The Tender For Law

Volume 6

Jun 25, 2014 7:00 AM

Isaiah Whitney

OK, so I know once I show these folks at work that this is no joke and we can take some power back they'll jump. This friend of mine is trusting me to help. We're going to ADMINISTRATE this PUBLIC DEBT and get a whole factory of men/women sticking it to the SURETY. This was part of a response to a letter that was sent using the Forrest Gump approach as recommended by Captain Pete Daoust which I'll add shortly.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=832332696785931&set=gm.685656618136940&type=3

Read Comments

Isaiah Whitney

This was completely ignored and they sent a clone of the last correspondence plus a little page saying the amount is due now. They can't seem to make up their mind really. We're going to let the SURETY handle this.

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

Send them a sworn affidavit of your truth (in question format) and require them to return that, point for point in sworn format. Give them X amount of days to reply. They will not reply. Then you can send a Notice of Default � Opportunity to Cure with another X days to reply. Then send a Certificate of Default (notarized) = judgement.

Isaiah Whitney

It's essentially rule of the gun now anyhow. You do what you're told or some cop will beat/shoot you. I'd like to say this stuff will be irrelevant soon, but Scott keeps teaching it. We may have a long haul in store.

Mike Lamb

Eli, is the IRS already "billing" ADMINISTRATOR for 2013? I did not think they would even remotely send a "letter" until a year later (at least, that is what I am hoping... until I can get my private affairs organized). My dad thinks 2+ years, but I doubt it. My goal is to get lawfully prepared BEFORE THEY start "demanding" crap, and I was under the assumption (I know, not smart) that THEY would not do that until sometime in 2015.

Mike Lamb

I thought the thread was informative and useful, thus far, for me. I have not even gotten through 25% of the information "here", so I am "listening" and absorbing as much as I can via the threads and documents, etc.

Mike Lamb

Exactly. That is my current thought process, but I am trying to go through all of the info here to do that PROPERLY etc. I have no fear of the IRS. I do enjoy the "relationship" I have with the EMPLOYER though.

Mike Lamb

Very disheartening to see so many in pain, but it is VERY refreshing to see others take an active stance and actually choose to take responsibility for their own affairs and assertively DEFEND themselves against those entities that only mean harm for most.

Mike Lamb

Ironic. I have had at least three "friends" who had children in the past year and half. I took a moment to explain to them, NOT to consent to the BC agreement... but no, just kind of ignored me (or thought it too radical or inconvenient).

Mike Lamb

Most of them are trying to "change" things via their VOTER REGISTRATION CONTRACTS, which we are in disagreement about. I don't get mad, I just put my energy and focus elsewhere. I have two close friends who are on the "same page". We have agreed to assist each other if (or when) SHTF. We openly trade/barter for "stuff", labor, etc.

Been trying to promote that in my own community, but most really like those FRN's.

Mike Lamb

For whatever reasons, I don't get "angry". I don't see myself as uncaring, but I admit, the CITIZENS are on their own. Have at it. Just don't come back crying and whining like a little baby, and most certainly do NOT expect (or require) me to be "like you".

Mike Lamb

Well, I have no problems sharing my "fuck-ups" with anyone, if it helps them. No disrespect, but I think Mr Paul was aware and simply another EMPLOYEE. And this is coming from someone who WAS a stealth delegate for his campaign.

Mike Lamb

Well, you sort of know my "nature" based on the way I communicate with others in other "groups". I realize that many have mental constructs based on belief. I don't subscribe to such stuff, let alone labels. For whatever reasons, it does not 'bother' me. Of course, if someone expects ME to go along with their beliefs.... well, we have sort of a "problem" - well, more of problem for them, not me. I can really care less of what others think of me. That is their issue, not mine.

[ Well Eli, as always, been a pleasure. I apologize for blowing up your thread. I have to clock out and eventually go to bed. ]

Anibal Jose Baez

Ok, I have a question/observation here. I thought it was like this:

DRAWER: The PERSON you happen to have. Then the ADMINISTRATOR must complete this DRAFT/BILL OF EXCHANGE. Just like in any business, administrators get paperwork for them to complete, and after completion they SIGN AUTHORIZED BY: (SIGNATURE HERE), include along CONSIDERATION (certified birth certificate), and then send back the completed paperwork to a department, which happens to be the PAYEE/BENEFICIARY.

Once the ADMINISTRATOR completes these tasks, his/her OBLIGATION is OVER.

DRAWEE: It is the place were the SURETY is kept. The bank that will finally be responsible to DISCHARGE this DRAFT/BILL. In the case of the USA, my knowledge is that it is the "Federal Reserve Bank". In Canada, it is the BANK OF CANADA. Why the Treasury? :/ I do not know why would all sureties would be held there. That's Free-Dumb stuff.

PAYEE (BENEFICIARY): The party who will get ultimately get the BENEFIT of that money of account. In this case it would be the UNITED STATES TREASURY.

It is the OBLIGATION of the PAYEE/BENEFICIARY to send this completed DRAFT to the DRAWEE, for complete discharge of the account.

If the PAYEE/BENEFICIARY does not send the completed DRAFT/BILL OF EXCHANGE to the DRAWEE, it is NOT the problem of the DRAWER. It has NOTHING to do with the DRAWER.

Scott Duncan, and/or Pete Daoust, please correct me if this is disinformation and/or lies. Thanks!

Pete Daoust

and after completion they SIGN in the capacity of administrators

No, in the capacity of CREDITOR :D

The NOTICE that comes with the completed bill of exchange is SEALED by the ADMINISTRATOR (not signed, but sealed) That's how I do it anyway....

Pete Daoust

DRAWEE: It is the place were the SURETY is kept. The bank that will finally "PAY" for this DRAFT/BILL

DRAWEE: It is the place were the SURETY is kept. The bank that will finally "DISCHARGE" for this DRAFT/BILL

They do not PAY fuckall, it's ALL debts, they ACCEPT the completed bill of exchange, so it can get DISCHARGED....

Again, that's how I see it.....maybe Scott Duncan could be more specific on this :D

Anibal Jose Baez

Kent Barrett, the way I have learned it is that: the person you happen to have received a bill. Because slavery and/or involuntary servitude are a crime, they gave us these surety bonds, just like a whole bunch of $20 dollar bills, to SETTLE any BILLS under the NAME, because buying back those BILLS that do not belong to "ME" by FORCE is SLAVERY. So you may ONLY administrate these public debts, unless you want to "pay."

If the surety bond if just like a $20 dollar bill (in which YOU are not surety for those instruments, but just enjoy the BENEFIT), when you get a BILL from them, just like with any other "payment", the administrator completes the BILL and includes CONSIDERATION. This time you are not PAYING, you are ADMINISTRATING. So instead of CASH, of a CHECK, or CREDIT CARD, etc., you include that surety bond as a way to SETTLE the account, just like tendering a $20 bill.

I hope that dumb it down a bit. If I am wrong, Scott Duncan, PLEASE correct me. Thanks!

Anibal Jose Baez

<<Pete: and after completion they SIGN in the capacity of administrators

No, in the capacity of CREDITOR

The NOTICE that comes with the completed bill of exchange is SEALED by the ADMINISTRATOR (not signed, but sealed) That's how I do it anyway....>>

Ok Pete, I know all notices go with the seal, preferably (that's how I do it), but what I meant is that the BILL OF EXCHANGE needs an authorized signature. You had told me that you sign under the capacity of SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR.

Are you saying now that we need to qualify the signature as CREDITOR, instead of Administrator? :/ I am a bit confused.

I know you are busy, take your time!

Anibal Jose Baez

<<How many times do you have to prove it? Do they keep losing them?>> That is a good question.

In this jurisdiction, you may get 10 certified copies at a time made by the government itself, for $5 dollars each. After I get those, may order 10 more, and so on. I "believe" there is no limit, so I have to check.

In the case of a utility bill, do you need to send a birth certificate every month? :/ That sounds impractical, but now I want to know as well.

Anibal Jose Baez

A word from Admiral Scott about who is the DRAWEE BANK for the USA:

<<Sue Rakestraw: Chris, perhaps the key is WHO is the United States equivalent to Bank of Canada? April 22 at 2:38pm � Like � 1

Sue Rakestraw: See, this is the confusion for us Pete. Fed Reserve System is NOT for us to use and we can make no demands of it. April 22 at 2:51pm � Like

Scott Duncan IT'S THE US FEDERAL RESERVE, YOU DIPSHITS! April 22 at 2:51pm � Unlike � 6

Scott Duncan Look for WHO ISSUES THE CA$H April 22 at 2:52pm � Unlike � 5>>

Anibal Jose Baez

Admiral Scott, and Captain Pete Daoust, I will ask pose the question again:

1- Ok Pete, I know I am the CREDITOR. And I know all notices go with the seal, preferably (that's how I do it), but what I meant is that the BILL OF EXCHANGE needs an authorized signature in the back. You had told me that you sign under the capacity of SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR. Are you saying now that we need to qualify the capacity of the signature as CREDITOR, instead of Administrator? I am a bit confused.

2- How many times must I send CONSIDERATION for a public debt? In the case of a utility bill, do you need to send a birth certificate every month? That sounds impractical, but now I want to know as well.

Anibal Jose Baez

Pete Daoust, how about this: How many times must I send CONSIDERATION for a public debt? In the case of a utility bill, do you need to send a birth certificate every monthly bill? That sounds impractical, but now I want to know as well.

Gail Marie

this conversation brings up questions for me too...I've seen discussion about, for example, the utilities already having access to the surety account by way of the persons SIN and the debt is paid in advance, if this were true and the debt is taken care of already, would that not be credit created to take care of that debt?

Pete has suggested in the past that they (utilitiy comp) spend before they receive and that is why they need us to buy back the debt. I may be mistaken, but I don't see the government working so efficiently/effectively that if a utility company presented the bank of canada a completed bill of exchange that the bank of canada would say "No sorry utility company, you have already received credit for that debt"? something isn't making sense for me unless the govt and corp are working together to sink the country in debt :/ where is my thinking messed up or what am I missing?

Will Bed

Whenever you SIGN a bill, you give it that VALUE. But it seems the Utility Company don't know that... The birth certificate is PROOF of an UNLIMITED CREDIT LIMIT. By sending a notarized copy of the birth certificate, you give them the proof that you can authorize the SURETY to create the CREDIT and pay the bill. The birth certificate is the "key" to the SURETY if you will.

As Pete once told me, if the government made profits, you could show up with the birth certificate and use it to collect dividends...

Same with the SURETY, if the utility company shows up without the "key" and they want to "unlock" the SURETY, that may be more difficult than if they show up with the "key" which undoubtedly authorizes the SURETY to CREATE that CREDIT... The fact that you can provide the birth certificate is PROOF that you are indeed the CREDITOR for that PERSON... That is the consideration.

Now I guess once you have proven it once, you don't have to prove it again, but what do I know ? Haven't been there yet...

So I'd ask them something like

Dear Utility Company, last month I sent the completed bill of exchange with a notarized copy of the PERSON's birth certificate as CONSIDERATION. I see you've been able to get your payment from the PERSON's SURETY, so it seems both you and the SURETY know you'll now be doing business together on a regular basis from now on, AM I CORRECT ? Now I'm wondering, for future bills sent to the PERSON, would you and/or the Bank of Canada require a new copy of the birth certificate each time, or can an original just be kept on file or whatever and I only have to return the completed bill of exchange itself ? Please let me know before you send the next bill, because it's never been never will be my intention to cause delays and/or trouble and/or create controversy and I want to make sure you guys are all set !

Will Bed

Well Gail, I completed a bill of exchange in April, and it ended up the company decided THEY WOULD NOT COLLECT the SURETY, they would ERASE THE DEBT from the ACCOUNT instead ? They DID return the completed bill of exchange, not REFUSED, along with the birth certificate which was sent to them...

By ERASING the DEBT, they just spit on +/- 4 times the usual amount of the monthly bill... WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT !???

Anibal Jose Baez

Eli Weakley the reason I post this video is for you to listen an IRS agent explaining HOW to fill the VOUCHER/MONEY ORDER to the person he happens to have.

The reason we ask for REMITTANCE every time, with any organization, it is because other entities may have DIFFERENT methods on how to complete the draft/money order.

In this particular case of this Man, the agent told him this instructions were specific just for the IRS, and maybe for this specific account.

Other than this video, I DO NOT recommend anything else coming from this wacko, Christopher Flemings.

Isaiah Whitney

When I administrated the state tax bill for the PERSON I happen to have I sent no valuable consideration. Over two months of silence so far. I bought back the majority of that tax liability because I didn't know who I was last year. Would that be the valuable consideration?

Anibal Jose Baez

That CONSIDERATION it's like a $20 bill. They sent you a BILL. You AUTHORIZE that BILL, and ACCEPT that BILL. If you do not send that $20 bill (BC), do you think they are getting CONSIDERATION? When you pay for your light bill, do you forget to include the cheque/money order with the voucher, Eli?

I hope that answer your question.

Anibal Jose Baez

The only difference here, is that you send that $20 bill just one time. It's like an unlimited OVERDRAFT ability $20 dollar bill. Afterwards, you do not need to send more certificates for the same account.

Anibal Jose Baez

Well, think about it, $50 dollars it is STILL a pretty good deal to administrate hundreds or thousands in public debt. And is you are smart enough, and keep all receipts incurred by the person (like those $50 bucks), you may get a return on those later, as well.

But one step at the time.

Anibal Jose Baez

Here in this jurisdiction, notaries are prohibited (allegedly) to make notarized copies of the birth certificate, because it is the State that actually only issue the certified copies of the Birth Certificate. And they only cost $5 bucks each here, and they are in bond paper.

Mike Lamb

Sue is correct Eli. I had pulled up their information a couple years ago. I was "born" nearby "Illinois" also. I do not possess a BC. I possess a Certificate of Live Birth. I am going to copy and save this whole thread. The information is very useful.

Pete Daoust

Consideration Money or other payment provided in exchange for an act or service that helps a business. Consideration may be cash in which case, it is more like a sale or payment-in-kind. For example, a person may receive a certain amount of equity in a business in exchange for giving or allowing the business to use the person's intellectual property.

Pete Daoust

I am saying that ...

ACCEPTED BY: ___sign here____

Means that the CREDITOR has ACCEPTED the debt.

And when I add the SURETY BOND with the completed bill of exchange, I give CONSIDERATION (prove of surety/other payment) to the fucktard who started that bill of exchange, without even knowing it (beneficiary) :D

Pete Daoust

:-o

mon�e�tize (mn-tz, mn-) tr.v. mon�e�tized, mon�e�tiz�ing, mon�e�tiz�es 1. To establish as legal tender. 2. To coin (money). 3. To convert (government debt) from securities into currency that can be used to purchase goods and services.

Will Bed

Criminal code of canada :

�valuable security� � valeur � ou � effet appr�ciable � �valuable security� includes

(a) an order, exchequer acquittance or other security that entitles or evidences the title of any person (i) to a share or interest in a public stock or fund or in any fund of a body corporate, company or society, or (ii) to a deposit in a financial institution, (b) any debenture, deed, bond, bill, note, warrant, order or other security for money or for payment of money, (c) a document of title to lands or goods wherever situated, (d) a stamp or writing that secures or evidences title to or an interest in a chattel personal, or that evidences delivery of a chattel personal, and (e) a release, receipt, discharge or other instrument evidencing payment of money;

Isaiah Whitney

This may be stupid but the PERSON I have recently applied for and was approved for a new credit card. The application was filled out as usual but with a qualified signature. What if anything does that change? I was just screwing around when I did it.

Will Bed

Eli, I'd guess all that changes is you made it clear you are not the PERSON, but the CREDITOR, in case anyone comes asking, you'll have proof you never gave them reasons to believe otherwise and presume you are SURETY...

Isaiah Whitney

UPDATE! The IRS is just as slow and bumbling as any other government agency because my friend just received a response to the letter sent using Captain Pete's "Forrest Gump" approach. I will post a scan later but it effectively says they'll contact him again in 90 days or so because they need time to research the matter! They would cease sending notices about the matter in the meantime!

Isaiah Whitney

I have another twist to report. He checked his account just a little bit ago and the IRS began taking payments out of his bank account without him finalizing the payment agreement that he'd initially agreed to before talking to me. They just playing games or what? I thought we had them over a barrel by the sound of that letter.

Anibal Jose Baez

So, there WAS an agreement. And now he wants to "not follow" the agreement? It would had been good to know that. That was left out of the equation when we discussed this.

Well, that sure it's a "twist" to report.

Isaiah Whitney

I don't know for sure. I am thinking they don't know how exactly to answer the initial letter he sent. Lawyers scrambling for a half truth lie by omission? He ADMINISTRATED the BILL that was received prior to this, but only sent it a few days ago. It's my hope they receive the BILL OF EXCHANGE settle the account and refund what was taken from his bank account. It was my opinion that the payment plan wasn't finalized and I'll post the letter that gave me that impression here in a few min if I can find it.

Isaiah Whitney

Yes. He probably is bound. My only reason for thinking no is in the letter I'm scanning now. They said the information must be verified first and only now lay out all the terms and conditions. Should that not have been disclosed before if it was final? They also sent this letter twice so it led me to think they needed him to finalize it.

Isaiah Whitney

No I have not. Just got the letter today was at work all day. I should have probably familiarized myself with TAXPAYER by now yes. I thought it was just something the PERSON got involved with and we just need to administrate.

Isaiah Whitney

Yes. Such masters of trickery. Say I assume wrong, what's their game here? I don't know what else they could have received and they're basically saying "hang tight while we figure this out". What are they trying to get us to do?

Anibal Jose Baez

This communication should had not been accepted, and should had been returned, with the envelope. Keeping that offer is accepting that TENDER. So in one way he accepts the offer, but in other way is pushing another method as Administrator. I must presume these agencies detect that flip-flopping and decide to push forward.

Anibal Jose Baez

I think before sending bills of exchange out of the blue, one should make the necessary notices, to give opportunity for these trustees to obey the law (where there is still hope), and to be in a strong undeniable position as the Sole Authorized Administrator.

If you have a VALUABLE SECURITY from the State Register's Office, and you are going to be acting as Administrator, don't you think it would be good to give these people notice FIRST? And then, notify the rest about your INTENTIONS via notices. There is a few comments of Scott about notifying the Register that the SECURITY has been delivered, making you the HOLDER IN DUE COURSE, and announce that you are acing as Administrator.

For example, if you send the IRS, or CRA, not only a notice, but also an AFFIRMATION from the Administrator attached, and copies of the published notice as Administrator in a newspaper attached, when they receive your communication there is no space to deny that you are IN FACT the Administrator, and is less likely that they will start acting funny.

Plan ahead! Cover all bases! Do not do anything you do not understand WHY you are doing it.