| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Apr 2003 : 15:17:50
|
Hello All,
I learned something new last night. I am searching for the Federal Statute and will post it as soon as I find it. But here is what I was told, and it was supported by others....
When it is time to pay your property taxes, notify the county tax assessor of the day and time that you will be in to pay. Also, notify them that you intend to pay with Federal Reserve Notes, and oh by the way you have heard that it is a Federal crime for them to accept Federal Reserve Notes as payment.
Then watch the fun at the court house when you show up on the day and at the time you indicated. I had one person tell me he couldn't even get inside the court house.
I will be doing this when my taxes are due again in October. I will post the experience.
Peace to you all,
Lewis |
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 10 Sep 2004 : 18:39:42
|
Hello Lewis,
I am new to this forum and came upon your post in this category. I, as well as others, would be interested to know what your experience on this was. It is now nearly a year and a half later. Were you successful? (By the way, I had come across some similar information, but haven't be able to re-track it down to see what it said. All this information I read sticks in my mind, sometimes in bits and pieces, and then I don't remember WHERE I first read it. It can be a bit frustrating, to say the least.)
Anyway, I am glad I found this forum where people's experiences with the freedom processes can be shared. Hopefully readers can avoid making the mistakes that others have made in pioneering this information.
Thank you for sharing the information and insight into the process that you have already shared on the forum. Your comments as well as those of others are what I look forward to reading when I come here.
Peace. Stay well and healthy,
IanAnd
|
 |
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 10:07:14
|
Dear Ian;
There are (at least) two fundamental approaches to dealing with the world.
1) To make presumptions there is a script that must be followed.
2) Learn about contracting and play by heart, not rote.
The first method is extremely proactive but depends on the presumptions being in place and that the attorneys on the other side of the conversation know the same presumptions are law. For instance the presumption the tax assessor cannot accept Federal Reserve Notes as payment. They are doing that all the time - however the deviation here is the contract notice. If you have a proof of service of the notice then they know ahead of time you will be trying to get them to break the law. But as you read that maybe you see how easily that could backfire and become reactive with no Plan B.
Also you are dealing with attorneys who do not follow these scripts. I learned a lot over a decade ago about scripts. I wanted to throw my 5" Constitution at them and shout, "Don't you know what you are supposed to be saying??!" (see footnote)
Plan 2) takes some paradigm shift about cause and effect. But it seems to work much better. It works on common law notice and grace, just like Lewis' plan above. Lewis' plan might be effective but he failed to point out the effective mechanism - ten days notice and proof of service on that notice. But even that failed judging because Lewis never posted subsequent information. But then maybe Lewis did not see the effective mechanism himself...(note he wrote only a few hours after hearing about it himself.)
So one can do these things by rote; memorizing a script and hoping the attorneys are dumb enough to say and do what they are supposed to according to your (or a scriptwriter's) presumptions; or one can delve into contracts which may be the highest form of law, and move in the moment by heart. There is a passage about this in the Bible:
quote:
Mt 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
Mt 10:17 But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their synagogues;
Mt 10:18 And ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.
Mt 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Mt 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.
It may be difficult to comprehend the paradigm shift in cause and effect but this may help. "Judge" Coffin, an attorney in the black robe, is admitting that "Refusal for Cause" is not responsive. Of course physics demands we have a presentment to refuse, but just the same since the right of avoidance is pre-extant, refusing for cause cannot be considered a responsive pleading or appearance that subjects one to the jurisdiction of the presenter.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/non-response.gif
Regards,
David Merrill.
footnote: The primary experience of challenging jurisdiction was the attorney disclosing "Home Rule Cities and Towns" Article XX of the State of Colorado Constitution. I was convicted for speeding. But the scriptwriter has presumed that the attorney would never disclose the judicial circumvention of METRO organization. Back then I had no comprehension about municipal structure so I was helpless and did myself a lot of unnecessary damage trying to fight with the 'system'. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 16 Sep 2004 10:16:05 |
|
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 16:39:06
|
Dear David,
Thank you for responding so thoughtfully to my question.
I would never attempt an action before or until I had learned of its practicality in the real world. I asked the question in order to learn what the outcome might have been, to get someone's experiential feedback and possibly learn something.
Instead, your answer provided an even better response in that it indicated a philosophical way to view such questions and thus be able to interpret the answer oneself if given enough information about the process being followed. And I thank you for providing such insight, gleaned from your own personal experience.
If you could, would you be kind enough to expand on the point you brought up in your post regarding "Refusal for Cause." Though I have heard the phrase before, this is the first time I have seen it used in a definitive setting whereby its significance could be pondered. According to your brief note, it seems that "Refusal for Cause" is not considered a response nor is it considered an appearance in Ceasar's court. Is that correct? If so, I would like to learn more about this "tool" so that I may be able to understand how to use it correctly.
Thank you for any reply you may be able to afford, which may help not only myself but others who read this thread.
Kindest Regards,
Ian
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 18:30:11
|
Dear Ian;
I would love to but already have. You inquire only because you are new here to ecclesia.org.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/active.asp
Select for the past two weeks or so. You will find the majority of readers are flocking to the same information you are after.
To supplement my answer to your question, when you find the counterclaim in the 'saving to suitors' thread, remember it is just fluff around establishing an evidence repository for copies of your refusals for cause to keep the 'exclusive original cognizance' of the United States.
So you got it right the first reading. Authenticating your exercise of the right of refusal and avoidance (of unwanted contracts)is where this really becomes perfected. Finding confidence through experience in your court of competent jurisdiction brings results.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 16 Sep 2004 20:20:21 |
|
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2004 : 18:44:45
|
Dear David,
Thank you for directing me in the right direction regarding the information I was seeking (i.e. "savings to suitors" thread). I am in the process of going through it and others of your threads (e.g., advanced resonance indictive plasma physics) and finding it very enlightening.
There are, however, a few things I hope to get clear in my own mind about this process, and perhaps you can help toward this end. For instance, in the above example of a notice for property tax, does one only have three (3) days to respond after receipt by mail of the tax notice with a "refusal for cause" service, or is there a slightly longer period within which one can respond, e.g. ten days or fourteen days? Does this presentment (and perhaps all other METRO presentments of such ilk) fall under the three day right of recision of the "Truth in Lending Act" or some similar period of time mentioned elsewhere?
Using the same above example, is it absolutely necessary for one to open up an evidence repository for this specific "refusal" in order for the process to work? That is, I understand the importance of gaining the "exclusive original cognizance" of the United States, but I was just wondering. It may be that you have already provided the answer to this question in a statement you made on one of the threads to the effect that doing this (opening the evidence respository with the district court) and sending a copy of the letter to the court clerk along with the "refusal" puts the presenter on notice that an evidence repository has been established and that he ought to proceed carefully if he wishes to proceed any further with his "presentment." Thus this action acts as a deterrent to any further action by the presenter.
And finally, when searching for the mailing address for the distirct court of the United States in the State in which I live, am I to assume that that address would be one in the same with the United States District Court in my State, the two different "courts" being combined into one, or would there be a separate address to contact regarding the district court of the U.S.? In conjunction with this, how can I be assured the cognizance of the district court in this matter and not the District Court? In other words, I don't want to be filing into Ceasar's venue.
On a related note, I am enjoying reading your posts. They pack a lot of punch into a small space -- no unnecessary wording. Sometimes, though, one needs clarification to insure that he correctly understands the author's intent and specific meaning.
I look forward to being able to finish reading your posts and discovering more nuggets of helpful information. Thank you.
Kindest Regards,
Ian Allan Andrews
|
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 15 Oct 2004 : 22:52:25
|
"and oh by the way you have heard that it is a Federal crime for them to accept Federal Reserve Notes as payment." Lewis
Then you should send your FRNs by registered or certified mail and then file a criminal complaint if they accept your FRNs as payment. |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2004 : 17:44:56
|
| I believe it is a crime for them to "ask" for Federal Reserve Notes as payment, but it is not a crime for them to ask for cash as payment. |
|
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 09 Jun 2006 : 17:28:45
|
Has anyone here successfully followed David Merrill's process of refusal for cause through in regard to property taxes issued by the county?
If so, I would be interested to correspond off line about this process and the intricacies of using it. I am in need of clarification on a few points. I can be contacted through my email address in the profile.
Thank you, in advance, to any who care to correspond.
Best Regards,
Ian
|
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2006 : 12:41:08
|
Ian,
Property taxes are due and owing because you entered into a contract with the corporation posing as a county, when you signed the Deed of Trust. Any attempt to violate this contract, as long as you are a U.S. citizen, will result in a suit for specific performance, and probably the lost of your property.
It is all about contracts. U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals just ruled on that fact. The Courts have jurisdiction only by contract.
Get rid of the contract and your problem is solved.
Peace,
Lewis |
|
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2006 : 11:34:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lewish
Property taxes are due and owing because you entered into a contract with the corporation posing as a county, when you signed the Deed of Trust.
Hello Lewis,
Yes, indeed. It is "posing as a county," and the pertinent question we are all waiting to hear the answer to is: for whom is it posing as a county?
Once this is known, remedy can be formulated, would you not agree?
quote:
Any attempt to violate this contract, as long as you are a U.S. citizen, will result in a suit for specific performance, and probably the los[s] of your property.
It is all about contracts. U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals just ruled on that fact. The Courts have jurisdiction only by contract.
Get rid of the contract and your problem is solved.
Thank you for responding to my inquiry. Your response, though, leaves questions in the mind. You say: "Get rid of the contract and your problem is solved." Yet, you do not say how. Curious.
Would you mind expounding on your method for doing this, since this is what you propose as remedy?
Best Regards,
Ian |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2006 : 13:34:41
|
Hello Ian,
First step is to stop being a U.S. citizen. I have posted numerous times on this.
After that, you can get the equitable title released by the Alien Property Custodian. When you hold the allodial title, the property cannot be taxed. The Alien Property Custodian is currently holding the allodial title. See TWEA, 40 Stat. 411.
Peace,
Lewis |
|
|
|
IanAnd
Regular Member
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2006 : 14:23:09
|
Hello Lewis,
Thank you for your time and explanation. It's always nice to be aware of another process using the statue law venue.
Best Regards,
Ian |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Property Taxes
