Hagar Vs Rec. Dist #108
- thought this may help someone....
"The acts of Congress making the Notes of the United States a Legal
Tender DO NOT apply to involuntary contributions in the nature of TAXES
or ASSESSMENTS exacted under State laws, but only to DEBTS in the
strict sense of the terms; that is, to obligations founded on
contracts, expressed and implied, for the payment of money." Hagar v.
Rec. Dist #108, 111 U.S. 701 (1884). In the case aforesaid, the high
court also stated:
- Click on attachment..................
"The Old Must Go Away Before We Can Receive The New"-Author Anonymous-------Original Message-------From: Al Cintra-LeiteDate: 5/3/2009 5:02:41 PMSubject: [tips_and_tricks] Hagar Vs Rec. Dist #108thought this may help someone...."The acts of Congress making the Notes of the United States a LegalTender DO NOT apply to involuntary contributions in the nature of TAXESor ASSESSMENTS exacted under State laws, but only to DEBTS in thestrict sense of the terms; that is, to obligations founded oncontracts, expressed and implied, for the payment of money." Hagar v.Rec. Dist #108, 111 U.S. 701 (1884). In the case aforesaid, the highcourt also stated:
- GENE MACDONALD sent another great file by "clarity" showing that FRNs of
any stripe are not legal tender.
I've said all those facts before at some time or another over the years.
And I've also said that I saw the original repeal of HJR192, that it
occurred in 1978. Clarity found it "reported" in 1982. It was
"reported" in the Statutes at Large when it occurred. I used to have a
photocopy; it was stolen, and I have not been motivated to go find it
and copy it again. If I ever do, I'll post a copy here.
But it is at least gratifying to see another who recognizes the
significance of capital lettering, and the ramifications thereof!
So, now that it has been made crystal clear once again, are we to expect
anyone to act upon the information in their own lives and get to be "the
first on their block" to do so? I've been using this info for years!
And so have others! And this list has covered all of this before, and
yet, here is ANOTHER perspective on the same facts, the same situation!
Mr. Kahre was aware. Some of his "employees" were; some were not - you
can tell by their own statements. You can tell by ANYONE's statements
whether or not they are "monetarily aware." Merrill Jenkins always used
to say, "the unaware are unaware of being unaware". And so human nature
and life go on...
Don't believe a lie today!