Yes.

BC is the source document for the creation of credit from YOUR TRUST ACC

Its your ESTATE.

SO close. :D Ok start from scratch. Don't pull a Derek Moran. Pay attention. Line by line. Everyone keep quiet.

CREDIT. When you SIGN a FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT (ANY financial instrument) you are OFFERING CREDIT.

Your bank ACCEPTS your credit and ENDORSES it (with conditions) MONEY OF ACCOUNT has been created.

This is often refered to by laymen, as "Chequebook Money"... and yes, Adam Thomas, i am deleting your asinine babblings.

The only thing MONEY OF ACCOUNT can buy, is MORE MONEY OF ACCOUNT.

This is of NO USE in the real world. You need MONEY OF EXCHANGE. That is the "Service" a bank provides. It ONLY converts MONEY OF ACCOUNT to MONEY OF EXCHANGE, and also does the reverse.

Everyone follow so far?

Yup

YES!

*puts hand-up* I have 2 questions when your done.

Is the use of money of account accepting a tender for law?

Got that, so far!

"This is often refered to by laymen, as "Chequebook Money" ..what is the fancy-term that NON-laymen use?

MONEY OF ACCOUNT...like i said in THE FUCKING PREVIOUS POST!

Eamonn O Brien, for there to BE MONEY OF ACCOUNT, there MUST be CONTRACT.

Getting it...

I am just deleting the stupid shit as it comes up. It's SO much easier than correcting :D

And contract makes the law... Ok,sure I'll let you continue

"The only thing MONEY OF ACCOUNT can buy, is MORE MONEY OF ACCOUNT." ..using this same logic- would the only thing Money of Account can DISCHARGE then, be more Money of Account?

This is why you can ATTACH a TENDER FOR LAW (This Note is Legal Tender) to it.

Thank you for stating the Obvious. You are still picturing it as some sort of "magic" and don't see the big picture, if you need THAT clarified.

If I was given complete executive control of the BANK OF CANADA, the first order would be to BURN ALL THE CASH we have. ALL of it, so the only money left is IN CIRCULATION. Any idea why I would do this?

..there'd be a Finite supply now? (for the time being at least)

Finite supply of currency = no inflation ?

Yes. This means a short-term DEFLATION occurs, and would dry up the credit markets. I'd then offer INTEREST FREE LOANS to Canadians, as long as they graduated a MONETARY THEORY class, and could ACCOUNT for the expenditures.

...here in reality, I'm in a country filled with adults with imaginary friends who don't know what money is.

"as long as thy graduated a MONETARY THEORY class" ..is there one you would recommend to take, currently?

There's NO SUCH THING. I've mentioned this. MONEY AS DEBT 1 is ALL ABOUT that. Wow. it's like you INTENTIONALLY miss key points.

I should have just deleted that post, and saved me the time typing that. Oh well, next time.

Thanks Scott Duncan , appreciate your time, I'd like to reserve the right/opportunity to ask more questions, after I re-watch Money as Debt 1 :)

Talk's cheap, honey! YOU know how to express "gratitude" in a manner I take seriously :P

if contract = law....i'm starting to see how the law slays you...hillarious!

The law merely cracks me up. I slay me :D I'm fucking hysterical :D

Asinine question - DELETED! I'm SO onto something here :D

You mean if we can be accountable?

so if the party only writes prommisory notes (cheques) against the money of account there is no legal tender attached? so one could write checks or bank transfers for bullion metal and then use another party as the exchanger.

You do not understand what LEGAL TENDER IS. FOLLOW ALONG CONTRACT=LAW LEGAL=ACTS AND STATUTES WITH THE FORCE OF LAW TENDER=EVERYONE MAY ACCEPT THE BENEFIT OF A TENDER IF CONTRACTUAL CONDITIONS ARE MET. THIS NOTE IS A TENDER FOR LAW. FOR THERE TO BE ACCOUNTING, THERE MUST BE A CONTRACT. That's it. Anything else is shit you are making up.

copy paste and post that in my head

"FOR THERE TO BE ACCOUNTING, THERE MUST BE A CONTRACT" How much do I love this statement... :D

Its ALL about ACCOUNTING, and SURETY ..and for there to be ACCOUNTING, there MUST be a CONTRACT

Thanks for making a post I don't have to delete, Derek! :D

SO: Banks ONLY function as a CURRENCY EXCHANGE. They do nothing else. The Billions of dollars in profit they make every year, should now be truly offensive to you, once you understand that BANKS ARE ONLY CURRENCY EXCHANGES. They don't do ANYTHING ELSE.

..and they make those BILLIONS of dollars through fractional-reserve-lending?

from what I understand, when you authorize any payment, the bank exchanges it for new currency, but they debit your account as well.

Not quite Girl-Brain! :D

There is no NEED to. it's ALL "money of account" in a CLOSED SYSTEM (The IMF).

What if you write a cheque?

You are SURETY in a pre-authorized payment agreement. The BANK pays the debt with MONEY OF ACCOUNT and DEBITS your account to balance the books...they can. You're SURETY.

Am I comprehending this accurately...if I deposit a $20 cdn bill into my bank account...it is exchanged from money of exchange to money of account? and then when i withdraw it, it is exchanged from money of account to money of exchange?

Same thing. If you write ME a cheque, you are TENDERING CREDIT. If I sign the back, the CREDIT is ENDORSED by ME.

That's it exactly, Gail Blackman.

You can't be more consise. Nobody has an excuse now. EVEN A GIRL GETS IT!

it's cute how you attempt to make it seem like girls aren't intelligent :P

Oh they are INHERENTLY intelligent, but that shit's beaten out of them at 13. By 29 they are as stupid as a post. It's tragic really.

when we "accept" a remittance to set off an account for something,is that using money of account? and does the bank even get involved in this?

I understand that if you pay a debt with a debt instrument, that would create more debt. When you pay your bill, it is exchanged into more (new) debt. Accepting it sets off the debt.

Remember when the remittance portion USED to say "Remittance Advice"?

Look that up in Black's

ENDORSED CREDIT pays a debt. That's why BANK NOTES pay debts.

FOLLOW THE CREDIT (Follow the money)

Remittance IS advice. :P

Remittance is ADVICE on HOW to DISCHARGE.

Girl-Brain :P

Does ENDORSING the financial instrument, with our SIGNATURE, also NEGOTIATE the instrument, over to the bank?

BANKING & NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS - Legal and Lit www.legalandlit.ca/joomdocs/banking/banking_geva_w03_2.doc

Yes.

..and NEGOTIATE = TRANSFER basically?

No. NEGOTIATE means NEGOTIATE TRANSFER means TRANSFER.

There are NO homonyms in Law. There are no SYNONYMS in law. Stop making shit up.

Wait a sec- i got The Dictionary of Canadian Law here...

NEGOTIATE: 1. To TRANSFER for value, by INDORSEMENT or DELIVERY, a bill of exchange or other negotiable instrument ?

..a retraction, maybe? ;)

That's what you get for relying on "clubhouse rules". :P

It didnt cite any 'case-law,' actually... ;)

No, you cited a clubhouse rules. LEGAL = "Clubhouse"

Legal Dictionary = Clubhouse reference.

the same type of people that wrote the Bible

Same guys, actually. ;)

oh that's right King James

Yeeeeppp....JESUIT KUNTS &/or friends of....

ok, Legal = clubhouse rules... that makes acts like the bills of exchange act a clubhouse rule?

Yes. Bills of Exchange ACT. ACT = CLUBHOUSE RULE STATUTE = CLUBHOUSE RULE LEGAL = CLUBHOUSE RULES

CODE = CLUBHOUSE RULE (Sorry, forgot)

My dental appointment left me in a bit of a predicament, beyond a frozen mouth lol...there was a mix up with the insurance and now I'm going to owe them a significant amount which I don't have the money of exchange to cover. What I would like to do is approach the dentist and offer a contract with him to give me a bill and I'll endorse it. However, I don't know what to tell him about the process for him to follow in order for him to receive his money of account to cover the value of the service he provided me. Secondly, does this make me a freeloader on the land? Thirdly, be gentle, I'm just trying to survive the consequences of my lack of awareness and ignorance about this life:P

So what would you clasdify their Bible as then please Scott??

Sieg fail...classify

Compelling question! The bible keeps you dumb and controlled. That's all you are. Dumb Sheep. The nobility gave you a shepherd. That Shepherd was God's rape-baby "Jesus". The Jews said we had to keep the torah.

Gail Blackman, this one goes through the mechanics of the process: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJBblYulqFc You will need to go through your own Bills of Exchange Act to find the equivalent sections, the video explains the process of where to send it etc for New Zealand & from that, you should be able to work out the equivalent department where you are. I have today done this process with a credit card bill, to test the process & iron out any bugs...will post results when it's all done & dusted....any critique is welcome The accompanying instructions I sent with it follow: (The sections are from the Australian Bills of Exchange Act, so the numbers will probably be different for different Acts): Instructions for Account: (NAME AND NUMBER) Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to provide some clarification and or instruction, if required, with regard to the manner in which I have dealt with your credit card statement ending 26 June 2013. You have requested �payment� be made on the abovementioned account, which according to the Constitution, payment of debts can only be made in gold or silver coin. As gold and silver coin are no longer in circulation as a form of legal tender, I cannot be compelled to perform an impossibility. Consequently, I can only offset and or discharge a debt obligation and I am using the Bills of Exchange Act 1909 to provide remedy and instructions for same. In accordance with the Bills of Exchange Act 1909, I am accepting your statement in the capacity of accommodation party and instruct you to forward it to the Secretary of the NSW Treasury for discharge and or setoff to return the account balance to 0.00. The relevant sections of the Bills of Exchange Act 1909 include, but are not limited to Sections 8, 26, 27, 33, 44, 64, 69, 70, 97. To demonstrate that I am acting in good faith, I have added valuable consideration in the form of one Australian dollar and instruct you to forward the enclosed statement and cheque to the following address for setoff and or discharge: The Secretary NSW Treasury Mr Philip Gaetjens Level 27 Governor Macquarie Tower 1 Farrer Place Sydney NSW 2000 If there is any lawful reason that this matter cannot be dealt with in this manner, please provide specific details of any defects and instructions to remedy same. Otherwise, Non Acceptance will be interpreted as in Sections 47 and 48 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1909. Stuart Stone Authorised Representative for ACCOUNT NAME

Thanks Stuart, I'm not sure he will try this, but circumstances may be ripe for him to do so.

That's why I have trialled it using a credit card because I figure that the finance/accounting department of a bank should understand what's happening & just process & forward it as instructed. Once the process is perfected, I will do one of two things: 1. Try it with water rates, electricity bills etc to see if their accountants know how to deal with it. 2. Charge everything to the credit card & then discharge it using the process each month. That way, private businesses providing a valuable service aren't having to deal with something they may not understand & it saves the hassle of doing it numerous times a month on every bill. And if it's discharged properly, then debt is being removed from the system which can't be a bad thing ;-)

Gail, does your dentist have your SIN number on file?

I don't think so

I think to set off you would use your SIN account.

put the charge on a credit card and set that off

I used the passport to get the credit card account...I get the feeling that the Public Trustee can find the trust account's details based on any of the forms of 'government ID' provided eg: BC, SIN, Passport, drivers licence etc

Well if I owe my printer money for say flyers... and I just take his bill and sign it and give it back he's gonna freak out...

I was going to use the opportunity to introduce him to some new learning. It's very strange, I had the idea in my head before I found out about the insurance issue. I know he won't have a clue, and wants his money. I guess I'm thinking it's also a potential opportunity to test it like Stuart is doing. Worse case scenario I'll figure something out, but this may be an interesting opportunity.

I've been studying the theory for too long now & decided it's time to bite the bullet & see how it works in real life (well legal land)...one way to learn. What's the worse that can happen? I am acting in good faith, following their clubhouse rules & asking for instruction if I make a mistake. If I'm mistaken, please forgive me ;-)

Yep I'm feeling the same way, once the dots start connecting, everything shifts...we have a great opportunity to learn the basics, try/experience things and then a wonderful group/forum to debrief the experience for any increased learning

Ok so I just spoke with my dentists and he is game to make this happen!

the dentist's business pays taxes, he includes the bill endorsed by you as a claim against his payment by giving them the endorsed bill as applied to the payment. it is sort of like reverse withdrawal, he gives them the endorsed bill for credit as if it were a third party check. your signature offsets his debt.

or somthing like that. we will get it all figured out...

Oh does that mean he won't receive a check from them?

his secretary actually has a friend at the treasury, she is going to do some investigating too for the proper procedure

I'm looking to find a name equivalent to the secretary of the Treasury in Canada....and I'm thinking that here in Canada it's the Receiver General? Do I have him send the signed bill to the Rona Ambrose?

I believe Derek brought her up and Scott told him to say HI

hehe thanks Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma

Hang on Gail...

I would put together an affidavit, or actually NOTICE of claim of beneficiary of the PERSON (BC) trust in the private and will act as trustee of this trust in the public.

thanks Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma I'll put something together

Not sure... Scott, if Gail chooses to accept this bill for value, would she send this to the Finance Minister based on: Financial Administration Act Part III Public Disbursements 29. (1) Where a guarantee has been given under the authority of Parliament by or on behalf of Her Majesty for the payment of any debt or obligation, any amount required to be paid by the terms of the guarantee may, subject to the Act authorizing the guarantee, be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

Yes. It will work and I have a HUGE ethical problem with it.

tell then...

The CRF is where all TAX dollars go. You are doing, WHAT I WON'T. You are dipping into money that was TAKEN from others. The Government HAS no money.

Ok, then which other way would this burden be handled more honorably?

Um...don't make debt?

Ok, so on the other hand, dipping into tax dollars is bad but as they are busy spending it into their own salaries is better?

No. But I'm also NOT DOING THAT. That's why I get to look down my nose at government workers as if I'm better than them. IT'S BECAUSE I'M BETTER THAN THEM!

If... lets just say... everybody knew about this... would this not deplete some useless people doing useless jobs? Or they would just raise taxes?

I do not have to live off of stealing from others. If I ever get in dire straits, I won't be on the street. I'l simply slaughter a lawyer and live there. ...but I will NOT take money that was taken from strangers who have NEVER harmed anyone.

I just want to help Gail with this burden.

She likely also has paid into this tax...

Seriously? She's a victim, so she should victimize? REALLY?

And its not like she created this debt because she wanted a new flatscreen and/or car...

Debt is debt. Intent is irrelevant.

Well maybe getting your teeth fixed would not cost so much if we created our own money based on our own value?

Ok, this thought process is going weird... So if we extend the credit in order to live, i.e. phone bills, utilities, mortgages on homes, and we work our asses off to PAY for these strangely inalienable rights of our land, how does this differ, Scott?

Maybe. :D

Arrgh... what question do I need to ask...

It doesn't differ. The government just can't TAKE it. In Canada, $50,000 quickly becomes $100,000 when no money is deducted.

Ok then, I understand what you mean by not creating debt... but then is this also why Gail does not want to extend any further credit to PAY this? It would only create more debt?

Yes

Then what then?

Hint... one hint at what I should ask...

You are saying she should not create another debt instrument in order to remedy this claim, yet to collect it out of revenues of our land is stealing from ALL OF US who have put into it?

Thank you Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma and Scott Duncan I have some thinking to do

*grumble

Awesomeness. ...soooo much VALUE HERE......ITS PRICELESS.....THANK YOU ALL........

Ok Scott, the CRF only collect taxes from others? Do they not collect corporate revenue? For instance, when the utility companys major shareholder is the City of Whatever or Province of Whatever, are those revenues not included?

Is that not revenue based on 1. our land 2. our energy?

No. I can say for certain, that you have never once contributed to the electrical grid, nor have you supplied power. Somebody else did. Corporations don't pay taxes. ..well, the good ones don't. ;)

I was hoping I'd have a clearer head today about this, I can't say I do....but need to comprehend this. We offer credit, the bank accepts and endorses our credit etc.....what is the backing for the credit we offer?

Would it be ANY thing the credit is used to purchase? Assuming the labour you provide may never be enough to pay this credit back, the banks would end up owning everything.

Your labour. You spend it exchanging currency. That's why Jesus got mad at bankers, and was violent in a church. The were competing with him for YOUR time/value. Be a slave or trade money. That was the option back then. You just don't understand what gets stolen when you exchange currency with the IMF ;)

But we wanna!

I get that but I am sure everyone here has realized that most people have credit beyond their ability to "work" it off because they are always paying way more than they access in credit. Is this not just a "legal" way of eventually owning everything by default?

Gail... may as well start thinking up your stage name and get into the porn business...

HEY I have an idea for all three of us!

Shake it baby! :D

haha

Come ON! Wiggle that thing! Dance for Scottie! :D

WE wouldn't NEED Scott. Of course he could BUY it tho.

finally ...value....out of debt in no time!

I can say for certain, that you have never once contributed to the electrical grid, nor have you supplied power. Somebody else did. WHO IS THIS SOMEBODY ELSE ??...parents ?, grand-parents ?

Those that put up the capitol to construct the infrastructure did.

Well, here in Quebec, that must be the Quebec Government, which is US ? :/

Hydro-Qu�bec is a government-owned public utility established in 1944 by the Government of Quebec. Based in Montreal, the company oversees generation, transmission and distribution of electricity for all of Quebec. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydro-Qu%C3%A9bec

Between 2008 and 2012, the company paid C$8.9 billion in dividends to its shareholder, :D

Shareholder? or should that be plural?

Its sole shareholder is the Qu�bec government.

http://www.hydroquebec.com/investor-relations/

And I have good reasons to beleive that The government of Quebec is the 8 millions PERSONS that lives here :/

Gail- 'wise-man' once told me: "The only organization in Canada, that is capable of creating money/credit from your valuable consideration/signature, is the BANK OF CANADA....forget the City of Toronto and register-mail your bill-payment-remittance straight to the Bank of Canada, if need be." ..i dont think you would be TAKING any other strangers tax-dollars from them who have never harmed you THAT way ;)

Scott Duncan, if one was to balance credit endorsed to zero, would it then be wise to close account and start over, clarifying your standing with regards to the person? This is assuming one needs a third party to handle the account.

Thank you Derek :)

OK so, I will send the signed bill to Mr. Stephen Poloz, Governor of the Bank of Canada?

along with a notice for him to pay the bill using my valuable consideration/signature on the bill as his authority to do so?

this has nothing to do with the bills of exchange act then does it..this is something separate from it?

..im not sure Gail who EXACTLY you would send it to at the Bank of Canada, that would be a question for Scott

Maybe ask Mr. Poloz to "pass the buck" to who IS qualified to fulfil the exchange?

" Ultimately, the Bank is owned by the people of Canada" http://www.bankofcanada.ca/about/who-we-are/

Does the bank of canada hold an escrow account for our PERSON for all the credit we have extended?

No.

Like Hydro-Quec is owned by the people of Quebec :D Derek Moran

Ontario's is all privatized.

Ok is there an escrow account for our PERSON for all the credit we have extended? Would that be held in Treasury?

No. it doesn't work like that.

You seem to think DEPOSITS are "in" an account, and forget that it is JUST accounting. Your NAME is the account.

The account is the NAME

and when money is needed, money appears.... ?

Account: A written list of transactions, noting money owed and money paid; a detailed statement of mutual demands arising out of a contract or a fiduciary relationship.

OH! The account is the result of the contract?

OK... so this account ledgers all debt created and all debt discharged on our behalf... Sooooo, since we do not discharge, most of this account would show more and more debt?

Yes, I guess a contract beetween your parents and the government.... :D

Unless THEY discharge some for US Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma :D

which would have been the birth registration?

If when we are registered we receive a birth certificate ...in accounting terms..that would be one side of the balance sheet...what is the other side that sets it off?

5. Every person exercises his civil rights under the name assigned to him and stated in his act of birth.

Regulations 60. (1) The Governor in Council may make such regulations as he deems necessary to provide for the management of the public debt of Canada and the payment of interest thereon and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, may make regulations Form of register (2) The register maintained pursuant to subsection (1) may be in a bound or loose-leaf form or in a photographic film form or may be maintained by any system of mechanical or electronic data processing or any other information storage device that is capable of reproducing any required information in intelligible written form within a reasonable time. Marginal note:Canada Evidence Act (3) The register maintained pursuant to subsection (1) is deemed to be a record for the purposes of the Canada Evidence Act and every employee of the [BANK OF CANADA] who supervises the inscription or registration of securities in the register is deemed to be a manager of the [BANK OF CANADA] for the purposes of that Act. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-11/page-29.html#docCont

Scott has told us that the Birth Certificate is PROOF of the Security of the Person . . . .i have to imagine that this is where the actual SECURITY IS, being kept/held that is

Yes.

being kept/held IN TRUST ?

Remember, Gail- the Bank of Canada's OWN website states that ultimately WE/people, are the owners of it. Well- if they do consider me to be one of the owners, then one day i will feel like going to Ottawa and have a gander at the Security for DEREK MORAN, and get them to tell me what the value for it is up to now.....road-trip in your mini-van? ;)

Definition of 'Account In Trust' An account that is managed by one party for the benefit of another. It is sometimes called an account held in trust, and the trust relationship can be either explicit or implied. Accounts-in-trust are typically set up for minors, and transfer of ownership will occur when the minor reaches legal age. Investopedia explains 'Account In Trust' The person managing an account in trust is a fiduciary to the ultimate owner or beneficiary of the account. A good example of such accounts are accounts managed by adults for minors, such as Uniform Transfers to Minors (UTMA) accounts. The term can also be used generically for any trust account, regardless of whether there is a formal trust agreement.

Not bound to EXECUTE trusts 59. Her Majesty and a fiscal agent or registrar acting as such are not bound to see to the EXECUTION of any express or implied trust to which any securities are subject.

Have I reached LEGAL AGE ? :D

I think what you really want is to be qualified?

Noun 1. legal age - the age at which persons are considered competent to manage their own affairslegal age - the age at which persons are considered competent to manage their own affairs

Derek does that mean that it is our responsibility to let them know we've grown up?

Do WE HAVE to advise someone when we reach that AGE ?

EXECUTION: 2. Validation of a written instrument, such as a contract or will, by fulfilling the necessary legal requirements <DELIVERY of the goods COMPLETED the contract's execution>.

I visualize us doing a huge fucking puzzle as we speak, and Scott Duncan is busy with a peace and love funny personage somewhere else.....

so the contract is....you register your child...we will take responsibility of the security for the child until they are able to take the responsibility themselves? Here is your copy of the contract..a birth certificate?

ok I'm thinking outloud here....we received the BC as our proof of a contractual agreement....providing notice to them, that we have now met the terms of the contract (ability to be responsible) should complete the contracts execution....so the question is, if that is the case, how is the transfer of responsibility executed?

by doing a perfected lien process

"..we received the BC as our proof of a contractual agreement." - No.

Is your signature on the Birth certificate?

If it is, you'd be correct... but it ISN'T.

The BC is proof that a PERSON has been created ? And the contract was signed by our Parents ?

The SEAL, on the BC Gail, is PROOF, of a PROMISE, that the Registrar General of Ontario at the time, INTENDED to keep

The birth certificate is not a birth certificate at all rather a death certificate. it is evidence of a ceste De que trust . see create De que trust act 1666. It initiated a period of Seven years so when you don't claim to be alive after this period they can administer the trust on your behalf. IMHO b <3�

...and here in REALITY is is a SECURITY instrument. Nothing more. Fuck off with the Live/Dead shit. That's Free-Dumb Movement crap and has NOTHING to do with what it REALLY IS.

There's no "demons" and "devils" either. I honestly don't know why I have to keep saying this. Everyone is welcome here. Your imaginary friends and all their baggage-of-bullshit fairy-tales are not. You are welcome to pick imaginary friends and their bullshit, but that means you are NOT welcome here, because that makes you an Adult with an Imaginary Friend. That makes you SUBHUMAN, because that very same crap, is what leads to slavery, and genocide. Just ask any native who's even vaguely aware of their history.

I love it when you CLARIFY stuff :-D (seriously)

So I HAVE an account (NAME) IN TRUST, and NO contract signed by ME regarding this ACCOUNT IN TRUST.... There MUST be a MISTAKE somewhere :D

their is an account, the person who is the elected 'representative' is the fiduciary YOU appointed to manage the affairs of the public account related to the CUSIP #'s on the birth certificate and the SiN. so i presume you need to send it to the rep you elected. yes this is freeman crap, but it can be backed up/discovered. the CUSIP can be found traded on D&B along withthe name of the fidutiary. you can discharge that person from their duty after you lien the BC.

David Johansen: elected 'representative: WHO ELECTED THIS GUY ?

OR GIRL ? :D

I'm thinking David Johansen is referring to the Miinster of Public Works and Government Services?

What the helll are you talking about fairy demons and what ? it is a ceste de que trust. Your aware of this ..no?"

If you so choose, adding to what David Johansen said~~~Once you lien the BC you can, in the US, use IRS Form 56 to appoint your choice of fiduciary. Usually Sec of Treasury and IRS Commissioner.

You're

does 'regis' in register have any bearing on matters?

Gail Finance Minister

My understanding is, 1) You were born. 2) One of your Parents or Guardians along with an Agent of the Government REGISTERED your Live BIRTH with said Government (VITAL STATISTICS). 3) Some where either on said REGISTRATION of LIVE BIRTH or through a separate application for a BIRTH CERTIFICATE a box was ticked or said application filled out. 4) This box being checked or application filled and signed, was the moment of a PERSON being created for the benefit of the one whose name appears on said security instrument. 5) The TRUSTEES (Government) now plunder what was handed willingly thru ignorance to them from your parents the current and future profits of resources that you had the right of use. 6) The TRUSTEES then get you to *INVEST* in their system for the rest of your life thru different taxes on everything along with allowing you to pay them for the PRIVILEGE of elevating them above you as AUTHORITY over you. (You asked for it) YOU have now been DOUBLE FUCKED. Strangely most people enjoy this as they continue to let it happen. QUESTIONS A) Why LIEN the BIRTH CERTIFICATE? (I know that this is supposed to stop them from any further transactions regarding the BC but I really do not think it does anything that is provable unless it is a specific piece of land or building.) B) Would it not be better to CLARIFY your standing as to WHO you are and FucK them with 'BREACH of TRUST' charges for failure to pay the beneficiary what is due.?

Yes Marshall M Alan, I know all about cestui que trusts. Nowhere is your asinine "living" and "dead" bullshit applicable. Like I said; Keep your bullshit out of the forum. Period.

The ONLY people who present the asinine "living" and "dead" bullshit, are adults with imaginary friends. There are NO exceptions to this.

On further reflection while watching the dog poop is not the BC a SECURITY INSTRUMENT of your share of the EQUITY derived from the resources of the Governmental Jurisdiction (landmass it is located in) ?

Add the BC is located in.

That would be an accurate LEGAL statement. :D

can I clarify, the consolidated revenue fund is the fund that taxes are put in?

Look at the words, Gail Blackman.

...and yes, that's where taxes go.

yes I think I was confused about the use of the bills of exchange, I didn't realize that there were different places the money of exchange would be created from....am i comprehending that accurately? If you send to the Minister of Finance the consolidated revenue fund is used, to the Bank of Canada, it's created based on your BC? or am i still not getting it?

CONSOLIDATED. ALL PREVIOUS ACCOUNTING STOPS. It is ONE LARGE POOL OF MONEY, with NO accountability to the sources. LEGAL restrictions on the government prevent them from dipping in at will... but as you can see with worker's salaries, they have it wedged open nicely.

gosh thank you so much...phew....that has be bugging me, especially after you mentioned about taking from strangers that never harmed you...that wasn't even on my radar as a possibility...glad to get that cleared up

Shit, I just got the Living - Dead deception bit. It is ALL just LEGAL ALL of it. The ACCOUNTING part dropped into place as well. I'm embarrassed now.

lol I was listening to Dean's interview today and he was saying that once you start to learn and see the deception and start feeling free through learning and knowledge...he assumed it was like getting high....I have to agree with him....the brighter the light gets the more alive you do feel....thank you to Scott Duncan and all the others in this group!

So the entire TRUST is just ONE. NOT separate trusts (individual). Just one big huge trust. So when 'I speak of MY trust' I am wrong. It should be that ' I speak to MY SHARE of the ONE trust (my portion of)

You FEEL that way because you haven't seen what it illuminates, yet. You are blinded by it. Soon the "flash" will fade and you will see what a dark horrible place it is behind the facade.

Now you get it Chad.

It's ALL taken from YOU.

who is you?

ALL of you.

I'm a me?

Every time you touch commerce, you get a bit stolen from you.

oh does this relate to what you mentioned the other nite about the effect the IMF has on us?

So when "ME" touches commerce, ME becomes a YOU. :P

dang!

YOU PAID for that condom :P

The IMF was created in 1945, I don't comprehend yet their effect, but was that their original mandate ?

Stolen partly through inflation since most of their wages/salaries rise with inflation yet non-governmental workers wages/salaries do not.

So, this may seem like a naive question, but how, (by applying the maxim: as it is done, so it is undone, or otherwise), does one correct/reverse mistakes we made while sleepwalking, WITHOUT harming those who have not harmed me?

are you talking about the IMF Stuart or using the bills of exchange act?

It's probably a more general question in relation to the consequence of using the B of E Act & not realising/understanding how this impacts on those that have done me no harm...been thinking about Scott's comment re that point further up the thread

You don't. The transaction is complete. You have nobody to appeal to. Why do you think the Muslims are setting up their own courts in London? They already know.

Ok, slightly different question based on Pierre's thread/question re the B of E Act, if we are sent a bill and not provided with the instructions on how to discharge it, how do we remedy the situation and/or where do we instruct the bill be sent for discharge & setoff, the central bank & not the treasury? This is the part I'm getting hung up on. I appreciate & now understand your ethical issue with the process if it is harming others Scott, but is there another way, or by using commerce are we ultimately harming 'someone' or several someones? ie: Is the end result ultimately to cause loss or harm if we use this system?...and is that the way the system has been designed in the first place?

Can financial REMEDY still be acquired thru a NOTICE of MISTAKE. ? Such as Income taxes for example.

Only if you are not EMPLOYED.

Got it Scott Duncan. Show that the ACCOUNTING *WITH THE GOVERNMENT* is incorrect and that you wish to REMEDY that mistake. Thanks. Falls into place now. All the posts just fall into place.

Really? Because Adults with imaginary friends say otherwise. Just the other day, a "Truth Minister" declared that I was a "Demon" and was spreading "lies" and "blocking" the "truth". :D Fuck I can't stand theists. I can't stand any of you for allowing that shit to be considered "normal".

Good stuff :-D

Seriously I really want to know from all of you... Why do you give ADULTS, with IMAGINARY FRIENDS, "respect", instead of treating them the same way you'd treat the people who visit Graceland every year, and say Elvis is still alive? I REALLY want to know this.

that was an interesting convo you had in the contract group earlier, proves your point about belief quite well

Elvis is dead?!? Shit, when did that happen? I saw him just yesterday at the mall :P

I give YOU answers. These are the answers you give back. I'm not joking. I REALLY want to know.

You idiots could pull the whole house of cards down if you JUST GOT RID of that shit.

Because it is what we are taught by tyrannical parents. I feared mine and wanted to please.

It's all fear based...fear of taking responsibility for ourselves

So why now? Why is it still ok?

It isn't.

A quick look around and a look at the books will reveal that it clearly IS OK.

Raised as a Roman Catholic I can see the brain washing that goes on. The las 5 years have been interesting but the last few months have been orgasmic. :)

the more aware and the more you are able to comprehend the less it is....but there are still many that are scared to death of looking at themselves

None of it is OK. I am doing the best I can with what I am learning. I love all my friends and family and don't want to just abandon them all.

But all of you ACCEPT it.

Gail Blackman, you said it.

What is it you want me to do ? I have no respect for them, but what else can I do ?

No I don't. My friends and family avoid me because of it.

That why the nobility will ALWAYS win.

You all did it to yourselves.

What do they really win?

EVERYTHING.