FRNs and HJR 192 Repealed

[freeindeed]

My friend has just provided me with the law that repealed both HJR 192 and the current Federal Reserve Notes that are in circulation today. He received it from someone that frequents this site I believe. This was done on September 13, 1982 96 Stat 1068, 96 STAT 1074 Public Law 97-258.

Since I have not been posting here for very long if this has already been provided on this forum I apologize. I find this very interesting.

You will notice that PL 95-147 just modified HJR 192 but PL 97-258 effectively repealed it along with the FRN.

[Shoonra]

Like so much on this website, this is only half-right.

The 1982 Act cited is the re-enactment of Title 31 of the U.S. Code as positive law. It consists of the text of all the sections of the new (positive law) title 31, plus some brief provisions repealing the old version and any loose ends from other titles of the code.

It struck out the few surviving remnants of the so-called HJR 192 (altho its definition of "obligations" still exists in 31 US Code sec 5118(d)). But it didn't "repeal the Federal Reserve Notes". As a matter of fact, part of that 1982 Act was current 31 US Code sec 5103: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes ....) are legal tender for all debts. ...." 96 Stat 980.

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

...But it didn't "repeal the Federal Reserve Notes". As a matter of fact, part of that 1982 Act was current 31 US Code sec 5103: "United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes ....) are legal tender for all debts. ...." 96 Stat 980.

Can you clarify that Shoonra. The way you've mixed past and present tense is quite confusing. Did you mean to say it was incorporated into the current....?

[freeindeed]

Answer this Shoonra; are the Federal Reserve notes that HJR 192 was referring to the same as the Federal reserve notes that Title 31 is referring too? Unlike the Federal Reserve note under HJR 192, the Federal reserve note under Title 31 has no authority to be released into the general ciculation. When HJR 192 was repealed the Federal Reserve note that was declared to be legal tender under HJR 192 was repealed along with it. That means that all Federal Reserve notes issued after 1982 are now unlawful and fraudulent. If I am incorrect please show where I am mistaken. (emphasis added)

USC Title 31 Sec. 5103. - Legal tender " United States coins and currency (including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks) are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. Foreign gold or silver coins are not legal tender for debts. (emphasis added)

Originally Posted by HJR 192

All coins and currencies of the United States (including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations)hereunto and hereafter coined or issued, shall be legal tender for all debts, for public and private, public charges, taxes, duties, and dues, except gold coins, when below the standard weight and limit of tolerance provided by law for the single piece, shall be legal tender only at valuation in proportion to their actual weight. (emphasis added)

Title 12 USC Sec. 411. Issuance to reserve banks; nature of obligation; redemption

Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of
making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal
reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose,
are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United
States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and
Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public
dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the
Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of
Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank. (emphasis added)

[Shoonra]

The Title 31 that was enacted into positive law in 1982 is the same (with subsequent amendments) that is currently in the US Code. And section 5103 that appears now was part of the 1982 enactment (with the same section number), so the 1982 Act did not "repeal" FRNs.

Federal Reserve Notes were legal tender long before the 1933 HJR, "HJR 192" did not make FRNs legal tender.

[freeindeed]

Shoonra,

The FRNs of HJR 192 according to what I have provided were made legal tender according to HJR 192. The ones that say: "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, were made legal tender and later repealed according to the documents I have provided. The FRNs that were before HJR 192 had no authority then to be circulated in the general populous and those FRNs were Federal reserve notes not Federal Reserve notes.

You are good at dancing around the issue. You have not shown any evidence that Federal Reserve notes were not made legal tender by the passage of HJR 192 nor have you effectively rebutted any of the documentation I have provided that supports my contention that the FRNs of HJR 192 have been repealed.

What part of, "Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized" don't you understand?!! The NO OTHER PURPOSE ARE AUTHORIZED means not to be circulated in the general populous. Federal Reserve notes are no longer legal tender since the authorizing law in HJR 192 has been repealed.

[Jerseee]

I am in agreement with Shoonra.

This needs to be read very carefully and not taken out of context. Lots of folks say that FRNs are not legal or unlawful. Through my experience, I have come to learn that FRNs are legal, provided that they are accepted. This is why I state that acceptance is key!

if you do not accept something then its no good (for you). read the resolution carefully and you will find that it does not repeal---it enacts certain things.

We have discussed this before in the UCC forum and Jason W, corrected me a few of years ago on the accuracy of what I was reading.

[freeindeed]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

read the resolution carefully and you will find that it does not repeal---it enacts certain things.

Did I say that the resolution repealed anything? Correct me if I am wrong but what I said was the resolution was repealed in 1982, which it was. Are we talking about the same thing? HJR 192 did enact certain things. One of those things was that Federal Reserve notes became legal tender, which Federal Reserve notes were not beforehand. When HJR 192 was repealed Federal Reserve notes became no longer legal tender. Now you can agree with Shoonra all you want, but that does not make it so.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

I am in agreement with Shoonra.

This needs to be read very carefully and not taken out of context. Lots of folks say that FRNs are not legal or unlawful. Through my experience, I have come to learn that FRNs are legal, provided that they are accepted. This is why I state that acceptance is key!

if you do not accept something then its no good (for you). read the resolution carefully and you will find that it does not repeal---it enacts certain things.

We have discussed this before in the UCC forum and Jason W, corrected me a few of years ago on the accuracy of what I was reading.

First glance of the bill reveals to me why it has never come to my attention. It seems insignificant to extend the range of insurable (admiralty; because the contract between the IMF and the US is bottomry in nature) entities to credit unions.

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

The important part of the bill to pay attention to is that secret Jamaica-Rambouillet Accord struck between the French and Americans removing gold from stabilizing the exchange rate of the dollar domestic and foreign. Replacing the stabilizer with the Special Drawing Rights is the essence of confidence games; what Jerseee says about acceptance.

On the other side of the coin however, is endorsement. Endorsement is the papertrail proving your acceptance. Do you support the Tontine on human flesh and bone? If you pay for stuff with FRNs your answer is of course yes - you fool, you bankrupt, the next poor fool into fooling the next poor fool. But what gets you is being foolish enough to leave a papertail proving you are a confidence man.

Can you blame any responsible fiduciary wearing a black robe for simply informing you he has jurisdiction?


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Jerseee]

Originally Posted by freeindeed

Did I say that the resolution repealed anything? Correct me if I am wrong but what I said was the resolution was repealed in 1982, which it was. Are we talking about the same thing? HJR 192 did enact certain things. One of those things was that Federal Reserve notes became legal tender, which Federal Reserve notes were not beforehand. When HJR 192 was repealed Federal Reserve notes became no longer legal tender. Now you can agree with Shoonra all you want, but that does not make it so.

Friendindeed,

My agreeing with Shoonra does not make it so--I never said that it did. However, believe what you will. the keys to this whole thing lies in the Constitution. One side of this country is based in commerce (fiction), the other side is a republic (soveriegn). The fictional side has its currency and the republican side has its money.

THe ficitional side has its rules and the sovereign side have their laws. The fictional side have their citizens and the republican side have their sovereigns. The fictional side has their residences and the sovereign side has their dwellings. the fictional side has their drivers and the sovereign side has thier travelers. So on and so forth. Its all about acceptance--if you accept that HJR 192 is repealed, then its your truth. So believe what you will...I know what I do and what I do works.

I still use (if need be) HJR 192 and I haven't had it refuted yet.

have fun