Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aksis
We decided to use "Vatican City, General Delevery" for the foreign address as a work-a-round because "Universal Kingdom of God, Earth" was not yet in the software's list for foreign residence/domicile (I did use a 'local mailing location', in the "if mailing location is different from address" section, for the mail box in front of the house I lease a room in).
|
I am curious what it says on your WSA Passport? Is that what you are talking about? Or is that a work-a-round at BoA? |
On my passport it says,
For the 'place of birth': Universal Kingdom of God, Earth
At the back of the document, for Domicile: Universal Kingdom of God, Earth
(image attached)
As an aside, for those that don't believe in God in some way, shape or form, I would describe it (the U.K.G.) as the 'state of Nature'. The affirmation, "I am in the Universe, on Earth.", is a base reality and elementry truth.
Now, in the software on the BofA computers, in the section for "Nationality" (or what ever the exact word is), it only has a drop-down list and not an open field.
This list is limited, and "Universal Kingdom of God", "God's Kingdom", etc.. was not in the list.
So, to create the account, *
something* was needed for this field, and the only option that was even close was Vatican City... so it was used as a temporary work-a-round and I will simply correct the record with a written Notice... they (B of A) already has a verbal Notice and the manager is aware of all of this.
Now, it is still important to both B of A and me to have a physical mailing location where I can collect post, so there is that *other* section for "mailing location if different". In this section, I used the
address of the mailbox in front of the house.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
The problem I have with the WSA Passport is of course the falsification of calling "Name" = "Surname" which substitution is admitted on a different document - Page 5. So I had to put my name there instead of my Surname or family's name even though if you look at Page 5 they say it is the Surname. I have talked this over with the attorney there and they may correct that soon to:
Surname/familia nomo
Like expressed on Page 5.
|
David, looking at the image of your passport, even if the surname/family name VAN PELT appeared, I would see that you are the Coloradin, and not the STATE OF COLORADO and/or the U.S. person/citizen: DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT
note: I only use all caps for some names because that is the custom/slang in commerce used to distinguish between a 'natural person' and a 'legal person', yet the real distinction is what constitutes the person - Not the name... one is flesh, blood and bone, and the other is paper & ink... People are obviously not paper & ink... but it can be used to create persona[s] for them.
______________________________________________
[M]
Anyways, back on topic:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
I think for now, until I process what you are saying in your post fully anyway, I reconcile our research by pointing out that four quarters, silver or not still equal a $1 FRN.
|
Granted, the 4 quarters support the $1 FRN, but the $1 FRN dosn't support the 4 quarters. Yet, they are considered exchangeable on an equal basis.
In other words,
lawful money is
legal tender, but
legal tender isn't nececarly
lawful money.
The 4 quarters (non-silver) are obligations of the United States, whereas the Federal Reserve Note is an obligation of the Federal Reserve Bank and the United States.
I simply liked the idea of using the coins when initially crediting the account... thus, there can be no confusion about if I was tendering it as an obligation of the US or the FRB... or both[?]. It is, without a doubt,
lawful money.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
I believe our truths are further reconciled into one truth by the fact that if you cash your paycheck for coins [without the non-endorsment verbage], the bank still fractionalizes on your funds in private credit. It makes no record of whether they gave you paper or coin.
|
Well that makes sense. I can see this as well.
I wasn't talking about cashing a paycheck for coins
[without the non-endorsment verbage], and then depositing them for credit to the account, and then making a withdrawal... I hope readers didn't get the impression that's what I was talking about.
I didn't have an account at any bank, and was sharing how I went about very recently opening one. It was just
a way, not the
only way. I didn't have a check to non-endorse, only obligations of the United States in the form of FRN's.
If I already had an account, I would simply make it clear that, a) I recently became aware of the distinction between
lawful money and
private credit and intend to use
lawful money and wished I always had been, etc.. and; b) The bill of exchange is deposit for credit on account in lawful money, or exchanged for obligations of the United States [U.S. Notes, U.S. coin, etc..].
Note: U.S. Notes are like U.S. coin in that, they are both obligations of the United States.
Federal Reserve notes are obligations of the Federal Reserve bank and obligations of the United States.
I guess I could have simply credited the account with the "obligations of the United States" in the form of FRN's and it would have been
kind of the same, but I was going to have the banker who opened the account make an affidavit [that i am drafting] attesting that the account was opened and credited with U.S. coins (obvious lawful money)... I have no doubt that he would sign under the penalty of purjury to this fact.
I understand it may seem like I am walking around the block to get next door... prehaps I am.
By the way, where is it disclosed that the use of the private credit of the Federal Reserve bank creates an irrecusable obligation to file a tax return and creates a tax liability? Is this statute/code only applicable to US citizens?
I don't believe that non-U.S. citizens can even have an income tax liability. That's like Mexico saying you have to pay Mexico's income taxes... frivolous!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
So if you use the verbiage or some kind of non-endorsement, it makes no difference whether you get your lawful money in coin or in US Notes in the form of FRNs.
|
I see this as well. I simply find it more cumbersom to explain "U.S. Notes in the form of FRN's" to a highschool grad, then to explain that FRN's are different then U.S. coin (which is obvious) and that US coin is constitutinal/lawful money, where as FRN's are both a public & private matter via contract/legal principles -
legal tender.
Once an account is credited via deposits of
lawful money, one can simply use a debit card or
draw bills of exchange (
write checks) on the account... what else could be withdrawn from such an account?
You get out of it - what you put into it. Right?
Much love,
Christopher Theodore
of the family of Rhodes
P.S. I see the joke, but there is still the
good faith efforts... and that would be the punchline....
P.P.S. I hope this clarifies my previous post... forgive the redundancy of some points...
