated that what I post is for discussion only. Therefore you are WRONG and your entire rant is dismissed with prejudice.

[palani]

Fiat money has absolutely nothing at all to do with being in the system.............period!

Another false statement. Whether you accept fiat or not is your CHOICE. You choose. You either accept it or not. Obviously you plan on going thru your entire "appearance of life" period by CHOOSING to accept corporate coupons and the OBLIGATIONS that go with them.

You might want to read what George Mercier says about them in Invisible Contracts
http://www.constitution.org/mercier/incon008.txt


we turn now and address some Commercial debt instruments that just about everyone uses constantly. And when this Commercial paper is used and then recirculated by you, Federal Benefits are being quietly accepted by you and so now subtle contracts are in effect. As COMMERCIAL HOLDERS IN DUE COURSE, you and the King are experiencing mutual enrichment from each other.


The King believes that the mere use of Federal Reserve Notes, those "circulating evidences of debt" [578] that his Legal Tender Statutes [578] have enhanced the value of as a co-endorser; and that the mere acceptance and beneficial use of those circulating Commercial equity instruments of debt, constitutes an attachment of Equity Jurisdiction sufficiently related to experiencing Commercial profit or gain in Interstate Commerce as to warrant the attachment of civil liability to his so-called Title 26. Remember, once you get rid of your political contracts to pay taxes (like National Citizenship), Federal Judges will then start examining the record to see if there are any Commercial benefits out there that you have been experiencing. Once you are a Citizen, Federal Judges will generally stop looking for other contracts;but once Citizenship is gone, then other normally quiescent Commercial nexuses that attach King's Equity Jurisdiction suddenly take upon themselves vibrant new importance.

While I do not accept FRNs I do occasionally hold them as the agent for other parties. When I go into any courtrooms I make sure I have none on me. There have been instances where judges have instructed bailiffs to check the defendant for FRNs on them and evidence of even a single note has caused the defendant to be jailed for contempt of court. [Such is what I have heard but not verified].

[palani]

Show me where having FRN in my pocket causes being imposed federal taxes?

Again from Mercier's Invisible Contracts


if the King has got you accepting the Consideration inherent in Negotiable Instruments that he is a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE to, and that his Legal Tender Statutes have enhanced the value, and additionally retains a distant Equity interest in, then the King has got an invisible contract on you and the King has you plump little turkeys exactly where he wants you: Ripe for a Federal plucking. So to correctly handle this beneficial "use of Federal Reserve Notes" creating a taxing liability story, we need to start out with the basic premise that the King is correct in his assertions, and so are judges in their reasoning; to believe otherwise is to be self damaging, as we have no time to waste with any error in our reasoning.

Maybe you would prefer at this point to change your avatar to a turkey?

[Spectrism]

Palani- you don't happen to live on Hawaii, do you?


While I do not accept FRNs I do occasionally hold them as the agent for other parties. When I go into any courtrooms I make sure I have none on me. There have been instances where judges have instructed bailiffs to check the defendant for FRNs on them and evidence of even a single note has caused the defendant to be jailed for contempt of court. [Such is what I have heard but not verified].

I have dealt with people like you. They are quick to ridicule those in the system without showing the exit doors. It is a tedious series of whirlwind discussions to get to some basic points that finally crack open. I know the game is a strict walk to ensure there is no entrapment or ensnarement in the devil's sticky webs.

Most people don't have the easy path to walk away from their lives. To step out of the system means putting dire conditions on family. Soon the days will be pushing the elect in that direction.

[midnight rambler]

Most people don't have the easy path to walk away from their lives.

Most find it far easier to 'burn a pinch of incense for Caesar' rather than live their lives according to 'the perfect law of liberty' (see James 1:25).


Soon (as in NOT now) the days will be pushing the elect in that direction.

Apparently here you're referring to 'some *glorious day* in the future'. The future is an illusion, Jesus taught us that (as did John the Baptist). Therefore one's decision to follow Him NOW and reject Babylon should have already been made - otherwise one is lost (in the now).


From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. --Matthew 4:17

[BrewTech]

I am used to reading others who don't like my messages use any excuse to shift the topic. Frequently they use dupes to aid them. Such is your argument. You are a troll.I'm a troll? Ha!
I'm not making an argument either way, palani... I just know that nearly any time you assert something on a thread it's just a matter of time before 7th comes in and calls you an idiot, and the derail is on.

Simple observation is all.

[Spectrism]

Most find it far easier to 'burn a pinch of incense for Caesar' rather than live their lives according to 'the perfect law of liberty' (see James 1:25).

Apparently here you're referring to 'some *glorious day* in the future'. The future is an illusion, Jesus taught us that (as did John the Baptist). Therefore one's decision to follow Him NOW and reject Babylon should have already been made - otherwise one is lost (in the now).

James is quick to talk about works and the word of the law, but slow to talk about the Spirit. For that reason, and because James was insulted to the highest by the Messiah- "the world cannot hate you", I look upon that book as suspicious.

No, I am not referring to some future glorious day. I am referring to a time when the harvest cuts the fruit from the vine. A day when there is no doubt between sides. Even now we see the separation of muddy from clear waters. When the evil ones become so obvious and repulsive that separation becomes the only choice for the elect, we will be driven away as well as called away. One does not run away from things without also being called away. To run away from one danger without having a good direction can lead one into a worse danger.

Now for your pinch. Bull! You do not live the perfect life and you do not fulfill the letter of the law. The perfect law of liberty is for sinless man. There are none left. We need the law of grace to recover the soul, which allows us to struggle against the flesh with the law as our measuring line but the Spirit to guide us. Lacking the Spirit, you have nothing but hot air. With the Spirit, you lack nothing.

[Spectrism]

Just to set things straight... I don't see Palani or Midnight Rambler as idiots. Just the opposite. I will wrestle with them because I know they have truths that they are not sharing but playing a game. Sometimes the game is necessary for learning. It also provides a filter to block out those who do not love truth, and a shield from those who hate liberty.

[7th trump]

Again from Mercier's Invisible Contracts



Maybe you would prefer at this point to change your avatar to a turkey?
Who's this Mercier person and what does he have to do with American law?
Did you research this Mercier guy to see if what hes talking about can be indeed confirmed?
I'd bet this Mercier guy is talking about English law as it applies to a King having a Kingdom!
Any bets you are misconstruing Mercier to fill in where you dont understand American law?
You have a bad habit of adding in law forms that dont apply to this country's executive and judicial system!

Where are you getting this ridicules idea that frns are a hidden contract?

Your beloved 12usc 411 statute says that FRN's are an obligation of the United States government........not an obligation to the private reserve bank to even suggest the ridicules idea that the reserve bank is an all ruling king.
You dont understand 12usc 411 at all do you palani?
We live in America palani....there is no king!
And please go reread 12usc 411 for what it is in its entirety so you can fully understand what its saying instead of picking and choosing what you want to read and hear.

[Spectrism]

The laws are tangled webs to mask the truths.

If you are a subject, you are subject to the laws.

If you are a child of the King, you are not bound to the rules applied to those outside the house of royalty. If, however, you contract to surrender your rights, you set aside your royal position and become a subject under an evil master.


Federal Reserve Notes- as I understand them, are contracts of indebtedness owed by the US treasury to the federal reserve banksters. This is why I have always held that there should be zero interest for the US government to acquire them, however it is really the responsibility of Congress to control these.... dollars... not federal reserve fake money.


In this world, anything imperfect will corrode, decay, be eaten, abrade and fail away. The corrupt money system will crash. It has no other option. Holding to what is dying is to bring destruction upon yourself. Here is wisdom: hold to things that are incorruptible and let go of what is dying and decaying.

[palani]

Palani- you don't happen to live on Hawaii, do you? The username is Hawaiian for freeman. Never been there though and, sadly, there are no living souls in Hawaii. On Hawaii though the case might be otherwise.




I have dealt with people like you. They are quick to ridicule those in the system without showing the exit doors. I have never ridiculed 'the system'. I recognize a choice and respect peoples right to make their own choice.


It is a tedious series of whirlwind discussions to get to some basic points that finally crack open. I know the game is a strict walk to ensure there is no entrapment or ensnarement in the devil's sticky webs. Actually it is not hard to avoid snares. I used to think my present situation was untenable but now I believe it is very easy to maintain. A standard is established, a policy is set and followed and that is all there is to it.


Most people don't have the easy path to walk away from their lives. To step out of the system means putting dire conditions on family. Soon the days will be pushing the elect in that direction. To stay in the system is to put stress on family and marriages. I respect those who stay in the system and see no reason why I should not be respected for removing myself from the same system. I am driven more by reason than by statutes. My choice and no others.

[palani]

I'd bet this Mercier guy is talking about English law as it applies to a King having a Kingdom! You would be wrong. Common law requires a king even though the revolution was about removing this office. Any reference to 'king' is to an analogy ... his office still exists but is spread mighty thin.




Any bets you are misconstruing Mercier to fill in where you dont understand American law? England never had a Federal Reserve Note and there is no such thing as 'American law'.


You have a bad habit of adding in law forms that dont apply to this country's executive and judicial system! Which country are you talking about? Iowa?


Where are you getting this ridicules idea that frns are a hidden contract? Where indeed?


Your beloved 12usc 411 statute says that FRN's are an obligation of the United States government........not an obligation to the private reserve bank to even suggest the ridicules idea that the reserve bank is an all ruling king. Seek help. Seriously. I mean it.


You dont understand 12usc 411 at all do you? I don't stand under it.


We live in America palani....there is no king! I know of no country 'America'. Are you in the land of fiction?



And please go reread 12usc 411 for what it is in its entirety so you can fully understand what its saying instead of picking and choosing what you want to read and hear. Federal Reserve Notes are issued for one reason and one reason ONLY .. For exchange between Federal Reserve Banks. How's that?

[palani]

I'm a troll? Ha!
I'm not making an argument either way, palani... I just know that nearly any time you assert something on a thread it's just a matter of time before 7th comes in and calls you an idiot, and the derail is on.

I have noticed that. And the end result is my position gets blamed for instituting a derail. If I am responding to anothers post then there is no de-rail because the topic got changed prior to my response. The topic of de-rail is a red herring argument that is a de-rail in itself.

[7th trump]

Funny how you conveniently forget part two of 12usc 411?


12 USC § 411 - Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption.

Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.

If you notice in the title of the statute there's three parts to this statute.


12 USC § 411 - Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption.

Heres how its broken down Palani.

12 USC § 411 -Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized.
The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues.
They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank.


Same said notes, which you conveniently ignore and leave out, are also for public use, not just banks. And no way does that make you or anyone a bank. Banks require a charter, do you have a charter palani?
Basically part 1 is saying there will be no other purpose besides the fiat notes to transact between the banks themselves. There wont be any other form of money to advance. These banks cant take any other type of money and allow the government of the US to borrow from.
But hey thats your method of operation when it comes to you being dishonest.

[JohnQPublic]

A teacher who does not teach is not a teacher. One who chides and corrects the errors of another without offering the correction is not a guide, help, advisor, teacher or friend.

What I have found with those above the fray of this evil system is that they talk alot and manage slippery circular paths and ignore the crucial questions that would reveal their flawed positions. I have seen lawyers like that.


I will exit this system when my Master tells me to. He will provide all my needs. Anyone claiming to be walking upright (outside the system) and not under the Master who is the Lamb of YHWH, the Prince of Peace, the Messiah, are still under deception and ruled by delusion.

We are all living under the reign of terror of the beast of the Apocalypse. This will continue until Christ returns. In the mean time, the beast will use any and all means to destroy the church. Everyone will be forced at some level to participate in the beast's scheme, because the beast uses existing systems, then distorts and corrupts them to achieve its goal. Not all aspects of the system are inherently bad, but the beast will use weaknesses of participants to help distort and corrupt the systems.

One can survive under this system, even immersed in it (especially if "sealed", i.e., baptized). The beast does not exercise complete control, but allows the more corrupt greater power to lead the less corrupt, and the uncorrupt (not really anyone, maybe the least corrupt). The beast uses rules, laws, regulations, etc., that all participants must follow- even the corrupt. Since the beast does not have direct power (he is falling forever in the shackled in the bottmoless pit), he must work through organization. Since greed and corruption are tools to control the direction of the organizations used by the beast, there will be infighting amongst the participants (as for instance they try and grab more for themselves). The system must remain somewhat legitimate and consistent in order for the beast itself to operate without direct control. If it were just gang warfare, everyone would catch on, and kill the gangsters. The key to surviving in the system is to stay moral within your sphere of influence, and operate within what is legitimate. Some may be sacrificed for being moral, but most will survive (at least until satan's little time comes).

[palani]

Funny how you conveniently forget part two of 12usc 411?
Does part deuce cancel part uno?


"The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done."

- UNITED STATES VS. SCHENCK, 249 U.S. 47, at 52 (1918).

[palani]

From Invisible Contracts by Mercier


Is the King really interested in using penal statutes to enforce a

currency monopoly, down to the present day? Yes, he very much is,

and those who deal in that currency which the King has seen fit to

declare illegal in his kingdom will find themselves dealing with

the King's Agents at gun point.



...Being in the United States felt good to the Braselton Family,

who came over here from Manchester, England in the 1880's. They

settled down in rural Georgia, a remote 52 miles northeast of

Atlanta. This was 52 miles from nowhere, in the middle of

nowhere. This was an enterprising family with commercial

enrichment being a natural family attribute. The elder Mr.

Braselton borrowed $2,000 and started in business with his brother

at the age of 8 [a great deal of money for those days when SILVER

DOLLARS circulated and $1,500 bought a nice house]. Soon, a

farming supply store opened up, followed by a succession of other

stores and business interests. What was first a single building

was now a row of buildings lining both sides of a street, and

surrounded by neighborhoods of residents. House of Braselton

essentially grew into a town unto itself. Today, among the

visible merchant establishments, there are the BRASELTON BANKING

COMPANY, the BRASELTON SUPER MARKET, the BRASELTON FLEA MARKET,

the BRASELTON FURNITURE AND APPLIANCE STORE, the BRASELTON

MONUMENT COMPANY, and the BRASELTON SERVICE STATION. The State of

Georgia granted their hamlet political status as a town, and named

it the TOWN OF BRASELTON. After building up a bank and virtually

all of the supply stores in town, the Braselton Family then built

a high school for the town's residents. There is no police

department in Braselton, there is no fire department and no social

services -- and, not surprisingly, being no benefits, there are no

taxes to be concerned with. No, looters and Tory Aristocrats

never did succeed in gaining a foothold in Braselton. Over the

years from 1880 down to the present day, the Braselton stores have

had their trials and reversals: They have had an intermittent

fire, and in 1920 a tornado leveled many buildings, but the family

always rebuilt. The Mayor of Braselton has always been a

Braselton, and the family enterprises are managed by a family

triumvirate, affectionately called THE 3-B's [see the ATLANTA

CONSTITUTION ("Three Braseltons of Braselton Business Partners

Over 50 Years"), (May 31, 1939)].



Today, when I visited Braselton, only a handful of coins and

coupons ["Coupon Check"] mounted on a picture frame remain as

reminiscent icons of the grand days of the 1800's, when anyone

could issue their own currency without fear of being incarcerated.

The history and lore of Braselton, Georgia is written and mounted

on several walls in the BRASELTON BROTHERS HARDWARE STORE.

Walking into that store, one gets a feeling of power

relationships, as photographs from Presidents, Governors, and

Senators, and other Braselton Family Members hang in open view.

With such a display of high powered acquaintances, I almost felt

as if I was in David Rockefeller's office in the Chase Manhattan

Bank -- but there the feeling of similarity stops. In the

BRASELTON HARDWARE STORE, one feels a sweet and pleasant spirit

permeating the store, as if one great American family resides

here. In David Rockefeller's office, also adorned with

photographs of powerful acquaintances, the spirit in the air is

one of an icy demon chill. Once while travelling up in an

elevator in the Chase Manhattan Bank, my knees started to rattle

when passing the 17th Floor, where His Excellency used to maintain

his nest. The idea came to me, as I tried to stop the shivers,

that the Astral High Command was holding an important conference,

and that the demons were planning to pull off something grand.

Being primarily in the farming supply business, the Braselton

Family developed a Credit System based on TRADE CERTIFICATES to

handle the seasonal nature of surrounding farmers coming in to

trade crops for supplies. For store employees and local

residents, the Braseltons had their own coins minted, and dollar

equivalency coupons printed to be used as currency. Copper and

nickel based coins were minted in numerous equivalency

denominations under $1.00; the paper coupons ["Coupon Checks"]

were similar to those coupon issued by movie theaters and

carnivals, and were available in coupon books. The issuance and

circulation of coins and currency by THE 3-B's was not only

illegal, it was criminal, but in a friendly small town in Georgia

composed of class people, who concerned themselves with technical

banking statutes in Washington?



Over the years since the 1880's, while foreign wars came and went,

the Braselton Family enterprises prospered and grew independent of

the King -- but eventually the party would be over. As is always

the case, one little goof messes up the soup for everyone else,

and the Braselton's turn came in the early 1950's.



...One day in the early 1950's, a Braselton minted coin found its

way into a gas station in Atlanta. In turn it was passed on to a

bank, who could not redeem it into currency they are comfortable

with. So the bank called the United States Secret Service to

report this heinous criminal outrage being commercially

orchestrated right up State Highway 53 in Braselton. From out of

their offices in the Atlanta Federal Building descended a troop of

Federal Agents on Braselton [they always like to put on a big

show], and THE 3-B's surrendered immediately. THE 3-B's would

have surrendered on a phone call, but agents for the King earn

their pay IN TERROREM, and like to use a show force to make a

STATEMENT. The King's Agents brought with them guns and a slice

of LEX from Title 18 ["Crimes"], so now the private minting of

Braselton coins and currency coupons was over with. In time, the

Braseltons also disbanded the farmer's TRADE CERTIFICATES for

other reasons.



QUESTION: Will the King use his guns to prevent you from

circulating your own currency? Yes, he will.

[7th trump]

From Invisible Contracts by Mercier
What a story palani..........!
I feel all heart struck like I feel all heart struck over the Liberty dollar scam!
People if you read the story its about a town that prints its own money which as you know the Constitution forbids. For some reason palani is using this story to sway the readers into believing what he beleives..........like a politician looking for a vote.


No matter how heart struck that story is Palani............... it doesn't support any of your "money" positions, especially your premise about 12usc 411.

So...your still going to ignore the second part of 12usc 411 and continue on with your baseless premise huh?
Funny how you skip right over part 2 and go right into part three about redeeming frn's.........just makes you go HMMMM!

All...this is why I keep after Palani to procure any evidence ( I mean anything in law form. statutes, court cases, ect) to any of his premises as if they went to court to settle the issue.
If Palani cant show any evidence in a mock up court then palani is pulling a fast one over you.

Think about it....he never answers one damn question. If he does respond he attempting in turning or twisting it around to avoid answering the question. He really tries to turn it around to make you second guess yourself....he's slick one, but he's definitely not as good as he thinks he is!

[palani]

a town that prints its own money which as you know the Constitution forbids.

I am not a party to the constitution however if memory serves this document purports to a monopoly in COINING money rather than PRINTING money.

See, that is where your intellect falls apart. You fail to read and understand the English language. Have you ever considered taking a course in it? If you don't I am afraid you have no future here.

[gunDriller]

unless we are perfect & dealing with people who are perfect, we will always be dealing with people who are immoral.

perhaps the trick is to find a region/ sub-culture that is 'less immoral'.

[7th trump]

I am not a party to the constitution however if memory serves this document purports to a monopoly in COINING money rather than PRINTING money.

See, that is where your intellect falls apart. You fail to read and understand the English language. Have you ever considered taking a course in it? If you don't I am afraid you have no future here.

Not a part of the Constitution huh?
Theres a joke and a half!
What makes you beleive you are not a part of the Constitution?
You live in Iowa, or even in "the state of Iowa", doesnt matter, either one is a part of the Constitution regardless of your silly premises. And you have many silly premises.

So are you going address part 2 of 12usc 411 or just continue to ignore the question?
You do realize part 2 of 12usc 411 is the elephant is Palani's glass premise room.

Why do you ignore pertain facts that make your 12usc 411 arguement transparent?
I dont get you Palani.....you come across as someone well versed but yet completely ignore 1/3 of statute 12usc 411 to push a conspiracy that the part you ignore completely shatters your premise.

See you arent even honest with yourself...........and if you cant be honest with yourself how in the world can you be honest and truthfull and anyone else?

As one poster here put it.......you talk in circles.

[palani]

What makes you beleive you are not a part of the Constitution?
Gentle readers, kindly read the quoted passage and then go back and read what I posted previously. How does not being a party to the constitution come to be interpreted as being 'a part of the constitution'? And just what does 'being a part of the constitution' actually mean?




You live in Iowa, or even in "the state of Iowa", doesnt matter, either one is a part of the Constitution regardless of your silly premises If you had two brain cells that suddenly decided to communicate with each other you may find that there is nothing living in a corporate structure. Why do you believe I previously called you dead?


So are you going address part 2 of 12usc 411 or just continue to ignore the question? There is nothing here to address. Agents hold FRNs or banks hold FRNs. There is no other choice and if you find yourself in possession of one by mistake you ought to trudge on down to a federal reserve bank and ask for lawful money. The fact that you are unwilling to do this means you CHOOSE to be an agent.


As one poster here put it.......you talk in circles. Have you ever heard me 'talk'? Again ... seek professional help ... learn the language rather than continuing to abuse it.

[Son-of-Liberty]

The problem is not that there IS a contract. The problem is that there IS NOT a contract. Yet people continue to perform under a PRESUMED contract. Then you get hauled into or try to take your PRESUMED injury into an administrative court and they get a COPY of the note or mortgage and wave it under your nose while shouting "DID YOU SIGN THIS DOCUMENT?" and you don't have the sense to say "I'll comment on the authenticity of that document when it is entered into evidence." As YOURS may or may not be the only signature on the document in question then YOU are the only one who may authenticate the document for entry into EVIDENCE.

End analysis ... YOU are the one in control but if you are so uninformed that you are going to cave under pressure then you have handed your control over to others.

If you are the only one who signed the contract, then what is stopping you from changing the terms of the contract? In a two party contract the two parties can get together and renegotiate the terms of the contract. If you are the only signatory, what is stopping you from changing the terms and re-signing?

[palani]

If you are the only one who signed the contract, then what is stopping you from changing the terms of the contract? In a two party contract the two parties can get together and renegotiate the terms of the contract. If you are the only signatory, what is stopping you from changing the terms and re-signing?

Believe it or not contracts are dynamic. They change all the time. This is especially so of these invisible contracts however the terms of written agreements tend to be more difficult to change (not impossible .. just more difficult).

An example is when you have a mortgage and don't have enough to make a full payment. You make a partial payment. Banks generally refuse these because if they accept less than the full payment amount then you have entered into a new agreement. A precedent has been set and courts have been known to read a completely new agreement into the action. For all they know the reduction was negotiated (as it was because you offered and gave the bank an opportunity to accept).

[7th trump]

Gentle readers, kindly read the quoted passage and then go back and read what I posted previously. How does not being a party to the constitution come to be interpreted as being 'a part of the constitution'? And just what does 'being a part of the constitution' actually mean?



If you had two brain cells that suddenly decided to communicate with each other you may find that there is nothing living in a corporate structure. Why do you believe I previously called you dead?

There is nothing here to address. Agents hold FRNs or banks hold FRNs. There is no other choice and if you find yourself in possession of one by mistake you ought to trudge on down to a federal reserve bank and ask for lawful money. The fact that you are unwilling to do this means you CHOOSE to be an agent.

Have you ever heard me 'talk'? Again ... seek professional help ... learn the language rather than continuing to abuse it.

Having a frn in your pocket doesnt make anyone an "agent" or a "bank". To be an agent you have to meet certain criteria. To be a bank to have to be chartered.
Simple having frn in your pocket doesnt magically bypass the requirments of both.
What this is you wanting to beleive a premise which the statute 12usc 411, if properly understood, says doesn't exist.

What you demonstatrated palani is you cant read law correctly!

This is way I say you are lost in the law. Not that this happened accidently.........you did this on purpose. This is why you'll never ever explain to anyone the exit out of the rabbit hole. This is why you talk in circular.
You simple dont have an answer.....your helpless!

You're like a doctor who only medicates the symptoms and never the desease.

[singular_me]

Like I just said in another thread, as power is the paramount of all illusions, any monetary system will remain immoral and bring about social disasters.

I dont think playing the system is a wise thing to do as it sustains a deadly vortex and set us all up for the next crash.

Also talking to myself when saying this...

[7th trump]

Believe it or not contracts are dynamic. They change all the time. This is especially so of these invisible contracts however the terms of written agreements tend to be more difficult to change (not impossible .. just more difficult).

An example is when you have a mortgage and don't have enough to make a full payment. You make a partial payment. Banks generally refuse these because if they accept less than the full payment amount then you have entered into a new agreement. A precedent has been set and courts have been known to read a completely new agreement into the action. For all they know the reduction was negotiated (as it was because you offered and gave the bank an opportunity to accept).
Bullshit!
They dont accept a partial payment because the person making the payment came up short on the initial agreement.............nothing more and nothong less Palani!

[palani]

They dont accept a partial payment because the person making the payment came up short on the initial agreement.............nothing more and nothong less

Nothong less?

Right. A re-negotiation they choose to reject. Your lack of comprehension seems to be boundless.

[7th trump]

Nothong less?

Right. A re-negotiation they choose to reject. Your lack of comprehension seems to be boundless.

A breach of contract is not a negotiation you twit. A breach of contract is just that.........a breach!

Now they can accept that partial payment and still file appropriate paperwork for breach of contract........or not.
Either way it not a new negotiation and doesnt make null and void the contract.

No, your conspirative mind set is boundless.

I wouldnt want to have a contract with you palani....you're one of those guys if you sold a house the buyers would find all the windows, doors, plumbing, electrical, ect missing upon moving in because you'd claim then items as yours because those items werent in a definition of dwelling.
Thats what I mean about people like you Palani.........to damn lazy and wanting something for free.....you're weak minded!

[Spectrism]

A breach of contract cannot happen if the parties are just engaging in options- negotiating. Banks don't like to negotiate when the property has more value than the amount "owed". They will gladly exercise the acceleration clause and foreclose on the property when payments are not made.

If the cost to the lender is more than exercising remedial options of the contract, a renegotiation is acceptable.

In life, making offers inspite of sealed contracts and against their stipulations, is often a good tactic to improve your position. I use it all the time in sales. An offer is made. A rejection or counter-offer or acceptance is returned. It is important to know when you are being offered something and at what cost. Agreeing with an offer that will cost you too much is not wise.

[palani]

A breach of contract is not a negotiation you twit. A breach of contract is just that.........a breach!

Now they can accept that partial payment and still file appropriate paperwork for breach of contract........or not.
Either way it not a new negotiation and doesnt make null and void the contract.

No, your conspirative mind set is boundless.

I wouldnt want to have a contract with you palani....you're one of those guys if you sold a house the buyers would find all the windows, doors, plumbing, electrical, ect missing upon moving in because you'd claim then items as yours because those items werent in a definition of dwelling.
Thats what I mean about people like you Palani.........to damn lazy and wanting something for free.....you're weak minded!

Non-response and in the nature of a rant ... with ad hominem thrown in to boot. This bozo has no argument. He is a bag of methane filled with opinion.

[7th trump]

Non-response and in the nature of a rant ... with ad hominem thrown in to boot. This bozo has no argument. He is a bag of methane filled with opinion.

Hahahaha........you the master of non and circular responses is calling the kettle black huh!

WOW!

[palani]

Hahahaha...calling the kettle black..WOW!

I have called nobody black (not that there is anything wrong with that).