to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized.
This to me says that anyone handling frn's is either an agent or a bank. Since most people and banks handle frn's that makes the banks part of the fed and you can redeem your frn's their and this relieve yourself also the contractual obligations of being a federal reserve agent and bond by their rules, ie laws. But just remember you are volunteering to use the frn's and this it makes the tax you pay for using private money voluntary, just as they claim. sk
Quoting: seeker2 In order for your assertion that local commercial banks you claim hold the power of redemption to stand up, YOU must PROVE they are AGENTS of the FED, as it relates to the redemption process identified in 12USC411.
Yet another strike against your ASSUMPTION is that national bank charters are granted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (a branch of the US TREASURY) which receives and processes applications to open and operate NATIONAL BANKS. The OCC also Operates the FDIC and is responsible for auditing the ongoing operations of the bank.
[
link to www.occ.treas.gov]
Charters for STATE BANKS (ie, banks which operate only within the geographical limitations of a particular state) are made and granted by that STATE.
COMMERCIAL BANK CHARTERS are granted or rejected by the STATE and OCC/US Treasury Department.
It has already been demonstrated that the FED is a private organization, owned by its STOCKHOLDERS. That the FED's stockholders are COMMERCIAL BANKS does not, in and of itself, constitute AGENCY...just as a person being a STOCKHOLDER of GM does not authorize that person to ACT as GM's agent in their day-to-day business matters. Therefore, there is no DIRECT LINK between the public/governmental entities which have the power to create or dissolve banks and the PRIVATE FED, which supplies those commercial (state and nationally regulated) businesses with their PRODUCT...private credit notes...used by the COMMERCIAL BANKS...and for which the FED receives a FEE.
Since it is now demonstrated that commercial banks are not a part of the FED, that COMMERCIAL BANKS are separate, private entities which derive their authority and existence from the applicable non-FED public/state/national governmental regulatory agencies...
WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT COMMERCIAL BANKS ARE AUTHORIZED TO REDEEM FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES AS AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE?
Since national banks are created and regulated by the OCC,
a United States governmental agency, it would be a more logical argument to assert that the COMMERCIAL BANKS were acting as redemption agents for the US TREASURY, since they are, at least indirectly, creatures deriving their power of existence from the US TREASURY. Note however, that 12USC411 SPECIFICALLY authorizes ONLY the US Treasury WASHINGTON DC (physical location) and says NOTHING about AUTHORIZED AGENTS of the Treasury. Thus, there is CLEARLY only one PHYSICAL REDEMPTION LOCATION FOR THE US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, and the GOVERNMENT/TREASURY has no authorization to assign AGENCY for the redemption of PRIVATE CREDIT fiat.
Now, the only remaining question is whether a FEDERAL RESERVE BANK, as used in 12USC411 is the same entity, and transparently intechangeable with COMMERCIAL BANKS, which are specifically NOT mentioned in the language of 12USC411.
Does using the product of the FED in their daily business automatically confer AGENCY on the private company using that product?
If McDonalds acquires napkins for use in their business, does that relationship between McDonalds and their vendors automatically allow McDonalds to act as the napkin suppliers AGENT?
Clearly this is not the case; AGENCY would only exist if there were a contract in place AUTHORIZING McDonalds to act as the napkin suppliers AGENT...the fact ALONE that McDonalds uses napkins DOES NOT demonstrate AGENCY.
This explanation should be clear enough for even the dimmest-wit to either offer up PROOF to back up their previous assertions, or at least have the dignity to cut-and-run as 708 has apparently done.
Seeker, it is up to you to carry the burden of ignorance forward or modify your procedure to address the letter of the law in the redemption process to prevent others from the train-wreck you and 708 are promoting here. Keep in mind that not all of those following this thread are scared off by huff-and-puff bluster, ad hominem attacks or other tactics which do not address the meat of the point in question.
12USC411 Provides REMEDY
as it is written. Why pretend otherwise?
