you're reading...
Economics, Governance

Distinctions and Responses


Money of Account and Money of Exchange

Money of Account is debt-based financial transactions on paper.  All debt is created on paper, so all debt can be discharged with ‘other’ pieces of paper.  This has absolutely nothing to do with what we, the private think of as “money” which is promissory notes, aka debt notes and, since debt notes cannot ‘pay’ a debt, then, handing over what we think of as ‘money’ cannot possibly offset the debt of an entirely separate money system based upon electronic and paper-created debits and credits. When anyone talks about the ‘national debt’ the only way to discharge or offset that alleged debt, which is not real as it exists only in a virtual computer world, is to create paper which will balance said negative/red entries on the ledgers/computers.  Our cash cannot, in a million years, ‘pay’ that debt because the two are entirely unrelated.  It is “apples and oranges”.  If the apple bushel is nearly empty, then, filling it with oranges will not give you a bushel of apples. Cash is solely for exchange of goods and services which WE, in the private, obtain, not the debt which those in the public create by charging our trust accounts which have credit, only due to the bonds backed by our birth certificates. Only they can monetize that credit and offset the debt they create; WE cannot do so. We do not have access to those accounts. Yes, we ought to be able to do so, but, so far, they have thwarted us on every attempt. The public uses ‘money of account’ and we use ‘money of exchange’.  Please make the distinction.

US Government and government of the U.S.A.

Talk about a red herring!  I wonder from what they are intending to distract us with the quibbling over Obama’s birth certificate.  Corporate President/CEOs are not required to be born in the country where their corporation is registered.  The only entities who are required to be born in the U.S.A. are Presidents of the Government the U.S.A. Since there is no government of the U.S.A. and hasn’t been for however long, then, keep in mind that the “US Government” –the corporation– has nothing whatsoever to do with the government of the U.S.A., the country.  Please make the distinction.

“Health Care” and Medical Care

When we look after our own health, we save our time, our money, our sanity, and our life. When asked, “who is your Family Physician?”, I answer, “I am”, and when asked who my doctor is, I answer that I do not keep one on staff, any more than I keep a plumber on staff. “Health Care” is really “Medical Care” which is how the Medical Mafia takes money from us by butchering, burning, poisoning, and, ultimately, killing us.  The “Health Care” industry, i.e.: the Medical Mafia and the Genocidal Pharmaceutical industry, has nothing whatsoever to do with “health”.  Please make the distinction.

RCMP and R.C.M.P.

The Gestapo of the Crown -the RCMP- has nothing whatsoever to do with the R.C.M.P. –the Royal Canadian Mounted Police– a no-longer-in-existence, honourable police force of the North West Territories and nowhere else. RCMP has no authority. Please make the distinction.

Responses to an Offer to Contract:


Rob claims he has caused CRA to leave him alone. When he receives anything from CRA, he does not even open the envelope.  He writes on it:  “Return to Sender.  I do not wish to contract with you.  I am not a fiction.  I am a man created as male, by God, standing in my dominion over all the earth. (see: Genesis 1:26-28.)  “Dominion” means to rule.  I am not under anyone’s rule or authority.” Of all the ways of assessing our legal dilemmas, I think the one most damaging to our situations is the continuous belief that someone outside ourselves has authority over us.


We have all heard of “debt forgiveness”.  “You, the Crown/state, charged the JOHN HENRY DOE  Birth Certificate Trust Account, thereby creating a debt which requires offset/credit in order to balance the accounting.  It appears as if you intend to hold me, a live man known as John Henry Doe, liable for a debt you created.  Since a maxim of law states, “the one who creates the liability must provide the remedy”, yet you appear unwilling to do so; and, since there is no money to ‘pay’ your debt for you, nor do I have the authority to access the account in order to offset your debt for you, all I can do is forgive your debt for you. I hereby do so. Ergo, you are now free to forgive your surety, John Henry DOE, thereby leaving me, the live man, completely out of your accounting, as “John Henry Doe” is not listed anywhere on any of your documents.

Negotiation (1)

Since all law is contract, then any offer can be negotiated (unless the document states, “non-negotiable” on it; then, you can only accept or decline. If we opt to decline, we must do so within 72 hours.) So, if we accept it upon condition, we can say, “You want me to go to court?  Alright, here are my terms. According to the enclosed Fee Schedule, my fee for doing so is $50,000. Upon my receipt of your certified cheque for that amount, I’ll be there. Of course you can force me to go to court, but if you do so without compensating me, then that is slavery. Isn’t ’slavery’ in violation of your corporate policy? i.e.: ‘against the law’ of the state/province?” If we are the beneficiary of the trust, then they are the trustees and, if we are kidnapped and taken to court, against our will, then, we can instruct them to discharge the matter, with prejudice, and award the penalties to be paid to us, in order to compensate us for damages of false arrest.

Negotiation (2)

If their offer does not contain the term, “Non-Negotiable”, then it is ‘negotiable’, so, if there is no amount on their offer (e.g.: a summons), I would put on it, a large amount, in $ (e.g.:  ”$500,000″), or if there is an amount, on their demand for payment, I would increase the amount, and write, at the top, “BILL OF EXCHANGE”; “ONE DOLLAR” –as I would on a cheque; “NON_NEGOTIABLE”; I would put a $1 stamp on it; and, on a separate page, I would write, ”Thank you for your offer to contract. I notice you have signed it, but it is still incomplete, so I’m going to make it a non-negotiable contract and I’m going to pay you what it is actually worth, in accord and satisfaction of the debt, and you will be liable for the shortfall, and if you default on me, then you will be liable for 4 times your debt, plus the same penalties & interest rates that you would otherwise charge me.  Because there is no money, I have nothing with which to pay debts, so I am entitled to counterclaim and set-off against any action you wish to take against me.”  This leaves the offeror liable for the entire debt except $1.00.  Apparently, this response ends up in court in 20% of all cases. Be prepared: Have the judge prove he has your consent to move forward.




No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

NAMASTE for your support.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 92 other followers


%d bloggers like this: