Money Changes Purchase Power III
by Joe Kelley
11-2-2022

US_Politics Community
[retalk.com]

"If this is not how it is supposed to work, what is the purpose of the bond? "

In theory (think Conspiracy Theory), bonding codes move finances from bond investors to a collective fund and then bond policy benefits move out of the fund to the bond policyholders under specific conditions according to the written and agreed-upon bond policy, signed and recorded for future reference in case of memory loss.

This theory is no different than any other Ponzi Scheme or insurance policy.

If it is a legitimate, accurate, responsible, honorable, honest, and a well-defended insurance policy product, undamaged by a criminal attack, then each policy investor knows what they are buying because the benefits are worth the investment in their view at the time of the purchase of the insurance policy having no hidden costs, no fine print, no confusion, no duress, no extortion, no bribery, no empty or real threats of criminal attack upon those who prefer not to risk the asking price for a valueless bonding policy as adjudicated by the policy investor seeking a higher quality product at a lower cost in the free market of insurance, or bonding, policy products. 

No Ponzi Schemes, if you don't mind. 

Even if a criminal attack does progress through the planning stages planned by the criminals, and even if a criminal attack follows up with criminal actions against the people involved in the insurance policy, the insurance policy covers the costs of discovering the attack, validating the attack, and prosecuting the attack, so as to minimize the losses associated with the criminal attack upon the people involved in the insurance policy.

 The buyers buying possible future benefits, at a price, know in advance the risks associated with a criminal attack upon the policy providers and the policy consumers.

If X happens, according to the written, signed, and bonded policy, then Y happens, also according to the same written promises written into the policy by the policy providers.

Example:
The Uniform Bonding Code – (UBC)
[www]. 1215.org/lawnotes/work-in-progress/bonding-code.htm

"9.2 - Escalation
Further:

A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U. S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).

When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U. S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.

If the policy providers suffer an attack by Ponzi or Pyramid Scheme Snake Oil Selling organized treasonous criminals, then the policyholders are duty-bound to nullify the BOND.

If the policy providers are no longer honorable according to their own written words on paper, signed by themselves, under oath (so no fingers crossed and after-the-fact claims that they were "just kidding " when signing the promise to pay benefits according to the promise), and then X happens, and so then Y will happen.

X happens:
Fraud under oath.

Y happens:
Fraud victims discover frauds by their names on their signed documents.
Fraud victims prosecute fraud criminals by moving fraud cases to be validated by independent grand juries.
Fraud suspects named by name and named as defendants face the whole truth, and a criminal trial jury in a Court of Law.

The trial jurors are duty-bound (bonded) by the whole truth warrant to establish a verdict and a remedy offered to the defendant when found guilty, or initiate a remedy if needed in cases of false accusations, moving false accusers through the bonded process.

So, all that above may be a new discovery for anyone asking similar questions about Bonding Code, but rest assured that there have been in human history many examples of previous bond breakers where X happened and then Y happened.

Cases in point include A and B below:

A.
"Hallam says, "The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long-enduring forbearance. In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects' swords to abandon any pretension, would be supposed to have ceased to reign; and the express recognition of such a right as that of insurrection has been justly deemed inconsistent with the majesty of law. But ruder ages had ruder sentiments. Force was necessary to repel force; and men accustomed to see the king's authority defied by a private riot, were not much shocked when it was resisted in defence of public freedom. " - 3 Middle Age, 240-2. "
Essay on The Trial by Jury, Lysander Spooner, 1852

That is an example of legal precedent according to the unwritten law, the ancient law, the law of the land, and the common law, which is also the law in America since 1774.

14th of October, 1774
"On the same day, Congress unanimously resolved, “that the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more especially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage according to the course of that law.” They further resolved, “that they were entitled to the benefit of such of the English statutes as existed at the time of their colonization, and which they have, by experience, respectively found to be applicable to their several and local circumstances.” They also resolved, that their ancestors, at the time of their immigration, were “entitled to all the rights, liberties, and immunities, of free and natural-born subjects within the realms of England.”

B.
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
"That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
"That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn: "
The United States of America in Congress Assembled, July, 1776

See also Commercial Lein Right and Military Lein Right:
[scannedretina.com]
"In American history, the Declaration of Independence served the legal purpose of making a Solemn Recognition of Mixed War, which is a Notice of Military Lien Right, a warning of No Trespass, an assertion that any killing or taking of human life necessary for the protection of the legal remedies of the common citizen is being done, in the immediate situation described in the Solemn Recognition or Notice, not as murder, but as lethal self-defense of the commercial and social remedy against the cited domestic enemy or enemies. The Declaration of Independence is the legal model or format for the construction of the Solemn Recognition of Mixed War and the Notice of Military Lien Right. "

Organized criminals, as a rule, do not appreciate it when their victims grow enough balls to confront them according to the fraudulent claims that the criminals make when the criminals plan and execute treasonous fraud.

The Mob turns Angry according to long-established legal precedent. 

They are no longer laughing all the way to their fraudulent National-Debt Central Bank. 

Caveat Emptor