Awesome Essay on the Federeal Reserve

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Please cite those Supreme Court decisions.

You are a dunce Shoonra. The court decisions and law are cited in the video Article from 1984 and the key citation already linked with the video, all over suijuris.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You are a dunce Shoonra. The court decisions and law are cited in the video Article from 1984 and the key citation already linked with the video, all over suijuris.

I was hoping you could spare me - and maybe other people - the tedium of watching that video.

From what I see, it's an amalgam of anti-Masonic and anti-Catholic conspiracy theories, and the very same nonsense about the Federal Reserve and the Gold Clause Resolution that you've posted on this website.

It completely misunderstands (or misstates) the characteristic of public laws, of the enactment of US Code titles into positive law, and confuses the two. It completely garbles history by making the establishment of the Federal Reserve System rather than the 16th Amendment (which was proposed by Congress long before it enacted the Federal Reserve Act) the sine qua non for the federal income tax. It completely misunderstands (or misstates) the Gold Clause Resolution ("HJR 192") and its effect.

As for its legal references, it tries to entwine the Federal Reserve and the federal income tax with 19th century court decisions and a 19th century law dictionary.

There's nothing in Supreme Court decisions issued since the Federal Reserve Act that says what you claim.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

I was hoping you could spare me - and maybe other people - the tedium of watching that video.

From what I see, it's an amalgam of anti-Masonic and anti-Catholic conspiracy theories, and the very same nonsense about the Federal Reserve and the Gold Clause Resolution that you've posted on this website.

It completely misunderstands (or misstates) the characteristic of public laws, of the enactment of US Code titles into positive law, and confuses the two. It completely garbles history by making the establishment of the Federal Reserve System rather than the 16th Amendment (which was proposed by Congress long before it enacted the Federal Reserve Act) the sine qua non for the federal income tax. It completely misunderstands (or misstates) the Gold Clause Resolution ("HJR 192") and its effect.

As for its legal references, it tries to entwine the Federal Reserve and the federal income tax with 19th century court decisions and a 19th century law dictionary.

There's nothing in Supreme Court decisions issued since the Federal Reserve Act that says what you claim.

What you say can only mean that private credit cannot be redeemed in public money. Too bad for you. Anyway the video is bringing in some great compliments - surprising considering the time I put into it. There are many orders for the video. I regret the video linked is difficult to read along with.

The video is not anti-masonic. It is simply factual about a voluntary jurisdiction - private law. I only chose that fluff because it shows the true origin of US Notes were the Territorial Governor's drafts here on the Territory of Colorado.

There's nothing in Supreme Court decisions issued since the Federal Reserve Act that says what you claim.

Just because you do not see things that way does not mean things are the way you see them Shoonra.


Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. Shoonra;

You being a quasi-theoretical attorney gives me a lot of food for thought. Your protectionism and appeasement methodology is consistent and quite revealing. [By the way I am disappointed you quit undergirding my arsenal by (virtually) bonding me a Van Pelt.]

It [the Article/video] completely misunderstands (or misstates) the Gold Clause Resolution ("HJR 192") and its effect.

HJR-192 including its legislative history was for the fabrication of paper gold. By 1976 it was able to remove gold from the currency system like gold was just a historical relic - no longer precious metal. Gold was simply replaced by paper gold. What is the substance of paper gold? What bonds it? Are you saying that private credit is brought into existence out of thin air? That is something Heidi and many others around here would like to hear from your mouth in a post Shoonra.

It is backed by endorsement. It is backed by a pledge of the legal entity as property - chattel.

Just read it carefully...

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ill_Page14.jpg

It is accomplished through the combinatorial mathematics of the United Nations. [I recall having a major New York process service firm speacializing in the Hague Convention, an international UN treaty, research for a week and come up empty - How does one serve process, any process, on Kofi Annan?]

I will attach a page from P.L. 94-564 verbiage (Senate Report 94-1148) just to seal up this argument. Thank you for never learning Shoonra. Thank you for continually blurting wonderful ammunition with which I can save a lot of time and trouble explaining to people in posts!

From the State Department Bulletin:

http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images.../SeizeGold.jpg

As for its legal references, it tries to entwine the Federal Reserve and the federal income tax with 19th century court decisions and a 19th century law dictionary.

You play both sides of the fence on that issue Shoonra. When it is convenient, in your own mind, to attempt discrediting me about HJR-192, its legislative history becomes very important. Then you turn around a breath later and say something like that.

I am tempted to reveal the nature of the income tax from an 1861 perspective and from the Congressional Records of that time. Remove Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt from their proper context of being Masons if you wish Shoonra. I suppose you will simply continue to blurt ammunition and continue saving me hours of time and trouble describing accurate foundation for explaining modern banking through its history...

[David Merrill]

About those images attached above:

In other words Shoonra, the gold that was removed from the monetary standard by the Bloodline Merovingians (French) and the Transplant Vinyard (Americans) in secret, was conveyed into accounts in the International Monetary Fund - an organ of the United Nations.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I only chose that fluff because it shows the true origin of US Notes were the Territorial Governor's drafts here on the Territory of Colorado.

Bad history. US Notes have a very different historic foundation.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

HJR-192 including its legislative history was for the fabrication of paper gold.

You clearly don't know the legislative history of "HJR-192" or else you'd know that it was enacted to preserve the value of US currency and that the US was one of the last countries to enact a gold clause law. I had suggested earlier that you read Arthur Nussbaum's classic work, Money in the Law, and you obviously haven't because he devoted about a third of the book to gold clause legislation here and elsewhere.
The Gold Clause Resolution was enacted to protect the Constitutional authority of Congress to regulate the value of US money. For no good reason, an enormous number, perhaps a majority, of all the contracts and mortgages signed for many years preceding 1933, contained a clause that the payment of the specified amount would be made in gold coin or gold certificates. This despite the fact that all other federal currency was equally sound, and despite the fact that no other part of the transaction involved gold. If all those contracted gold payments had come due at the same time, there was enough gold in all the world to cover them, and this was in the depth of the Depression when hardly anyone normally had gold coins. The result of all these gold clauses was a windfall for money changers, who would charge a premium to exchange gold coin or gold certificates for US Notes, Silver Certificates, silver coinage, FR notes, and so forth. This meant that the Congressional control of the value of the currency was being disrupted because of these ubiquitous gold clauses. Therefore, the Gold Clause Resolution was proposed and enacted.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I will attach a page from P.L. 94-564 verbiage (Senate Report 94-1148) just to seal up this argument.

Public Law 94-564 has to do with the US participation in the International Monetary Fund, not with domestic US currency.

Your fulminations may impress others who are as ignorant as you are, but nobody else.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Bad history. US Notes have a very different historic foundation.


Public Law 94-564 has to do with the US participation in the International Monetary Fund, not with domestic US currency.

Your fulminations may impress others who are as ignorant as you are, but nobody else.

Granted I said that Gilpin's drafts were predecessors of US Notes. You have twisted my subsequent post to mean I am saying they were the first US Notes.

The US participation in Bretton Woods is enough admission for most of the people here that you know what you are talking about Shoonra. You know the US is bankrupt as the other nations participating in the International Monetary Fund handouts. Representative Ron Paul seems to have gone quiet about that cause of his to sunset that participation...

http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images...s/1-HR3812.jpg
http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images...s/2-HR3812.jpg
http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images...s/3-HR3812.jpg
http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images...s/4-HR3812.jpg

I imagine somebody who thinks like you do sat him down and told him his bill had more a chance of success than a snowball in hell. Which really gets us back on point with the video material; the law in the Article is exciting because it explains how we can do something about the situation ourselves without waiting on Congress.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...ublicMoney.wmv

You clearly don't know the legislative history of "HJR-192" or else you'd know that it was enacted to preserve the value of US currency and that the US was one of the last countries to enact a gold clause law. I had suggested earlier that you read Arthur Nussbaum's classic work, Money in the Law, and you obviously haven't because he devoted about a third of the book to gold clause legislation here and elsewhere.

The Gold Clause Resolution was enacted to protect the Constitutional authority of Congress to regulate the value of US money. For no good reason, an enormous number, perhaps a majority, of all the contracts and mortgages signed for many years preceding 1933, contained a clause that the payment of the specified amount would be made in gold coin or gold certificates. This despite the fact that all other federal currency was equally sound, and despite the fact that no other part of the transaction involved gold. If all those contracted gold payments had come due at the same time, there was enough gold in all the world to cover them, and this was in the depth of the Depression when hardly anyone normally had gold coins. The result of all these gold clauses was a windfall for money changers, who would charge a premium to exchange gold coin or gold certificates for US Notes, Silver Certificates, silver coinage, FR notes, and so forth. This meant that the Congressional control of the value of the currency was being disrupted because of these ubiquitous gold clauses. Therefore, the Gold Clause Resolution was proposed and enacted.

I love that Shoonra. You eloquently describe the stellionation (selling one thing twice). The bankers had fractionalized so badly that one had to specify in the contract payment would be in money instead of fractionalized instruments! Then when people were on the verge of making a run by cashing in all those "equally sound" instruments, the bankers got their Bankers' President (FDR) and the Bankers' Holiday by way of a bailout.

I think your attempt to whitewash all that failed around here - ignorant as all of us are (according to you).


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Granted I said that Gilpin's drafts were predecessors of US Notes. You have twisted my subsequent post to mean I am saying they were the first US Notes.

Gilpin's drafts were not predecessors of anything, but a lingering relic and imitation of the paper money issued by the Colonies prior to and during the War of Independence. Similar paper notes and scrip had been issued at various times in communities too small and remote to be able to bring in sufficient amounts of Congressionally-authorized currency.
US Notes - also called Greenbacks and Legal Tender notes, were issued in an amount specified by Act of Congress, partly to facilitate the monetary system which had sometimes bogged down for lack of metallic coinage, which had followed the Act of Feb 21, 1857, which revoked the legal recognition of foreign coinage in domestic transactions.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You know the US is bankrupt as the other nations participating in the International Monetary Fund handouts.

The US is not bankrupt, at least not in the financial sense. If it were, other countries would not be quite so willing to accept US FRNs -- some countries don't even bother minting their own bills but simply use US FRNs for their currency.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You eloquently describe the stellionation (selling one thing twice). The bankers had fractionalized so badly that one had to specify in the contract payment would be in money instead of fractionalized instruments! Then when people were on the verge of making a run by cashing in all those "equally sound" instruments, the bankers got their Bankers' President (FDR) and the Bankers' Holiday by way of a bailout.

No such thing. The Gold Clause Resolution resolved a serious problem - which was making some bankers insanely rich. But virtually none of those Gold Clauses were to the benefit of "the people" - they mostly worked to the advantage of businesses, esp large corporations, at the expense of ordinary people. The Bank Holidays, which were separate legislation, were set to break up the momentum of bank panics and failures, and give the Federal Reserve and other supervisory authorities a chance to audit banks - as a result of which some weak and failing banks were merged with stronger ones to protect the depositors.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Gilpin's drafts were not predecessors of anything, but a lingering relic and imitation of the paper money issued by the Colonies prior to and during the War of Independence. Similar paper notes and scrip had been issued at various times in communities too small and remote to be able to bring in sufficient amounts of Congressionally-authorized currency.

US Notes - also called Greenbacks and Legal Tender notes, were issued in an amount specified by Act of Congress, partly to facilitate the monetary system which had sometimes bogged down for lack of metallic coinage, which had followed the Act of Feb 21, 1857, which revoked the legal recognition of foreign coinage in domestic transactions.

That is interesting but again goes to prove my point. You have completely ignored a major change that took place on March 28, 1861 when Congress adjourned sine die for the last time. I point this out in the video with photos from the Congressional Globe. Congress was convened on July 4, 1861 and the Executive Orders of emergency are still in full force and effect today. We effectively still have that de facto Congress in place today.

On that point Gilpin's drafts were the first notes issued after the Emergency began and prior to Greenbacks. Like I have said many times now; FRNs are foreign emergency currency and USNs are domestic emergency currency.

Gilpin's drafts were not predecessors of anything, but a lingering relic and imitation of the paper money issued by the Colonies prior to and during the War of Independence.

Exactly. The formation of a Congress and formal nation ended the emergency of being under the tyranny of England. The War Between the States destroyed the de jure 13th Amendment and it was "subsequently never ratified" (Afroyim v. Rusk) into the new federal Constitution. However it is still in full force and effect in the Territory of Colorado.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

The US is not bankrupt, at least not in the financial sense. If it were, other countries would not be quite so willing to accept US FRNs -- some countries don't even bother minting their own bills but simply use US FRNs for their currency.

Read the attached article about the default. I may get to the library for the Associated Press (January 26, 1995?) article Rubin predicts default date. You may have a technically viable point but at best the US government simply plays the bankrupt card whenever it is adventageous and plays liquid with Federal Reserve private credit NOTES when that is adventageous.

Simply put; if the US were not in bankruptcy as you say, then Congress would not keep voting to raise the debt ceiling. Being indentured to the IMF/Treasury/UN is enough to convince people with eyes to see and ears to hear. Don't get me wrong Shoonra, your feeble attempts to explain around the facts are welcome. I am surprised after all this time that I still find you interesting enough to argue with...

Originally Posted by Shoonra

No such thing. The Gold Clause Resolution resolved a serious problem - which was making some bankers insanely rich. But virtually none of those Gold Clauses were to the benefit of "the people" - they mostly worked to the advantage of businesses, esp large corporations, at the expense of ordinary people. The Bank Holidays, which were separate legislation, were set to break up the momentum of bank panics and failures, and give the Federal Reserve and other supervisory authorities a chance to audit banks - as a result of which some weak and failing banks were merged with stronger ones to protect the depositors.

The Bankers' Holiday was to prevent people from cashing in all the gold certificates for gold. The people in that intent were labeled by the FDR administration as hoarding their own gold! If you kept gold or gold certificates you would go to prison.

I heard a rumor that the 1933 gold coins are still illegal to hold. However you can get replicas of them as a novelty collector item.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[PANICPASS]

Shoonra wrote:

The US is not bankrupt, at least not in the financial sense. If it were, other countries would not be quite so willing to accept US FRNs -- some countries don't even bother minting their own bills but simply use US FRNs for their currency.

The US is financially bankrupt. It appears to not be bankrupt because it survives off the American citizenry's substance.


The National Debt is defined as “mortgages on the wealth and income of the people of a country.” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 1959)

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You have completely ignored a major change that took place on March 28, 1861 when Congress adjourned sine die for the last time. I point this out in the video with photos from the Congressional Globe. Congress was convened on July 4, 1861 and the Executive Orders of emergency are still in full force and effect today. We effectively still have that de facto Congress in place today.

Your tinfoil helmet is on way too tight. Congress ends EVERY legislative season with Adjournment Sine Die. It commences the next legislative season in accordance with the Constitution, Art. I, sec. 4, clause 2, and it has its own rules for the summoning of a special session. I can't be sure, but I'll bet that none of the members of the Congress that convened on July 4, 1861, are still in office.

Originally Posted by David Merrill

.... The War Between the States destroyed the de jure 13th Amendment and it was "subsequently never ratified" (Afroyim v. Rusk) into the new federal Constitution. However it is still in full force and effect in the Territory of Colorado.

There was no "de jure 13th Amendment" until the adoption of the 1865 Amendment abolishing slavery. There is no "new federal constitution" and "the Territory of Colorado" ceased to exist long ago.

In any case, all these red herrings have NOTHING whatever to do with the Gold Clause Resolution of 1933 nor with the Federal Reserve.