Pay No Taxes legally -End the FED -synopsis page 8-Why are waiting for someone to do it for us like Ron paul

Here is an interesting call with an IRS case attorney getting cornered (unwittingly by Marc) when pressed on what is the factual difference between "income" and "taxable income".

Of course, the man Marc is speaking for will be found guilty of whatever charge the IRS/US charged him with, since he clearly does not understand endorsement nor 12-USC 411.

Marc even admits to the IRS attorney his 'client' will most likely lose in court, but claims is will be the IRS or Judges fault.

In reality, the IRS attorney does not understand endorsement nor 12-USC 411 and it is not her job to educate Marc or the tax evader even if she did know.

See how simple the facts are once you 'get it' and why the IRS will not even approach the subject of 12-USC 411 and lawful money redemption.

Forgot the link to the other thread

Thread: VIDEO: Owning An IRS Lawyer

good night all.

It is not voluntary as in 'casual'; I can pay or not pay... it's voluntary.

It's referred to as voluntary compliance... example:

Traffic light is red; you voluntarily stop. IF YOU DON'T... the penalties can be severe ;)

Peace

False. If you use property that is not yours, or you use property in a way that is not authorized for you to use it, you are legally and lawful at fault and subject to punishment.

Federal reserve notes are not money, nor are they YOUR property, if you endorse and use them, you do so with restrictions and fees associated.

Running a red light is not the same thing at all.

Peace to you.

Thanks for the link 708, I will check it out.

I recall how frustrating that call is to listen to.

That is how I recall it though; just like you. She had no obligation to explain anything more to Marc than she did. If you listen to it with the impression that she had to explain things though, it sounds as though Marc was in control.

First time I have heard the tape, just starting to listen, but it sounds like the title of it is miss leading, based on you and Davids post. lol sk

For frik sakes! If you work for the corporation you must pay for the benefit & priviledge of it!

But you can conduct commerce without profit to live & prosper.

Needed to add, stopping at a red light does not obligate me to pay a fee, nor lose estate rights, property rights nor subject me to jurisdictional presumptions.

Stopping at a red light does not presume or assume an endorsement of trillion dollar debts, fractional reserve credit, peonage and voluntary, deceptive 'voluntary' servitude.

David has some good insight on the insidious nature of endorsing private FED credit/debt.

I personally found the IRS attorney very polite and professional, which is easy when there is little doubt she is about to win another case in Federal court. :)

Good Friday to David, SK2 and everyone else.

Thank you for your post AC! Glad to have you here.

hi, i was reading through the posts for the past week or so,

it seems to me that when you go to your bank and demand lawful

money, they can deny you because of 12 uscs 411 stating that

you could redeem for lawful money at Washington or any of the

federal reserve banks. unless i could show them within the

law that they must accept my demand. i went to my bank to

deposit a check earlier this week and wrote on the back of it

'deposit for credit on account or exchange for non negotiable

federal reserve notes of face value by:first and last

dba:first middle and last name', they deposited it without any

problem at all, i even asked for a copy of deposit slip and check which

i also endorsed in same way, and they gave me a copy of both

check and deposit slip. i opened up an account at Astoria federal savings

3 days ago and i wanted to withdraw some money and i wrote on

withdrawal slip 'withdrawal from account in exchange for

lawful money in the form of non negotiable federal reserve

notes of face value by: dba:' and they refused to take

it, when i told them to call they're legal dpt they got back

to me the next day saying that they were told that anything

other than my signature on the slip in unacceptable, so i

guess they refuse to honor my demand for lawful money, how

can i show them by law that they have to accept my demand?

Hey Sam. The important part is keeping a record of your demand. Take them copy of the law, then its up to them to honor it or not. But once again it is your demand that counts. I make copies of all check prior to cashing them. I use personal checks to withdraw money and endorse them the demand verbiage. I got the same thing from my bank, but a I have a date stamps request by them, that I made a demand for all transactions done through my account be done in lawful money. I got a phone call to the effect that they would not accept an alteration of the signature/endorsement. Next trip to the bank they accepted one. lol sk

Sam, just keep doing it. I have never had an issue because I never make it an issue. Most tellers just look for a signature, so do not make it any big deal.

Act like its business as usual, if they do ask about it, I usually tell them "my accountant wants it that way" or "my lawyer told me to do that" funny thing about an appeal to authority, most people stop asking when you use the word "lawyer".

Keep doing it, you will find its not a big deal for them at all.

It is quite obvious to me now - a check inscibed with words " Pay To The Order Of " is in actallity a "dividend " warrant. It is not Pay, this can only mean, a draw is being made to bring this money into the treasury, and the compensation is legal tender frn's.

The canada bills of exchange act, clearly states - a crossed cheque is a dividend warrant. We have been writing these crossed cheques all our life, but have never exercised our right to recieve our dividend warrant.

It is not clearly spelled out, about how to go about this, some trial and error is needed, which I am in the process of doing. Nothing to report yet.

I would suggest though, take a look at this aspect.

Thank you for that! I will be looking into your information. I should add I actually cross out (line through) the "pay to the order of" and simply leave the "pay to" on all my deposited checks.

Just to add a little more;

The nature of a reserve banking system is just that, it is a reservation that each person that writes a crossed cheque has a claim to.

But, as always nothing is clearly spelled out, and it takes some testing to arrive at the correct formula to exercise your right.

I understand your process of legal and lawful money, one being taxable and the other not. I believe you are correct, in that it is not taxable, because your method does not produce a dividend warrant.

The question is - is it better to not pay the tax, or is it better to be taxable and have access to a dividend warrant?

My research leads me to conclude - both the credit and debit combined, is the dividend warrant you can claim.

Dividend Warrant?

Cool!

I get where you are coming from and you are unlocking a whole new way to explain the same old law. Please get over on StSC www.savingtosuitorsclub.net and elaborate.

Sam and 708;

That is a great discussion going there too. I have dug up a couple Talkshoe recordings for you all:

[link to docs.google.com (secure)]

[link to docs.google.com (secure)]

Hey David, thank you for the invite.

But, for now, I am going to decline. I need to get results from my tests first, before I feel comfortable to elaborate further.

Those tests are in motion right now.

RON PAUL 2012 ??? ITS TIME TO WAKE UP !!!



Video Links -

VR To - No Word From Ron Paul Still By MorningMayan
[link to youtu.be]

The Obama Deception (Skip To 13:40)
[link to youtu.be]

Wake Up Call By JohnNada80 (Full Movie)
[link to youtu.be]

You Are Not Alone By SimpleDanForever
[link to youtu.be]

You Are Not Alone! This Is Your Wake Up Call!
[link to youtu.be]

Also See -

The New World Order Is Here
[link to youtu.be]

The President Who Told The Truth
[link to youtu.be]

Rest In Peace John Fitzgerald Kennedy, The Last True President Of The United States Of America

Video Thumbnail By Deesillustration
[link to www.sl-webs.com]

bet op tard is still paying taxs.

try stopping and watch the death squad come for you

tardcake

Got $10,000 for a bet. Put your money where your mouth is.

Of course you won't bet because your all Mouth. sk

Seeker.

Don't concern yourself with the uneducated two line bandit.

your all a bunch of idiots

i knew a man who was a lawyer and knew all the laws, and tried just this,

in short

they ruined his life, even his wife left him he got so financially screwed

YOU ARE CORRECT ITS ILLEGAL

so what... they will own you


your tard ass's are essentially doing this
(compare to old days)

no the kings law is illegal!
yes seeker!
just go before the king and tell him no!
it is the truth!
truth is all that matters!
just tell the king no!

wise man: you are correct but he will kill you

fool: Seeker.

Don't concern yourself with the uneducated two line bandit.


man goes before king: NO!

KING: CHOP HIS HEAD OFF

Last Edited by Daersoulkeeper on 06/14/2012 02:16 PM

Who is the "King" again in your little play?

Because last time I checked, there is no King in this nation.

Strange your so called lawyer friend "knew all this" and they ruined his life, but others have been doing it for over a decade and not ONE CASE has ever been filed against any of them.

Nor is there any mention of 12 USC 411 at the IRS "tax scams" page.

Maybe your 'friend' does not know what you think he knows, but I know, because I do it and have done it and will continue to do it, if your King chops my head off, I won't really have to worry about it, will I?

They can only kills me once.

for attornies paying for their education ....

IRS last letter that showed(about 12 yrs ago) up in mail box asked if this was my correct address. There was a box to check and a line to sign on. I put a check mark in the yes part. I saw no request to sign anything. Please read until you know what the offer is. Everything is an offer. They have never contacted me again. I decided yrs ago that I wouldn't volunteer, before I ever knew what I was doing. It was a matter of conscience for me. I cannot support a war machine.

This thread should be turned into a book!

Working title:

Slaying the Creature from Jeckyll Island

fitting?

First lets bring back some writing from 1984:
Today, we have two competing monetary systems. The Federal Reserve System with its private credit and currency, and the public money system consisting of legal tender United States notes and coins. One could use the public money system, paying all bills with coins and United States notes (if the notes can be obtained), or one could voluntarily use the private credit system and thereby incur the obligation to make a return of income. Under 26 USC 7609 the IRS has carte blanche authority to summon and investigate bank records for the purpose of determining tax liabilities or discovering unknown taxpayers: 'United States v. Berg' 636 F.2d 203 (1980). If an investigation of bank records discloses an excess of $1000 in deposits in a single year, the IRS may accept this as prima facie evidence that the account holder uses private credit and is therefore a person obligated to make a return of income. Anyone who uses private credit -- e.g., bank accounts, credit cards, mortgages, etc. -- voluntarily plugs himself into the system and obligates himself to file. A taxpayer is allowed to claim a $1000 personal deduction when filing his return. The average taxpayer in the course of a year uses United States coins in vending machines, parking meters, small change, etc., and this public money must be deducted when computing the charge for using private credit.

[link to www.silverbearcafe.com]

On June 5, 1933, the day of infamy arrived. Congress on that date enacted House Joint Resolution 192, which provided that the people convert or turn in their gold coins in exchange for Federal Reserve notes. Through the operation of law, H.J.R. 192 took us off the gold standard and placed us on the dollar standard where the dollar could be manipulated by private interests for their self-serving benefit. By this single act the people and their wealth were delivered to the bankers. When gold coinage was thus pulled out of circulation, large denomination Federal Reserve notes were issued to fill the void. As a consequence the public money supply in circulation was greatly diminished, and the debt-laden private credit of the Fed gained supremacy. This action made private individuals who had been previously exempt from federal income taxes now liable for them, since the general public began consuming and using large amounts of private credit. Notice all the case law prior to 1933 which affirms that income is a profit or gain which arises from a government granted privilege. After 1933, however, the case law no longer emphatically declares that income is exclusively corporate profit or that it arises from a privilege. So, what changed? Two years after H.J.R. 192, Congress passed the Social Security Act, which the Supreme Court upheld as a valid act imposing a valid income tax: 'Charles C. Steward Mach. Co. v, Davis' 301 U.S. 548 (1937).