franklin
Forum Replies Created
Thanks Riverway…
Off the economic point…but still related to fg and sedm re Consent being necessary for the government to impose on sovereigns…is Hank Reardon's speech in court where the panel seeks his consent to do him in…and he eloquently tells them that he will not help them in the slightest. An ancestor of CH no doubt! 🙂
Franklin
Poldon wrote…
Quote:In the meantime, I'll post my progress if anyone else is interested.Many people would probably be interested in how you work with this issue. If you're successful…then others can try your strategy.
If you're unsuccessful…others can look at your strategy and see where you might tweak it. 🙂
Good luck.
Franklin
Bing you wrote…
Quote:Hey, if my therapist is unable to persuade me who I am after 9+ years, how the heck do you expect me to know who I am?? LOLHuh?
I am a lost soul searching for Truth. And at last count, I gots 5 distinct personalities.
Question: Does your therapist bill you separately for each personality? And do you do group therapy with all five of you?
Franklin
Bing,
Thanks. Went back and rechecked it. The new link just worked for me.
Franklin
When I was a student…friends and I where passing through Reno on our way to California. To keep customers from counting cards…the blackjack dealers… all women…wore sheer nylon blouses and no bras! No joke!
😆 😆 😆 😆 😆
So presumptions do have a useful function! We can take them seriously…nonchalantly…or we can use them to laugh. Good Post.. 😆
- Quote:I am planning on buying a house soon, but I need to research how to get a mortgage loan without an SSN. Has anyone else here researched whether or not this is possible or done it themselves?
I recently met with a loan agent, but he said he wasn't sure if it was possible without entering an SSN into the system. He was really nice about it and is willing to find out from people in the company, but anything I can provide him with would be helpful.
There is a lot of info about opening non-interest bearing bank accounts, but I'm coming up empty on searches for obtaining loans. Obviously, if I didn't need a loan and could pay cash, buying a home would be a snap. I just have a feeling I've got a long road ahead on this one. sad.gif
Thanks in advance for any help anyone can give.
If you're using a small local bank you can ask them if they are planning to sell the loan. If not they may just need an in house number to make their computers work. Then they can just assign you a number.
Next…this real estate market is definitely a buyer's market. Many people want to sell but cannot find a buyer. There are probably many who would be willing to take back the mortgage themselves, secured by the property, for monthly income. Instead of coming up with all of the money…the buyer just needs a decent down payment so the seller can be confident you won't just walk away from the contract.
Some mortgages are assumable…that's another route…but the mortgage holder…likely a bank…may require a SSN. FHA mortgages used to be fully assumable with no hassle…but I don't know if that's still true.
However, if I wanted to find a frugal seller who has not maxed out the equity in the property (because those loans would have to be paid off at sale)…all I would need do to start the ball rolling is pick my neighborhood…put up a notice on a supermarket bulletin board…put flyers on cars and front doors with my contact info on them and see who calls. I would look at the property…ask about outstanding loans and other liens…whether the seller needed all their money now or whether they could hold the mortgage (which they could sell in the secondary market if need be)…etc. There are many frugal sellers who simply want to change their life-style and had counted on selling their property and moving…say to Florida…and the real estate bust has stalled them.
I would think of myself as someone who wants to solve someone's problem while solving my own at the same time. That's called Win-Win and it's by far the best way to enter the real estate market no matter what the economy is doing.
Making a private contract with no bank involved is also much more honest. I'd be using money that is directly due the seller. The banks would simply write numbers in my account and lend nothing (by law they cannot lend you anything from their assets…so there is no legal debt to repay). In a private contract there is a real debt owed to real people…and an honest person will pay them what is truly owed.
Good luck.
Thanks for this post admin. I agree…everyone should listen to these broadcasts.
According to Selgas's research…It is the District Directors who are authorized and required to give notice to keep books and records…make assessments…and collections.
His FOIA for the names of District Directors produced the response that there were no District Directors!!
So…there is no delegation of authority down to the masked Revenue Agents (of Department of Treasury — Puerto Rico).
Unbelievable. No…I take that back. I would believe that US, Inc. is capable of any kind of criminal act.
Now…here's a question…
If there is no office and officer to do the above tasks…wouldn't that mean that even federal employees could not be given notice to keep books and records…or have assessments and collections made against them? That the code applies to no one at all?
Since most freedom lovers are highly independent in their thinking and behaving…it is difficult for them to band together to combine their efforts to restore the constitutional republic.
Enforcing the 10th Amendment through the states' legislatures seems an ideal way to achieve unity of purpose combined with unity of action to usurp the criminal/terrorists that make up the US, Inc.
Interesting…interesting.
Now I'm not going to be able to look with the same eyes at the Renaissance and Baroque art that adorns catholic churches…and museums…around the Western world.
The pictures are usually full of putti (naked infant boys with wings) that look exactly like cupid. As that wisely skeptical TV personality Marge Simpson would say…Hmmmmm? <_<
And in a possibly related pagan vein…there's the claim that the Catholic priesthood descends directly from Jesus himself.
Howsomever…a pontifex (today's equivalent of a bishop) was a member of the council of the ancient Roman priests…
and today the pope is called the Roman Pontiff…and his actual title is Pontifex Maximus…or the chief bishop…the Bishop of Rome…first among equals.
And the current Pontifex Max is taking dictation from Angela (as in angel) Jerkel…the presumptive Popessa…on what catholics must believe about what is called the Shoa. (although there is no comment on the current Palestinian Shoa). Hmmmm… <_<
And I've read somewhere…and I don't remember where…that “Liberty”…the statue that sits atop the capitol in DC…is actually an image of Persephone…wife of Hades and goddess of the underworld…where all the oil is. Hmmmm…. <_<
Politics under color of religion perhaps. Hmmm…..<_<
Stija…
Lighten up. Tell us a joke…
Those aren't necessarily the views of the poster. That's why it's in this forum.
It's called irony…it's an imaginary list of the underlying thoughts of people who actually do believe there is a difference between the (formerly) two parties.
There…now you can have a good laugh 😀
franklin
Admin
I wasn't suggesting that FG findings were rebuttable if only people had debating skills and would use them.
Making an effort to rebut someone from your own premises is a powerful way to learn where you may need further study.
If justaboutmypolitics had brought his “understanding” of the 14th Amendment to the forums…he may have been able to continue on the road to more complete genuine understanding. As the response to mcoffeetea shows…there are a lot of knowledgeable people who want to help that process.
On the practical side…you can't employ effectively something you don't understand. And many people have argued 14th Amendment issues and found they were walking on water…unsuccessfully.
I'd hoped to suggest that debating is a way to assess the soundness of one's conclusions out in the open…not commenting on the soundness of FG research.
Apologies if I seem to have missed my own point. <_<
franklin
Admin wrote what I think is an excellent syllabus for any newbie and an excellent review for others…like myself.
Quote:The following video is BUNK. It confuses statutory and constitutional citizenship, which are not the same. The video was posted by one of our forum members, whose name is JustAboutMyPolitics:http://www.youtube.com/user/JustAboutMyPolitics
We found the above website mentioned in the profile of Mr. JustAboutMyPolitics on these forums. The false conclusions indicated in the video are thoroughly rebutted in:
Why You are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt…hyANational.pdf
We agree with JustAboutMyPolitics that:
1. We have become enfranchised. See:
Government Instituted Slavery Using Franchises, Form #05.030
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/Franchises.pdf
2. We became enfranchised through SS and Medicare and other government benefits. See:
The Government “Benefits” Scam, Form #05.040
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
3. A “U.S. citizen” is a statutory creation of Congress who works for the federal corporation. See:
Why You are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt…hyANational.pdf
4. People in a state of the Union are “nonresidents” but not aliens. See:
Nonresident Alien Position, Form #05.020
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/NonresidentAlienPosition.pdf
HOWEVER, we disagree that:
1. The Fourteenth Amendment was the cause.
2. The Fourteenth Amendment created any new status of citizenship that didn't exist before.
3. The Fourteenth Amendment makes constitutional or statutory citizens equivalent. They are NOT.
4. The Fourteenth Amendment makes anyone in a state the proper subject of any federal legislation.
5. The Fourteenth Amendment changed the definition of “United States” within the meaning of the Constitution to include federal territories or possessions. It did NOT.
The fact of the matter is that all the problems stem from the abuse of words of art, and that because there are three definitions of “United States”, then there are, ipso facto, three types of “U.S. citizens”. The one who is the proper subject of federal franchises is NOT the one mentioned in the Fourteenth Amendment, but the statutory “U.S. citizen” domiciled on federal territory and mentioned in 8 USC 1401. Statutory and constitutional citizens are, in fact, mutually exclusive groups. JustAboutMyPolitics, like most others, is a victim of presumption and fails to distinguish that the context is the method for determining which “citizen” is described in the Fourteenth Amendment and that the “United States” mentioned in that amendment refers to states of the Union and excludes any federal territory or possession, as admitted by the U.S. Supreme Court. In essence, words of art are being used to destroy the separation of powers that is the foundation of the Constitution. That abuse is thoroughly described in:
Government Conspiracy to Destroy the Separation of Powers, Form #05.023
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/SeparationOfPowers.pdf
We have been patiently waiting eight long years for anyone to disprove the research contained in the “Why you are a national” pamphlet and no one has done it so we have to conclude that JustAboutMyPolitics, like so many other Fourteenth Amendment conspiracy theorists, just doesn't “get it” and is engaging is religion, not reasonable belief based on evidence, in his video. For further details on why his Fourteenth Amendment views ( but certainly not ALL his views or even the majority of his views) are simply incorrect, see:
Flawed Tax Arguments to Avoid, Section 6.1
http://famguardian.org/Publications/Flawed…ArgsToAvoid.pdf
We might also add that it's not a crime to not “get it”. We were in that league for most of our lives. Welcome to the club and welcome to these forums to all those who finally realize that they have been deceived by a lying government and legal profession for most of their llives. The crime instead is not wanting to hear, read, or investigate the WHOLE truth or the REST of the story or not wanting to admit that one may be mistaken. On this subject, the Bible says:
It is a sad thing when people make the decision not to learn any further. And that seems at times to be the norm for most people. Especially when JustAboutMyPolitics had come so far in understanding. To go from the rational and demonstrated to the unsubstantiated and irrational…as though one followed logically from the other…is sad indeed.
One of the problems is education. In high school we had a debating team that went around debating other high school teams…and we rooted for them just as we did for the varsity sports teams. I went to a college where every incoming freshman had to learn the principles of debating both sides of any issue and take part in actual classroom debates.
Today people don't debate…taking a position and defending it on the grounds of logic or dismantling an opponent's position using the same methods.
Today people tend to simply dismiss others with whom they have a difference. Rather than making a case for their position…they simply protect it by ignoring those who would invite them to substantiate it.
That, I think, is why people do not rebut famguardian and sedm research. They simply don't know how to make a case for their own position and defend it properly…or how to show any flaws in someone's else's position. Instead…they become the most devoted followers of their own religion. Sad.
The closing line of this excellent video is…
If three hundred families can pursue world domination…then three hundred families can figure out how to stop them.
Has many excellent practical suggestions.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4…58889#01h22m45s
