The criminals have taken property in Geneva County unlawfully. Every notice in the Geneva Reaper with MERS involvement is an unlawful foreclosure conveyance. The criminals should be made to pay for the jail that they should reside in in Geneva County. One hundred million would not be too much. The county could use it. The people who had their homes stolen should return.

     The Alabama Court of Appeals made a PER CURIAM ruling that is now beyond controversy. Law Enforcement and the Judicial Courts should move hastily to get in step with the ruling. At least lock up the criminals.

 

Act in the power of, "all the promises of God," which are "Yea, and Amen in Christ Jesus." Faith is not affected by ruined temples, fallen cities, faded lights, or departed glories. Why not? Because God is not affected by them. God is always to be found, and faith is always sure to find Him.

 

An Index of Understanding for You

Insight from being Vice-Chairman of a Bank, a New Year’s Present

The mortgage note acts like money. Once you sign the mortgage note it acts like money. The bankers now trick you into thinking they loaned you legal tender, when they never loaned you any of their money.

The trick is they made you a depositor instead of a borrower. They deposited your mortgage note and issued a bank check. Neither the mortgage note nor the check is legal tender. The mortgage note and the check are now money created that never existed, prior. The bank got your mortgage note for free without loaning you money, and sold the mortgage note to make the bank check appear legal. The borrower provided the legal tender, which the bank gave back in the form of a check. If the bank loaned legal tender, as the contract says, for the bank to legally own the mortgage note, then the people would still own the homes, farms, businesses and cars, nearly debt free and pay little, if any interest. By the banks not fulfilling the contract by loaning legal tender, they make the alleged borrower, a depositor. This is a fraudulent conversion of the mortgage note. A Fraud is a felony.

The bank had no intent to loan, making it promissory fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, and a list of other crimes a mile long. How can they make a felony, legal? They cannot! Fraud is fraud!

The banks deposit your mortgage note in a checking account. The deposit becomes the bank’s property. They withdraw money without your signature, and call the money, the banks money that they loaned to you. The bank forgot one thing. If the bank deposits your mortgage note, then the bank must credit your checking account claiming the bank owes you $100,000 for the $100,000 mortgage note deposited. The credit of $100,000 the bank owes you for the deposit allows you to write a check or receive cash. They did not tell you they deposited the money, and they forget to tell you that the $100,000 is money the banks owe you, not what you owe the bank. You lost $100,000 and the bank gained $100,000. For the $100,000 the bank gained, the bank received government bonds or cash of $100,000 by selling the mortgage note. For the loan, the bank received $100,000 cash, the bank did not give up $100,000.

Anytime the bank receives a deposit, the bank owes you the money. You do not owe the bank the money.

If you or I deposit anyone's negotiable instrument without a contract authorizing it, and withdraw the money claiming it is our money, we would go to jail. If it was our policy to violate a contract, we could go to jail for a very long time. You agreed to receive a loan, not to be a depositor and have the bank receive the deposit for free. What the bank got for free (lien on real property) you lost and now must pay with interest.

If the bank loaned us legal tender (other depositors’ money) to obtain the mortgage note the bank could never obtain the lien on the property for free. By not loaning their money, but instead depositing the mortgage note the bank creates inflation, which costs the consumer money. Plus the economic loss of the asset, which the bank received for free, in direct violation of any signed agreement.

We want equal protection under the law and contract, and to have the bank fulfill the contract or return the mortgage note. We want the judges, sheriffs, and lawmakers to uphold their oath of office and to honor and uphold the founding fathers U.S. Constitution. Is this too much to ask?

What is the mortgage note? The mortgage note represents your future loan payments. A promise to pay the money the bank loaned you. What is a lien? The lien is a security on the property for the money loaned.

How can the bank promise to pay money and then not pay? How can they take a promise to pay and call it money and then use it as money to purchase the future payments of money at interest. Interest is the compensation allowed by law or fixed by the parties for the use or forbearance of borrowed money. The bank never invested any money to receive your mortgage note. What is it they are charging interest on?

The bank received an asset. They never gave up an asset. Did they pay interest on the money they received as a deposit? A check issued on a deposit received from the borrower cost the bank nothing? Where did the money come from that the bank invested to charge interest on?

The bank may say we received a benefit. What benefit? Without their benefit we would receive equal protection under the law, which would mean we did not need to give up an asset or pay interest on our own money! Without their benefit we would be free and not enslaved. We would have little debt and interest instead of being enslaved in debt and interest. The banks broke the contract, which they never intended to fulfill in the first place. We got a check and a house, while they received a lien and interest for free, through a broken contract, while we got a debt and lost our assets and our country. The benefit is the banks, who have placed liens on nearly every asset in the nation, without costing the bank one cent. Inflation and working to pay the bank interest on our own money is the benefit. Some benefit!

 

Does the Truth Matter Anymore?

Michael Gamble, Dothan attorney wrote on June 09, 2010 about gambling in Alabama.

 

"To say that a man lieth is as much to say that he is brave towards God and a coward towards men" Francis Bacon, On Truth, quoting Montaigne


Country Crossing was marketed to the public as a bigger and better Branson, Missouri.

 

With great fanfare and the investment of millions of dollars its doors opened in December and were locked in January. The doors were locked because Country Crossing, unlike the family entertainment facility in Branson, was first and foremost a casino.  As the issue of the legality of the Houston County regulation purporting to authorize the licensing of “electronic bingo” continued to come up, Commission Chairman Mark Culver repeatedly assured the public the commission had "acted with due diligence." There was no due diligence.  There was only a conspiratorial collaboration to draft a regulation that had one purpose: to grant a government sanctioned monopoly to operate “electronic bingo” in Houston County.

 

Now, four months after the doors were locked, with the primary a week away, the question remains: How did it get this far? The public rightfully wants to know the facts and to affix fault when a public-private venture turns into a public boondoggle.

To understand how it got this far one must start at the beginning. Ten years ago Alabama voters had rejected an education lottery by a substantial margin. There was no confusion about "electronic bingo" because no one had ever heard of the term. There was no question about the legality of slot machines-- this was, after all, Alabama, not Nevada.

Numerous attempts have been made to skirt Alabama’s prohibitions against gambling. Numerous appellate decisions demonstrate a clear and consistent judicial rejection of such attempts. Two attempts in the 1990s involved collaborations between gambling operators and local governmental bodies to enact local regulations purporting to make the gambling operations "legally permissible" under charitable bingo amendments. Both attempts were struck down in appellate court decisions rendered in 1994 and 1997(see City of Piedmont v. Evans, 642 So.2d 435 (Ala 1994) and Foster v. State, 770 So.2d 534 (Ala Crim App.1997).

To gambling operators, such as Milton McGregor, this meant Alabama citizens were an un-exploited resource ripe for development.

In 2005 McGregor thought he had discovered a loophole in the law and opened Quincy’s MegaSweeps at the Birmingham Race Course. His scheme eventually ended up being reviewed by the Alabama Supreme Court, after McGregor obtained a favorable ruling from the trial judge who agreed that McGregor had found and successfully exploited a loophole. The Alabama Supreme Court was not fooled, stating:

 

"Alabama's gambling law, however, is not so easily evaded. It is 'the policy of the constitution and laws of Alabama [to prohibit] the vicious system of lottery schemes and the evil practice of gaming, in all their protean shapes. (emphases in original opinion) see Barber v. Jefferson County Racing Ass’n, 960 So.2d 599 (Ala 2007).

 

Though the Quincy’s MegaSweeps venture experienced only limited success, gambling operators such as McGregor learned a great deal.  First, developing a gambling operation premised on a “loophole” in a large metropolitan area such as Jefferson County was problematic.  The numerous political connections needed to facilitate such a development were more difficult to establish.  The sheriff and district attorney had vigorously prosecuted the case all the way to the Alabama Supreme Court.  Second, he had succeeded in persuading a trial judge to rule in his favor.  This was significant.  If it could be done once, it could be done again. 

 

The ideal environment to establish a Mega casino was one where relations with all local elected officials could be successfully nurtured.

McGregor refocused his attention on his investment in Shorter, Alabama, a community of less than 300 according to the 2000 census. Shorter is located in Macon County, which was sparsely populated, characterized by chronic high unemployment and ranked last in Alabama in per capita income-- thirty-three percent of its population was considered "below the poverty level."  The same type demographics described Greene and Lowndes Counties.

 

These counties proved to be fertile ground for cultivating cooperative efforts between the gambling operators and local elected official. The promises were always the same: economic development, jobs, and new sources of tax revenues. 

 

In return, local resolutions were passed under the guise of regulating charitable bingo.  The resolutions all had this in common: they were essentially grants to each operator of a defacto government sanctioned monopoly to open and operate a casino. These resolutions purported to recognize "electronic bingo" as "legally permissible."

McGregor also developed a relationship with Alabama Attorney General Troy King. In December 2004, King issued the now infamous Findings of his Gambling Review. With no consideration of the cases cited above, nor any of the other body of appellate decisions that have uniformly struck down attempts to skirt the law on gambling, without any reasoned analysis that would withstand judicial scrutiny, King gave his opinion that "electronic bingo" machines were "legally permissible." Although King's "opinion" carried no legal weight and has since been thoroughly discredited by opinions of the Alabama Supreme Court, it had a profound impact. It provided gambling operators with what looked like a legal pronouncement that "electronic bingo" was "legally permissible." Local elected officials wanting to collaborate with gambling operators accepted King's pronouncement as authority to license "electronic bingo."

[date] Attorney General King sent letters to every prosecutor and law enforcement head in every county of Alabama stating his opinion that "electronic bingo" was "legally permissible."  With Alabama’s attorney general having effectively abandoned all efforts to enforce Alabama’s law as it pertains to “electronic bingo,” gambling halls spread and flourished.

 

Major gambling operators, such as McGregor, became bolder with their operations. Soon, there were billboards all around the state portraying pictures of persons who had won jackpots. Milton McGregor was on television telling audiences "you could be a winner, too!"

Alabama citizens began to sense confusion about the legality of slot machines.  There had been no vote on gambling since the education lottery was defeated, yet, there were those billboards advertising Quincy’s 777 Casino.  Most Alabamians still were not familiar with the term “electronic bingo,” as that was more a term of art incident to the loophole the casinos were purporting to operate under.  Every machine in the various “bingo” halls looked, sounded and acted like slot machines. 


It was against this back drop that Ronnie Gilley formulated his vision for Country Crossing.

Gilley first pitched his vision in Coffee County. This was his home, where he grew up, where he conducted business.  However, he could not get the support of the people in Coffee County.

He found a willing collaborator in Houston County Commission Chairman Mark Culver who assured Gilley Houston County was progressive and pro-development. Soon, the Houston County Commission and others were being impressed by Gilley’s command of facts, figures, projections, his knowledge of the Branson, Missouri, development and the positive comparisons he drew between the demographics of Southeast Alabama and those of Branson, Missouri. Efforts to reduce visions to plans were soon underway.  The concept of a Branson type development in Houston County was floated to the public and drew immediate excitement.

But behind the scenes, among the collaborators, was the issue of gambling. This was Houston County, not Macon County. All of the representatives of Houston County participating in the collaboration knew there would be public opposition to a casino. All agreed the success of the collaborative effort would depend on generating public enthusiasm for the Country Music/Branson Missouri theme while discretely devising a resolution that would effectively grant Ronnie Gilley Properties, LLC a government sanctioned monopoly to operate an "electronic bingo" hall.  The collective wisdom of the collaborators was that once the project was up and running the public would see the benefits and would come to support the project.

January 24, 2008, one month prior to the Houston County Commission meeting when the bingo resolution would be enacted, Ronnie Gilley hosted a party honoring Attorney General Troy King and attended by country music stars George Jones and John Anderson. The presence of the country music stars demonstrated Gilley could "deliver the goods."  The presence of Troy King tended to lend an air of legal legitimacy to what was about to transpire.  It also provided an opportunity to talk face to face with the Attorney General about the "legally permissible" gambling in Macon and Greene Counties and his attitude about the legality of the proposed Bingo Pavilion.

The connection with Attorney General Troy King led to a referral to attorney Kenneth Steely, who had worked extensively with Troy King as a staff attorney with the AG’s office. They were closely connected. Steely had been manager for Troy King’s reelection campaign. He was considered by insiders in the A.G. office as the “guru” on gambling issues.  And, he was a registered lobbyist for gambling magnate Milton McGregor. He could be counted on.

The county commission by-passed the services of County Attorney Gary Sheerer and retained Steely to come up with a legal strategy for drafting a bingo resolution that would enable the Houston County Commission to grant Ronnie Gilley Properties, LLC a monopoly to operate "electronic bingo" in Houston County.   That the Steely “opinion” may have been sought, not as legal advice, but, to provide a color of authority is suggested by the date of the final draft, February 25, 2008, the same date the commission was meeting to enact the bingo resolution.

 

The Steely “opinion letter,” like the 2004 pronouncement of Troy King, was devoid of generally accepted legal analysis.

February 25, 2005, at 10:00 A.M., Chairman Culver called the commission meeting to order, noting that it was the largest crowd he had seen attend a county commission meeting.

The first item on the agenda was the bingo resolution.  The only persons to speak on the resolution were Mark Culver and six prominent members of the community.

 

The six members of the public who spoke pleaded with the commission to postpone its vote so that the public might have a chance to digest the contents of the eighteen page bingo regulation. Two of those persons, former state representative Riley Seibenhener and businessman John Downs testified they had sought copies of the bingo regulation the previous week but were not provided with a copy until just prior to the meeting that morning.

 

A review of the minutes of that meeting demonstrate no less than twelve misrepresentations made by Chairman Culver with the intent to mislead the public. He stated “he had asked Attorney Sheerer, County attorney, to investigate... [that] he has done exhaustive research on rulings and opinions.”  No such ‘exhaustive research’ was conducted. 

 

He showed a map of bingo halls in Walker County as an example of a county where “without regulation, the expansion of electronic bingo has been rampant.” Even as he was citing Walker County, the elected officials of that county were taking legal steps, not to introduce “electronic bingo,” but to rid the county of it.  Ironically, as our commissioners were opening the doors of Houston County to “electronic bingo” Walker County was shutting the doors of their illegal operations; by the time Country Crossing started operating, all “electronic bingo” operations in Walker had been shut down, permanently.  The Walker County charitable bingo enactment is substantially the same as the Houston County charitable bingo enactment.

 

Chairman Culver assured the public that the proposed regulation was "an attempt to fill the gap" that “extensive legal research [indicated] electronic bingo can be done if the county does absolutely nothing.” He assured the public “the commission is not setting it up for a monopoly but they were setting it up to be difficult for anyone to do this.”  The truth is the bingo resolution had but one purpose, to grant Ronnie Gilley Properties, LLC a defacto monopoly to operate a casino under the guise of calling it charitable bingo.

Chairman Culver assured the public the commission did not want to bring class III gambling (slot machines) into Houston County.  That is exactly what they did by licensing the Bingo Pavilion.  Furthermore, once it became clear that the law was going to be enforced, that the “electronic bingo” operation was illegal, Culver and others began vigorously lobbying the legislature to pass legislation that would legalize the very thing they were trying to convince the public they were trying to “control.”

 

The remaining members of the commission sat silent though all the representations made by Chairman Culver.  None of the commissioners spoke.  The question was called and the motion carried unanimously.

 

Two weeks after the passage of the bingo regulation attorney Kenneth Steely was awarded a lucrative contract by his former boss, A. G. Troy King, to perform legal work for the Office of the Attorney General.

There was an immediate outcry from the public.  Senator Smith, joined by Representative Lewis cried foul and began efforts in opposition to the actions of the commissioners.  A delegation of concerned Dothan citizens traveled to Montgomery and met with the governor, who referred them to the Office of the Attorney General, who had nothing to offer.

 

Not long after the commission meeting, community leader John Watson tried to persuade chairman Culver as to the illegality of what the commission had done and urged him “to shut it down now, before somebody spends a lot of money out there.”  Chairman Culver did not listen.

 

Many loud voices have criticized Governor Riley, including the Editorial Board of the Dothan Eagle, characterizing the governor as sanctimonious and heavy handed.  The facts are that the spread of gambling into Walker and Houston Counties prompted an outpouring of protests from members of those communities and requests for action. Governor Riley listened and acted.

 

December 29, 2008, Governor Riley issued an executive order empaneling the Task Force on Illegal Gambling. 

 

February 10, 2009, concerned how the Task Force on Illegal Gambling might impact plans to develop Country Crossing, another Dothan delegation, consisting of Chairman Mark Culver, Mayor Pat Thomas, Matt Parker and Bob Hendrix, traveled to Montgomery to discuss their concerns with Governor Riley.  At that meeting Governor Riley brought in members of his legal staff who explained in great detail why “electronic bingo” was illegal.  It was made clear during this meeting that the Task Force would enforce the law in every county in Alabama.

 

Nevertheless, Chairman Culver and company were determined to ignore what the governor’s legal team had told them.  Nor did they request County Attorney Gary Sherrer to communicate with Governor Riley’s legal team to see if he thought their position had merit.

 

March 19, 2009, the Task Force executed a search warrant on Whitehall Entertainment Center in Lowndes County, seizing 105 slot machines, over $500,000 in cash and financial records.  This event was widely reported in the news.  That same day officials held a ground-breaking ceremony at Country Crossing.

 

November 13, 2009, the Alabama Supreme Court rendered its decision in Cornerstone Community Outreach (“Whitehall”) case.  This decision approved the Task Forces search and seizure of the “electronic bingo” machines.  It also included the “six characteristics” of the game of bingo.

 

November 25, 2009, the Houston County Commission initiated a request to Gaming Laboratories International, an “independent laboratory,” to obtain certification that the “Bingo Systems” in use at the Bingo Pavilion at Country Crossing were compliant with the six characteristics articulated in the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision.  However, a careful reading of that request reveals that the actual “characteristics” articulated in the body of the request were not the six characteristics articulated in the Court’s decision.  They were simply a restatement of the existing operating functions of those machines.  Thus, the “certification” which Chairman Culver literally waved before the media as he repeatedly assured the public “these machines are legal” provided no such certification.

 

Every Houston County Commissioner is seeking re-election. Each continues to repeat the absurd notion that the collaboration with Ronnie Gilley was necessary to prevent the rampant spread of "electronic bingo." Such was implied by Francis Cook in the Dothan Eagle last week: "[Is] keeping it out of convenience stores and McDonald’s so wrong?" 

So, How did it get this far? The Houston County Commission and others bought into the promises of Ronnie Gilley.  No one checked his figures or the validity of his projections.  No one considered whether there would be any adverse impacts resulting from casino style gambling. Wary of public opposition, they decided to proceed in secret.  The history of apparent success with such operations in Macon, Greene and Lowndes Counties along with the tacit support of Attorney General Troy King encouraged them to think the only practical obstacle would be public attitudes toward gambling.

 

Having undertaken a course of deception, they have continued down that course.  That many people still express confusion is a testament to the efforts to mislead, rather than enlighten the public.  It is contributed to with one-sided reporting by area print and broadcast media.

Throughout all of this there has been no public debate on whether Gambling is good or bad, as though it were merely a moral issue.  A modest internet search of terms such as “gambling effect on economy,” “gambling effect on politics,” or “gambling effect on community” will produce ample independent studies and reports that, at the least, will demonstrate it is not the win-win scenario Ronnie Gilley or Milton McGregor describe.  An honest public debate is what should take place if there is significant interest in opening our state to casino gambling.

 

Honesty and trust in elected leaders is what the coming election should be about. We teach our children to be truthful. We should expect the same from elected officials.  As voters we are the ultimate shepherds of good government. It is our responsibility to hold elected officials accountable. Ultimately, the government we get will be no better than what we require.

I have taken the trouble to publish this expose because I believe truth matters.

 

Michael J. Gamble

Usury is Evil

The Greatest Swindle Ever!

“through knowledge shall the just be delivered” Proverbs 11:9

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it all back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits" -- Sir Josiah Stamp (President of the Bank of England in the 1920s, the second richest man in Britain).

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender" -- Proverbs 22:7

“If thou hast nothing to pay, why should he take away thy bed from under thee?” Proverbs 22:27

“Hath given forth upon usury, and hath take increase: shall he then live? He shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood be upon him”. Ezekiel 18:13

“For the wages of sin is death;” Romans 6:23

“So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.” Romans 14:12

“While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things that are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.”

2 Corinthians 4:18

 

The Philosophy of Liberty or Freedom

The philosophy of liberty is based on the principle of self-ownership. You own your life. To deny this is to imply that another person has a higher claim on your life than you do. No other person or group of persons owns your life nor do you own the lives of others.

You exist in time. This is manifest in past, present and future time and in life, liberty and the product of your life and liberty. To lose your life is to lose your future. To lose your liberty is to lose your present. To lose the product of your life and liberty is to lose that portion of your past that produced it. A product of your life and your liberty is your property, the fruit of your labor and the product of your time, energy and talents. Property is that part of nature which you turn into valuable use. Property is the property of others that is given to you by voluntary exchange and mutual consent. Two people who exchange property voluntarily are both better off or they wouldn't do it. Only they may rightfully make their decision for themselves.

At times some people use force or fraud to take from others without voluntary consent. The initiation of force or fraud to take life is murder. To take liberty is slavery. And to take property is theft. It is the same whether these actions are done by one person acting alone, or by the many acting against a few, or even by officials with fine hats. You have a right to protect your own life, liberty, and justly acquired property from the forceful aggression of others and you may ask others to help defend you, but you do not have the right to initiate force against a life, liberty and property of others. Thus, you do not have the right to designate some person to initiate force against others on your behalf. You have the right to seek leaders for yourself, but you have no right to impose rulers onto others. No matter how officials are selected, they are only human beings and they have no right or claims that are higher than those of any other human beings. Regardless of the imaginative labels for their behavior or the numbers of people encouraging them, officials have no right to murder, to enslave or to steal. You cannot give them any rights that you do not have yourself.

Since you own your live you are responsible for your life. You do not rent your life from others who demand you obedience. Nor are you a slave to others who demand your sacrifice. You choose your own goals based on your own values. Success and failure are born the necessary incentives to learn and to grow. Your action on behalf of others or their action on behalf of you is virtuous is only when it is derived from voluntary mutual consent. For virtue can exist only where there is free choice. This is the basis of a truly free society. It is not only the most practical and humanitarian foundation for human action it is also the most ethical.

Problems in the world that arise from the initiation of force by government have a solution. The solution is for the people the earth to stop asking government officials to initiate force on their behalf. Evil does not arise only from evil people, but also from good people who tolerate the initiation of force as a means to their own ends. In this manner, good people have empowered evil people throughout history.

 

Having confidence in a free society is to focus on the process of discovery in the marketplace of values rather than to focus on some imposed vision or goal using governmental force to impose a vision on others is intellectual sloth and typically results in unintended, perverse consequences.

Achieving a free society requires courage to think to talk and to act especially when it is easier to do nothing.

Credits Written by Ken Schoolland Produced by Lux Lucre www.jonathangullible.com

 

CHRISTIANS AND POLITICS.

The government that is always in control even if mankind is not.

"What is taught in the Word regarding the position of a Christian when called upon to vote?"

 

You will, perhaps, be startled when we tell you that your question involves the very foundations of Christianity. We would ask you, dear friend, to which world does the Christian belong? Does he belong to this world or to the world above? Is his citizenship on earth or in heaven? Is he dead to this world, or alive in it — which I If he be a citizen of this world — if his place, his portion, and his home be here, then, assuredly, he cannot take too active a part in its affairs. He should vote for town councilors and members of Congress, he should strain every nerve to get the right man into the right place, whether it be at the municipal board, or on the floor of Congress. He should put forth every effort to mend and regulate the world. If, in a word, he be a citizen of this world, he ought, to the best of his ability, to discharge the functions pertaining to such a position.

But, on the other hand, if it be true that the Christian is, as regards this world, "dead" — if his citizenship is in heaven, if his place, his portion, and his home be on high, if he is only a pilgrim and a stranger here below, then it follows that he is not called to meddle in any way with this world's politics, but to pass on his pilgrim way, patiently submitting himself to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, yielding obedience to the powers that be, and praying for their preservation and well-being in all things.

"What is taught in the Word" on this point? An all-important question. What, then, saith the Scripture? A passage or two will suffice. Hear what our Lord said, when addressing the Father in reference to "His own in the world:"

"I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."

Again, hear the inspired apostle on this subject: "Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ; whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)”

For our citizenship is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ." (Phil. 3: 17-20)

So also, in the epistle to the Colossians, we read, "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with: Christ in God. When Christ our life shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory."

Some, however, may say that the fore-going Scriptures no longer apply — that "the world" of John 17 is not the world of the twenty-first century — that the former was a pagan world, whereas the latter is a somewhat Christian world. To all who take this ground, we have nothing to say. If the teaching of the New Testament was only designed for a bygone age, if it bears only upon the things that were, and has no application to the things that are, then, indeed, we know not where we are, or whither to turn for guidance or authority. But, thank God, we have a divine: and, therefore, all-sufficient directory for all ages, all times, and all conditions.

If, therefore, we are to be guided by Scripture, we have no warrant whatever for meddling in this world's politics. The cross of Jesus has snapped the link which connected us with this world. We are identified with Him. He is our Model. If He were here, He would find His place outside the range of this world. You would not see Him at the council-board, on the judicial bench, in the Halls of Congress, or with the sword in His hand. By and by, He will wield the scepter, draw the sword, and hold the reins of government in His hand. (May God hasten the day?) But now He is rejected, and we are called to share His rejection.

Our path in this world, as Christians, is obedience or suffering. We are called to pray for all in authority, but not to be in authority ourselves. There is not so much as a single line of Scripture to guide me as a voter, or a member, or a magistrate. If, therefore, I act in these characters, I do so without one word of direction from my Master — nay, more, I act in a way utterly opposed to Him, and in direct opposition to the spirit and teaching of the New Testament.

May God make us more faithful to Christ! May we be delivered more completely, in heart and spirit, from this present evil world, and be enabled to pursue, with holy decision, our pilgrim path across the sand of the desert! We are quite aware that what we have written on this subject will prove unsavory and unpopular; but this must not deter us from speaking the truth, and we trust it may not deter us from acting the truth also.

 

Auburn University at Montgomery Newspaper published this Letter in 1989

Letters to the editor entitled, The Living Death

     The re-examination of the Roe vs Wade Supreme Court decision has fanned a new wave of emotional tantrums from the opposing camps.

     The number one problem in this debate is that most commentators on the issue are not even qualified to comment on the affairs of man because they do not know what a man is. When I attended Auburn University in the early 60s I was taught that a man is body and mind. The professor had an earned doctorate degree after his name and yet he did not know that a man is a body, soul, and spirit. 1Thessalonians 5:23.

     We do evolve, but not in a manner Darwin thought. Darwin thought we started as a worm in water and progressed upward into a man. God declares that we start as a man and can evolve in one or two directions- upward or downward.

     In order to make the directional decision one must first be in a body, which is to have been born of water, then the second step is as essential as the first, he must have a soul. The soul arrives at the same time that the first breath is taken and departs the body when the last breath is taken. Genesis 2:7, 35:18, 1Kings 17:17, 17:22, and acts 17:25.

     The third step is invisible because it is exclusively spiritual. God is always interested in the spiritual because he is a spirit. He defines life as being in possession of spiritual life. John 3:36. God even declares that if you reject his source of life, then you will never see life or you suffer the real abortion- being forever spiritually dead. The very landscape of America is dotted with anti-abortion clinics called churches, which exist for one purpose and that is to produce spiritual offspring.

     Children who are not born because of their having been physically aborted also rendered invisible from society because of the abortion procedure. Yet, these invisible children, cry out even from the grave. It is tragic, for all that a child is aborted physically, but it is nothing compared to all those who are spiritually aborted by their own will.

     Examine Exodus 21:22-25 and you will find that a fetus is the fruit of the womb and is not on the same legal standing as a mother who has the breath of life. The child, as a fruit, did not yet possess a soul. The fruit value is determined by the father, and if that is not just, then the Supreme Court decides. The woman is pregnant and the child aborts and is dead, but the woman lives. The husband and the court decide the restitution. If the woman loses her life, then the one who causes the loss must die. One thing is for certain. Physical abortion is wrong, but it is not murder. The woman’s life is more important than the fruit’s life.

     Now, if the child is born and breaths, and does not accept Jesus Christ, it would have been better if he had never been born, or better, if he had been aborted. Job 10:19.

     It is true that Adam fell. His spiritually aborted children continue to fall by losing their physical life in the grave, and then experience a second death of their soul. (the second death of Revelation 20) by losing their soulish-bodly-shape of a human and becoming the shape of a sperm or a worm. (Psalms 22, Isaiah 66). This is the opposite of Darwin. Man falls rather than evolving upwardly. The symbol at your Doctor’s office illustrates this traditional belief. The healing man shows a worm wrapped around a pole as the example of his occupation of fighting disease. All because a man refuses to accept that he cannot return to his mother’s womb to be born again, but must be spiritually born of God. (1John 3:9).

     “Lo, children are a heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.” (Psalms 127:3) …but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, O Lord: what will thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts.” (Hosea 9:12-13).

     Each of us must search out his own position for his life and establish a standard that is his authority. The decision is serious. H Jack Mizell

Which President personifies this definition?

WHAT IS SIN?

Sin is to feel a secret pride in success, training or appearance.

 

Sin is to feel an important independent spirit.

 

Sin is to feel bitter over what someone else has told you about the success of another.

 

Sin is a harsh, sarcastic, unyielding spirit; a touchy bitter, sensitive spirit. A desire to attract the attention of the opposite sex; to say and do things to attract attention to self.

 

Sin is a constant complaining and a desire to quit trying to do right.

 

Sin is unnatural or abusive acts to self or others.

 

Sin is a deceitful spirit that seeks to create false impressions; to pick flaws and criticize when set aside unnoticed.

 

Sin is lustful and wandering eyes; a shrinking from duty and reproach; a tendency to retaliate when crossed; permitting things in yourself that you would not permit in others in your idea of a concentrated Christian.

 

Sin is a shallow, stingy uncleanness in thought or desire; a joker or jester; vain or light in manner of conversation or life; unwilling to put out for others unless personal advantage is involved; partiality to certain people, class or denominations; always thinking of what might have been if things had not happened the way they did.

 

Sin is being unthankful and unappreciative of your lot in life, and constant fear of failure, and taking an unmerciful attitude toward those who do fail; or taking an inferior attitude toward those of wealth or position.

 

Sin is putting on a false or exaggerated humility, imagining how others are praising you or speaking well of you.

 

Sin is straining at the truth, and showing an "I don't care" attitude toward being caught in sin, or shirking responsibilities.

 

Sin is the feelings of nervousness you get when you see someone doing something you think you could do better.

 

                                                 SUCESSFUL LIFE

Luke 9:23 "...If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me."


 

TWO DIFFERENT

     Earth and Heaven are not the same. They are spelled differently. Who said they were different? God. In Genesis 1:1 states they are different. Never are they to be combined. Revelation 21:1 states them different even when new. They can never be mixed or blended. Earth and heaven are different. Who can dispute the God who segregates them?

   In Alabama there are two different foreclosure processes, non-judicial and judicial. They are different. Non-judicial is private matter where there is consent only, no dispute from start to finish.

 Judicial foreclosure is a state action devoted to the satisfaction of due process. The debtor must be given notice and opportunity to be heard. The absence of one hundred percent consent from the two private parties makes the judicial necessary.

     A trial by jury of peers alone can determine the facts that demand a course of action, even the deprivation of property.

     The most valuable earthly property that any man can ever own is his signature, the representation of his consent given freely. When one steals a signature and uses it for his own purposes, then he is a thief and that use of signature is called forgery.

     The law is clear about the distinction between the two foreclosure procedures. “However, even where self-help (non-judicial) repossession is valid under applicable due process standards, when state law enforcement personnel are present in the course of what began as a self-help repossession, the proceeding becomes state action and the debtor must be given notice and opportunity to be heard or there is a deprivation of constitutional rights.”

     Many people are deprived of their constitutional rights under the color of law and by those who are ignorant of the law, and are self-righteousness. See Romans 10:3.

     Only Satan uses instruments of coercion to keep you under bondage. Redemption is free for the asking.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BT9E1SRrXU

 

NO TAXES

June 15, 2013

 

Should America Print its own Script and do away with taxes by all principle paid to state rather than the financial elite?

     Banks steal all principle by filing a 1099A after 90 days from final payment. Banks then enter abandoned principle as income for the Bank on their balance sheet.

     Principle paid to the state eliminates all taxes except for a 1.5% fee for the bank’s expenses of operation. All bank facilities and employees are state assets and operation.

     See Nehemiah 5:1-13, Also Ezekiel 18:13

       Why encourage bankers to violate Exodus 20:15

The following historical story is taken from a radio address given by Congressman Charles G. Binderup of Nebraska, some 50 years ago and was reprinted in Unrobing the Ghosts of Wall Street:

Colonies More Prosperous Than The Home Country

Before the American War for Independence in 1776, the colonized part of what is today the United States of America was a possession of England. It was called New England, and was made up of 13 colonies, which became the first 13 states of the great Republic. Around 1750, this New England was very prosperous. Benjamin Franklin was able to write:

“There was abundance in the Colonies, and peace was reigning on every border. It was difficult, and even impossible, to find a happier and more prosperous nation on all the surface of the globe. Comfort was prevailing in every home. The people, in general, kept the highest moral standards, and education was widely spread.”

When Benjamin Franklin went over to England to represent the interests of the Colonies, he saw a completely different situation: the working population of this country was gnawed by hunger and poverty. “The streets are covered with beggars and tramps,” he wrote. He asked his English friends how England, with all its wealth, could have so much poverty among its working classes.

His friends replied that England was a prey to a terrible condition: it had too many workers! The rich said they were already overburdened with taxes, and could not pay more to relieve the needs and poverty of this mass of workers. Several rich Englishmen of that time actually believed, along with Mathus, that wars and plague were necessary to rid the country from man-power surpluses.

Franklin’s friends then asked him how the American Colonies managed to collect enough money to support their poor houses, and how they could overcome this plague of pauperism. Franklin replied:

“We have no poor houses in the Colonies; and if we had some, there would be nobody to put in them, since there is, in the Colonies, not a single unemployed person, neither beggars nor tramps.”

Thanks To Free Money Issued By The Nation

His friends could not believe their ears, and even less understand this fact, since when the English poor houses and jails became too cluttered, England shipped these poor wretches and down-and- outs, like cattle, and discharged, on the quays of the Colonies, those who had survived the poverty, dirtiness and privations of the journey. At that time, England was throwing into jail those who could not pay their debts. They therefore asked Franklin how he could explain the remarkable prosperity of the New England Colonies. Franklin replied:

“That is simple. In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one.”

The Bankers Impose Poverty

The information came to the knowledge of the English Bankers, and held their attention. They immediately took the necessary steps to have the British Parliament to pass a law that prohibited the Colonies from using their scrip money, and then ordered them to use only the gold and silver money that was provided in sufficient quantity by the English bankers. Then began in America the plague of debt-money, which has never since brought so many curses to the American people.

The first law was passed in 1751, and then completed by a more restrictive law in 1763. Franklin reported that one year after the implementation of this prohibition on Colonial money, the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployment and beggars, just like in England, because there was not enough money to pay for the goods and work. The circulating medium of exchange had been reduced by half.

Franklin added that this was the original cause of the American Revolution – and not the tax on tea nor the Stamp Act, as it has been taught again and again in history books. The financiers always manage to have removed from school books all that can throw light on their own schemes, and damage the glow that protects their power.

Franklin, who was one of the chief architects of the American independence, wrote it clearly:

“The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been the poverty caused by the bad influence of the English bankers on the Parliament, which has caused in the Colonies hatred of England and the Revolutionary War.”

This point of view of Franklin was confirmed by great statesmen of his era: John Adams, Jefferson, and several others. A remarkable English historian, John Twells, wrote, speaking of the money of the Colonies, the Colonial Scrip:

“It was the monetary system under which America’s Colonies flourished to such an extent that Edmund Burke was able to write about them: ‘Nothing in the history of the world resembles their progress. It was a sound and beneficial system, and its effects led to the happiness of the people.’”

John Twells adds:

“In a bad hour, the British Parliament took away from America its representative money, forbade any further issue of bills of credit, these bills ceasing to be legal tender, and ordered that all taxes should be paid in coins. Consider now the consequences: this restriction of the medium of exchange paralyzed all the industrial energies of the people. Ruin took place in these once flourishing Colonies; most rigorous distress visited every family and every business, discontent became desperation, and reached a point, to use the words of Dr. Johnson, when human nature rises up and assets its rights.”

Another writer, Peter Cooper, expresses himself along the same lines. After having said how Franklin had explained to the London Parliament the cause of the prosperity of the Colonies, he wrote:

“After Franklin gave explanations on the true cause of the prosperity of the Colonies, the Parliament exacted laws forbidding the use of this money in the payment of taxes. This decision brought so many drawbacks and so much poverty to the people that it was the main cause of the Revolution. The suppression of the Colonial money was a much more important reason for the general uprising than the Tea and Stamp Act.”

Today, in America as well as in Europe, we are under the regime of the Scrip of the Bankers instead of the scrip of the nation. Hence the public debts, everlasting interest charges, taxes that plunder purchasing power, with the only result being a consolidation of the financial dictatorship.

There is only one cure for America’s ultimate financial collapse and that is for Congress to exercise Clause 30 of the “Federal” Reserve Act, buy the outstanding shares of stock, shut down this unconstitutional system and sell off their assets to reimburse the people of this nation for this unspeakable theft of their wealth. This is the first installment of postings on this issue, new ones will be put up as soon as manpower allows.

Copyright © 1941 by Congressman Charles G. Binderup

BINDERUP, Charles Gustav, a Representative from Nebraska; born in Horsens, Denmark, March 5, 1873; when six months old immigrated to the United States with his parents, who settled on a farm near Hastings, Adams County, Nebr.; attended the county schools and Grand Island (Nebr.) Business College; engaged in agricultural pursuits near Hastings and Minden, Nebr., and also in the mercantile and creamery business at Minden, Nebr.; elected as a Democrat to the Seventy-fourth and Seventy-fifth Congresses (January 3, 1935-January 3, 1939); was an unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1938 to the Seventy-sixth Congress and for election as an Independent in 1940 to the Seventy-seventh Congress; organized and was active in the Constitutional Money League of America in Minden, Nebr., until his death; died in Minden, Nebr., August 19, 1950; interment in Minden Cemetery.

Important Caveat

On November 11, 2007, I sent the following e-mail to Professor Farley Grubb, author of  Creating the U.S. Dollar Currency Union,1748-1811: A Quest for Monetary Stability or a Usurpation of State Sovereignty for Personal Gain?, and Benjamin Franklin and the Birth of a Paper Money Economy:

Dear Professor Grubb,

Please find attached a copy of a transcript of a radio address given by Congressman Charles G. Binderup in 1941.

He quotes several times from Benjamin Franklin and Peter Cooper, without giving citations.

When I posted this article on my blogsite, several people asked for citations.

I would like to know whether the Franklin quotes are genuine, and if so, what are the sources.

Yours sincerely

Anthony Hopkins

He replied the following  day:

Dear Anthony,

As far as the exactness of the Franklin quotes the person you should consult (the expert) is Professor J. A. Leo Lemay [//21stcenturycicero.wordpress.com/agent/MobNewMsg?to= This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it "> This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it "> This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it "> This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ] English Dept., University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716. He is writing the definitive “Life of Franklin” –see his first 2 volumes.

Otherwise, to my ear the quotes seem in the spirit of Franklin but sound a bit paraphrased, even anachronistic (e.g. the reference to bankers seems out of place)…especially the latter quotes in the speech. But I could be wrong. I am not all knowledgeable about every word Franklin spoke. The best would be to check through the indexes of the standard sources on the writings of Franklin during the periods mentioned for the phrases…e.g. see THE PAPERS OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN v. 1-38; or given that the senator was speaking in 1941, one of the older compilations of Franklin’s writings such as A. H. Smyth (1907) THE WRITINGS OF BENJAMIN FRANKLIN v. 1-10. Use the indexes of these to check for key phrases.

Finally, setting the accuracy of the Franklin quotes aside, the passages in the senator’s speech are choked full of exaggerated and outright erroneous history. For example, the Currency Acts if 1751 and 1764 did not [REPEAT--DID NOT] prohibit the colonies from issuing paper money. Read the acts, and then look at what the colonies actually did. That these currency acts were the KEY spark to the revolution is highly doubtful.

Sincerely,

Farley

Farley Grubb, Professor and NBER Research Associate
Economics Dept.
University of Delaware
Newark, DE 19716
USA

Following Professor Grubb’s suggestion, I e-mailed Professor LeMay, asking him if the quotes were genuine and, if so, what their sources were. Here is his reply:

Dear Anthony,

I apologize for not reading what you sent before. I had just replied to a couple Nazi propaganda efforts that resurrect commonly, and I assumed you were asking about them.

There are, however, a number of strange statements in the quotation, though it reflects some of Franklin’s opinions. Of course the American colonies were generally regarded as partly New England, partly Middle Colonies, and partly Southern colonies. All had poor houses. Philadelphia had a fairly large one. Franklin disapproved of offering charity rather than work to healthy6 people, but he was also a chief founder and first President of the Pennsylvania Hospital (the first in America), which, like almost all hospitals in the eighteenth century, was a charity hospital.

He was an advocate of paper money, and Pennsylvania’s colonial paper money was sound and therefore never prohibited, though New England’s was unsound, inflationary, and finally prohibited (reasonably, it seems to me and probably to Farley Grubb) by Parliament, because it
became nearly worthless — before being prohibited. (It had become a dodge to pay off English creditors, rather than a reasonable medium of value.)

He also did think that America was generally better off than England and that its population was growing faster than England’s. (Thomas Malthus later used Franklin’s data.) That was true because of the available land in America (which, of course, the colonists took from
the Indians) and true in the South because of available land and the slave system. Indeed, Franklin said that the Indians in America lived better than the Irish in Ireland — because the latter were oppressed by the English landlords.

As for the causes of the American Revolution, the colonists had many complaints, but the most fundamental one was taxation without representation.

There are no accurate quotations from Franklin, though sometimes his point of view is reflected in the speech, but sometimes, too, it misrepresents him.

Best wishes,

Leo 

I also put the words, “scrip”, “prosperous”, “poverty”, and “English bankers” in the search box on an online version of The Papers of Benjamin Franklin, and found nothing corresponding to the purported Franklin quotes in Binderup’s address.

I also went on the online version of The Writings of Benjamin Franklin and found the following article, Causes of the American Discontents Before 1768. In it, Franklin enumerates a number of grievance, including the following:

That on a frivolous complaint of a few Virginia Merchants, nine Colonies were restrained from making paper money, though become absolutely necessary to their internal commerce, from the constant remittance of their gold and silver to Britain. — But not only the interest of a particular body of Merchants, the interest of any small body of British Tradesmen or Artificers, has been found, they say, to out-weigh that of all the King’s subjects in the Colonies.

Thus, taking away from the colonists the right to issue their own money was indeed a grievance, but it was one of many and does not appear in the Declaration of Independence.

I made this point to Professor LeMay, who replied:

Dear Anthony,

Franklin objected to the English acts denying some colonies the right to make money because the Penns used that dodge to turn down the Pennsylvania Assembly bills. The Pennsylvania Assembly charged a small interest on the paper currency it issued, and that financed the
government. Penn (ie, Thomas Penn) scorned the assembly and wanted it at his mercy, so he generally had his governors turn down paper money bills. They said that Parliament would not want them to pass such bills. (They used that dodge rather than say Thomas Penn had forbidden them to do so, and taken out a bond for five thousand pounds that they would do
what he required.) But Parliament did not object to Pennsylvania’s issuing paper money — only to those colonies who issued nearly worthless paper money.

I suspect that had Franklin been in charge of the entire paper currency (as he was, to some degree, in part of 1775 and 1776), he would not have allowed the individual colonies to issue nearly worthless mediums of exchange.

On the other hand, Parliament behaved unreasonably to America in the Stamp Act and following years, and Franklin was a better propagandist than Parliament.

All best, Leo

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it all back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits" -- Sir Josiah Stamp (President of the Bank of England in the 1920s, the second richest man in Britain).

 

George Washington Carver

Quotes from a Christian

 

Fear of something is at the root of hate for others, and hate within will eventually destroy the hater.

 

When our thoughts - which bring actions - are filled with hate against anyone, Negro or white, we are in a living hell. That is as real as hell will ever be.

 

How far you go in life depends on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in your life you will have been all of these.

 

Education is the key to unlock the golden door of freedom.

 

Ninety-nine percent of the failures come from people who have the habit of making excuses.

 

I love to think of nature as an unlimited broadcasting station, through which God speaks to us every hour, if we will only tune in.

 

Our creator is the same and never changes despite the names given Him by people here and in all parts of the world. Even if we gave Him no name at all, He would still be there, within us, waiting to give us good on this earth.

 

There is no short cut to achievement. Life requires thorough preparation - veneer isn't worth anything.

 

No individual has any right to come into the world and go out of it without leaving behind him distinct and legitimate reasons for having passed through it.

 

Learn to do common things uncommonly well; we must always keep in mind that anything that helps fill the dinner pail is valuable.

 

George Washington Quotes

“Where are our Men of abilities? Why do they not come forth to save their Country?”

“It is better to offer no excuse than a bad one.”

“Make sure you are doing what God wants you to do--then do it with all your strength.”

“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.”

“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”

“A primary object should be the education of our youth in the science of government. In a republic, what species of knowledge can be equally important? And what duty more pressing than communicating it to those who are to be the future guardians of the liberties of the country?”

“A free people ought...to be armed”

“In politics as in religion, my tenets are few and simple. The leading one of which, and indeed that which embraces most others, is to be honest and just ourselves and to exact it from others, meddling as little as possible in their affairs where our own are not involved. If this maxim was generally adopted, wars would cease and our swords would soon be converted into reap hooks and our harvests be more peaceful, abundant, and happy.”

“I hope I shall possess firmness and virtue enough to maintain what I consider the most enviable of all titles, the character of an honest man.”

“Human happiness and moral duty are inseparably connected.”

“99% of failures come from people who make excuses.”

“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth”

“Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder.

“Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.”

“Paper money has had the effect in your state that it will ever have, to ruin commerce, oppress the honest, and open the door to every species of fraud and injustice.”

“No Man has a more perfect reliance on the all-wise and powerful dispensations of the Supreme Being than I have, nor thinks his aid more necessary...The man must be bad indeed who can look upon the events of the American Revolution without feeling the warmest gratitude towards the great Author of the Universe whose divine interposition was so frequently manifested in our behalf....In war He directed the sword, and in peace, He has ruled in our councils.”



“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.”


“Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle”

“The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.”


“if to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair. The rest is in the hands of God.”


“...overgrown military establishments, which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to Republican Liberty.

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

“The thing that separates the American Christian from every other person on earth is the fact that he would rather die on his feet, than to live on his knees.”

“The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.

“We must consult our means rather than our wishes.”

“No people can be bound to acknowledge the invisible hand which conducts the affairs of men more than the people of the united States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency”
“A slender acquaintance with the world must convince every man that actions, not words, are the true criterion of the attachment of friends.”
“It is absolutely necessary... for me to have persons that can think for me, as well as execute orders.”

“Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness.”

'ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear”

“The blessed Religion revealed in the word of God will remain an eternal and awful monument to prove that the best Institutions may be abused by human depravity; and that they may even, in some instances be made subservient to the vilest of purposes.”

“No pecuniary consideration is more urgent, than the regular redemption and discharge of the public debt: on none can delay be more injurious, or an economy of time more valuable.

God help us.

 

Should America Print its own Script and do away with taxes by all principle paid to state rather than the financial elite?

     Banks steal all principle by filing a 1099A after 90 days from final payment. Banks then enter abandoned principle as income for the Bank on their balance sheet.

     Principle paid to the state eliminates all taxes except for a 1.5% fee for the bank’s expenses of operation. All bank facilities and employees are state assets and operation.

       See Nehemiah 5:1-13, Also Ezekiel 18:13

       Why encourage bankers to violate Exodus 20:15

The following historical story is taken from a radio address given by Congressman Charles G. Binderup of Nebraska, some 50 years ago and was reprinted in Unrobing the Ghosts of Wall Street:

Colonies More Prosperous Than The Home Country

Before the American War for Independence in 1776, the colonized part of what is today the United States of America was a possession of England. It was called New England, and was made up of 13 colonies, which became the first 13 states of the great Republic. Around 1750, this New England was very prosperous. Benjamin Franklin was able to write:

“There was abundance in the Colonies, and peace was reigning on every border. It was difficult, and even impossible, to find a happier and more prosperous nation on all the surface of the globe. Comfort was prevailing in every home. The people, in general, kept the highest moral standards, and education was widely spread.”

When Benjamin Franklin went over to England to represent the interests of the Colonies, he saw a completely different situation: the working population of this country was gnawed by hunger and poverty. “The streets are covered with beggars and tramps,” he wrote. He asked his English friends how England, with all its wealth, could have so much poverty among its working classes.

His friends replied that England was a prey to a terrible condition: it had too many workers! The rich said they were already overburdened with taxes, and could not pay more to relieve the needs and poverty of this mass of workers. Several rich Englishmen of that time actually believed, along with Mathus, that wars and plague were necessary to rid the country from man-power surpluses.

Franklin’s friends then asked him how the American Colonies managed to collect enough money to support their poor houses, and how they could overcome this plague of pauperism. Franklin replied:

“We have no poor houses in the Colonies; and if we had some, there would be nobody to put in them, since there is, in the Colonies, not a single unemployed person, neither beggars nor tramps.”

Thanks To Free Money Issued By The Nation

His friends could not believe their ears, and even less understand this fact, since when the English poor houses and jails became too cluttered, England shipped these poor wretches and down-and- outs, like cattle, and discharged, on the quays of the Colonies, those who had survived the poverty, dirtiness and privations of the journey. At that time, England was throwing into jail those who could not pay their debts. They therefore asked Franklin how he could explain the remarkable prosperity of the New England Colonies. Franklin replied:

“That is simple. In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It is called ‘Colonial Scrip.’ We issue it in proper proportion to make the goods and pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In this manner, creating ourselves our own paper money, we control its purchasing power and we have no interest to pay to no one.”

The Bankers Impose Poverty

The information came to the knowledge of the English Bankers, and held their attention. They immediately took the necessary steps to have the British Parliament to pass a law that prohibited the Colonies from using their scrip money, and then ordered them to use only the gold and silver money that was provided in sufficient quantity by the English bankers. Then began in America the plague of debt-money, which has never since brought so many curses to the American people.

   More see Freedom Chronicles,  Political Editorials at freedomyell.com

 

Christ has suffered.

     Movement into the last Adam ends in heavenly bliss. Being stuck to the first Adam ends in eternal torment. Truth frees the prisoner from the counterfeit who stole the first Adam’s estate.        

     Having been born into the family of the first Adam, how can you be adopted into the family of the last Adam, the only begotten Son?

     What are your consequences if you elect to stay put, never offering yourself for adoption into the family of the last Adam? The Head of the second family has already agreed in writing to accept you. Will you agree to receive the offer and make your new family membership real, official, and final?

          Is Hell a bunch of maggots in an eternal flame with no light?   Was Jesus’ description clear when he said, “...into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched. Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”? Mark 9:44, 46, 48. Three times he repeats, “WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.”

     Isaiah 66: 24 is the similar Old Testament description. “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.”

     “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” Ezekiel 18:4. The value of a soul is well established in Mark 8:36, 37 “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”

     Genesis 35: 18 “And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, (for she died) that she called his name Ben-o-ni: but his father called him Benjamin.” When the physical body dies the invisible soul departs. The first death is the death of the body. The second death is the death of the soul.

      Revelation 20:14 “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”

    

     We now know who is involved in the second death and their destination. How did the destination (hell) come about?

     Matthew 24:41, “Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:” John 8:44, 47, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. …there is no truth in him. (47) He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.” Revelation 20:2, “that old serpent, which is the Devil.”

 

   The current shape of the soul is like the human body and is, at the second death, turned into the shape of a worm or serpent. (Luke 16)

 

     “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” Acts 16:30, 31.

     There are two Adams. There are two “musts”.

     When our Lord spoke with Nicodemus He used the word “must” twice, a four letter word of great significant truth introducing light into our understanding. Let us study on it for a few minutes; for, though it is but a word of one syllable, it contains a vast volume of most precious evangelical truth from every viewpoint imaginable. Perhaps, in the word, is the key needed to escape the bondage of sin inherited from our physical parents.

     Can it be that there is a cure in following those two “must” words?

"Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." John 3:7.

"As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life." John 3:14

     Man’s first birth, his first estate, is totally set aside. Can I boast of my first estate when I must be born again? I must have a new life, a new nature, a new estate.  My boast matters not. Any man, born of woman, bears the worldly image, of his fallen parent stamped upon him, body and soul, Adam, made by the hands of his Creator, was made in the "image of God." A descendant of Adam issued from his mother’s womb, bears the image and shape of a fallen creature. Adam lost one third of his three parts, his spirit. Hence Jesus said, with force, "Ye must be born again." He did not say, Ye must live better, ye must try and be better, ye must change your way of living, ye must turn over a new leaf. Had it been a matter of improvement, Nicodemus would never have asked, "How can these things be?" A Pharisee would have understood any or all of these things. Any self-improvement, any moral reform, a change of conduct, a change of character, all perfectly intelligible to a Pharisee of every age; he was told "Ye must be born again." Such a statement can only be understood by one who has reached the end of himself and his doings; who has been brought to see that in him, that is in his flesh, dwelleth no good thing; who sees himself as a thorough bankrupt without recourse, the account dead. He must get a new life that bankruptcy cannot apply, and another’s acceptable wealth set up, on which creditors have no possible claim.

     The immense power of this little word "must." impacts all alike. It speaks to the alcoholic. The abstainer is addressed in the same manner, "Ye must be born again." "Ye must be born again." It speaks to every race, color, creed, and class, to every condition, to every grade and rank, and to every denomination, and declares in its own clear tone and emphatic, sweeping style, and says, "Ye must be born again."

  

 

Ben Franklin said in his autobiography,

"... the inability of the colonists to get

the power to issue their own money

permanently out of the hands of

King George III and the international bankers

was the prime reason for the revolutionary war.”

 

"For the first time in the nation's history, there is no longer an authoritative, public record of who owns land in each county." -- University of Utah law professor Christopher Peterson

There is an unbelievable scandal in the making that threatens to subvert our four-century-old method for guaranteeing a fundamental building block of the American republic—property ownership. The biggest reason why you probably haven’t heard much about it is that it involves one of the most generic and boring company names imaginable: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., or MERS. It is a story of deception engineered at the highest level of power for short-term gain, and another epic failure of the private sector to uphold the laws and traditions of American society, even something as fundamental as property rights.

Created in 1995 by the country's biggest banks, MERS quietly took control of and privatized mortgage record-keeping across the country and, in the span of a few years, scrambled America's private property ownership records to the point where no one could figure out who owns what. This was no accident, and was done by design: MERS was a tool used by America's top financial institutions to pump up the real estate market. Mortgage-backed securities, robo-signers, lightning quick foreclosures, subprime mortgages and just about everything else that went into feeding the biggest real estate bubble in U.S. history could not function without help from MERS. But unlike many of the Wall Street scandals, this one could blow up in the banks’ faces, with the little guy laughing all the way back to his free McMansion, and local governments seeing their empty coffers fill back up with the billions of dollars in unpaid fees that MERS circumvented.

The story begins in mid-'90s with the founding of MERS, Inc. by the nation's most powerful banks, ostensibly with the aim of streamlining and modernizing the process of registering and tracking mortgages. Traditionally, there has been no centralized registry of real estate ownership information, with counties maintaining their own records for properties within their borders—a system that has remained virtually unchanged since colonial times.

The MERS database went live in the middle of the dot-com bubble, and was supposed take inefficient government bureaucracies kicking and screaming into the future by providing a centralized, national registry of mortgage ownership information. "MERS addresses a problem that was costing the industry a significant amount of money," Rick Amatucci, a Fannie Mae vice president and the agency's liaison with MERS, told Mortgage Banking magazine, just as the new registry went online in 1997. The database would give lenders across the country instant access to real-time mortgage information, diminish potential for fraud, and lower costs for servicers and borrowers, according to Mortgage Banking Association, which was tasked with overseeing the project.

But that kind of talk was just for the press release. The banking industry wasn't concerned with efficiency or transparency or the greater good. It was all about making money, as quickly and cheaply as possible. And that is what MERS was for. It was created to help the industry push its latest money-maker: mortgage-backed securities, a Wall Street financial scam that dressed up the most toxic, guaranteed-to-fail loans as Grade A investment vehicles that could be sold to suckers looking for an easy gain.

But before mortgage-backed securities could be unleashed on the residential housing market on a massive scale, bankers needed to get rid of America's long-standing real estate recording laws, which required lenders to file all mortgage transactions—the origination of a new loan, for instance, or the transfer or sale of a mortgage between banks—with the county in which the property is located. While this recording requirement was not a problem in the sleepy pre-securitization days of the home loan business, when mortgage transactions were kept to a minimum, it was going to be much more difficult—if not impossible—with widespread use of securitization, which jacked up the industry like high-grade meth. Mortgages would be changing hands dozens of times, going from loan originators to banks to Wall Street investment houses, which would collect them by the thousands and package them into complex debt instruments that would be chopped up into shares and sold off to multiple investors all over the world.

Bankers needed a quick, clean way of reassigning mortgages without having to go through the "cumbersome" process of recording them with county courts and recorder offices. But instead of working with municipalities to modernize title registration by a creating a national database that was aboveboard and that everyone could use, the banking industry did what it does best: hid the information with sly accounting tricks.

And it succeeded. In just a few short years, MERS took over the bulk of residential mortgage registration. There are about 80 million residential mortgages in America today, and MERS tracks 60 percent of them.

"[M]ortgage bankers formed a plan to create one shell company that would pretend to own all the mortgages in the country—that way, the mortgage bankers would never have to record assignments since the same company would always 'own' all the mortgages," wrote University of Utah law professor Christopher Peterson, who wrote a key paper on MERS and the mortgage industry.

Here is how the plaintiffs in a class action suit filed in Florida in July 2010 against MERS and a legal firm described the MERS registration system:

The whole purpose of MERS is to allow "servicers" to pretend as if they are someone else: the "owners" of the mortgage, or the real parties in interest. In fact they are not. … With the oversight of Defendant Merscorp and its unknown principals, the MERS artifice and enterprise evolved into an "ultra-fictitious" entity, which can also be understood as a "meta-corporation." To perpetuate the scheme, MERS was and is used in such a way that the average consumer, or even legal professional, can never determine who or what was or is ultimately receiving the benefits of any mortgage payments. The conspirators set about to confuse everyone as to who owned what. They created a truly effective smokescreen which has left the public and most of the judiciary operating "in the dark" through the present time.

The use of MERS as a generic placeholder for the real owner of a mortgage was a crucial component of the entire securitization machine."[T]he entire scheme was predicated upon the fraudulent designation of MERS as the 'beneficiary' under millions of deeds of trust," according to a class action suit filed in Nevada in 2009 against MERS and all the big, crooked banks we’ve learned to fear and hate. "Before MERS, it would not have been possible for mortgages with no market value . . . to be sold at a profit or collateralized and sold as mortgage-backed securities. Before MERS, it would not have been possible for the Defendant banks and AIG to conceal from government regulators the extent of risk of financial losses those entities faced from the predatory origination of residential loans and the fraudulent re-sale and securitization of those otherwise non-marketable loans."

How efficient was MERS at perpetuating trickery in the real estate market? Well, according to statistics published by the U.S. Treasury’s Financial Crime Enforcement Network [3], from 1997—the year MERS went online—to 2005, mortgage fraud reports increased by 1,411 percent.

The MERS hustle had another benefit: it saved the banking industry—and cost municipal governments—tens of billions of dollars by allowing lenders to avoid paying county filing fees, which cost an average of $30 a pop. According to the AP, if every mortgage tracked by MERS had been resold and re-recorded with a county just one time, the system would have saved the banking industry $2.4 billion in filing fees. In reality, most mortgages are sold and resold a dozen times—sometimes more, which means that MERS extracted at minimum around $30 billion from cash-strapped local governments. "Some counties also use recording fees to fund their court systems, legal aid organizations, low-income housing programs, or schools. In this respect, MERS's role in acting as a mortgagee of record in nominee capacity is simply a tax evasion tool," says Professor Peterson.

But there was one major downside to the scam: because MERS departed from established real estate recording requirements, there was no guarantee that its claim to ownership, if challenged, would be honored by the courts.

Transparent real property registration was one of the earliest—and most important—functions of the American government, a practice that has changed amazingly little since the colonial times. According to "Foreclosure, Subprime Mortgage Lending, and the Mortgage Registration System," American colonists began to enact laws requiring land sales, transfers and mortgages to be entered into the public record with a government agency going back almost 400 years. The Massachusetts Plymouth Bay Colony adopted its first such "recording law" in 1636, which stated that "all sales exchanges giftes mortgages leases or other Conveyances of howses and landes the sale to be acknowledged before the Governor or anyone of the Assistants and committed to publick Record."

By the time the Boston Tea Party rolled around, every English colony had passed laws that required lenders and landowners to enter their names and property and mortgage information into the public record. The reasons for the popularity of the laws are simple and utilitarian: transparent public records of property ownership prevented disputes over who owned what and allowed people to use land as collateral on loans. "The necessity and usefulness of these early public title records is attested to by their nearly universal and uninterrupted force in subsequent American law. Indeed, Pennsylvania's first recording act, first adopted in 1717, remains in force to this day," wrote Peterson. Banks that failed to register mortgage transactions risked losing their ability to enforce the contract. And that is exactly what is on the verge of happening with mortgages registered with MERS.

Dozens of lawsuits all across the country have been filed against MERS and its partners to put this very issue to the test. And while most of them are still ongoing, it's clear that MERS is fighting for its life.

The Wall Street Journal:

Now, critics and homeowners facing foreclosure are increasingly challenging, among other things, MERS' role and legal standing in home foreclosures where it acts as legal representative of the mortgage holder. MERS has fought and won legal challenges in the past. But the nationwide epidemic of foreclosures in the wake of the housing collapse will present it with a wave of challenges unlike any it has seen previously.

Trouble for MERS could add risk to banks by slowing down the securitization process, and creating uncertainty during a time when banks are struggling to reassure shareholders and customers. One hedge fund investor said Friday that questions around MERS are adding to his concerns about banks in the mortgage business and are keeping him from investing in the sector.

While MERS officials say they are confident about their business model, it has become clear that their scheme might very well be on the verge of toppling. On November 17, Congress quietly rammed through a sneaky, vaguely worded bill that would have legalized MERS’ dealings retroactively [4]. And while the bill didn't pass [5], we can expect Wall Street's lackeys in Congress to continue their efforts. After all, if courts continue to rule against MERS's business model—and it looks like they will—many homes may become foreclosure proof [6]. As Reuters put it: “If court rulings against MERS' authority to foreclose proliferate, many foreclosure cases may be halted indefinitely, and some homeowners in default may end up with clear title to their homes.” Owners will still owe money to banks, but their homes would no longer be counted as collateral on the loan. In short, banks would not be able to kick people out of their homes. And clearly, that is something that America's plutocracy just cannot abide.

***

So who or what is MERS? How was this little-known corporation able to change nearly 400 years of legal practice in the span of a decade, and do so much damage so quickly? And why did no one blow the whistle?

As a result of the lawsuits being filed against MERS, a lot of previously unknown information about the inner workings of MERS is coming to light.

The people who developed the concept of MERS were connected with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as the most corrupt lending institutions in America. People like Brian Hershkowitz, former director of the Mortgage Bankers Association and founder of the association’s technology committee that oversaw the early development of MERS in the early '90s, according to a homeowner-turned-activist-blogger, who is involved in a class action lawsuit against MERS (In 1993, Mortgage Banking magazine referred to this new mortgage resignation system [7] as “New Age Delivery.”)

Hershkowitz was an early tech-booster in the banking industry, heralding a new age where efficiency and profitability would reign supreme. In the early 90s he attributed the success of Countrywide Financial to the fact that it embraced emerging computer technology. "They use technology in ways that give them a competitive advantage and set them apart. They were operating with excess capacity, and now they are putting it to use," Hershkowitz, then-associate director of the Mortgage Bankers Association, told the New York Times in 1991. A few years later he went to work for Countrywide as an executive involved in "areas of strategic planning and executive management." From 1982 to 2003, Countrywide performed like a Ponzi scheme, with shareholders gleefully getting a 23,000.0 percent return [8] on their investment, until the bank collapsed under the weight of its own fraud schemes in 2007.

It seems that MERS has operated along similar lines. According to sworn testimony by various MERS executives, the organization has cycled through four different corporate entities in its brief lifespan. MERS also has almost no paid employees and does not seem to keeps any records or minutes of corporate meetings. When pressed to explain the inner workings of the organization, its executives evaded questions, feigned ignorance and generally acted like provincial mafia bosses on trial—exactly the kind of professionalism one would expect for a company responsible for tracking the ownership information of 50 million mortgages. It was just a couple of guys sitting around, chatting, smoking…and making sure not to leave any evidence behind. No wonder county officials who blew the whistle on MERS early on were squashed.

Edward Romaine, a Republican recorder of deeds for New York's Suffolk County, was one of the few officials who tried to refuse to take filings from MERS. "He argued that not only would the county lose out on fees—$1 million in one year alone—but that MERS failed to even maintain a clear chain of title on a property. He got backing from New York's attorney general," reported the Associated Press. MERS sued Suffolk County and took the case all the way up to the state's highest court, where it won on appeal in 2007. The court forced the county to accept MERS filings because the county lacked the statutory authority. Put another way, the court forced a municipal government to do business with a criminal organization, despite objections from county officials.

MERS cost local governments billions of dollars in lost revenue, but there is a chance that the cash-strapped counties will be able to claw some of that money back. Lawsuits have been filed against MERS in California, Nevada, Tennessee and 14 other states that accuse the company of functioning as a tax evasion vehicle designed to help banks circumvent filing fee requirements. “In California, the suit against MERS could cost the company somewhere between $60 to $120 billion in damages and penalties. With so much money extracted from California's municipalities, no wonder the Golden State is facing a $25 billion budget gap,” reported the Association Press.

We're constantly being told that liberalization, deregulation and privatization automatically equal greater freedom and increased efficiency. But MERS provides us with a different narrative, one in which the government works perfectly well, when not corrupted by corporations who want to use it to loot public wealth.

 

Why is it that there is such a problem with “lost Mortgage Notes” as is claimed by numerous lenders that are trying to foreclose today?

 

How could it be that there could be so many “lost” documents all of a sudden? Could it be that the documents weren’t really lost at all, but were actually turned into a source of revenue that was never disclosed as being a part of the transaction?

 

To believe that so many “original” documents could be legitimately “lost” in such a short period of time stretches the credibility of such claims beyond belief. Could this be the reason that MERS (Mortage Electronic Registration Systems) was formed in the 1990’s as a way to supposedly “transfer ownership of a mortgage” without having to have the “original documents” that would be required to be presented to the various county recorders?

 

Could it be they KNEW THEY WOULDN’T HAVE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS FOR RECORDING and had to devise a system to get around that requirement? When the foreclosure action is filed in the court the attorney for the purported “party of interest”, usually the “lender” who is foreclosing, files a “COPY” of the “Deed of Trust” or similar “Investment Security” with the Complaint to begin foreclosure proceedings.

 

Is that “COPY” of the “Security Instrument” within the “regulations” of Federal Law under 18 U.S.C. § 474? Is it usually the same size or very nearly the same size as the original document? Yes it is and without question it is a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY!

 

Who was it that produced that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY? Who was involved in taking that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY to the Court to file the foreclosure action? Who is it that is now legally in possession of that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY? Has everyone from the original “lender” down to the Clerk of the Court where the foreclosure is now being litigated been in possession or is currently in possession of that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY?

 

What about the Trustees who are involved in the process of selling foreclosed properties in nonjudicial states? What about the fact that there is no judicial proceeding in those states where the documentation purported to be legal and proper to bring a foreclosure action can be verified without expensive litigation by the alleged “borrower”? All the trustee has to do is send a letter to the alleged “borrower” stating they are in default and can sell their property at public auction.

 

It is just ASSUMED that they have the “ORIGINAL” documents in their possession as required by law. In reality, in almost every situation, they do NOT!!! They are using a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY as the basis to foreclose on a property that was paid for by the person who signed the “Mortgage Note” at the closing table that was converted to money by the bank.

 

When it is demanded they produce the actual “original signed documents” they almost always refuse to do so and ask the Court to “take their word for it” that they have. They have, instead, submitted a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY to the Court as their “proof of claim” to attempt to unjustly enrich themselves through a blatantly fraudulent foreclosure action.

 

One often cited example of this was the decision handed down by U. S. Federal District Court Judge Christopher A. Boyko of Ohio, who on October 31, 2007 dismissed 14 foreclosure actions at one time with scathing footnote comments about the actions of the Plaintiffs and their attorneys.

 

Not long after that came the dismissal of 26 foreclosure cases in Ohio by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas M. Rose who referenced the Boyko ruling in his decision. How many other judges have not been so brave as to stand on the principles of law as Judges Boyko and Rose did, but need to start doing so TODAY?

 

BOTH of the original documents which are absolutely required to be in their possession to begin foreclosure actions. Almost every time the people that are being foreclosed on are able to convince the Court (in judicial foreclosures) to demand that those “original documents” be produced in Court by the Plaintiff, the foreclosure action stops and it is obvious why that happens! THEY DON’T HAVE THE “ORIGINAL” DOCUMENTS

 

Has any of this foreclosure activity crossed state lines in communications or other activities? Have there been at least two predicate acts of Fraud by the parties involved? Have the people involved used any type of electronic communication in this Fraud such as telephone, faxing or email? It is obvious that those questions have to be answered with a resounding YES! If that is the case, then the Fraud that has been discussed here falls under the RICO statutes of Federal Law. Didn’t they eventually take down the mob for Racketeering under RICO statutes years ago? Is it time to take down the “NEW MOB” with RICO once again?

How could this kind of situation ever occur in this country? Could it be that this whole entire process could be “studied concealment or misrepresentation” where the parties involved are responsible under the law for their conduct? Could it be that it is no “accident” that so many “wet ink signature” Notes cannot be produced to back up the foreclosure actions that are devastating this country?

 

Could it be that the overwhelming use of COUNTERFEIT SECURITIES, as purported evidence of a debt in foreclosure cases, is BY DESIGN and “studied concealment or misrepresentation” so as to strip the people of this country of their property and assets?

 

“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.”

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:” Declaration of Independence

 

Could it be that a VERY substantial number of Banks, Mortgage Companies, Law Firms and Attorneys are guilty of outright massive Fraud, not only against the people of this country, but of massive Fraud on the Court as well because of this COUNTERFEITING?

 

How could one possibly come to any other conclusion after learning the facts and understanding the law? How many other people are implicated in this MASSIVE FRAUD such as Trustees and Sheriffs that have sold literally millions of homes after foreclosure proceedings based on these COUNTERFEIT SECURITIES submitted as evidence of a purported obligation?

 

How many judges know about this Fraud happening right in their own courtrooms and never did anything? How many of them have actually been PAID for making judgments on foreclosures? Wouldn’t that be a felony or at the very least, misprision of felony, to know what is going on and not act to stop it or make it known to authorities in a position to investigate and stop it?

 

How is it that so many banks could recover financially, so rapidly, from the financial debacle of 2008-09, with foreclosures still running at record levels, and yet pay back taxpayer money that was showered on them and do it so quickly?

 

Could it be that when they take back a property in foreclosure where they never risked any money and actually were unjustly enriched in the previous transaction, that it is easy to make huge sums by reselling that property and then beginning the whole “Unconscionable” process all over again with a new “borrower”?

 

How is it that just three years ago a loan was available to virtually almost anyone who could “fog a mirror” with no documentation of income or ability to repay a loan? Common sense makes you ask how “lenders” could possibly take those kinds of risks.

 

Could it be that the ability to “repay a loan” was not an issue at all for the lenders because they were going to get their profits immediately and risk absolutely nothing at all? Could it be that, if anything, they stood to make even more money if a person defaulted on the “alleged loan” in a short period of time? They could literally obtain the property for nothing other than some legal fees and court filing costs through foreclosure. They could then resell the property and reap additional unjust profits once again! One does not need to have been a finance major in college to figure out what has been happening once you are enlightened to the FACTS.

 

Why is it that there is such a problem with “lost Mortgage Notes” as is claimed by numerous lenders that are trying to foreclose today?

 

How could it be that there could be so many “lost” documents all of a sudden? Could it be that the documents weren’t really lost at all, but were actually turned into a source of revenue that was never disclosed as being a part of the transaction?

 

To believe that so many “original” documents could be legitimately “lost” in such a short period of time stretches the credibility of such claims beyond belief. Could this be the reason that MERS (Mortage Electronic Registration Systems) was formed in the 1990’s as a way to supposedly “transfer ownership of a mortgage” without having to have the “original documents” that would be required to be presented to the various county recorders?

 

Could it be they KNEW THEY WOULDN’T HAVE THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS FOR RECORDING and had to devise a system to get around that requirement? When the foreclosure action is filed in the court the attorney for the purported “party of interest”, usually the “lender” who is foreclosing, files a “COPY” of the “Deed of Trust” or similar “Investment Security” with the Complaint to begin foreclosure proceedings.

 

Is that “COPY” of the “Security Instrument” within the “regulations” of Federal Law under 18 U.S.C. § 474? Is it usually the same size or very nearly the same size as the original document? Yes it is and without question it is a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY!

 

Who was it that produced that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY? Who was involved in taking that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY to the Court to file the foreclosure action? Who is it that is now legally in possession of that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY? Has everyone from the original “lender” down to the Clerk of the Court where the foreclosure is now being litigated been in possession or is currently in possession of that COUNTERFEIT SECURITY?

 

What about the Trustees who are involved in the process of selling foreclosed properties in nonjudicial states? What about the fact that there is no judicial proceeding in those states where the documentation purported to be legal and proper to bring a foreclosure action can be verified without expensive litigation by the alleged “borrower”? All the trustee has to do is send a letter to the alleged “borrower” stating they are in default and can sell their property at public auction.

 

It is just ASSUMED that they have the “ORIGINAL” documents in their possession as required by law. In reality, in almost every situation, they do NOT!!! They are using a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY as the basis to foreclose on a property that was paid for by the person who signed the “Mortgage Note” at the closing table that was converted to money by the bank.

 

When it is demanded they produce the actual “original signed documents” they almost always refuse to do so and ask the Court to “take their word for it” that they have. They have, instead, submitted a COUNTERFEIT SECURITY to the Court as their “proof of claim” to attempt to unjustly enrich themselves through a blatantly fraudulent foreclosure action.

 

One often cited example of this was the decision handed down by U. S. Federal District Court Judge Christopher A. Boyko of Ohio, who on October 31, 2007 dismissed 14 foreclosure actions at one time with scathing footnote comments about the actions of the Plaintiffs and their attorneys.

 

Not long after that came the dismissal of 26 foreclosure cases in Ohio by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas M. Rose who referenced the Boyko ruling in his decision. How many other judges have not been so brave as to stand on the principles of law as Judges Boyko and Rose did, but need to start doing so TODAY?

 

BOTH of the original documents which are absolutely required to be in their possession to begin foreclosure actions. Almost every time the people that are being foreclosed on are able to convince the Court (in judicial foreclosures) to demand that those “original documents” be produced in Court by the Plaintiff, the foreclosure action stops and it is obvious why that happens! THEY DON’T HAVE THE “ORIGINAL” DOCUMENTS

 

Has any of this foreclosure activity crossed state lines in communications or other activities? Have there been at least two predicate acts of Fraud by the parties involved? Have the people involved used any type of electronic communication in this Fraud such as telephone, faxing or email? It is obvious that those questions have to be answered with a resounding YES! If that is the case, then the Fraud that has been discussed here falls under the RICO statutes of Federal Law. Didn’t they eventually take down the mob for Racketeering under RICO statutes years ago? Is it time to take down the “NEW MOB” with RICO once again?

How could this kind of situation ever occur in this country? Could it be that this whole entire process could be “studied concealment or misrepresentation” where the parties involved are responsible under the law for their conduct? Could it be that it is no “accident” that so many “wet ink signature” Notes cannot be produced to back up the foreclosure actions that are devastating this country?

 

Could it be that the overwhelming use of COUNTERFEIT SECURITIES, as purported evidence of a debt in foreclosure cases, is BY DESIGN and “studied concealment or misrepresentation” so as to strip the people of this country of their property and assets?

 

“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.”

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:” Declaration of Independence

 

Could it be that a VERY substantial number of Banks, Mortgage Companies, Law Firms and Attorneys are guilty of outright massive Fraud, not only against the people of this country, but of massive Fraud on the Court as well because of this COUNTERFEITING?

 

How could one possibly come to any other conclusion after learning the facts and understanding the law? How many other people are implicated in this MASSIVE FRAUD such as Trustees and Sheriffs that have sold literally millions of homes after foreclosure proceedings based on these COUNTERFEIT SECURITIES submitted as evidence of a purported obligation?

 

How many judges know about this Fraud happening right in their own courtrooms and never did anything? How many of them have actually been PAID for making judgments on foreclosures? Wouldn’t that be a felony or at the very least, misprision of felony, to know what is going on and not act to stop it or make it known to authorities in a position to investigate and stop it?

 

How is it that so many banks could recover financially, so rapidly, from the financial debacle of 2008-09, with foreclosures still running at record levels, and yet pay back taxpayer money that was showered on them and do it so quickly?

 

Could it be that when they take back a property in foreclosure where they never risked any money and actually were unjustly enriched in the previous transaction, that it is easy to make huge sums by reselling that property and then beginning the whole “Unconscionable” process all over again with a new “borrower”?

 

How is it that just three years ago a loan was available to virtually almost anyone who could “fog a mirror” with no documentation of income or ability to repay a loan? Common sense makes you ask how “lenders” could possibly take those kinds of risks.

 

Could it be that the ability to “repay a loan” was not an issue at all for the lenders because they were going to get their profits immediately and risk absolutely nothing at all? Could it be that, if anything, they stood to make even more money if a person defaulted on the “alleged loan” in a short period of time? They could literally obtain the property for nothing other than some legal fees and court filing costs through foreclosure. They could then resell the property and reap additional unjust profits once again! One does not need to have been a finance major in college to figure out what has been happening once you are enlightened to the FACTS.

 

STAND STILL

"The Lord shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace." Precious assurance. How eminently calculated to tranquillize the spirit in view of the most appalling difficulties and dangers! The Lord not only places Himself between us and our sins, but also between us and our circumstances. By doing the former, He gives us peace of conscience; by doing the latter, He gives us peace of heart. That the two things are perfectly distinct, every experienced Christian knows. Very many have peace of conscience, who have not Peace of heart. They have, through grace and by faith, found Christ, in the divine efficacy of His blood, between them and all their sins; but they are not able, in the same simple way, to realize Him as standing, in His divine wisdom, love, and power, between them and their circumstances. This makes a material difference in the practical condition of the soul, as well as in the character of one's testimony. Nothing tends more to glorify the name of Jesus than that quiet repose of spirit which results from having Him between us and everything that could be a matter of anxiety to our hearts. "Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee, because he trusteth in thee." Isaiah 26:3

But some feel disposed to ask the question, "Are we not to do anything?" This may be answered by asking another, namely, what can we do? All who really know themselves must answer, nothing. If, therefore, we can do nothing, had we not better "stand still" If the Lord is acting for us, had we not better stand back? Shall we run before Him? Shall we busily intrude ourselves upon His sphere of action! Shall we come in His way? There can be no possible use in two acting, when one is so perfectly competent to do all. No one would think of bringing a lighted candle to add brightness to the sun at mid-day: and yet the man who would do so might well be accounted wise, in comparison with him who attempts to assist God by his bustling officiousness.

However, when God, in His great mercy, opens the way, faith can walk therein. It only ceases from man's way in order to walk in God's. "And the Lord said unto Moses, Wherefore criest thou unto me? Speak unto the children of Israel that they go forward." It is only when we have learnt to "stand still" that we are able effectually to go forward. To attempt the latter, until we have learnt the former, is sure to issue in the exposure of our folly and weakness. It is, therefore, true wisdom, in all times of difficulty and perplexity, to "stand still" — to wait only upon God, and He will, assuredly, open a way for us; and then we can peacefully we happily "go forward." There is no uncertainty when God makes a way for us; but every self-devised path must prove a path of doubt and hesitation. The unregenerate man may move along with great apparent firmness and decision in his own ways; but one of the most distinct elements, in the new creation, is self distrust, and the element which answers thereto is confidence in God. It is when our eyes have seen God's salvation that we can walk therein; but this can never be distinctly seen until we have been brought to the end of our own poor doings.

There is peculiar force and beauty in the expression, "see the salvation of God." The very fact of our being called to "see" God's salvation, proves that the salvation is a complete one. It teaches that salvation is a thing wrought out and revealed by God, to be seen and enjoyed by us. It is not a thing made up partly of God's doing, and partly of man's. Were it so, it could not be called God's salvation. In order to be His, it must be wholly divested of everything pertaining to man. The only possible effect of human efforts is to raise a dust which obscures the view of God's salvation.

"Speak to the children of Israel that they go forward." Moses himself seems to have been brought to a stand, as appears from the Lord's question, "Wherefore criest thou to me?" Moses could tell the people to "stand still and see the salvation of God," while his own spirit was giving forth its exercises in an earnest cry to God. However, there is no use in crying when we ought to be acting; just as there is no use in acting when we ought to be waiting. Yet such is, ever, our way. We attempt to move forward when we ought to stand still, and we stand still when we ought to move forward. In Israel's case, the question might spring up in the heart, "whither are we to go?' To all appearance there is an insurmountable barrier in the way of any movement forward. How were they to go through the sea? This was the point. Nature never could solve this question. But we may rest assured that God never gives a command without, at the same time, communicating the power to obey. The real condition of the heart may be tested by the command; but the soul that is, by grace, disposed to obey, receives power from above to do so. When Christ commanded the man with the withered hand to stretch it forth, the man might naturally have said, "How can I stretch forth an arm which hangs dead by my side?" But he did not raise any question whatever, for with the command, and from the same source, came the power to obey.

 

 

DAILY WALK

The Spirit of God delights to trace the boundaries of the people, and to dwell on the most minute details connected with their history. He takes a lively and loving interest in all that concerns them, their conflicts, their victories, their possessions, all their landmarks, everything about them is dwelt upon with a minuteness which, by its touching grace and condescension, fills the heart with wonder, love and praise. Man, in his contemptible self-importance, thinks it beneath his dignity to enter upon minute details; but our God counts the hairs of our heads; puts our tears into His bottle; takes knowledge of our every care, our every sorrow, our every need. There is nothing too small for His love, as there is nothing too great for His power. He concentrates His loving care upon each one of His people as though He had only that one to attend to; and there is not a single circumstance in our private history, from day to day, however trivial, in which He does not take a loving interest.

Let us ever remember this, for our comfort; and may we learn to trust Him better, and use, with a more artless faith, His fatherly love and care. He tells us to cast all our care upon Him, in the assurance that He careth for us. He would have our hearts as free from care as our conscience is free from guilt. "Be careful for nothing; but, in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God; and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." (Phil. 4: 6, 7.)

It is to be feared that the great majority of us know but little of the real depth, meaning and power of such words as these. We read them, and hear them; but we do not take them in, and make our own of them. We do not digest them and reduce them to practice. How little do we really enter into the blessed truth that our Father is interested in all our little cares and sorrows; and that we may go to Him with all our little wants and difficulties. We imagine that such things are beneath the notice of the High and Mighty One who inhabiteth eternity, and sitteth upon the circle of the earth. This is a, serious mistake, and one that robs us of incalculable blessing, in our daily history. We should ever remember that there is nothing great or small with our God. All things are alike to Him who sustains the vast universe by the word of His power, and takes notice of a falling sparrow. It is quite as easy to Him to create a world as to provide a breakfast for some poor widow. The greatness of His power, the moral grandeur of His government, and the minuteness of His tender care do, all alike, command the wonder and the worship of our hearts.

See that you make your own of all these things. Seek to live nearer to God in your daily walk. Lean more upon Him. Use Him more. Go to Him in all your need, and you will never have to tell your need to a poor fellow mortal. "My God shall supply all your need, according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus." What a source! "God." What a standard! "His riches in glory." What a channel! "Christ Jesus." It is your sweet privilege to place all your need over against His riches, and lose sight of the former in the presence of the latter. His exhaustless treasury is thrown open to you, in all the love of His heart; go and draw upon it, in the artless simplicity of faith, and you will never have occasion to look to a creature stream, or lean on a creature prop.

 

“WHAT WAIT I FOR?” (Christmas Time)

Psalm 39:6-7 “Surely every man walketh in a vain shew: surely they are disquieted in vain: he heapeth up riches, and knoweth not who shall gather them. And now, Lord, what wait I for? My hope is in thee.”

This is a searching question for the heart, but it is oftentimes a most necessary one, inasmuch as we may constantly detect ourselves in an attitude of waiting for things which, when they come, prove not to be worth waiting for.

The human heart is very much like the poor lame man at the gate of the temple in Acts 3. He was looking at every passerby “expecting to receive something.” And the heart will ever be looking out for some relief, some comfort or some enjoyment in passing circumstances. It may be found sitting by the side of some creature-stream, vainly expecting some refreshment to flow along its channel.

It is amazing to think of the trifles on which nature will fix its expectant gaze — a change of circumstances, change of scene, a journey, a visit, a letter, a book. Anything is sufficient to raise expectations in a poor heart which is not finding its center, its spring, its all, in Christ.

Hence the practical importance of frequently turning sharp round upon the heart with the question, “What wait I for?” Doubtless, the true answer to this enquiry would at times furnish the most advanced Christian with matter for deep humiliation and self-judgment before the Lord.

In Psalm 39: 6 we have three great types of character as set forth in the “vain show,” “vain disquietude” and “heaping up.” These types may sometimes be found combined, but very often they have a distinct development.

There are many whose whole life is one “vain show,“ whether in their personal character, their commercial position, their political or religious profession. There is nothing solid about them, nothing real, nothing true. The glitter is the most shallow gilding possible. There is nothing deep, nothing intrinsic. All is surface work — all the merest flash and smoke.

Then we find another class whose life is one continued scene of “vain disquietude.” You will never find them at ease — never satisfied, never happy. There is always some terrible thing coming — some catastrophe in the distance, the mere anticipation of which keeps them in a constant fever of anxiety. They are troubled about property, about friends, about trade, about children, about servants. Though placed in circumstances which thousands of their fellow-creatures would deem most enviable, they seem to be in a perpetual fret. They harass themselves in reference to troubles that may never come, difficulties they may never encounter, sorrows they may never live to see. Instead of remembering the blessings of the past and rejoicing in the mercies of the present, they are anticipating the trials and sorrows of the future. In a word, “they are disquieted in vain.”

Finally, you will meet another class, quite different from either of the preceding — keen, shrewd, industrious, money-making people who would live where others would starve. There is not much “vain show” about them. They are too solid, and life is too practical a reality for anything of that sort. Neither can you say there is much disquietude about them. Theirs is an easy-going, quiet, plodding spirit, or an active, enterprising, speculating turn of mind. “They heap up, and know not who shall gather.”

But remember, on all three alike the Spirit has stamped “vanity.” Yes, “all” without any exception, “under the sun,” has been pronounced by one who knew it by experience and wrote it by inspiration, “vanity and vexation of spirit.” Turn where you will “under the sun” and you will not find anything on which the heart can rest. You must rise on the steady and vigorous pinion of faith to regions “above the sun,” to find “a better and an enduring substance.” The One who sits at the right hand of God has said, “I lead in the way of righteousness, in the midst of the paths of judgment: that I may cause them that love Me to inherit substance, and I will fill their treasures” (Prov. 8: 20-21). None but Jesus can give “substance.” None but He can “fill.” None but He can “satisfy.” There is that in Christ's perfect work which meets the deepest need of conscience. There is that in His glorious Person which can satisfy the most earnest longings of the heart. The one who has found Christ on the cross and Christ on the throne, has found all he can possibly need for time or eternity.

Well might the psalmist, having challenged his heart with the question, “What wait I for?” reply, “My hope is in Thee.” No “vain show,” no “vain disquietude,” no “heaping up” for him. He had found an object in God worth waiting for. Therefore, turning away his eye from all beside, he says, “My hope is in Thee.”

This, my beloved reader, is the only true, peaceful and happy position. The soul that leans on, looks to, and waits for Jesus will never be disappointed. Such an one possesses an exhaustless fund of present enjoyment in fellowship with Christ. At the same time he is cheered by “that blessed hope” that when this present scene, with all its “vain show,” its “vain disquietude” and its vain resources shall have passed away, he shall be with Jesus where He is, to behold His glory, to bask in the light of His countenance and to be conformed to His image forever.

May we, then, be much in the habit of challenging our earth-bound, creatures-seeking hearts with the searching enquiry, “What wait I for?” Am I waiting for some change of circumstances or “for the Son from heaven?” Can I look up to Jesus and with a full and an honest heart, say, “Lord, my hope is in Thee.”

May we be more thoroughly separated from this present evil world and all that pertains thereto, by the power of communion with those things that are unseen and eternal.

“From various cares my heart retires,

Though deep and boundless its desires,

I'm now to please but One;

He before whom the elders bow,

With Him is all my business now,

And with the souls that are His own.

“With these my happy lot is cast,

Through the world's deserts rude and waste,

Or through its gardens fair;

Whether the storms of trouble sweep,

Or all in dead supineness sleep,

       Still to go on be my whole care.”

 

WGEA.us is a website dedicated to local Geneva news and information.

 

We are asking all the churches in Geneva County to share with us any information you would like to have posted on our site. You can spread the word about upcoming events and activities via the internet.

 

Just email your information to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Or fax it to 334-774-6450

 

And don’t forget to tell your congregation to look for information on the website at www.wgea.us

 

Wgea.us is a service of WGEA AM 1150 radio in Geneva, Alabama.

                    wiregrass medical center