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

Bullshit, the FED has ZERO reserves, nothing, and you cannot provide proof otherwise. Maybe when it was founded, but not today, only the "full faith and credit of the united States" backs the Feds promises to pay.

The labor, goods and services of the US Citizen 'back' the DEBT created by the Federal Reserve.

The Government cannot write BONDS to the Fed forcing me to back their DEBT, its against the law. I have to voluntarily bond and submit myself, my labor and my energy to them.

I am not a human resource nor a peon. I demand lawful money and because they will not give it to me, the obligation to pay the DEBT (and any interest or penalties associated with it) remains with them.

They took my access to lawful money (no matter what anyone says about going to the Fed member bank, they will not give me Gold or silver coin, so stuff that idea). I cannot lawfully therefore, pay debts I owe, since they took the gold in 1933, they have to pay the debts. I do not endorse it nor will I pledge my goods, services and labor to them to pay the debt THEY create.

I demand lawful money, on the record because it leaves the obligation to pay with those who are in violation of the law of the land. Congress, the courts and the District of Columbia.

"There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services.

Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity BUT THEY ARE REDEEMABLE IN LAWFUL MONEY 12-usc 411, and receive no backing by anything This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy."

[link to www.treasury.gov]

RED BOLD added by me.

When you endorse the un-backed FEDERAL reserve credit, you pledge everything you have or ever will have to pay the debt, everything means everything, your children, your body EVERYTHING.

The is the insidious nature of ENDORSEMENT, who in their right mind, would give everything to international bankers by NOT restricting their endorsements on EVERYTHING?

But hey, the government is all about full disclosure, right?!?! LOL!!!!! What a crock.

The major difference is this: US notes are always obligations of the USand obligations of the US are NOT SUBJECT TO INCOME TAX.


SHOW ME THE LAW WHICH VALIDATES YOUR CLAIM!!

"Where is the LAW on that? You are saying that if one is PAID in US NOTES, the payment is NOT TAXABLE under LAW? Where is the authority/support/proof for this statement derived??"

I am saying that NOTHING is "paid" with anything but Gold or silver coin, NOTHING. That includes US Notes, they are evidence of DEBT, not a tender (to hold out) is not and never has been payment. The law requires payment in Gold or silver coin at face value of the coin. Debt may be transferred, but it is not paid with more debt.

FIAT money means everything is 100% plus interest TAX. If you want the LAW on that, you need to review the past 6000 years of history.

You have no lawful title to anything because you have never paid for anything, including any taxes owed.

"You are stating that using a FRN is acting as an ENDORSEMENT, and that such ENDORSEMENT makes the user PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE for the interest payments accruing...and that the Treasury is then the BACKUP guarantor?
I suppose that would explain why the IRS is a division of the Treasury...if the primary obligator (user of FRN) "defaults" on the payment interest (1040 taxes) the Treasury would then be responsible for the interest?"

I am saying that the is ONE signature on each note which requires a second endorser, since there are 2 notes, you are adding (or presumed to be adding) your endorsement to the Federal Reserve NOTE on the right side, unless and until you tell them otherwise via your restricted endorsement (which, in effect, adds your signature endorsement to the left side of the BILL, the US Treasury NOTE. Yes, the 1040 is another way of assuming this debt onto the US Citizen, or it is another way to tell the IRS of your demand for lawful money per 12-USC 411. If there is a tax to pay, it REMAINS with the ISSUER of the debt (the original primary endorser, the Sec. of Treasury).

The Government is already in DEFAULT and has been since 1933,(The NEW DEAL, get it?). The Government/Treasury was the primary endorser, but now the US Taxpayer/Citizen, as the second endorser, is on the hook for everything he/she chooses to endorse and accept.

If I owe 100 dollars for anything, but I cannot access 2 50 dollar US coins at face value, I cannot 'pay'. Those 2 gold coins were taken in 1933 from my Grandfather via the New deal. They are held in trust by the Treasury (300 million).


I now have a choice, I can work off the DEBT and DISCHARGE it under the rules of Bankruptcy (an obligation created by the Government not being able to pay its debts in gold and silver) and pass the debt onto every other US Citizen now and future.

Or, I can demand my access to the TRUST account set up in the new deal and demand the GOVERNMENT pay that debt, since they TOOK on that obligation by stealing my inherent right to Gold or Silver coins and true ownership of land, goods and services.

The choice is MINE to make. That is the deal they offered my Grandfather (give up your gold and your rights that go along with actually paying your debts and WE will pay them for you by pledging the "goods and services" you create to our debtors).

Or, I can demand lawful money per 12 USC 411 and leave the obligation on those creating the debt in the first place, Congress and the Treasury and claim my lawful rights as one of the people not a peon.

Income tax would also be an obligation they would have to pay, if, in fact, it is owed on lawful money any 1040 I file would simply be to inform the IRS of that fact and they could collect it from the original issuer of the DEBT being SERVICED.

From the ABOVE LINK TO THE FED Collateral Held against Federal Reserve Notes: Federal Reserve Agents' Accounts

Less: Notes held by F.R. Banks not subject to collateralization $208,086,000

Of course, notes held by Federal Reserve banks NOT SUBJECT TO COLLATERALIZATION is the very definition of US NOTES, since US NOTES DO NOT REQUIRE COLLATERAL SINCE THEY ARE LAWFUL MONEY. Also note that treasury bills and bonds are held in a separate category on that balance sheet...so it ain't them.

So, it is obvious that the FED is holding just over 200 billion in US NOTES which would be LAWFUL MONEY available for redemption. I would guess that a careful reading of the Treasury balance sheets will reveal the other hundred million, or so US NOTES, less any which would still be in circulation (Remember, a total of $300 million was the total authorized by congress). I wouldn't be surprised if the commercial banks have the ability to pull the occasional US NOTE out of circulation.

Based on this, I have a high level of confidence that redemption takes place in US NOTES, and that the FED or Treasury would require a PHYSICAL REDEMPTION/PRESENTMENT for the exchange. Like all things legalistic, I assume there is a specific method of presentment which would need to take place to effect the conversion.

So study the FRB collateralization chart 708 and you will see what I said was exactly correct...every FRN is backed 1:1 with lawful money, which is comprised of treasury/USG securities, US NOTES and some gold type holdings.

FRNS are only a very small fraction of Federal Reserve credit/debt, which is at least 16 trillion now, and it is always expressed in a $ value for every man, woman and child in the US (can you say HUMAN CAPITOL/COLLATERAL?). You are either included in that human capitol/collateral or you are not.

What separates you from I in the eyes of the Treasury, IRS and Federal Government if NOT my restricted endorsement on every single bank or credit transaction I restrictively endorse?

Even IF the actual FRN is 1:1 with US Notes (another reason you will find a US Treasury Note on each currently issued FRN BILL) if true (again above the 1 and 2$ notes) it is further proof that US Treasury notes are already in your pocket and the only thing lacking is your DEMAND for redemption of said notes. If what you post is true, you have just confirmed my assertion of the 2 faced BILL having 2 separate and distinct NOTES.

You are seeking an answer How do get US Bank Notes, well, you need to go to a Federal Reserve BANK and ask them, I have mine. You will find if they give you anything, it will be exactly what I have (and you have) already.

Hmm, it seems there are 1.8 trillion $ worth of FRN BILLS .

Since Federal law mandates only 300 million US Notes can be in circulation, your 1:1 ratio does not add up.

[link to www.federalreserve.gov]

"There was approximately $1.1 trillion in circulation as of August 22, 2012, of which $1.08 trillion was in Federal Reserve notes."

The real question is what happens when 300 million in lawful money demands are made in any one year by the people?

A careful study of history would also show the 300 million (face value) of Gold coins taken in 1933 and held in trust for redeemers of lawful money are the exact same coins given to the people who redeemed their GREEN BACKS issued by the Destroyer of the republic, Honest ABE.

That is NOT the property of the United States, nor the District of Columbia, nor the US, it is public money and has been since the 1800's when it was first minted under Congressional Constitutional authority.

The Government cannot tax what is not theirs. Nobody can, lawfully.

One thing we can agree on, every jot and tittle of the law must be fulfilled.

You will find, as many other have, you cannot access the Gold and silver coins that are the and always have been the Dollar of the Republic (even if some of those dollars were Silver eagle pesos from Spain, lol).

That being the case, the question of getting the red sealed US notes is not relavent to me.

Since the current Government makes it nearly impossible to pay my debts with truly lawful money (gold and silver coin) they bear the lawful weight of paying for what goods and services I produce (a workman is worthy of his hire) and that is the law.

Not familiar with financial statements, are we?

Federal Reserve notes outstanding 1,289,255
Less: Notes held by F.R. Banks not subject to collateralization 208,086
Federal Reserve notes to be collateralized 1,081,169

FRN NOTES OUTSTANDING MINUS NOTES NOT SUBJECT TO COLLATERAL IE US NOTES equals 1,081,160 to be collateralized

Below is how the collateral is held

Collateral held against Federal Reserve notes 1,081,169
Gold certificate account 11,037
Special drawing rights certificate account 5,200
U.S. Treasury, agency debt, and mortgage-backed securities pledged 1,2 1,064,932
Other assets pledged 0

Note that EVERY FRN issued is backed by a US NOTE OR A US GOVERNMENT SECURITY OR GOLD...exact to the dollar!

Any other questions?

What exactly does this mean? By definition, one would not apply a tax to what one owns already.

The constitution provides for a government administered by the elected representatives of those governed. In order for the government to provide constitutionally approved services, such as defense and infrastructure, taxes are levied.

I'm looking for the legal/lawful proof of your statement that US NOTES were not subject to income tax in the way that FRN's supposedly are. That is a big assertion and I want to know where that supposed authority comes from.

I do retract the use of the word PAID as I understand your technical distinction. Let's say instead that if one were to receive income, from whatever sources derived...as per the IRS verbiage...and in one case the income was FRN's and the other US NOTES...you are saying that one requires filing and payment of tax and one does not?

If that is what you are stating, where is your black letter law proof or court findings?

Proof, or it didn't happen

There are at least a dozen Article III court cases on the record with default judgments, all opened with redeemed lawful money so if you are looking for court judgments as "proof" they are on the record already.

[link to savingtosuitorsclub.net] David will be happy to give you the case numbers and you can go to a district court house and look at the records yourself.

I will give David permission to give you my Art III case number and you can use that information to give to the IRS or the attorneys I linked above.

Have at it.

No questions, but some clarification. Gold Certificates are NOT physical gold. So its paper backing paper. Tell me, how much gold is there Verses Gold CERTS and at what "price" per ounce is the Gold CERT covering? Current market value? If so, it is an elastic amount, in elastic currency pricing. Same with any other paper, in most cases, not worth the paper it is written on.

Hardly a "backing". AS for the rest of the backing, its mostly paper or electronic smoke and mirrors.

Of course, the REAL backing are all the Goods and services pledged by the US Peon endorser for the credit, what you have is a modern, high tech version of voluntary servitude (a legalese term for slavery by deception).

And its all perfectly legal.

An EXCELLENT write up on the "illegality of legal tender" here:

[link to www.thefreemanonline.org]

"These flawed decisions upholding legal tender, when considered in conjunction with the reasoning of earlier cases, indicate that legal tender laws lack a firm basis in constitutional law. Even without that basis, the decisions of Knox v. Lee and Juilliard v. Greenman served as dangerous precedents for the government’s monetary monopoly. "

From the write up.

Please notice that it was not until AFTER the Civil War (which, for all practical purposes ended the Constitutional Republic for the united States and started Democracy in the District of Columbia.

[link to documents.jdsupra.com]

Another great write up about "implied powers" of Congress, of course, anyone who has read this thread will see that "implied powers" belief is just a cover up for Maritime/Commercial law being brought onto the land under a high water mark.

It is my OPINION that Congress and the courts somehow think their "right to contract" is unlimited, I do not agree.

708, we have had a spirited debate relative to the redemption process of Federal Reserve Notes, and relating factors.

Although I believe that you have made a grave error in ASSUMING that the local commercial banks are authorized agents of the federal reserve and treasury, and although the language of 12USC411 is quite specific, and although I have demonstrated that the FED is holding $200 million of the $300 million US NOTES which you claim are in circulation thereby demonstrating redemption capability, and I have clearly demonstrated that a federal reserve bank is NOT a commercial bank...and further proved that federal reserve banks are independent and chartered agents deriving their charter and authority from the federal reserve board of governors in DC..and one can assume they are NOT the agent of the US treasury...

I offer one final point for your consideration...made earlier but ignored, as well as a summation:

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.

at/at/
Preposition:
Expressing location or arrival in a particular place or position: "they live at Conway House".


by/bī/
Preposition:
Identifying the agent performing an action.

in/in/
Adjective:
Present at one's home or office: "we knocked but there was no one in".

So, that leaves DEMAND, which may be used as a NOUN or a VERB.

The NOUN: a CLAIM or LEGAL OBLIGATION and

The VERB: An insistent and peremptory request, made as if by right

Very interesting choice of words...in one sense, denoting and underscoring the legal obligation for redemption, and the other imposing a DUTY, an insistent and peremptory request on the part of the redeemer... a lot going on with that one word.

So, which prevails? DUTY, always.

For example, under law a plaintiff may win a suit and have a judgement awarded entitling the plaintiff to damages. Say the defendant does not pay...

The plaintiff is BARRED from bringing (say)an action of contempt unless and until it is PROVED that a DEMAND FOR PAYMENT has been made by the plaintiff.

A landlord with a lease is entitled to rent payment. Should a tenant not pay rent, may a landlord go to court and file an eviction action? NO...not unless DEMAND for payment has been made and can be demonstrated. Can the landlord go to the adjoining tenant, who lives in the same building but has no AGENCY to conduct the affairs of the primary deadbeat and demand HE pay on behalf of the deadbeat? NO.

Thus, demand implies both RIGHT and a DUTY. Both are relevant here.

In the landlord example, the contract already has a specific requirement and implied DEMAND. The rent must be paid by the first of each month or the tenant will be evicted. The landlord has already made the demand known to the tenant, and in this case the tenant has even AGREED to the stipulation...clearly not the case in your dealings with the commercial banks.

Even with this up front demand, another MUST BE MADE when the tenant fails to pay. Further, the tenant must have a separate DEMAND issues EACH TIME the tenant is in jeopardy of eviction. Thus, I do not see examples in the law where a blanket demand is sufficient for repeated occurrences under the law.

I believe it is clear your approach at redemption fails on every level, but from above it can be seen that these failures turn on the words AT IN and ON and definition of DEMAND as a verb with its DUTY OF ACTION.

Then you prove it by doing it at the Federal Reserve bank.

You show me your belief (faith) in your words here, back it up by your actions (works).

My actions are public record, as are the results. You have no actions, no record, nothing but the legal definition of "at", which I have already posted defies actual redemption of national and private paper currency from its inception in the US, including Federal reseve Notes AT local banks.

Get off your ass, go to a Fed member bank and show me your faith with your works, because your claim, like your faith is DEAD without works.

The law is: faith without works, is DEAD. So, go now and fulfill the law.

Being forced to redeem FRN's at a FR bank or DC is a ridiculous position. Does that even sound remotely reasonable? Consider this angle. A large percentage of checks are cleared through the federal reserve check automated clearing house (ACH). Would this not provide the opportunity to redeem your FRN's? Or at least make your demand?

Look on your personal checks...somewhere on the back of them does it state "Federal Reserve Board of governors reg CC" mine do.

Agreed and I will look for that on checks. Also, from what I can find, no Federal Reserve Bank has ever dealt directly with the public or individual in ANY fashion, other than tours for the public.


"Federal Reserve Banks were established by the Congress as the operating arms of the nation's central banking system. Many of the services provided to depository institutions and the federal government by this network of Reserve Banks are similar to services provided by commercial banks and thrift institutions to business customers and individuals. However, the Federal Reserve Banks do not provide banking services, including accounts, to individuals.

Reserve Banks:

provide accounts to depository institutions--banks, thrifts, and credit unions--in which those institutions hold reserve balances, make loans to depository institutions, move currency and coin into and out of circulation, collect and process millions of checks and other payments each day, provide checking accounts and other services for the Treasury, issue and redeem government securities, and act in other ways as fiscal agent for the U.S. government;"

[link to www.kansascityfed.org]

"individual" "citizen" "resident" and other definitions are a whole other area of entanglement.

Are you an "individual"?

The definition of what the Kanses City fed does is likewise vague and subject to multiple interpretations

words mean things...and in law, they frequently mean things other than the definitions used in the common vernacular

I understand your point, but, unlike others, I make sure my position and assertions are CORRECT before I go marching up to a speaker at the fed and demand gold or silver redemption...as the guy on the video did.

This thread alerted me to the whole issue in the first place, and I am doing my due diligence...and part of that is putting it out there for critical review and debate. Naturally, I prefer to stick to the issue at hand as much as possible and avoid the name-calling and petty comments. It seems we have arrived at that point.

The posters comments that it "doesn't make sense" to make the redemption process so difficult is exactly the point. Once the redemptions exceed $300 million its game over for the fed. Making compliance difficult, but not impossible, is the oldest bureaucratic trick in the book.

For an example, check out the driving "license" scam and all that follows.

Or not having a "social security" number and trying to get said license, or open a bank account or applying for a job...all of which ARE possible, but not without a lot of teeth grinding and bullshit.

Please allow me to interject. You are aware that the US govt. can seize precious metals in times of war or crisis, right?

You probably also know about the guys that became independent agents instead of employees and were paid with silver coins and declared their yearly income at around $1000 (the face value of the coins) and survived the legal meat grinder the IRS put them through without going to jail like Wesley Snipes.

As far as Wrong Paul goes, some paultard issued a press release on behalf of Ron Paul imploring people not to pay their income taxes. The instructions told people to sign and send forms to the IRS without declaring your income (filling in blanks with phrases like "none of your damn business, etc.), thereby fulfilling the law of completing the forms but supplying no numerical info.

Wrong Paul issued a retraction faster than you can say, "Yes, Massa," showing people that he was no revolutionary.
----------------------------------------

I'll let you get back to your discussion now:)

Yes, I followed that story and Had they presented their case differently they might not be jail now. They did not present their case as a lawful money issue but used the face value of the coins rather than the gold value so their claim an their taxes was for face value. The courts and the IRS did not see it the same way. Their said they needed to pay taxes on the full value they received for their labor and based on the tax statutes they were right. sk

Golly gee, thanks for the heads op on legal definitions, nothing like that has ever been brought up here!

MIND BLOWN.

Restricted endorsements, lawful money REDEMPTION at local banks, demand per 12-USC 411 and Article III court record forming.

Good luck to you in dealing with the Federal Reserve member bank, please record or video your interactions, cause its going to be wonderful to see.

"If I were to send you a greeting card, what NAME would I send it too?" ~ A local police man trying to arraign me ...

As pointed out by seeker2, the gold coin guy and some of his co workers/family members are in Federal prison for tax evasion. Again, both cases already reviewed in this thread, in detail.

As for the rest of your post, thank you and for the most part, I agree.

Are you demanding your redemption and controlling your endorsement signatures? That is the solution and it has been proven to work.