Provost Marshalls to Serve Notice To Governors of All 50 States? Restore America

reply to post by Caulfield


I guess the plot thickens before our very eyes! Conspiracy potential about these movements is quite high - causality is suspect - players and provocateurs aren't clear - vigilance and caution advised. I'm not as convinced as Infinite and Libertygal that certain players are involved, but I am convinced of highly likely manipulation by parties as yet unknown.

gj

Originally posted by Caulfield
reply to post by ganjoa

 

Weird, one whois lookup I did had William Irving listed as "Owner" so to speak.

the world bank has access to your gold reserves at $42.50 an ounce
and have started to buy ever larger amount of gold

buy $42,000,000 dollars in gold @ $42.50= 1,000,000 ounces
sell $1,120,000.000 current market rate 3/4/10 1,000,000 ounces

profit for them = $1,078.000,000 = loss for americans

this gold moving outter you country and into the world bank will bunkrupt your country in no time

edit to note amount of gold being sold is unknow numbers are for demonstration of how selling gold at lower than current price is killing your reserves and feeding central bankers large sums of money




[edit on 4-4-2010 by XPLodER]

reply to post by ganjoa


One thing we both agree upon is your signature "Reveal Nothing Conceal Nothing". I respect and appreciate that and your feedback. My signature should be "X-File" related, The Truth is Out Where.

reply to post by XPLodER


we wont need gold if we can get our country back from these corporate criminals. bring the troops home put them on the border, jack up trade tariffs to bring our factories back, declare all forign debt false, and cutt taxes.

america will be rolling in gold in 3 years tops.

reply to post by Caulfield


And to follow up, there is no doubt in my mind that sites such as this are created and/or monitored to attract the right people for the wrong reasons, I may be paranoid, but I doubt very seriously that this site and many others are monitored, and as a result who knows what list we'll all end up on.

I meant they are being, not, not being

reply to post by Caulfield


*** Hey mods please delete if this is too off topic ***

Uh oh are you telling me that's not an original thought?
Sorry if I plagarized it from somewhere. My little motto means basically that I'm a private person willing to explore and discuss anything but reserve the right to an opaque private life. Reveal nothing of substance or risk about onself and the need to conceal anything does not exist. I thought it sounded catchy - I'm not advertising as a troll or disnfo agent


No offence taken or intended if I missed your point there. We are definitely in agreement and concurrence on the risks and implications, but I doubt there's much deep background checking going on for ATS posters we're getting stuff second hand at best, but please watch out for the ECHELON trigger words!

gj

[edit on 4-4-2010 by ganjoa]

No, I meant to say I really appreciate your signature, in all honesty, as well I was serious about what I might like as well, I sometimes come across the wrong way, miscommunication has been an issue for me, both verbal and written, lets put it this way, I'm still learning, thanks for making me aware.

[edit on 4-4-2010 by theyreadmymind]

Good Point, your absolutely right, issues of this nature should be addressed privately, we both did address good points though. I was hoping for a response from you about the traceroute information I gave you earlier, what are your thoughts on that, I can only trace a route to a specific point via standard icmp, but via tcp which is not blocked by routers I can get the entire route. Have you tried to do a traceroute to the site hosting the Gotfr.com, I'd like to know where your route ends?

SAM KENNEDY LIVE RIGHT NOW ON TAKE NO PRISONERS

ESSENTIAL LISTENING TONIGHT

Why aren't you, the monitors questioning my reply, I have seen various others withdrawn, so far from various servers I see all my posts being allowed, talk about conspiracy, I'm on the verge of 20 Posts, at this point, can I contact you directly? In the mean time lets chat, what do you say

Did anyone hear Sam say there's no such thing as a sovereign citizen? I believe he said it's an oxymoron and the proper term is sovereign person. Can anyone verify that?

[edit on 4-4-2010 by theyreadmymind]

Yes he was right. "Sovereign citizen" is an oxymoron

Citizen: Someone who takes an oath of allegiance to the state in return for a duty of protection. Agrees to abide by the rules and policies of the state. Sidenote, there are IN FACT no citizens because there is no duty to protect, for example you cannot sue the police because they failed to uphold their duty to protect you from being stabbed.

Sovereign: As in a king, Someone who is free to live and contract without retraint, ie license, permit etc, unless you injure others or commit fraud in your contracts.

Sovereign Citizen: an oxymoron, ie a big small/ dark white.

See Marc Stevens website, Adventures in legalland, for further indepth study.

The thing about the foreclosures was crap. I didn't hear the whole show, but did hear him say that because they delivered these papers, and this process has been started, no one can be foreclosed on anymore unless the bank can show proof of the debt.

He went on a while about notes and how lending works, blah blah.

That's not news... and not because of anything they did.

Mortgage lenders sell your debt almost as soon as you close on your house. It is sold for the highest value, and can be traded multiple times. If, during the course of that trading, they fail to keep the copy of the contract you signed, you do not have to pay it off. The debt is discharged.

You can google it and see it's been going on long before this all started.

The date on this article is 2007.

What the Bank Must Prove to Sue You for Foreclosure
December 12, 2007, 11:25 am

The first element that the foreclosing bank has to prove is that there was a legally binding contract between the lender and the homeowners. After a loan has been sold numerous times, it may seem quite confusing to the average homeowner of who actually owns the mortgage. In fact, with the amount of technical, incomprehensible adjustable rate mortgages and interest-only loans and subprime mortgages that were packaged and sold off to hedge funds, financial institutions, and investors, there may be some very tough questions that the lender would have to answer if challenged on this element. A court in Ohio recently dismissed fourteen foreclosure cases because the lender could not prove they owned the loans, so this is not as easy as it would seem.

And after listening to the radio broadcast, and the way he basically took credit for you being able to accomplish this, this isn't deceptive?

reply to post by Libertygal


If he hasn't done anything illegal, I don't really care what he does. I think he was just disseminating public information. If he hasn't done anything to you or imposed on you in any way, why do you care?

Nobody could prove this is a hoax, so now it's turned into endless pages of character assassinations, faux paranoia, and mindless jibber-jabber. Here's a conspiracy theory for you. I'm starting to think there are a bunch of people around here that may have a lot to lose in this scenario.

[edit on 4-4-2010 by theyreadmymind]

This has been building for sometime. I dont believe he is taking credit for stopping previous foreclosures, there were cases dating back into the 50s where people made that argument and beat the banksters, it took guts and an honest judge, (not too many of those around). Many times the judge would rule in the favor of the banks whether or not they held the contract or not in order to continue the deception.

What I gather from him is that the foreclosures will stop across the board because these grand juries are returning the system to de jure which nullifies any, which would be basically all mortgages, created by imaginary funds through the de facto fed, banks, and courts.

By the way, a copy will not do, the banks must present the orginal contract signed in wet ink. They cannot produce it because they sold it.
If you have signed a mortgage you may or not be aware it states: for the funds I HAVE recieved when in fact you recieve no funds until after you sign, another clever trick they use. Also the orginal contract cannot be shown, to my understanding, because they have altered it after you have signed which is unlawfull on its head.





[edit on 4-4-2010 by Canadianinsight]

Originally posted by theyreadmymind
Did anyone hear Sam say there's no such thing as a sovereign citizen? I believe he said it's an oxymoron and the proper term is sovereign person. Can anyone verify that?

[edit on 4-4-2010 by theyreadmymind]

in new zealand we are just citizens or soverin
people of new zealand are soverin

but we are citizens when it comes to maritime courts of law if (WE apper before the court WE TAKE LIABILITY for the crime under there law
they have there own language and key words mean completly different things

so when the judge asks is MR FRIST MIDDLE LAST

reply to post by theyreadmymind


It depends on what you mean by hoax, now doesn't it? Are the papers being mailed a hoax? Nope.

Are the actors questionable? *Very*.

I feel that I proved that, and that was all I wanted to do. I leave every man to himself todecide what to do about becoming a Sovereign Citizen.

I will not, however, sit here while someone lies on a radio show, taking credit for something like the foreclose thing, when he had nothing to do with it.

Oh, I almost forgot one other thing:

useconomy.about.com...

Obama Announces Bill to Stop Foreclosures
Wednesday February 18, 2009

On February 18 2009, President Barack Obama announced a $75 billion plan to help stop foreclosures. The Homeowner Stability Initiative (HSI) will help between 7-9 million homeowners avoid foreclosure by restructuring or refinancing their mortgage.

Banks halt foreclosures; Obama to outline plan
Updated 2/13/2009 6:48 PM

By Alan Zibel, AP Real Estate Writer
WASHINGTON — The biggest players in the mortgage industry are halting home foreclosures while the Obama administration develops its plan to help struggling homeowners.
The White House said Friday that President Barack Obama will outline his much-anticipated plan to spend at least $50 billion to prevent foreclosures in a speech Wednesday in Arizona, one of the states hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis.

So, lemme guess, Sam Kennedy is responsible for this too?



ETA - It is not character assassination to post FACTS. So shove your insults.


[edit on 4-4-2010 by Libertygal]