WHAT IS CHECK KITING?

Check kiting is a term applied in a method of floating checks between various bank accounts in a never ending circle. Here is how it works: Suppose Tom, Dick and harry each had a checking account of three different banks, Bank A, Bank B, and Bank C. Tom writes a check for $3,500 from his account at Bank A to Dick. Dick writes a check for $3,500 from his account at Bank B to Harry. And harry writes a check for $3,500 from his account at Bank C to Tom, thus finishing the circle. Together, they have written checks totally three times $3,500 or $10,500. Yet between the three of them there is less than $100 in all three checking accounts.


Will any of the three checks bounce? The answer if "No," unless the banker figures out the scheme. If any of them withdraw the checks for cash, they can be charged with fraud, and just for writing them, they can be charged with check kiting, which is a federal crime. Some check kiting schemes involve millions of dollars of bad checks floating between various accounts, which the depositors suddenly cash in before vanishing with their ill-gotten gains.


E. F. HUTTON


In the summer of 1985, E. F. Hutton gained national notoriety for floating up to $270 million dollars worth of checks each day in what was up until now, the largest check kiting scheme ever perpetuated in the country. E. F. Hutton never cashed the checks, but instead collected an estimated $25 million dollars in interest each year on the checking accounts through which all the bad checks were floating. The Department of Justice, even after a thorough investigation, could find no one to indict, incredible, but true-believe it or not.


THE GAMES PEOPLE PLAY


If a group of people sits down to play a Monopoly games, and only one person (the "banker") has the power to create money, there can be little doubt who will win the Monopoly game. Here's the strategy. The "banker" lends money to the people who want to stay in the game, AND he gets mortgage and security liens against all their personal and real property. The interest he charges for the money he creates and lends out is all gray-virtually all profit and no overhead. Once everyone is in debt to him, he just cuts off their credit and calls in his loans. Because the interest on the loans creates a debt greater than the supply of money to repay it, all the lender does to foreclose on everyone is to stop making new loans. When the existing loans are paid off, the money supply dries up, and prices of land, buildings, and commodities fall. Then, the lender forecloses.

All this is done very smoothly as lenders deprive people of property under color of law.


Taking the Monopoly game from the parlor into today's real life is simple. What is happening is merely a repeat of a script written long ago. We the People, have been conned into a trap, tempted by the lure of money, and have signed our land and freedoms away with contracts that have made us perpetual economic slaves to the lenders. Under our right to contract, we have signed notes, entering ourselves "voluntarily" into a debt dictatorship - although few, if any, of us realize the trap we were led into.


WHO CREATES THE MONEY?


Under the U. S. Constitution in Article 1. Section 8, Congress shall have the power "to coin Money, and regulate the Value thereof." Today money is defined by 31 U.S.C.A., Section 5103, which say, "United States coins and currency....are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes and dues." It is quite clear that the U.S. Government has exclusive power to coin money, and this power has not been delegated by the Constitution to private individuals or corporations. It is important to realize here that evidences of debt are not money, and are not legal tender. Such evidences of debt include: checks, credit cards, lines of credit, demand deposits, credit, letters of credit, and checkbook money. These latter instruments pass as money only as long as people have 

confidence in them. 


DO BANKS CREATE MONEY?


In their own publications, the banks claim they create money. Because money is defined by law as coins or currency, we must look at the evidence to see if they create coins or currency. A close examination of the evidence shows that the banks neither create coins nor currency, as these are exclusive function of the U.S. Government. What, then, do they create? They create something that passes as money, yet isn't real money.


 DID THE LENDER CREATE THE MONEY? OR, DID HE MERELY WRITE A BAD CHECK?


When we looked at what the E. F. Hutton people did, we saw that in a sense they created money and benefited by it. They wrote bad checks which passed as money because Hutton always backed its bad checks with more bad checks in a never ending check kiting scheme. Yet, what difference is there between what E. F. Hutton did and what a commercial bank does on a regular basis? Consider this, "Modern Money Mechanics," published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, says: "The actual process of money creation takes place in commercial banks." "Deposits are merely bank entries." "Banks can build up deposits by increasing loans..." "....bankers discovered that they could, merely by giving borrowers their promises to pay (bank notes.) In this way banks began to create money." "Demand deposits are the modern counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to making book entries in the credit of borrowers which the borrowers, in turn, could spend by writing checks."


A publication by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, called "Putting it Simply," says "When the Federal Reserve writes a check, it is creating money."


Another publication by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, called "I Bet You Thought," says "This checkbook money is bookkeeping money created mainly by the nation's commercial banks."


Now, you may want to buy the story that the bankers are creating money, but I will not. The courts have clearly decided that checks and evidences of debt are not money. (See Hegeman V. Moon. 131 N.Y. 462.30 NE 487 and/ or State V. Neilen, 73, Pac 321, 43 Ore 158.) IF YOU OR I WRITE A CHECK WITHOUT HAVING THE FULL VALUE IN CASH TO BACK IT UP YOU OR I HAVE WRITTEN A BAD CHECK. IF A BANK WRITES A CHECK WITHOUT THE FULL VALUE IN CASH TO BACK IT UP, THEN THE BANK, TOO, HAS WRITTEN A BAD CHECK. The bank, however, is in a unique position to circulate its bad checks as 'money' by stamping the "PAID" and crediting the depositor's checking or savings account with some book entries. The banks are getting away with this fraudulent activity because most of us don't cash our checks because we use checks and credit cards as substitutes for cash (money). As a result, many banks are making loans up to 33 times the amount of actual money (cash) they have to loan. This technique is known as "fractional reserve banking."


Today the American people have become a party to the check kiting scheme of the bankers by accepting checks and depositing them, and then writing checks against those book entry deposits. We unwittingly help the banks pass on bad checks as "money."


IRS agents are neither trained nor paid by the United States Government.

 The IRS is not who you think they are. IRS agents are neither trained nor paid by the United States Government.






Pursuant to Treasury Delegation Order No. 92, the IRS is trained under the direction of the Division of Human Resources United Nations (U.N.) and the Commissioner (International), by the office of Personnel Management.


In the 1979 edition of 22 USCA 278, "The United Nations," you will find Executive Order 10422. The Office of Personnel Management is under the direction of the Secretary of the United Nations.


Pursuant to Treasury Delegation Order No. 91, the IRS entered into a "Service Agreement" with the US Treasury Department (See Public Law 94-564, Legislative History, pg. 5967, Reorganization (BANKRUPTCY!!!) Plan No. 26)and the Agency for International Development. This agency is an international paramilitary operation and according to the Department of the Army Field manual (1969) 41-10, pgs 1-4, Sec. 1-7 (b) & 1-6, Sec. 1-10 (7)(c) (1), and 22 USCA 284, includes such activities as, "Assumption of full or partial executive, legislative, and judicial authority over a country or area."


The IRS is also an agency/member of a 169 nation pact called the International Criminal Police Organization, or INTERPOL, found at 22 USCA 263a. The memorandum of Understanding, (MOU), between the Secretary of Treasury, AKA the corporate governor of "The Fund" and "The Bank" (International Monetary Fund, and the International Bank for reconstruction and Development), indicated that the Attorney General and its associates are soliciting and collecting information for foreign principals; the international organizations, corporations, and associations, exemplified by 22 USCA 286f.


According to the 1994 US Government Manual, at page 390, the Attorney General is the permanent representative to INTERPOL, and the Secretary of Treasury is the alternate member. Under Article 30 of the INTERPOL constitution, these individuals must expatriate their citizenship.


They serve no allegiance to the United States of America. The IRS is paid by "The Fund" and "The Bank." Thus it appears from the documentary evidence that the Internal Revenue Service agents are "Agents of a Foreign Principle" within the meaning and intent of the "Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938" for private, not public, gain.


The IRS is directed and controlled by the corporate Governor of "The Fund" and "The Bank." The Federal Reserve Bank and the IRS collection agency are both privately owned and operated under private statutes. The IRS operates under public policy, not Constitutional Law, and in the interest of our nations foreign creditors.


The Constitution only permits Congress to lay and collect taxes. It does not authorize Congress to delegate the tax collection power to a private corporation, which collects our taxes for a private bank, the Federal Reserve, who then deposits it into the Treasury of the IMF.


The IRS is not allowed to state that they collect taxes for the United States Treasury. They only refer to "The Treasury."


For those looking for solutions, here's one.

Like I said before, if you want to protect yourself from being subject to State codes and statutes, you gotta have EQUITY in something. I.e. you buy a car with gold or US coins, so you just didn't give the seller promissory FRN debt notes, but something of ACTUAL (intrinsic) value.

Then you have an EQUITABLE CLAIM, and can argue that the State does NOT have security interest in that car. FYI, when you register your car, the State acquires PERFECTED SECURITY INTEREST in it. I.e. it has a LIEN against it, which is why it can make you obey State Vehicle Code.

But with an equitable claim, you can BAR the State from enforcing its Code against you, or otherwise get a REMEDY against the State, since Equity supersedes Law. That is, even if you lose the legal case against you, you still can get REMEDY in Equity. Here's what lawyers say about equitable claims:

There are two types of claims: legal and equitable. While plaintiffs pursuing a legal claim ask a court to award money, litigants bringing an equitable claim ask a court to either prompt or stop a particular action or event.


Equitable Claims
A plaintiff who seeks equitable relief is asking the court for an injunction. An injunction is a court order compelling a party to do or refrain from doing a specified act.

A court awards an injunction to prevent a future harmful action -- rather than to compensate for a past injury --or to provide relief from harm for which an award of money damages is not a satisfactory solution or for which a monetary value is impossible to calculate.

Example: The Springfield City Council decides to re-zone a parcel of residential land as commercial land. The neighbors, who own homes on the neighboring parcels, are not pleased by this decision. The neighbors can sue the City Council, and ask the court to issue a preliminary or permanent injunction to block the law from taking effect.

In this example the neighbors can't just say we don't like the rezoning, they gotta have a VALID REASON, i.e. an Equitable claim. Such as that the rezoning will harm them, or decrease value of their properties, etc.

So basically, when you buy a car with gold coins, and you're not a resident of their corporate State (no ZIP code in your address), then you could ask the court for injunction against the State, even before you get charged with any traffic violation. And if granted, then the corporate State would be barred from giving you any traffic tickets.

BTW, there already are some people who used injunction to be put on the DO NOT DETAIN list, so that when a cop pulls them over, he sees 'do not detain' in his car computer, and has no choice but to leave them go.