My first discharge of debt back in '03

[Myk:Hill]

One day I went to get teeth cleaned and x-rays and had a coupon with me,
when I was done the front desk clerk who I later found out to be the office
manager later, said i did not put an ssn on the info request sheet an
said I don't need one since I am settling in full today and have a coupon.
Said that her computer billing will not let her enter the info in without
an ssn... Longer story shorter she wrote one up by hand. I looked at
it and asked her where the discount was an she said since i did not give
her an ssn she did not apply it.
Told her this was false advertisement and since she declined my offer to
settle in full according to the advertised price that she would be responsible
for the bill and walked out as she shouted it will would be sent to the home
office for collections, said no problem send me a bill and will see who pays
for it.
Sure enough a generated bill from home office arrived in the PO Box, I wrote them a letter
explaining exactly what happened, also sent my Copyright with UCC-1 along with the
attached docs to this posting.
They could not have scrambled fast enough to delete my name from the computer
of the home office, called 3 weeks later an they could not find me in the system,
searched by different spelling of names and address e.t.c,,, nothing was found.

AAAhhhhh,,,,, Miller time  ;-)

--
"History repeats and life emulates"
by; Silver Dollar

[Darren & Sharon]

Dang, this is how I'll pay my $1500 dentist's bill!  Yeah!

 

 -- Sharon

--
*** DISCLAIMER: Free Speech Only. For educational and/or entertainment purposes only. Not intended to be construed as legal, medical, financial, religious, or other advice. Without Prejudice, Without Recourse, All Rights Reserved, No Liability Assumed, No Value Assured. Read at your own risk!***

[Myk:Hill]

you can get the certificate paper from a office supply store. I would also
would suggest putting your seal on it to give the bond your energy.

Also if they give you any problems, make copies of everything and include
this attached notice you will need to modify for sending to the corporate
attorney.

[Janet Pytynia]

Why don't you just have the IRS take care of the bill through the 1099 OID process?  Everyone gets paid and everyone is happy!  --- On Sun, 6/15/08, Darren & Sharon <carls...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Myk:Hill]

I am working on that starting tomorrow,  think I know how it works but want to put
the research in tomorrow to know for sure then I will put the ginny pig form out there
to test the waters.

[Janet Pytynia]

Why don't you join our group?  There is a plethora of information available, with verifiable results.  We have a gold mine of a files section.  You don't have to "test the waters," it's all there to be utilized if you can follow directions. --- On Sun, 6/15/08, Myk:Hill <jea...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Myk:Hill]

Which group are you speaking of?

[Janet Pytynia]

redemptio...@yahoogroups.com

[hal]

UCC 1?

[Janet Pytynia]

What do you mean?  Yes, I have a UCC-1 on file, but it's not an issue with the 1099 OID process, if that's what you mean. --- On Sun, 6/15/08, hal <hgw...@yahoo.com> wrote:

[Janet Pytynia]

This could have been taken care of so easily with the 1099 OID method.  You send in the forms (bills) along with a 1040-V (voucher to pay the bill) to the IRS and they send a check for the amount due.  You can then submit it to the dental office.  If they balk, just send a letter to IRS CID and you'll get all the respect you want and need.  IRS has paid the bill, the dentist can't complain.   I received an offer in the mail recently for a water machine I'm interested in.  I filled out the forms necessary and will be sending them to the company and the IRS tomorrow.  I'll bet you $10 to a donut that the machine is forwarded without haste.  I'll probably get the machine before the check from the IRS.

--- On Sat, 6/14/08, Myk:Hill <jea...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Myk:Hill <jea...@gmail.com> Subject: My first discharge of debt back in '03 To: sj...@googlegroups.com

[Myk:Hill]

yep, I am already on there. Posted a couple messages too.

aka.. Silver Dollar

[Myk:Hill]

keep us up to date and let us know what happens on that good or bad. We
can learn from both.

thanks.

[hal]

Janet~
 What I was driving at is the UCC en totem is De Facto and to utilize the De Facto "benefits and privileges'" one must contract in. Additionally, "contracting in" is no piecemeal deal; it's definitely all or none!
~Hal~

[Israel Perl]

Hi which Group are you talking here ?

 

---

[Janet Pytynia]

Redemptio...@yahoogroups.com --- On Mon, 6/16/08, Israel Perl <perl...@frontiernet.net> wrote:

[Darren & Sharon]

It would be even better if you purchased the security basketweave bond paper from this site:  http://www.paperworks.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Category_Code=SEC-SPP

Also, my research tells me the seal (right thumbprint in red ink) is not so much for "energy" alone as for proof that you are coming from the private side, rather than from the public side as the DEBTOR...

 

-- Sharon :)

[Myk:Hill]

My experience with bonding and other processes has been is that the seal
is your "Marque" whether it be by a stamper or by a thumb print.

Since the bond certificate is just the Proof of a Security that exists it does
not need to be on any special bond paper. The cheap certificate paper at
office depot or similar will do just fine.

[Eileen]

The bond is proof of a security?  I have not read that anywhere.  What is the security?

----- Original Message -----

From: Myk:Hill

To: sj...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2008 7:40 AM

Subject: Re: My first discharge of debt back in '03

[Myk:Hill]

Every bond needs an indemnity in which to secure it.
Indemnify = to provide security for financial reimbursement to an individual or person.

You get a bill from a collector, a coupon "remittance" is at the bottom, this is a request
for credit to compensate for some kind of loss (Offer of Indemnity).
Then you do your "Accepted as Value, Returned for settlement, discharge and closure"
on it. This is indemnifying the requester giving them credit and holding them harmless
in the transaction. The bond certificate you provide is just an added insurance instrument
securing the substance(Credit) should they suffer any additional losses in the transaction.

Your creating a win/win situation, if the debt is valid, the process it and are compensated
for their claim. If they do not process it and hold the bond still attempting to charge you
then they can get nailed for securities fraud, most corporate attorney's will advise
them to remove the account and send the paperwork to the shredder... you win.

The Revenue boys up in DC got one of these from me and they handled it like a hot
potatoe , sent the bond back to me in a express mail envelope with no explanation.

Myk

[Darren & Sharon]

I believe he is talking here about the birth certificate, which is an actual negotiable instrument.  That is what is backing (indemnifying) the bond which is sent to the treasury to open up the treasury account, and to take control over your exemption.

 

-- Sharon

[Darren & Sharon]

Myk, per your note below, I am still learning and so am wondering how exactly they go about processing it?  Thanks for any info, Myk!!!

 

-- Sharon

On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Myk:Hill <jea...@gmail.com> wrote:

...If the debt is valid, they process it and are compensated

for their claim. If they do not process it and hold the bond still attempting to charge you
then they can get nailed for securities fraud, most corporate attorney's will advise

them to remove the account and send the paperwork to the shredder... you win.*** DISCLAIMER: Free Speech Only. For educational and/or entertainment purposes only. Not intended to be construed as legal, medical, financial, religious, or other advice. Without Prejudice, Without Recourse, All Rights Reserved, No Liability Assumed, No Value Assured. Read at your own risk!***

[Myk:Hill]

It is both noted on the bond and a separate sheet with instructions.
attached is an example of a bond an a indemnity, they are not paired up
but the wording is there for you to see.

[Darren & Sharon]

Humm...  The wording on the A4V looks practically identical to the information given in The Redemption Manual (myredemption.net/files, use password "eagle2002" to download)...  Did you ever see this material before?

 

It appears to me that you are basically telling the bondholder to negotiate it as a check via their bank account, how do the banks usually take this?  Do you know?

 

Thanks again, Myk!

 

-- Sharon :) 

--

[Darren & Sharon]

ALSO, I have been wondering why the A4V stamp always says "Non-Negotiable."  Aren't we actually trying to get them to negotiate it via their bank?  Or does "non-negotiable" merely mean the bank is not permitted to stellionize and fractionalize the bond in order to generate 90% more public debt (thereby devaluing the dollar even further)...  -- Sharon

--

[Myk:Hill]

You are correct in where I got some information from, this was back in 2003
when I was first learning and testing the waters. I of course looked up the
local State statutes for processing a bond and other resources so that I knew
how to prepare if they had refused it and what recourse I had.

Rice MCclouds material made a lot of since to me so that is where I started
from but not what I do now which is still taking material from many resources
but creating my own method and wording when it comes to putting things into
action.
So many people in this movement are like drones, they go to all these seminars,
pay all this money and then never do anything with it, don't study enough and
just wait for the next seminar while they BS on e-groups about things they have
read on postings of other groups. I can never find a good study partner locally
because nobody is willing to go to the extensive levels at which I operate at.
These people in my opinion should just get the best attorney they can find
and get it over with.

[Darren & Sharon]

What, you mean file BK? 

 

I actually spent considerable time myself, yes in person, researching US Codes last week.  I had already studied relevant CFR regulations last summer.  Came upon some real goodies!  IMHO.

 

As a result, I was able to fine tune/tweak Kevin Hines bond, so now we have Siren's version available if interested.

 

Recall we are told that when we name HJR-192 our instruments can be ignored, as HJR-192 was repealed (ostensibly).  However, if we mention the relevant US Code, which is Title 31 USC 5118, they have to respond in accord with the law, and accept our instruments.  Ostensibly.

 

-- S

[Darren & Sharon]

Oh, just for good measure, see attached...  -- S

[Myk:Hill]

Read the footnotes of the statute and you just might find out why it is ignored.

[Darren & Sharon]

Nope, don't see it.  Care to expound, Myk?  I would sure love an exposition!  -- S

[Myk:Hill]

Possession of Gold Coins and Bullion
The possession of gold coins and bullion was prohibited except under Government license by Ex. Ord. No. 6260, eff. Aug. 28, 1933. That prohibition was revoked by Ex. Ord. No. 11825, Dec. 31, 1974, 40 F.R. 1003, eff. Dec. 31, 1974. See notes set out under section 95a of Title 12, Banks and Banking.

Ex. Ord. No. 11825. Revocation of Executive Orders Pertaining to Regulation of Acquisition of, Holding of, or Other Transactions in Gold

Section 2. The revocation, in whole or in part, of such prior Executive orders relating to regulation on the acquisition of, holding of, or other transactions in gold shall not affect any act completed, or any right accruing or accrued, or any suit or proceeding finished or started in any civil or criminal cause prior to the revocation, but all such liabilities, penalties, and forfeitures under the Executive orders shall continue and may be enforced in the same manner as if the revocation had not been made.

This order shall become effective on December 31, 1974.

Gerald R. Ford.

The key words your attorney friend mentioned in his Notice and Demand were:
"Positive Law". They the government are acting under "Non-Positive Law" ..aka
Color of Law, not real law. So for someone to bring a Bond in based on HJR-192
in a Criminal or Civil proceeding is unenforceable, they would have had to gone
to a local Administrative Court first, get the Declaratory Judgment and that is
the evidence that could have been entered into the court. It is the Judgment
that monetizes the claim so that it could be brought into a Criminal or Civil
court .. aka Civil claims or Commercial crimes from the opposing party.
Do you see now why people are beating their heads against the wall in the
court systems over this junk?

From: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode12/usc_sec_12_00000095---a000-notes.html

Myk

[Darren & Sharon]

All-righty.  Which one of these has to do with HJR-192 of June 5, 1933? 

 

"Section 1. Executive Order No. 6260 of August 28, 1933, as amended by Executive Order No. 6359 of October 25, 1933, Executive Order No. 6556 of January 12, 1934, Executive Order No. 6560 of January 15, 1934." 

I ask only since the above EO's were the ones repealed, as you know.  HJR-192 lives on in Title 31 USC 5118, and is STILL RELATIVE in that it states that 1) all obligations due on US funds are obligations of the US government, and 2) legal tender is whatever legal tender is deemed to be at the time of discharge. 

 

Ergo, these are the facts that we are calling upon when using an "Accepted for Value and Returned for Discharged" action. 

 

I still am grappling with the information that a bill sent to me requesting payment is actually the payment/discharge of the debt.  HOW the blazes is that even possible?

 

Also, per your explanation in blue below, does that explain why my Silveer Surety Bond which was placed in the American General Finance Lawsuit file prior to the judgment did not work to payoff the debt?  Is that something we were supposed to do AFTER the judgment came through?  Thanks to $5K atty fees, the debt is now at over $7K.  Egads!

 

-- Sharon :)

[Myk:Hill]

- Those foot notes are on the same page as the 31 USC 5118 right below it,
whereas showing that these apply to that statute. I guess someday, someway something will sink in. That prohibition was revoked by Ex. Ord. No. 11825, Dec. 31, 1974. Another words this HJR 192 died with it.
Kennedy wanted to bring the FRNS back to substance based notes,
but banks could not do that and then extend fractional reserve system
up to 30 to 1 ratios, it would have made it unlawful to do that so
he had to be removed as they said.

Check out youtube videos: "Debt as Money"


- The remittance suggest a letter of credit created only if we accept
it as such, they are apply to us for credit so they can settle/zero out
the account. Due to the above explanation, this credit is based on
absolutely nothing, it is just numbers created in a computer somewhere.

- Silver Surety Bonds are for bonding a case up via secured bond,
which means you better have about 10 pieces of silver or whatever
the market price is on silver you holding to back it. Once they have
received the bond into the file it has been accepted and so you
would use the silver to pay the debt if you lost the case, otherwise
if they refuse you have every right to discharge through alternative
means, mark accepted as value / return for settlement, discharge and closure of accounting, sign date it with 1099 e.t.c, if they look at you clueless ask them for a CD Form.

Myk
-

[Darren & Sharon]

Oh, do you mean a CID form?  Criminal Investigation Division? 

 

Ok, I must beg to differ with you here, Myk, on 192 being repealed.  Title 31 USC 5118 deals with multiple "resolutions" all rolled into one category, "Gold Clauses."  The ENTIRETY of Title 31 USC 5118 would be repealed if the processes behind this were done away in full.  The portion that was done away is listed as repealed, and is stricken from the code; it is then reworded to conform with CURRENT law; ergo, anything that is stated in Title 31 USC 5118 now, at this present date, IS CURRENT LAW.

 

It's the law, man.  Read it.  Section (d) is the portion of HJR-192 which is still in full force and effect. 

 

So I don't understand why you think it was completely repealed, ONLY the portion dealing with ownership of gold being illegal was ever repealed by Ford in 1974.  Here is the actual wording for HJR-192, you will see that nowhere does it mention the restriction on owning gold since that law was still to be passed later that year/early the following year.

 

Thanks for the link to "Debt as Money" and I would request you watch "Tom Schauf , Federal Reserve, Modern Money Mechanics Parts 1 through 5," here's the link to Part 1:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDun7uNo138

 

Ok, tell me what I am still not getting here?  Thanks Myk!

 

-- Sharon :)

[Darren & Sharon]

P.S. I would not have done the Silver Surety Bond if I had not been prepared to back it up.  -- S

[Darren & Sharon]

Also, WHY would I send THEM, the "Judgment Creditor" the OID?  What will that accomplish?  I would much rather send it to the IRS along with my 1040 and 1040-V and have the IRS reverse the "debt."  -- S