The Concept of Legal Person

[sigma6]

United Kingdom Corporation LTD
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154746377190553&set=a.10151694919295553.846880.608685552&type=1&theater


Its proven that this COUNTRY is a CORPORATION (ref: dnb.co.uk), which means it operates as a business, being a CORPORATION means it has to have EMPLOYEES to keep the CORPORATION running

It seems those with NATIONAL INSURANCE NUMBER are the EMPLOYEES of this CORPORATION, its not just CIVAL SERVANTS that becomes the EMPLOYEE, but EVERYONE

As a CORPORATION, there has to be COMPANY POLICIES, which in this CORPORATION requires us to pay, TAX and follow LEGISLATIVE POLICY RULES of that CORPORATION, the LEGISLATIVE POLICY RULES in this CORPORATION are called STATUTES

note: STATUTES are not LAW, they are COMPANY POLICIES, not LAW of the LAND

Definition of STATUTE: a LEGISLATIVE RULE of SOCIETY given the FORCE of LAW, by the CONSENT of the GOVERNED(you), a RULE of a CORPORATION

So what are the DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES of this COMPANY?
DISCIPLINERY PROCEDURES:

The POLICE believe it or not are ALL COMPANIES for PROFIT (ref:dnb.co.uk)

They are CORPORATION POLICY ENFORCMENT OFFICERS, their job is to ENFORCE the RULES and POLICIES of the CORPORATION not actual LAW (common law)

Note: There are two types of LAW in this country: COMMON LAW(law of justice) and MARITINE LAW(law of money/business)

than you have COMPANY RULES called ACTS & STATUTES, which is not actual LAW

The COURTS are ALL COMPANIES run for PROFIT (ref:dnb.co.uk)

If we break the RULES and POLICIES of this COPORATION, we will get SUMMONED to their place of BUSINUESS to discuss punishment

Note: SUMMOMS=INVITATION

The COURTS and the whole CORPORTION speak a language that we think we understand, this language is called LEGALESE

Some words have VERY different MEANINGS

So to OVERSTAND the way they speak, we need to learn LEGALESE, its a LANGUAGE created purposely to mislead persons into giving their consent unknowingly

So what is a PERSON ?

The Person

Lets look at the definition of the word PERSON

PERSON = A HUMAN BEING is not a PERSON because he is a HUMAN BEING, but because RIGHTS and DUTIES have been ascribed to him, specifically that PERSON is LEGAL SUBJECT (legal fiction) or SUBSTANCE of which the RIGHTS and DUTIES are attributes, BUT not all HUMAN BEINGS are PERSONS, as was the case in OLD ENGLAND when there were slaves

So how did we transform from being a HUMAN BEING to becoming a PERSON (Legal fiction)?
It all started in the 1800s, that’s when the BIRTH CERTIFICATE SCHEME was put into play, those of us who have a BIRTH CERTIFICATE are actually PERSONS if you CHOOSE to represent yourself via the BIRTH CERTIFICATE which is also known as your STRAWMAN

Our PERSONS become LEGAL FICTION, and so COMPANY POLICY don’t apply to us as HUMAN BEINGS, they only apply to us as PERSONS
There is a difference between a police MAN (Common Law) and a police OFFICER (Acts/Statutes) the difference being LEGAL FICTION
LEGAL FICTION is the title given to you to represent you (Persons) but not to represent the real you (Human Being)

MR, MISS, MS, MISSES, MASTER, SIR: These are all forms of LEGAL FICTION, we wasn't born into LEGAL FICTION, we jus adopted it down the line as NORMAL...

[eaglespirit]

..and so it is

the "living" man and woman become the 'walking dead' in the legal fiction arena.

And as Sigma and Others here have shown in the past...the only way out is in through forthright sovereignty in action, "The Federal Truth in Lending Act"

http://www.stopthecrime.net/docs/THE-GREAT-AMERICAN-ADVENTURE.pdf
...excerpt from "The Great American Adventure":
CITATIONS
The CITATION process can be handled much easier; through
the mail. When a Police Officer issues you a CITATION, he is
actually requesting you to CONTRACT with him! He is alleging
that you violated a corporate regulation in writing, which you
have accepted by signing and thus requires you to respond.
The Police Officer is instructed to explain that your signature is
merely an acknowledgment that you received a copy of the
CITATION but in actuality, your signature is notification to the
Court and Judge that you have accepted or CONSENTED to this
offer to CONTRACT, which also grants the Judge CONSENT;
PERSONAM and SUBJECT MATTER jurisdiction over you and
the case!
You can cancel that CONTRACT however by rescinding your
CONSENT. The Federal Truth in Lending Act provides that
any party to a CONTRACT may rescind his CONSENT, within
three business days of entering into such a CONTRACT. So
across the face of the CITATION you should print or type in
large print, the following words:
I DO NOT ACCEPT THIS OFFER TO CONTRACT
and
I DO NOT CONSENT TO THESE PROCEEDINGS.
Use blue ink [for admiralty] or purple ink [for royalty].
Admiralty is the Court and Royalty represents your Sovereignty.
Either way is appropriate. Sign your signature underneath in
blue or purple ink and in front of a Notary and under your
signature type: Without prejudice, UCC 1-308. This is another
way to declare that you may not be held responsible for this
Contract pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code.
Serve Cancelled Citation back it on the Clerk / Court, along with
a Certificate of Service, by Certified Mail, Return Receipt
Requested. This kills the CITATION; removes your CONSENT
and removes the JURISDICTION of the Court, all at the same
time. It really is that simple!
NOTE: A Certificate of Service is a letter that first identifies the
Citation and then defines how and when you returned the document to the Court and is signed. If not denied, it becomes
a truth in commerce by Tacit Procuration.
Remember to keep a copy of everything, in case the Clerk
attempts to trash your response, which certainly will not happen
with a Certificate of Service or if it is mailed back by the Notary.
The Notary is actually a Deputy Secretary of State and is more
powerful than the Court Clerk!
Public Notaries originate from the time of the Egyptian and
Roman Scribes who were the purveyors of certified documents,
which are sworn affidavits. Certified documents and sworn
affidavits are truth in commerce. [e.g.] Birth Certificates are
certified documents on bonded paper. The word bonded is
derived from bondage as in slavery, which makes all of us Bond
Slaves to whoever retains custody of our original Birth
Certificates. I bet you believed that the Emancipation
Proclamation freed the slaves and it did for a short time and
then the Birth Certificate and the 14th Amendment enslaved us
all!
SUMMONS and LAWSUITS
The SUMMONS process, weather it is defined a Civil or Criminal
Action, is once again an offer to CONTRACT, despite what
words are used to command your appearance or response. It
too can be cancelled just by following the same procedure as the
CITATION process above. A million dollar lawsuit is no
different than a CITATION and both can be cancelled! Hard to
believe, isn’t it?
Does your lawyer know about this? You bet he does but he is
not permitted to embarrass the Court and besides, Court is
where he makes his money!
NOTE: How many of you have ever attempted to avoid Jury
Duty? All you had to do was cancel the SUMMONS [OFFER to
CONTRACT]; Notarize it and mail it back to the Jury
Commissioner. Don’t worry, they won’t bother you because you
are obviously too smart and may influence their Jury! The Jury
[controls] the Court and not the Prosecutor and Judge and if you
know that, they lose and the defendant wins, which is why they
prefer only the dumbed down candidates to serve on a Jury.

[sigma6]

or accept your use of the NAME without claiming "ownership" and only use for the benefit of the "subscriber" (in this context this means the party issuing the "subscription") which it has been described as.

A "subscription" is an offer which bestows the authority of the subscriber onto the "recipient" of the "subscription" One of the conditions of the subscription in this case is that it be "used for the benefit of the "subscriber" (again this refers to the party offering the "subscription") In practice this means not claiming ownership for your own personal use...

and fully supports s.336 in the Criminal Code which indirectly recognizes that there are two different ways for a trustee to hold trust property, which the BC has been assessed as being in other sections of this forum...

(Pocket Criminal Code 2009,, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46) (R.S., c. C-34, s. 297)


Criminal breach of trust:

336. Every one who, being a trustee of anything for the use or benefit, whether in whole or in part, of another person, or for a public or charitable purpose, converts, with intent to defraud and in contravention of his trust, that thing or any part of it to a use that is not authorized by the trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years. R.S., c. C-34, s. 296.

If there are at least two different ways that the government recognizes how trustees can hold property, then it can also be deduced that there is more than one way to "use" the B.C. NAME, registered organization, sole corporation, etc. keep in mind the word "use" is a trust term, as defined in legal dictionaries...

We can use "for the use and benefit of another person" or "for a public purpose". If the offer of the "subscription" was used for the "benefit of another person", this would be consistent with the "user" claiming ownership and being the "beneficial owner"... But if used for a public purpose, this would be consistent with NOT claiming ownership and also fit the subscriber/subscription model where one of the conditions of the "offer of subscription" is that it be used for the "benefit of the subscriber" (the issuer) ...in this alternative understanding, if properly translated into application, would be a powerful game changer in the whole interpretation of one's relationship (who you are) to the NAME...

When we claim ownership we become the "beneficial owner" which implies public legal obligation for liabilities in the public (including taxes) This is the price of stepping out of the private and joining the NAME in the public, and taking on the surety for the NAME...

Whereas there is an interpretation and an option where we use things in trust... we are not claiming ownership, and also recognizing another party is holding legal title, and by using it for the benefit of the subscriber, we are maintaining the "beneficial ownership" liabilities on the "subscriber" (the issuer) (avoiding a constructive trust interpretation [punishment, loss of control]) (see "de son tort trustee" definition)

This is why trust is just as much a transformation of your thinking, before you can really act on it and take advantage of what it has to offer...

"own nothing, control everything" - Rockefeller


I will add more on the concept of subscriber/subscription when I can find the article...

[betoobig]

does anyone knows if it works the same way in other countries, for example, Spain????
Thanks and Love

[sigma6]

Fundamentally yes, if they are operating a fiat currency (check!) issue birth certificates (check), and operate a probate court system, (i.e. administrative trusteeship over the abandoned "Persons" (dead legal fiction, entity)) i.e. does your court claim jurisdiction over "you"? then they are operating on the "Person". All governments (and banks) are really acting corporate trustees. Especially countries under the Commonwealth, that have courts of common law/equity And recognize Admiralty Law. Does your country have a "constitution"? Does it recognize the rules of commerce that go back to the Romans, like Admiralty Law? The law of the sea? or as Jordan Maxwell said, "...the Law of the Planet" (when it comes to Commerce). UCC, (universal Commercial Code, etc. things to look for... Do they collect taxes? Do they issue tickets, fines, and charge for everything under the sun? Then you are operating a similar system...

[Sebastion]

I want to thank you Sigma6 for your posts regarding all of this legal stuff! I read and re-read everything you post and am learning to grasp the "language" of the law from your every posting. My sincere gratitude to you. Please continue!

[sigma6]

I want to thank you Sigma6 for your posts regarding all of this legal stuff! I read and re-read everything you post and am learning to grasp the "language" of the law from your every posting. My sincere gratitude to you. Please continue!

I pulled up a link that connects a bunch of posts I strung together... thanks for the compliment and reminder what I consider my more important messages... cheers
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?52893-David-Wilcock-Back-In-Action&p=595931&viewfull=1#post595931

[sigma6]

Did a promo interview for a friend and fellow truth seeker, he takes a very statutory approach in my opinion, but I can't deny his knowledge and research on the subject of how the Queen and the Bible ties into Canadian Law, one of the very first researchers to focus on the complexity surrounding the concept of "legal Person"...

I have a new found respect for all the interviewers out there... it's harder than it looks!!! :p But this was tough because his knowledge is so far advanced than my own on this particular subject, such as court process, rules and procedures, etc, which is definitely where I can learn tons of insights from him. I tried as hard as I could to tone down my trust interpretation... since this was about his views and his webinar... ';0 but did take the opportunity that was of common interest to us both, and that is the nature of the "legal person" ...


Listen or download David Kevin Lindsay Interview
http://www.4shared.com/mp3/6kh0FBaRba/David_Kevin_Lindsay_-_Upcoming.html

We discuss the history of taxation, the Queen as a legal entity, Sole Corporation,
Different takes on "What is the Person" and highlights on his upcoming webinar -
And how can we use this information to protect ourselves and hold our public servants accountable... plus contact information and how to get his latest info product: How to lay criminal charges when the police will not "cooperate"...

David’s upcoming webinar -
The Premiere of his Live Weekend Webinar with interactive Q&A
based on hundreds of court experiences and over two decades of legal research!
www.WeBookYourShow.com/WEBINAR-Pre-Sale.html

David’s email contact Information:
clear@clearfreedom.org







For people new to 4shared:
may vary slightly as 4 shared is constantly updating, but the basics
are still the same... have these instructions handy BEFORE you go to page!
http://www.4shared.com/dir/vo3VIWx9/Trust.html (example link)
(Warning! - 4Shared "pop up" windows and fake “download” buttons = advertisements)
(i.e. follow CAREFULLY to bypass ALL advertising)


(1) To Start: click 4shared link provided ... (add password if requested)
- folder or files will display (click on files or folders ONLY)
- window will "refresh" displaying file selected for download and/or play (file may start playing)
note: a "pop up" window now appears - close and GO BACK to page
- LOOK FOR 3 buttons below (side by side)
"Download" "Share" and "Add to my account"
(note: everything else will sidetrack you into advertising)

(2) Select "Download"
a "pop-up window" will appear in front - it's advertising!
(CLOSE "pop-up window" - go back to original page!
- look for these 2 buttons...
"4 PRIORITY DOWNLOAD" and "FREE DOWNLOAD"

(3) Select "FREE DOWNLOAD" (with "20 seconds" in box)
Sign-in 'box' will appear...
Look for 4shared account access at bottom (in fine print)
- Sign Up (left) - or Log-In (right)
Don’t download anything to sign up...
(by-pass "social media" signup - requires additional info)

(4) Login: (username, password)
- "download, save, save as, etc" should appear
a count timer will appear (wait 20 seconds)
if another pop up window appears - close it AGAIN

[sigma6]

Once I had a judge say "I don't see a bond here, this isn't a bond..." etc.. and she was right, it's a certificate to a security, evidence of interest, more accurately ...


DEFINITIONS RELATED TO LEGAL PERSON


(S.2 Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)
"property" includes
(a) real and personal property of every description and deeds and instruments relating to or evidencing the title or right to property, or giving a right to recover or receive money or goods.



http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/T/Title.aspx
Title:
"Title refers to the legal ownership of a property interest so that one having title to a property interest can withstand the assertion of others claiming a right to that ownership.
(tells me that we don't want to compete with them in the statutory public as a citizen, unless you are a masochist... since they hold legal title to original signature CofLB, which itself being a form of legal property, if you really think about it long and hard, is the actual registered owner of all property registered in the public. )


(INTERPRETATION; Definitions - Securities Act R.S.O. 1990, c. S-5)
1. (1) In this Act, "security" includes,
(a) any document, instrument or writing commonly known as a security,
(b) any document constituting evidence of title to or interest in the capital, assets, property, profits, earnings or royalties of any person or company,
(c) any document constituting evidence of an interest in an association of legatees or heirs,
(d) any document constituting evidence of an option, subscription or other interest in or to a security,



http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/subscription
Subscription;
"The act of writing one’s name under a written instrument; the affixing of one’s signature to any document, whether for the purpose of authenticating or attesting it, of adopting its terms as one’s own expressions, or of binding one’s self by an engagement which it contains".

"State law determines the enforceability of oral and written subscriptions. Courts have regarded subscriptions that are not supported by some consideration as mere offers that become legally binding when accepted or when the recipient of the promise has acted in reliance on the offers. The promise that forms the subscription need not be to pay money but might be for the performance of other acts, such as to convey land or provide labor for construction".

The offered subscription must be accepted if it is to legally bind the subscriber. It is essential that acceptance occur within a reasonable time, since, as an offer, the subscription can be revoked any time prior to its acceptance. A subscription is also revocable upon notice given by the subscriber if a condition upon which it is based has not been performed. A subscriber may be prevented from claiming revocation in situations where it would be contrary to the interests of justice.

"note: in the case of the BC, for the promise to be binding, the subscriber must receive the benefit".
(as in "transfer" of beneficial ownership!)



(Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)
"valuable security"
includes
(a) an order, exchequer acquittance or other security that entitles or evidences the title of any person
(i) to a share or interest in a public stock or fund or in any fund of a body corporate, company or society, or
(ii) to a deposit in a financial institution,
(b) any debenture, deed, bond, bill, note, warrant, order or other security for money or for payment of money,



Certificate:
A ticket:
A warrant:
A written assurance: of official representation that some act has or has not been done, or some event occurred, or some legal formality been complied with
A written assurance made or issuing from some court, and designed as a notice of things done therein, or as a warrant or authority, to some other court, judge or officer.
A statement of some fact in writing signed by the party certifying.



(Vital Statistics Act (VSA) Ontario,RSO 1990, Ch V.4)
Admissibility of Certificates, etc.
46. (1) A certificate purporting to be issued under section 44 or a certified copy of a registration purporting to be issued under section 45 signed by the Registrar General or Deputy Registrar General or on which the signature of either of them is reproduced by any method is admissible in any court in Ontario as proof, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, of the facts so certified, and it is not necessary to prove the signature or official position of the person by whom the certificate or certified copy purports to be signed.



BC/SoB is a certificate, containing dates, registration, certificate and file numbers which are evidence of title. A manifest of cargo, registration of property.


(Change of Name Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER C.7)
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c07_e.htm#s2s1
"child" means a person under the age of eighteen years; ("infant")

Person’s name
2. (1) For all purposes of Ontario law,
(a) a person whose birth is registered in Ontario is entitled to be recognized by the name appearing on the person’s birth certificate or change of name certificate, unless clause (c) applies;
implies an authorization to contract in the public, "right to use" (which is a definition of property)


...and let's not forget what a "Person" is...
(Pocket Criminal Code 2009 - Section 2 Definitions, pg 6)
"every one", "person" and "owner", and similar expressions, (note: words defined)
include Her Majesty and an organization; (definition)

(note: do not be confused by this 6 word definition of "person")

... more evidence..
(Police Officer’s Manual)
also The Canadian Dictionary of Law:
PERSON. "persons are of two classes only---natural persons and legal persons. A natural person is a human being that has capacity for rights or duties. A legal person is anything to which the law gives a legal or fictitious existence and personality with capacity for rights and duties. The Only legal person known to our law is the corporation----the body corporate"



(S.2 Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)
"property" includes
(a) real and personal property of every description and deeds and instruments relating to or evidencing the title or right to property, or giving a right to recover or receive money or goods.

(we have property rights within the context of a trust since someone else is "holding" legal title, if this isn't incorporated into your understanding, you will always be in breach in the public... (=taxed, and fined) If you recognize the trust and f*** it up, a worse crime (breach of trust) and you go to jail) So you are either "taxed" or jailed... or you educate yourself until you know how to operate the trust side of it yourself... it's all about who has control of the "Person")

Now the question remains HOW you use it...

(Notice written on Birth Certificates in the UK)
"This extract is evidence of an event recorded in a register of births. It is not evidence of the identity of the person presenting it"


This tells me a few things, it validates other research that it was actually recommended by the Deputy Registrar herself (whose signature is on the BC... see definition of subscription) that we SHOULD NOT use it as "identification"... and secondly that it is understood that there are clearly contexts where it can be PRESENTED...

(an anvil should be hitting you on the head...right about..... NOW!)

....in any event... how that is done, is the subject of much research and conjecture... Rod Class apparently has recently been taken into custody... and he was clearly moving towards an interpretation based on trust, equity
Here's a link to the Sep 28, 2014 Private Call on "The Constitution, Equity and Trusts"
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-48361/TS-902772.mp3 54 min
This may give you some background on what strategy Rod was using.

And also note the similarity to the attack on Dean Clifford, same thing, as soon as he started to move toward an interpretation on trust and equity...


I have a fair idea of what may have happened, but getting a hold of these people is difficult given their current state, and getting them to hear me is another issue. And sadly, Karen Hudes was on Rod's show... she could help him in a snap... but I don't think that is going to happen for a number of reasons...


and lastly (not to be cryptic, but it is such a monstrously HUGE list of definitions...) But "ownership" is NOTHING what you think it is...




Links for my own reference:


Previous:
DHS Funded Report: Sovereign Citizens Greatest Threat To U.S.:
EXAMPLES OF PRACTICAL APPLICATION ARE COMING OUT (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?73599-DHS-Funded-Report-Sovereign-Citizens-Greatest-Threat-To-U.S.&p=862116&viewfull=1#post862116)

Following:
TITLE OF THREAD GOES HERE:
TITLE OF POST GOES HERE (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/URL THREAD LINK GOES HERE)

[BF88]

I would step away from this statutes are not law free man on the land etc theories they are based on sketchy interpretations of the law pretty much useless in practice. The legal definition of 'person' is a human being or bodies corporate which is a business that has been incorporated under the relevant companies act. If an act of parliament is not law it certainly has the effect of being law whilst the courts are enforcing them. Playing this game of trying to find common law theory loop holes is playing by their rules, a better idea would be to codify a real constitution with a court having the power to back it up (along with removal of the hereditary head of state)

[sigma6]

I would step away from this statutes are not law free man on the land etc theories they are based on sketchy interpretations of the law pretty much useless in practice. The legal definition of 'person' is a human being or bodies corporate which is a business that has been incorporated under the relevant companies act. If an act of parliament is not law it certainly has the effect of being law whilst the courts are enforcing them. Playing this game of trying to find common law theory loop holes is playing by their rules, a better idea would be to codify a real constitution with a court having the power to back it up (along with removal of the hereditary head of state)

Jumbling together "statutes, free man (which was never mentioned) theories based on "sketchy" is pretty much useless... blah blah...

I don't doubt the great majority are completely ignorant, as you are suggesting, no disrespect... but ignorance of something isn't an excuse to persist in your ignorance. If it is "sketchy" to you, that is an accurate reflection of where your understanding lies... I am sure the English language is "sketchy" to 2 or 3 year olds... but that doesn't quite equate to the suggestion that they shouldn't bother spending the rest of their life learning how to say their ABC's and then spell 3 letter words and then make sentences....

An act of parliament is "law" is a statutory law, an oxymoronic concept, kind of like artificial gold plated plastic, (I will give you the benefit of a doubt, but as usual it's clear you haven't read anything I posted... and are speaking quite accurately from yet another position of self imposed ignorance... (and correct me if you have read anything I posted yet... )

And again coming up with the supposition that I am making reference to "common law" when I made reference to trust interpretation is another one of the results of your "sketchy" understanding... another stupid assumption is "loopholes" This isn't about loopholes, it's quite the opposite (you're not even close) If you had any inkling, it's about literally sitting on your arse thinking all the crap they are pouring down your throat is the law... when it's just a desperate measure by desperate despots, who are already applying countermeasures (a sign we are starting to affect them) i.e. precisely because people like Rod and Dean are even "considering" trying to educate themselves.

The reality is THEY ARE OPERATING ON LOOPHOLES! One of the biggest "loopholes" is getting away with all this as a DIRECT result of the IGNORANCE of the general public... they have jurisdiction over "Persons"... You think the concept of "Person" is easy to understand? If you do, then at best you are kidding yourself, at worse you are hopelessly out of your element, stick to something you actually know something about...

Dude, there are no short cuts, no magic pill substitute for educating yourself, the mistake was, your parents didn't think it was important, like feeding you, and clothing you and sending you to the "public fool system"... not their fault, because their parents did the same...

On the other hand awareness of your ignorance, isn't a solution, it's just awareness. Your ignorance is not a reference point of judgement, and attacking other people who learn by making mistakes, is also not a credit to you... Go back to start, don't collect $200, and try again... Time to wake up, not take another sip of kool aid... to put it "politely"


update: I would add, all the current "philosophies" interpretations, etc... ALL point to one common denominator, the system is "corrupt" only to the degree that the general public it was intended for is too ignorant to operate within it "effectively"... WHY that is , and whose fault are side issues, the point is this is where we stand today... If you allow your servants to cook your food, do your shopping, cut your lawn, then massage you, burp you, and put you to bed, then you suggest they should look after your finances and accounting and even make decisions in your absence... given human nature the results are going to be predictable... you are going to wake up, and find out you have been transferred from your queen size bed to a giant crib with bars... (for your own benefit) Your servants are now your trustees... and you are incompetent...

[Anchor]

I appreciate this thread and all those like it.

They always attract a good measure of criticism, but it seems to me that it is usually coming from a place that has not really grasped the enormity of the deception we are subject to and that is OK really because it is not easy to do that unless you spend a bit of time with it.

What I see on threads like this one, is not the secret formula for how to get off parking tickets or other such shenanigans that enable for example bad actors to get away crimes, exploit loopholes, or otherwise get off lightly when "transgressing" some part of the system. If you look hard enough there are indeed places on the web which do try to do that, some seem pretty good and some seem like they have been set up as a deliberate trap to make people look foolish and discredited by those who control. (I think the "freeman on the land" groups are particularly vulnerable to this). I don't think it applies here on Avalon though in the same way that we don't expect to see the work of paid shills last too long on the forum.

Would those techniques result in chaos if more widely used? Probably ! ;)

Is it not, more simply in fact, an attempt to show the devious and subtle ways that we have been deceived?

Most are conditioned and schooled to accept from birth by a system of deception that does not just need beating in my opinion, but ultimately complete destruction.

For many though the system works and coddles people sufficiently that they do not want to give it up either and fear any alternative. This applies to both the governors and the governed alike - but the system busters will keep working on it because that is what they are here for, nothing less than the wielding of the sword of truth.

I usually tell people that the key to solving any problem is first to define it completely - usually the solution is found in the process of doing that. This is a bit like the process I see happening here. It is a long slog, but it is work that needs to be done.

The veils of deception need to be lifted or cut through; either approach works for me!

[maurice]

I wish I had the time and energy to really study and use this information safely . But perhaps the best advice ever given to me by a very wise friend of mine was this . The best way to protect yourself and those you love is to be aware . Sounds overly simplistic in a way but somehow the choice to be aware and on the look out makes predation a lot harder for the parasites . They prefer to prey on the weak and ignorant .That said I still think this is vital info and I greatly appreciate the efforts of those who study and share what they know . Thank you .

[BF88]

Wow now billy don't have a heart attack....:p



The reality is THEY ARE OPERATING ON LOOPHOLES! One of the biggest "loopholes" is getting away with all this as a DIRECT result of the IGNORANCE of the general public... they have jurisdiction over "Persons"... You think the concept of "Person" is easy to understand? If you do, then at best you are kidding yourself, at worse you are hopelessly out of your element, stick to something you actually know something about...

Dude, there are no short cuts, no magic pill substitute for educating yourself, the mistake was, your parents didn't think it was important, like feeding you, and clothing you and sending you to the "public fool system"... not their fault, because their parents did the same...


I mean by a sketchy understanding as an understanding of how a court interprets an act of parliament to provide a remedy for whatever dispute happens to be before them on that day. My understanding of this from an English/EU law perspective is about as accurate as you can get, it is rather a basic concept.
I am reasonably well educated in law so your assumption there (of needing to educate myself) was as baseless as my own assumption that you were referring to the free man theories of common law etc. Why i mentioned common law (as in interpretation of statutes/creating arbitrary legal rules seemingly out of nowhere) was this is how the loop holes are created. What kind of crap are you referring to that is being poured down our throat? If you want to disobey the system do it in its entirety rather than fighting it using its own rules. If you play the game you will always lose, it is designed that way. Law, after all, is made up and only perpetuated because people feel bound by it either through warped or force fed morals or because they fear the consequences of what would happen if they disobey. Think of it as a matter of perception, if you think oh no they have me by the balls because a piece of paper has my name written in capitals or the legal system is corrupt then you are playing the game (poorly). If you start by changing your perception to one that allows you to not feel bound by made up rules you are on the right track although it could land you in trouble it is a question of how far are you willing to take it.

[maurice]

When I lived in the states I signed my drivers licence without prejudice . They did not like it at the licence registration place and tried to get me to redo it three times before caving in .The excuse was the photo was not coming out . Tried using the argument once in court on a minor speeding infraction. BUT because I was not well enough informed the judge let me off points on my licence but I got to pay the fine . I went in there without any real desire to get all ' I know my rights bitches' . Just wanted to see what actually happens when you reserve your rights and try to get some feedback . What it really needs for things to change is wide community outrage at injustice . Then the bastards will have to sit up and take notice . Otherwise it seems to me its a very brave and well informed student who takes these guys on single handed . Kinda like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

[haibane]

does anyone knows if it works the same way in other countries, for example, Spain????
Thanks and Love

I've researched this a few years back in relation to my country (Czech Republic), and the answer would be yes, to certain extent - you will have to do more research within the Spanish resources. This mostly applies in countries where English is the official language and the Black's Law Dictionary applies. The fundamentals (as mentioned by sigma6 at #5) mostly apply, but for example there's no such thing as 'common law' in my country's legal system - there's civic law, penal law, corporate law and military law, all codified in print, but particular laws only come in effect when an implementing decree is issued (which can take years) and upheld at will by the courts. I think it's about the same or worse in Spain.

Also my country is land-locked, so no maritime law (there are some international treaties signed though as my country used to have a commercial maritime fleet until recently). Common law gets barely mentioned in academic papers when referring to the UK legal system. You're pretty much on your own in this research as most native English speakers around here and even in dedicated discussion forums have very little insight and experience when it comes to non-English speaking countries' law (they usually make uninformed assumptions though). Also the thing about constitution is how it's upheld, how easy is it to make changes and amendments to it and who has the power to do it - in my country it's in the parliament's hands and they do pretty much whatever they want without referendum.

If you do undertake the research however, it would be great if you could come back and report what you found out :-)

[BF88]

does anyone knows if it works the same way in other countries, for example, Spain????
Thanks and Love

I've researched this a few years back in relation to my country (Czech Republic), and the answer would be yes, to certain extent - you will have to do more research within the Spanish resources. This mostly applies in countries where English is the official language and the Black's Law Dictionary applies. The fundamentals (as mentioned by sigma6 at #5) mostly apply, but for example there's no such thing as 'common law' in my country's legal system - there's civic law, penal law, corporate law and military law, all codified in print, but particular laws only come in effect when an implementing decree is issued (which can take years) and upheld at will by the courts. I think it's about the same or worse in Spain.

Also my country is land-locked, so no maritime law (there are some international treaties signed though as my country used to have a commercial maritime fleet until recently). Common law gets barely mentioned in academic papers when referring to the UK legal system. You're pretty much on your own in this research as most native English speakers around here and even in dedicated discussion forums have very little insight and experience when it comes to non-English speaking countries' law (they usually make uninformed assumptions though). Also the thing about constitution is how it's upheld, how easy is it to make changes and amendments to it and who has the power to do it - in my country it's in the parliament's hands and they do pretty much whatever they want without referendum.

If you do undertake the research however, it would be great if you could come back and report what you found out :-)
Most European countries have the civil law system opposed to common law, it is something to do with the Roman empire.

It is countries based on the English common law system which are basically the old colonies of America Canada Australia. As the English parliament is 'supreme' or 'sovereign' in its law making abilities (Has no one to answer to or tell them how to behave) it basically created the other countries constitutions through acts of parliament which made them in a constitutional sense inferior, for want of a better term, in its law making abilities (until they grow a pair and tell the UK to get lost that is!)

[sigma6]

Wow now billy don't have a heart attack....:p



The reality is THEY ARE OPERATING ON LOOPHOLES! One of the biggest "loopholes" is getting away with all this as a DIRECT result of the IGNORANCE of the general public... they have jurisdiction over "Persons"... You think the concept of "Person" is easy to understand? If you do, then at best you are kidding yourself, at worse you are hopelessly out of your element, stick to something you actually know something about...

Dude, there are no short cuts, no magic pill substitute for educating yourself, the mistake was, your parents didn't think it was important, like feeding you, and clothing you and sending you to the "public fool system"... not their fault, because their parents did the same...


I mean by a sketchy understanding as an understanding of how a court interprets an act of parliament to provide a remedy for whatever dispute happens to be before them on that day. My understanding of this from an English/EU law perspective is about as accurate as you can get, it is rather a basic concept.
I am reasonably well educated in law so your assumption there (of needing to educate myself) was as baseless as my own assumption that you were referring to the free man theories of common law etc. Why i mentioned common law (as in interpretation of statutes/creating arbitrary legal rules seemingly out of nowhere) was this is how the loop holes are created. What kind of crap are you referring to that is being poured down our throat? If you want to disobey the system do it in its entirety rather than fighting it using its own rules. If you play the game you will always lose, it is designed that way. Law, after all, is made up and only perpetuated because people feel bound by it either through warped or force fed morals or because they fear the consequences of what would happen if they disobey. Think of it as a matter of perception, if you think oh no they have me by the balls because a piece of paper has my name written in capitals or the legal system is corrupt then you are playing the game (poorly). If you start by changing your perception to one that allows you to not feel bound by made up rules you are on the right track although it could land you in trouble it is a question of how far are you willing to take it.

Baseless? haha nice try... more vaguerisms... and you are flipping the loopholes around, my statement still is the opposite of what you said and stands as perfectly valid, if anything you are now agreeing with my point... (did you study politics too?) And if you did study law, which I am not gathering from the depth or detail of your posts, but I can see this... and I have had this of discussion so often, that maybe I take it for granted, although I think there are some posts from Paul on a similar tack... (if anyone wants to verify... i.e. this so old that it could be a personal "maxim" by now... and there's a concept worth contemplating... :-) i.e. to suggest one just lie down and roll over, because you can't beat the system... and "fighting it in it's entirety" could be misleading to people... literally going out and rebelling against it would make you a sitting duck and is the most foolish information you could suggest, but then it is such a vague statement I can expect your next response will be a "correction" again... But then in your round about way, while you are pretending to reprimand my point of view, but you are essentially sneaking in that you are agreeing with it by rephrasing the same thing.. and if I had to guess at your ambiguity, it appears you are basically agreeing that it is nothing more than a dog and pony show. Which is exactly what I said what STATUTORY LAW IS... It is LITERALLY NOTHING MORE THAN CORPORATE POLICIES FOR EMPLOYEES OF THAT PARTICULAR CORPORATION.

Once it is understood that STATUTORY LAW is NOTHING MORE THEN CORPORATE POLICY APPLIED TO EMPLOYEES OF A CORPORATION, which in fact was only originally meant to be applied to the EMPLOYEES OF THE GOVERNMENT. It exposes the deception lies in the fact, that by altering and massaging the definitions of their own corporate policies, and applying the fraud in areas where it is very difficult to catch them at it... They have created the misleading contractual interpretation within their Corporate "Contract" That ALL CITIZENS are also to be treated as GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES... Maybe you could have pointed up this issue... AND this is only one issue, if you studied "Law" (which is not what I consider Law at all...) You are probably completely oblivious to deeper and more fundamental interpretations of TRUST INTERPRETATION... which statutory law is designed to be superimposed over and hide/mislead the public away from...

If common people honestly and fully understood this, there would be riots... WE will uncover all these focus points, and we will eventually know how to safely and effectively apply the proper protections... That this is the case as I have stated and which you are obviously not disagreeing by your fencepost splitting "technical agreements" with a connotation of reproval (LOL...) If you really studied law, and wanted to give honest insight, you might have mentioned an inkling of this...

We are coming to a time where a lot of the crap has been milled out, and we are getting to the heart of the matter, and it lies in Jurisdiction, awareness of what is Statutory law, which begs the question, then what is the REAL LAW?... other issues that need "awareness" are INALIENABLE RIGHTS vs BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES... REAL LAW turns out to have more philosophical and biblical origin then most people can imagine in the WEST, which would also partly explain the pre-meditated self destruction of the "PERCEPTION" of "Religion" in the public media btw... I see this a long term legal strategy that is specifically designed to associate Corporate Religious institutions (like the Vatican) with more fundamental spiritual values (which it is almost becoming antithetical to... i.e. it is satanic, and corrupted

Statutory law is based on RATIONALIZATION (which is NOT the same as rational or what a rationale is...) controlled by an elite inner group of secret society members (begs more questions doesn't it?) and separate and apart from more FUNDAMENTAL LAW systems. The occultism runs so deep it's mind boggling...

The argument you pose is the same argument that all Lawyer pose... and the reason is because they are basing it (whether consciously aware or not depending on their education, experience and years of their own personal research...) and that is, once you are inside a contract and agree to all the terms to that contract, then by definition all the rules are now treated as "LAW" This is as old as time... And just another example of the level of the depth of the deception... as if this was truly laid in a manner that was properly understood, NO ONE would consent to it... NO ONE.

What you hinted at is technically correct... But "they" have made it so convoluted and twisted... i.e. "how to get out" of such contractual consent of jurisdiction (ie. employment within a corporation, managing your energy) When it is understood fully and completely in such way, that we don't have to fear the use cheap and technically misleading interpretations currently used to "jail" and fine and economically destroy truthseekers... I have no doubt it will be so retardedly simple as to make everyone laugh... (ok, not that simple, but I know in principle, it will be something that CAN be easily taught and shared... it is more hidden, secret and subtle than it is complicated, after all their ranks aren't that smart on their side either... just willing suck ups)

Also and finally it is not so much about attacking the existing system, if people had the right knowledge and awareness, they would simply have the CHOICE of how they wanted to live... Living outside the statutory system is actually living according to a higher standard of value and principles... You would certainly have to be more mature, more responsible, BUT you would also have MORE FREEDOMS. And with that freedom, you would NOT need a license to do what is already a God given right such as driving, growing and sharing your own food, choosing not to vaccinate your children by corporations, exempt of all liability, You could choose not to pay taxes for a Corporation that is killing people living under other Corporations. You could choose not to pay charges to a "for profit" corporation (as listed in Dunn & Bradstreet) such as the Police force and the court systems and the municipalities themselves...

There is a way to do this and it would bring these out of control corrupted, trusteeship based corporations to their knees and expose the hidden organized crime syndicates they attract. This obviously can't be done acting as an employee for a corporation... in that you are correct. The only way to bring any corporation to it's knees is to redirect your monetary funds away from it... i.e. quitting the corporation and exercising your already existing, inalienable rights and choosing how to manage the corporation that literally has YOUR NAME on it, and voting with how you want that portion of the debt (which is what they use to create securities, bonds, financing... imagine that... because that is a REAL POSSIBILITY regardless how remote it may seem today... This is our birthright, the birthright of every living man and woman living today.

And that is where the TRUST INTERPRETATION issues come in... ';-)





Most European countries have the civil law system opposed to common law, it is something to do with the Roman empire.

Civil Law is statutory in a nature, in the Canadian Constitution and in the British system (hidden behind the statutory system) Is something that will never be taken away... It was created in direct opposition to the "Roman Empire" exactly, because it was well know the Vatican was and still is the "Roman Empire" a totally irreligious institution, having hijacked Christianity, institutionalizing it for the sole purpose of creating a satanic version of it...

Getting back to the Canadian system which come from the the UK system which is based on a "Kingdom", that is supposed to be a trustee of a higher institution...

God is the ultimate arbiter of all things on this planet, then MAN, and then the government, on the most foundational principle that the created is not more powerful then the creator (as in Man created the corporation, and the government... That's why they are called Government SERVANTS) although people's knee jerk reaction is to cower (they are thinking of organized religion again... it's truly about the inalienable rights of MAN... Biblical law is clear, NO MAN has dominion over any other MAN. Period... You are free to have dominion over the earth and everything in it, and free to live in compliance with certain values, which include not violating the same rights given other men. If there was any "slavery" in that time it was by CONSENT. It was and is exactly what today is called "employment".

Where as civil law is the opposite "GOVERNMENT" than "Person" (Does that kinda sound like "Corporation" and "Employee"? because that is all it is...) i.e. Person is "superimposed" over MAN... or "Man under contract". I'm sure the principle of Man is still somewhere behind the Civil System, and just like in our dual system, not in the Civil System itself... in a "Civil Court" you are seen as a "Person" maybe brighteyes can shed some light on his knowledge of the "legal system" and tell us what he knows about the concept of "Person" vs "Man" ??

[BF88]

I'm not even reading it, have a nice day.

[Mike Gorman]

I would step away from this statutes are not law free man on the land etc theories they are based on sketchy interpretations of the law pretty much useless in practice. The legal definition of 'person' is a human being or bodies corporate which is a business that has been incorporated under the relevant companies act. If an act of parliament is not law it certainly has the effect of being law whilst the courts are enforcing them. Playing this game of trying to find common law theory loop holes is playing by their rules, a better idea would be to codify a real constitution with a court having the power to back it up (along with removal of the hereditary head of state)

Agreed, and this strange idea that 'Common Law' is somehow a kind of natural justice that harks back to a time pre-dating this phony 'corporate statute'- Hmm Common Law is simply the law of precedent, which means if a case came up in 1537 where Mr James Bumface argued a case against Cedric Bottompincher about a contract they had, and James won that case it was then entered into the legal lexicon and remains as a reference case- it is common law, 'Law' is that which is tabled into legislation, whether it be statute or criminal code or whatever - there is no weird upper case 'Person' that is dead - Maritime law does not apply, Jordan Maxwell is misguided (Docs and births notwithstanding) there is no bond being sold on the stock exchange attached to your birth certificate. YES we are all collateral for national debts and the financial system is rotten to the core and YES we are slaves and indentured to the various states we are born into - but this common law internet mythology put forward by Mary Croft is full of half truths and hyperbole. You can get yourself into a lot of serious bother if you try and apply a lot of it, i recommend deep study before you yahoo and try and stick it to the system. I have never seen a generation of atheists embrace the idea of 'God' so readily and rapidly as when it is suggested God is behind the natural rights of man, and that this civil 'phony statute' law does not include the creator's plan for man - really, I'll see you in church Sunday and we can discuss the sermon-meanwhile the authority of any law comes from where it has always emanated from: the wielders of power in society. Such pious concern for God's law, I'm impressed.

[naste.de.lumina]

I'm not even reading it, have a nice day.
Looks like the friend above is very attached to fiction and to be confronted with reality,
cognitive dissonance resulting cause great damage.

[sigma6]

I would step away from this statutes are not law free man on the land etc theories they are based on sketchy interpretations of the law pretty much useless in practice. The legal definition of 'person' is a human being or bodies corporate which is a business that has been incorporated under the relevant companies act. If an act of parliament is not law it certainly has the effect of being law whilst the courts are enforcing them. Playing this game of trying to find common law theory loop holes is playing by their rules, a better idea would be to codify a real constitution with a court having the power to back it up (along with removal of the hereditary head of state)

Agreed, and this strange idea that 'Common Law' is somehow a kind of natural justice that harks back to a time pre-dating this phony 'corporate statute'- Hmm Common Law is simply the law of precedent, which means if a case came up in 1537 where Mr James Bumface argued a case against Cedric Bottompincher about a contract they had, and James won that case it was then entered into the legal lexicon and remains as a reference case- it is common law, 'Law' is that which is tabled into legislation, whether it be statute or criminal code or whatever - there is no weird upper case 'Person' that is dead - Maritime law does not apply, Jordan Maxwell is misguided (Docs and births notwithstanding) there is no bond being sold on the stock exchange attached to your birth certificate. YES we are all collateral for national debts and the financial system is rotten to the core and YES we are slaves and indentured to the various states we are born into - but this common law internet mythology put forward by Mary Croft is full of half truths and hyperbole. You can get yourself into a lot of serious bother if you try and apply a lot of it, i recommend deep study before you yahoo and try and stick it to the system. I have never seen a generation of atheists embrace the idea of 'God' so readily and rapidly as when it is suggested God is behind the natural rights of man, and that this civil 'phony statute' law does not include the creator's plan for man - really, I'll see you in church Sunday and we can discuss the sermon-meanwhile the authority of any law comes from where it has always emanated from: the wielders of power in society. Such pious concern for God's law, I'm impressed.

Well your all over the board here, that is the beauty of arguing stuff so wide open, anyone can be as general or specific in context or out of context as they want... and not really address anything posted and barely what was quoted and already refuted... I don't agree with your definition of Common Law at all... What you are talking about is Case Law. Changing interpretations and rulings and judgements based on precedents set in the past. So that is whole different issue, but would fall under statutory in my current understanding by definition. Arbitrary changing the law based on personal preferences of judges opinions. But it does highlight one of the problems, there are different understandings of what Common Law is. Some say common law is executory... out of the old testament, others say it is unwritten and based on maxims. What has been commonly understood by the people since time immemorial. Others believe there is a specific definition of Common Law that is defined in Statutory Law.

One thing I have noticed repeatedly and if you study anything in "statutory" law long enough you always seem to find a different hidden interpretation. So much so I expect it.. Statutes are NOT LAWS. They are CORPORATE POLICIES. Part of that means they can take any word and re-define it to mean what they want it to mean. Legalese is the term used to describe this practice. Why you have to refer to a legal dictionary, because words used in their occult (latin for hidden) courts are encoded. Which is what statutes are... Codes (hidden language) and Regulations...

It's oxymoronic to think that Common Law changes with precedent, (but that could be possible in a Statutory Legal system...) and that is the problem. If McDonalds wants to change all their rules and regulations, they can, and if they want to invent new definitions for common words that must now be accepted by all their employees, they can... And many corporations do this, it defines them as a group and differentiates them from outsiders for example. Why "Codes" are used. This may be be obvious to some why they might do these things... Also Common Law doesn't operate by itself today as far the Canadian (and US) courts. Common Law operates side by side with the Courts of Equity, two different jurisdictions within the same administration (almost as if they are hiding the one behind (or beside the other) But I don't want to break down and define Common Law more here, other than to state the most general characteristics. My understanding is if you are in a Common Law Court or invoke a Common Law Court you have the "potential" to be seen as a "man" (if you know what you are doing... and good luck to you...) Enough said on that...

And Jordan Maxwell is misguided?... because there is no bond being sold on the Stock Exchange?, but then you admit we are collateral for national debts? (you're like the Strawman in the Wizard of Oz pointing which way to go? ...lol) Could this be more vague? I might agree with you if you had some context. These are models being put forward to explain what is known. There must be "something" like a bond. So technically correct on broad generalization. You are taking both Jordan and Mary Croft out of context. Freud is criticized in the same hypocritical manner by psychologists today...(who fail to see the irony I guess) Sure, we need security and bond and banking experts to weigh in, this is sophisticated stuff... And here we go back full circle... ignorance isn't proof of non existence. It's based on inference, deduction, logic, court experiences, ie. people doing research. What is known (HJR-192, etc) shows as you even admit, there IS a chain of relationship between the BC and Commerce. I'm not going to split hairs on "perfect" definitions. Mary wrote her book well over a decade ago, maybe even 2 decades ago? Have you read Cracking the Code? It was quantum leap, an almost impossible undertaking, given how much interpretation and understanding changes. So to judge people out of historical context is a cheap shot...

Anybody can get themselves into any problem if they are stupid enough, this was already hashed out and responded to... This is always the "concern" of the "silverbullet" armchair critics... "Where's my silver bullet?" (at least give the impression you read the whole thread or incorporate, other's responses, you're just making me go back... yes, nitwits who think they got it all figured out will make fools of themselves, granted and that adds nothing to the discussion... this isn't a short cut, and not for the feint of heart, or people afraid of confrontation, it's more about the future, about what is right. I think mainly of what life will be like in the future, if we don't pull our heads out of our arses today...

[sigma6]

Law of Agency

Very much related to a lot of what I speak of, so many nuggets,
you just have to listen to it many times...

https://my.pcloud.com/publink/show?code=ds9#folder=11608521

[sigma6]

Ah... the tech industry, of computer programming nerds just got a wake up call... good news... the net of awakening widens, it will be good to have them on our side...

THE ALL CAPS NAME GETS A FACE LIFT – WHILE FREEDOM TAKES A SERIOUS HIT
by Bradley Loves
http://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/the-all-caps-name-gets-a-face-lift-while-freedom-takes-a-serious-hit-by-bradley-loves/?utm_source=111914+Winston%27s+Watch+-+Bankers+Deceit&utm_campaign=Winston%27s+Watch+15&utm_medium=email

The next step in having technology “controlling” our lives is already in place, and is being installed into the new smart phone and computer “pad” technologies. It is the technology that reads your fingerprint, or thumbprint!

Apple has come out with an IPhone and and IPad which uses your own thumbprint as a personal Identification code to “unlock” the device. Sounds harmless right? Almost like a good thing, so what could possibly be wrong with it?

Well, here’s something that may just make you stop and take pause.

It also is being “planned” to have people start using their thumbprints as a personal SIGNET, or LEGAL Signature so that you can make payments with your device simply by pressing your thumb on a certain key, or you can “BUY THINGS” on line by pressing your thumb on the same key.

THIS is so dangerous to personal freedom that it boggles the mind, and most people can’t even begin to understand why!

This story really begins as my brother and I were celebrating my birthday, and talking about new technology.

My brother lives near San Francisco, CA, and works in the “TECH” industries, or the dot-com companies that are everywhere present in that area of the United States. He works with applications and knows coding and programming.

Apparently, there are various circles of men and women in that industry who like to keep in touch with each other, and gather into Twitter groups to share information. They call themselves “techno-philes”, or people who LOVE technology.

I was talking about the ALL CAPS name and how the government uses it to entrap people into being a FICTION. He sat there for a few moments listening carefully, and then suddenly he raised his eyes. “OKAY, now I get it, it all makes sense.” he said.

He began to tell me about how the BANKING INDUSTRY is very interested in this new thumb print technology that uses a persons “thumbprint” as a signature to pay for things, to make online purchases and even to SIGN DOCUMENTS, simply by using a phone or some other device.

Here’s where it gets interesting.

A lot of these San Francisco “programmers” are super geniuses, and super nerds! They are very independent and don’t like to be told HOW to create their programs.

Many of them were approached to write the difficult programming and coding that would “attach” a persons thumbprint, gained by the “print capturing” technology of these smart devices, to the persons actual name.

Several of the programmers took on this task and finally had a workable application that did just that. The BANKS who wanted this technology immediately sent it back to them in a not so nice way, and told the programmers and coders that what they had developed was totally unacceptable for their purposes.

When asked why, the reply was simply that the persons name, that was being attached to the thumbprint WAS NOT IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!

When several of the programmers who had worked so hard on this stuff had the audacity to ask WHY a persons name had to be in all capital letters, and why it mattered so much, they were told to MIND their own business and simply do it the way they were being told to do it, and not ask any questions.

As you can imagine, this really rattled a lot of the nerdy techno-guys and gals, in the area, and they started to “TWITTER” amongst themselves asking if anyone knew WHY a persons name HAD TO BE written in all capital letters, and what the story behind that was.

My brother told me all of this and then said —“Now I know why!”

Well, the rest of this gets even better. We all know that before ANY contract can be signed…, a SIGNET or SIGNATURE has always been required as a mark of CONSENT. However, these sneaky BANKSTERS are really trying to put one over on the public here.

What they are trying to do here is to substitute a living human being’s actual Thumbprint for their Signature! This is HUGE! This is also CRAZY.

You have really dig down into the demented and sicko logic of this to see what they are trying to do.

Only a real living and breathing human being HAS a thumb print! The ALL CAPS NAME is a total fiction, created by the Government, and has nothing to do with a human being. The two were always totally separate! We all know that now. But what this does is to DIRECTLY CONNECT a real living beings physical BODY to that ALL CAPS fiction! Almost making them inseparable!

They’ve now removed a very substantial barrier between what was fiction and what was real.

And now here’s the trap! The more that a real living being uses his thumbprint as his signature (to sign papers, checks, and buy things) the more he is CONSENTING that his own physical body IS NOTHING MORE THAN A FICTION. Which makes him a slave, and owned piece of property and nothing more.

This technology is nothing more than a trap…, a huge, huge trap!

Shame on the tech companies for working with the BANKSTERS. Shame on them! Shame!!!

[genevieve]

I've just read all eleven parts of Loves' article and found it fascinating.
Highly recommended! Thanks, Sigma!

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve


Edit to ask: At the link I just got a blank page. Is it just my techtardiness or is there a problem with the link?

[sigma6]

When I lived in the states I signed my drivers licence without prejudice . They did not like it at the licence registration place and tried to get me to redo it three times before caving in .The excuse was the photo was not coming out . Tried using the argument once in court on a minor speeding infraction. BUT because I was not well enough informed the judge let me off points on my licence but I got to pay the fine . I went in there without any real desire to get all ' I know my rights bitches' . Just wanted to see what actually happens when you reserve your rights and try to get some feedback . What it really needs for things to change is wide community outrage at injustice . Then the bastards will have to sit up and take notice . Otherwise it seems to me its a very brave and well informed student who takes these guys on single handed . Kinda like bringing a knife to a gunfight.

I must have overlooked this post (notice the "thanks" names dont' show on your posts? which I reference... anyhow, this is VERY interesting, I had an almost exact similar experience, doing EXACTLY the same thing, and oddly, they gave a SIMILAR excuse. I even recorded the call, she was trying to say that the photo machine was upgraded and the original photo image file format didn't work (RED FLAG I could see from a mile away) so when I called her directly, and asked if there was any problem with my signed "without prejudice" or for: [the name] she completely backed away and insisted that had nothing to do with it... (given the circumstances, what could she say) and then insisted that I resend the information... (while she still tried to get me to "request" this...) which I know in trust is a no-no... so I sent back the letter regarding her "request" for my resubmission of information, got the driver's licence in 3 days...

Thanks for sharing that experience, these are the posts I look for... Totally confirms my own experience, and it is odd, how they will "try" to deceive you... there is some interpretation that it is a test of sorts... Rights are for people of vigilance, who take responsibility, so by definition, it's almost as if they have to test you to verify this... to see if you are competent or not... since so many people are just going through the motions, trying to copy others, that doesn't cut it anymore... which is not a true exercise of rights...

Rights are based on intentionality... not throwing spaghetti on the wall...

[RunningDeer]

When I lived in the states I signed my drivers licence without prejudice .

I must have overlooked this post (notice the "thanks" names dont' show on your posts? which I reference... anyhow, this is VERY interesting,

When you're unsubscribed for specific reasons the thanks no longer show up in all posts.

Bill's post from maurice's thread: So you got your wake up call and recoiled in fear ? (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76626-So-you-got-your-wake-up-call-and-recoiled-in-fear&p=902034&viewfull=1#post902034)

What was the deal with that "Krissy" thread? (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?77256-What-was-the-deal-with-that-Krissy-thread&p=904103&viewfull=1#post904103)

[sigma6]

Legally Who You Are - Steve Thomas
xFYu2LTHEas
Posting this link in this thread for the record, it definitely fills in a huge slice of information I'll bet is missing from everyone's understanding of the current legal system they are operating in within the US. And for those who have difficulty dealing with the Birth Certificate as Registered Name, and a separate legal entity that DOESN'T identify you, but is something that YOU have inadvertently identified yourself with... (the only way to avoid this is through a "trust interpretation" i.e. a different way of thinking altogether... )

addendum: btw "identify" means "to make two things one"... or along those lines... it creates attachment by association, as in surety for example... that is why they alway ask you in court... "Are you JOHN/JANE DOE?" (also you is plural)

i.e. YOU can refer to the "individual" which actually means you AND the corporate Person, going this routes also creates a presumption of you taking on the surety for the Registered Name...

This was confirmed to me by a friend's father who was a cop, and he explained the "step by step" process for proper determination of jurisdiction... they first ask for ID... then they read out the NAME... then ask you IF YOU ARE JOHN DOE! (just like in court!!!) When you say yes they have established their jurisdiction over you by YOUR OWN ACTIONS...

[sigma6]

Another recent breakthrough in my perception and understanding of Trust Interpretation... I was absent mindedly responding to another post and this just came out, a recent epiphany or clear picture of the Cestui Que Trust model I am always working on...



REGISTRATION ESTABLISHES THE ELEMENTS OF TRUST
Recently it just hit me, that THE REGISTRATION process IS the trojan horse that introduces all the elements necessary to create and operate trust in the public, the true basis and foundation of the defacto government's management of the statutory legal system... (i.e. corporate policies, rules and regulations that only apply to "citizens", "employees" etc. i.e. another form of public Person) this concept of REGISTRATION, is the very element that is introduced to all western children, hidden right in the nativity story... literally hiding in plain site... subconsciously introduced to the young before they can even understand what the implications are... by parents who are equally blind... which is just another layer of the subconscious programming (ironically... I'm not a "Bible hater" either... I just don't think it is logistically possible to completely understand it as literal imo ;-0 And I don't think this is necessarily good OR bad... It is just completely hidden and thus not even understood by all the people who are staring it in the face...

We are all blind, incompetent... and NOTHING will change, until we step up and educate ourselves... this concept, as the Nativity reference suggests has been around for a long, long time and is NOT going away... Our ignorance has to go, our reliance on blindly allowing trustees to operate without any outside feedback and accountability has to go... I have never met anyone who can "get underneath" this interpretation since I introduced it a few years ago, inside or outside the movement... and although there are many derivative concepts and explanations being touted they largely fall on deaf ears because these same individuals either don't or cannot explain the underlying mechanism... the underlying logic of why their "interpretation" should be followed... (they may have relied on parroting information from others with no understanding themselves in many cases)


"...A second significant development in the evolution of uses and trusts was the adaptation of the concept of equitable (beneficial) interest for much more elaborate purposes. [think Birth Certificate as certificate to property (in this case a security interest)] Originally the use or trust related only to land. All that was required to create an enforceable right for the beneficiary in equity was that the land be conveyed unto and to the use of the trustee in fee simple, in trust for the cestui que trust. The trustee’s role in this situation was straightforward: to hold the fee simple (legal title) to the land, to turn over the profits to the cestui que trust, to dispose of the land in accordance with conveyor’s instructions, and to undertake all necessary proceedings to protect or recover the land.(13) When one considers the simplicity of this method of splitting legal title from beneficial enjoyment of property, it is not surprising that the cestui que trust, or beneficiary, came to be thought of as the real owner—or, as sometimes stated in modern terminology, the “beneficial owner”—of the property. However, the right of the beneficiary in equity was primarily a right against the trustee to enforce the terms of the trust..."(14)
- pg 406-7, Beneficial Ownership & The Income Tax Act - Catherine Brown

I would add a few points of clarification: If you download and read the document it, or have some familiarity with this very unique form of trust... the beneficiary is also called the "cestui que trust" i.e. the trust form itself is called a "cestui que trust" and the beneficiary in this cestui que trust is also called the "cestui que trust"... It is being both "hidden" and confusing if you don't understand that, but also makes perfect sense if you do... (contemplate it for a while and ask yourself why... (I think it is because the whole purpose of the "cestui que trust" is ALL about the BENEFICIARY!) The Beneficiary has power to act against the trustee, and it has been stated the beneficiary can and does have trustee powers, i.e. there are unique properties associated with this trust...


Banks control the distribution of money, a paper representation of wealth, and if you trace back the ultimate source of all that wealth, it is the labour, energy or productive activity (and all it's products by extension) of individual living men and women.


This "energy" was reified CORRECTION... I got it backwards... your energy is REAL... the monetizable credit is fiction... I need a word the OPPOSITE of "REIFY" i.e. the taking of something conceptual and concretizing it as if it was real... But just get the idea, our labour, is turned into something that can be manipulated by the economic controllers... you work, you get a dollar... that piece of paper is a measure of value, that represent your labour... now how would you try to capture everyone's lifetime of labour... at the beginning of life... I suspect it would be based on an actuarial value (a calculated value)


So for now I will just say your energy is converted into monetizable credit (for financial and accounting reasons) via the issuance of Birth Certificates (starting in 1933) which the certificate to a record of an event, which is the original ink signature document, held by the Registrar, which operates as the legal title to your pledge (of your energy) part of an Estate with all the elements necessary to operate as a trust, and with many additional attributes as well... i.e. it can also act as a corporate sole entity, a corporate juristic Person... a financial account with access to the treasury, (the UCC1 "transmitting utility" Winston Shrout identified) the legal and symbolic representation (via reification) of an actuarial (or averaged) value of your lifetime of labour, i.e. your labour is being converted into monetizable credit.

This is the "money" or "credit" that was borrowed into existence via bonds and securities from banks that are the trustees and creators of the "form"... whereas the consideration was of course provided by a living man or woman who was issued the certificate, as the sole source of energy associated with that particular birth certificate. This is the "conduit" that Winston Shrout spoke of, this is the method by which all this "credit" was pooled and constitutes a portion of what is held in the treasury.

Registration always creates a split in the title of any property that is publicly registered, the original ink signature document as record becomes the legal title held by the Registrar, usually a representative of the Crown or State or Province, etc... the Certificate YOU receive is a form of receipt of this transaction and corresponds to what is known as the equitable title... and represents your right of possession and SUPERIOR title.



Settlor:
The grantor or donor in a deed of settlement.
Also, one who creates trust.
One who furnishes the consideration for the creation of a trust, though in form the trust is created by another.
- Black’s Law 4th ed


Settlors are the original grantors... We are the hidden grantors in this special trust arrangement.

...And the bankers/government are supposed to be the trustees... only problem is nobody understands how trust operates anymore... hence metaphorically they are like horses without riders... unbridled and out of control... chasing their own interests more then their mandates would otherwise ever allow. Wild horses that have broken into the feed silo of our oats... Wild and out of control... and now the barn is on fire..

Many of the 'gurus' I have been following all these years have been saying this in one form or another but none ever just spit it out, or just called a spade a spade... it was always round and round the raspberry bush...


Why this doesn't "work" in the "public", Admiralty law or the hidden military jurisdiction we are living in that everyone is equally blind to (how ironic is that?...) and I quote...

(note: Winston was also one of the first I heard, identify the Birth Certificate structure along the same lines as deed trusts to land, (people as "land" or "movable dirt"... worth our weight in gold?) also this trust deed was described by Robb Ryder and also John Gorman in the George (Hughe) Bothwell case... by now people should be aware that many legal concepts are based on previous more fundamental principles, this principle of ideas, words and concepts being generated by metaphor is the basis of language generation going back thousands of years...(re: The Origin of Consciousness & the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind - Julius Janes) Microsoft used the same principle in developing their present day Operating System. So too is the nature of the present day Legal "Operating System" i.e. don't be surprised at the idea of defining living men and women as "movable dirt"... originated from the same system of land registration, as the basis and template (metaphor) being applied to "living souls" ...and that this concept is justified and is echoed (has precedence) also in biblical reference (the original source of law, and still active, more than people could possibly imagine...) hence "...from dust you came, and to dust you shall return..." still holds true last I checked...)


"...A trust imposed a duty on the common law owner to hold the property for the benefit of someone else. Thus, one of the key rights of ownership—the enjoyment of the property—no longer belonged to the titleholder. Equity provided the person intended to benefit with a means to enforce the right of enjoyment. This was a personal right, or right in personam, against the trustee. It was not a proprietary right, or right in rem, with respect to the trust property itself.(5) Therefore, it is not strictly accurate to refer to the beneficiary of a trust as the beneficial owner of trust property since this suggests that the beneficiary has a right in rem with respect to the trust property..." -
- pg 404, Beneficial Ownership & The Income Tax Act - Catherine Brown


Catherine Brown - Beneficial Ownership & The Income Tax Act
http://www.4shared.com/office/kqFCSwtzce/Beneficial_Ownership__The_Inco.html
(You only need to read the first 7-10 pgs since all the Beneficial Owner definition really applies to the Registered Name, that you are learning how to differentiate and manage as a separate corporate legal entity in the public with it's own liability (properly understood...;)

Note: beware there is ONLY ONE PROPER "Download" button (hint: it is the one beside the "Share" and "Add To my account" buttons... after pushing it, another tab or window will pop up and block your view... that too is just another ad, GO BACK and search for the two options "PRIORITY DOWNLOAD" and "Free DOWNLOAD" You have to have a 4shared account... If you don't already have one, I would suggest it over using a social media account and also you DON'T have to download any additional software and I don't recommend that either... (sorry, I like using 4shared...)

[sigma6]

I would step away from this statutes are not law free man on the land etc theories they are based on sketchy interpretations of the law pretty much useless in practice. The legal definition of 'person' is a human being or bodies corporate which is a business that has been incorporated under the relevant companies act. If an act of parliament is not law it certainly has the effect of being law whilst the courts are enforcing them. Playing this game of trying to find common law theory loop holes is playing by their rules, a better idea would be to codify a real constitution with a court having the power to back it up (along with removal of the hereditary head of state)

Agreed, and this strange idea that 'Common Law' is somehow a kind of natural justice that harks back to a time pre-dating this phony 'corporate statute'- Hmm Common Law is simply the law of precedent, which means if a case came up in 1537 where Mr James Bumface argued a case against Cedric Bottompincher about a contract they had, and James won that case it was then entered into the legal lexicon and remains as a reference case- it is common law, 'Law' is that which is tabled into legislation, whether it be statute or criminal code or whatever - there is no weird upper case 'Person' that is dead - Maritime law does not apply, Jordan Maxwell is misguided (Docs and births notwithstanding) there is no bond being sold on the stock exchange attached to your birth certificate. YES we are all collateral for national debts and the financial system is rotten to the core and YES we are slaves and indentured to the various states we are born into - but this common law internet mythology put forward by Mary Croft is full of half truths and hyperbole. You can get yourself into a lot of serious bother if you try and apply a lot of it, i recommend deep study before you yahoo and try and stick it to the system. I have never seen a generation of atheists embrace the idea of 'God' so readily and rapidly as when it is suggested God is behind the natural rights of man, and that this civil 'phony statute' law does not include the creator's plan for man - really, I'll see you in church Sunday and we can discuss the sermon-meanwhile the authority of any law comes from where it has always emanated from: the wielders of power in society. Such pious concern for God's law, I'm impressed.

Hmm... I must have missed this post... or maybe it didn't strike any cords in me... Mary has kinda went underground of late, she didn't keep going in my opinion... and I don't blame her, but she contributed in her own way... she was graced with a peak behind the curtain, and her intuition must have been quite in tune at the time. Common Law as the be all end all I agree is another misconception... I even made a mistake I think in previous posts associating it with the superior court... It may well be, and I did think I heard or read that, but the one source I do have, "Beneficial Ownership" actually said the supreme court. i.e. if you are not in either of these courts, I highly, highly suspect you are not in a REAL common law court, but some statutory version (remember they can rename anything they want and apply and definitions they want in their own jurisdiction. And this is one of their favourite tactics, like getting you to think you are in a real court with a real judge, when in fact you are in an arbitration with an arbitrator and an adjudicator that all work for the corporation you are being interpeted as being under the jurisdiction of via your unqualified signatures, your actions, and behaviours, etc... Also, I am not sure your evidence for saying there is not financial birth certificate, or that these aren't traded on the stock market. That may be literally true, because I don't thinkit would ever be made so obvious.

Just like they don't make it obvious that all the cities and police unions and courthouses are listed on Dunn & Bradstreet as for profit corporations. Now just because the majority of people are ignorant of that isn't evidence that it doesn't exist.... that is not even logical.. I can assure you there is a financial connection to the birth certificate, and just for disclaimers, unfortunately I don't think it is a hidden bank account, and they just didn't give you the passbook... (if it were only that simple... ;-) But there is clearly financial indicators all over it... First off, it is created to satisfy or at least become part of what bonds and securities and how money is printed, i.e. it is printed by a Bank Note Company, and that isn't because they never got around to creating a Birth Certificate Company... it is because it related to the financial system.... (go figure...) Also it contains unique identifiers just like bonds and money, thirdly some have reported seeing on different variations... "For Treasury Use Only" that absolutely is consistent with my interpretation and understanding... just have to ask yourself of course who has a Treasury Account? According to Winston Shrout every court has a treasury account... just like Jordan Maxwell said the courts ARE banks, that just happen to deal in securities... Let's add a point of clarity and insight, a security is essentially a financial debt that is being treated like a financial instrument... Banks and Securit y Exchanges have a license to either create, manage or handle these instruments. For example when you are charged, at that point, they are in the process of creating a "security interest".... if you look up the legal definition of security, the Birth Certificate would qualify for one of the definitions...

(INTERPRETATION; Definitions - Securities Act R.S.O. 1990, c. S-5)
1. (1) In this Act, "security" includes,
(a) any document, instrument or writing commonly known as a security,
(b) any document constituting evidence of title to or interest in the capital, assets, property, profits, earnings or royalties of any person or company,
(c) any document constituting evidence of an interest in an association of legatees or heirs,
(d) any document constituting evidence of an option, subscription or other interest in or to a security,


People have to stop using ignorance or failure as a proof... (just stop it! o.O!) Is this difficult? sure it is... I can't speak French, but that doesn't mean it's a bunch of BS, and is probably not even real! (although I think that sometimes :>D ...this is ludicrous logic... egocentric thinking, and it drives me nuts when I hear people pose this as an argument... people attempt things, and fail, some people learn and move forward others consider it proof that it's BS, (never their own misapplication or lack of proper understanding...) How long would it take anyone to learn how to speak another language btw? If you plan on getting frustrated because you haven't mastered it in 6 months or a year, you are misperceiving the whole idea...

There is tons and tons of evidence of the financial nature of the Birth Certificate.... but one has to learn trust, and many I see looking at trust really don't understand it... I am not even claiming a full understanding, but I am cognizant and aware of what I know and what I don't know... I still see many hours and weeks and months ahead of me... (not a problem...)

[sigma6]

I've just read all eleven parts of Loves' article and found it fascinating.
Highly recommended! Thanks, Sigma!

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve


Edit to ask: At the link I just got a blank page. Is it just my techtardiness or is there a problem with the link?

sorry don't know how I missed this post (my techtardiness... :D) But link seems fine...

[sigma6]

I keep promising myself that I will create a library of all of Karen Hude's interviews, because I think they will become a powerful study in retrospect... I think Karen slips in lots of "things" which can be interpreted if you understand the legal implications of what she is touching on... (and at the same time it seems more impossible each month as she comes out with endless interviews... o.O~!

I just listened to this one, and I thought the interviewer was keen, on focus, and well researched in his understanding... I decided to add this interview in here, because it got much more to the point of what is going on, in a way that does in many ways, ties in to the interpretation of "The Legal Concept of Person" if you consider the operating environment that makes this idea so important is the CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT in which it operates... As this is where the presumption of jurisdiction over the "Person" lies. The other factor of course is how WE operate in relation to that "Person" aka "the Registered Name" ... since it is, and can be treated like, a separate legal entity, a security, a property, an account, etc...

Thus there were a couple of solid points I wanted to mention (one escapes me, will have to listen again) Karen very clearly talks about the "Hidden Government" that is operating as a CORPORATION... a de-facto government in effect... the interview portion is around 40 minutes... but I could listen to this guy interview Karen for 2-3 hrs ideally... he really had a great focus on some key issues and apparently there is supposed to be a follow up interview specifically on the cone heads ...Homo Capanesis? (or whatever)

RE-POSTED: The Criminal Banking Cartel Will Soon Be HISTORY -- Karen Hudes
ZAvlMBdT0Vo

Also an interesting note for gold bugs... she suggested she was recommending gold be priced at $2500, was interesting... I thought was a little naive... why such an arbitrary figure and what difference would it make in a dynamic market where so many factors will influence and dynamically effect it's price... To me she would have made more sense if she talked about the forces acting on it's price rather then the price itself... hmmm...

[genevieve]

sigma6--

I would love to get your take on Kurt Kallenbach's info. He says that when we're born, the Vatican and the Crown take possession of our DNA through the afterbirth and are acting as trustees. Until we make a claim to our DNA, so that we become whole, and claim our life, they continue to operate as if we were lost at sea. (Maybe not the best summary, but you get the picture, I'm sure.)

Here is a link to Kallenbach's talk with Peter Eugene (who doesn't get many words in edgewise :clapping:) in case you haven't heard it and are interested. I found it VERY interesting and oddly believable.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kNAK9ekVtg


Wishing you well,
Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve

[sigma6]

Kurt Kallenbach reminds me of Sam Kinison and Bobcat Goldthwait when he talks... and he freaks out into bouts of histrionics to emphasize his points, which I don't find convincing, I wrote a long response to this, and as fate would have it, I must have got distracted and it didn't post!!! I'm taking that as a subconscious cue... but in a nutshell he has some good stuff, I haven't followed him too closely for the reasons stated above... and I found that I was asking myself a lot of questions listening to some of his interpretation. The principle of registration is universal. I know about the Vatican baptismal certificates, as the source of inking the newborn's feet, after pricking it's heel (all very symbolic, like everything the Vatican does. On the other hand, it is not necessary to get DNA or human placenta tissue, or blood sample to create a trust. I have focused on the credit created from our labour represented by the record of the event of our birth, which was then securitized and borrowed against, based on an actuarial value of our lifetime of labour. I think when some people get into the trust it is has so many permutations, so much history, and it is so subtle and convoluted sometimes, people will over literalize what is going on... Not writing him off, I just haven't got to sit down (and get through his presentations) I know Kerry did an interview with Cindy Brewer on this topic, I still have difficulty seeing it... not that I don't think it is impossible, but if they are, I think it is more about using it as a form of identification, which could technically fall back into a trust interpretation, but again, don't believe it is necessary or required to create this trustee relationship...

Now that all said the principles he is talking about is fundamentally correct... I'd like to see him explain what his practical application for dealing with this looks like... I know he has shown up recently on a guy named Jonah Bey's talk circuit, who is becoming a "hot topic" (read fave flavour of the month) and we are trying to assess the validity of his process, and my gut instinct was that he has some process, but he doesn't seem to know exactly how to explain why his process works, like he has copied it from someone else... and there is evidence that he has, based on the rants of another guy called True Freeman.

The movement continues to grow, as more and more individuals step up to the plate.

[sigma6]

EMF Mind Control Weapons Being Used On Population - Deborah Tavares - Scary Info
E5aV_7k3PPo

She uses and speaks of everything I have discussed previously, the cities and states have been reorganized as corporations, they are NOT governmental bodies, they are listed as "for profit" corporations listed on Dun & Bradstreet... Another voice in the wilderness unfortunately... It's just sad that someone has to have this much experience and knowledge and education in order to be able to understand what is going on... It just worries me how this information can be broken down so that more everyday people can understand it...

Interestingly, she is also talking about all this within the context of several hot conspiracy topics...(they do tend to go hand in hand) I think it is refreshing to see somebody like this nailing all the secret agendas of how the government is trying to control the source of tax dollars (instead of truly focusing on our welfare) Unfortunately the old adage appears to be true. All institutions contain the seeds of their own destruction (or ours?) The banks and governments need more money. Your money.

warning: mind blowing information on government mind control programs

[genevieve]

Thanks for your response, Sigma.

You said, "It's not necessary to get DNA or human placenta tissue, or blood sample to create a trust," and I agree with you. The importance of what Kurt Kallenbach has discovered seems to be that "Their" claim to our DNA creates the bottom-line trust on which all other trusts are based. Therefore, until we become "whole" again by claiming our DNA, Their bottom-line, foundational trust pretty much negates any work we do to claim our beneficiary status and get Them out of our lives. As KK says, "A house divided cannot stand," and our house is divided until we become whole again by claiming our DNA.

According to KK, our DNA/the afterbirth, is claimed by Them via the Certificate of Live Birth and, KK says it is the only thing referenced in that certificate. The live child is no longer present and so is considered to be lost at sea. Until we show up as alive and claim our DNA (through the laws of salvage, I think), the baby (later the man/woman) is not recognized as alive and appears from time to time only to act as a representative of the DNA (the estate of the missing person), for which They exercise Their fiduciary duty.

Another thing of interest: KK says that the Anno Domini calendar we are using actually places us into the past because the Anno Mundi calendar is the one They use. Our 2015 A.D. is Their 5472 (or something thereabouts). This means that we're operating three thousand some odd years in the past and are dead to Them--until we claim our living status.

I'd still like to get your take on this info (and anyone else's who's interested [Grip--you there?]. I know KK gets excited and sounds rantish sometimes, but I believe he's worth listening to. I've listened to a lot of others who weren't nearly as coherent or interesting.

Thanks for what you share with all of us. Bless you.

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve


P.S. I think I listened to a conversation by Jonah Bey and Peter Eugene and was very intrigued with what JB had to say, but it seemed he said only enough to pique interest and promote the sale of his info.

[sigma6]

Thanks for your response, Sigma.

You said, "It's not necessary to get DNA or human placenta tissue, or blood sample to create a trust," and I agree with you. The importance of what Kurt Kallenbach has discovered seems to be that "Their" claim to our DNA creates the bottom-line trust on which all other trusts are based. Therefore, until we become "whole" again by claiming our DNA, Their bottom-line, foundational trust pretty much negates any work we do to claim our beneficiary status and get Them out of our lives. As KK says, "A house divided cannot stand," and our house is divided until we become whole again by claiming our DNA.

According to KK, our DNA/the afterbirth, is claimed by Them via the Certificate of Live Birth and, KK says it is the only thing referenced in that certificate. The live child is no longer present and so is considered to be lost at sea. Until we show up as alive and claim our DNA (through the laws of salvage, I think), the baby (later the man/woman) is not recognized as alive and appears from time to time only to act as a representative of the DNA (the estate of the missing person), for which They exercise Their fiduciary duty.

Another thing of interest: KK says that the Anno Domini calendar we are using actually places us into the past because the Anno Mundi calendar is the one They use. Our 2015 A.D. is Their 5472 (or something thereabouts). This means that we're operating three thousand some odd years in the past and are dead to Them--until we claim our living status.

I'd still like to get your take on this info (and anyone else's who's interested [Grip--you there?]. I know KK gets excited and sounds rantish sometimes, but I believe he's worth listening to. I've listened to a lot of others who weren't nearly as coherent or interesting.

Thanks for what you share with all of us. Bless you.

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve


P.S. I think I listened to a conversation by Jonah Bey and Peter Eugene and was very intrigued with what JB had to say, but it seemed he said only enough to pique interest and promote the sale of his info.

I in fact agree with much of what you have stated Kurt has said, and given your excellent summation I would actually say he is very much in line with my own interpretation which is very rare... because I too emphasize the ultimate trust (the one the Birth Certificate represents) is the ONLY one we can claim, i.e. is the one the Birth Certificate represents, or is the Certificate of... (simple logic really) The part people miss is that through this Certificate, everything else you are doing is being registered through it, you aren't the actual party on any contract or registration from that point forward, the "Corporate Sole" is. You are the "operator" of a Corporate Sole in the public, and you are inadvertently taking on the liability of it unnecessarily and not allowing the trust to operate.

The part where I differ is about this DNA thing. I think we are talking about the same trust (based on the Statement of Birth) It is still as I have suggested and I believe I am applying more logic and context to support what I am saying if you listen to what Kurt and Cindy Brewer and others are saying, they never get into the full logistics... the Rez clearly does not have to be a physical object, which is what I think they are stuck on... and it also doesn't explain what they have been doing since 1933, whereas my interpretation does so explicitly. (I am just no professional expert on private Bonds and Securities...)

And this is not to say that someone's "labour" or "lifetime of labour" or "energy" is not real and tangible "object" but it needs to be converted into something that can be bonded, securitized and circulated in the financial world... i.e. It eventually gets created into some form of credit that either has a value placed on it, or is created "on the fly" with each security interest (debt obligation) that is imposed against the Master Account that was created as part of the original Statement of Birth, which is the original record of the event, which is the original ink signature, which is designated as the legal title to the "res" (the "thing" that the trust was created for") Which is the energy of the living soul (nothing mystic here, but a human life obviously has to have a real value and real energy and labour is it's output) So this legal title in the form of an original ink signature document, or record of an event, is now "held" by the Registrar who is acting as the representative of the State or Province and ultimately the Crown...

His idea of the DNA is intriguing and compelling, and may even exist and may even have political or occult interpretation... all of these things are possible... I haven't done enough research or haven't seen enough evidence but it also is completely unnecessary to create the trust that he is describing... like I said if, and that's a big if.... such a program exists (i.e. DNA collection) it may have alternative (and very questionable) purposes... but I don't have enough to even go there... and it is not necessary, but I do agree the Statement of birth as the original ink signature document and original record of the event is what creates the "legal title" upon which the State creates a "Master Account", Estate, Corporate Sole (Juristic Corporate Sole or Legal Person)

And what I have been trying to stress over and over, it is this entity, which was designed for our use (but there are different ways HOW to use it)... And this is now what is finally gaining traction in the CR movement by EVERYONE now (who is worth their salt)... including Winston Shrout, Neo and Jack Smith, Christian Walters, Boris, ... and I give a lot of credit to Boris for cracking this open, and being the bigger giver/sharer... I'd say that right now... it is a VERY interesting time... Things are coming into focus after almost 20 years(?) But the learning curve is still there... and you have to start learning some trust interpretation, no getting around it...and everyone who first jumps in finds in incredibly both simple and yet it can also be incredibly convoluted, and this is what I think is going on with Kurt (Cindy, I can't even say...)

This legal entity is actually the party that registered your vehicle, i.e. you registered the vehicle in this Corporate Person. And the second part to understand and what Kurt's info should lead to, and seems to be saying as you very well described, is via this means of registering property in the public via a Corporate Sole Legal Person, which itself is a "property" that has been registered in the public via the original Statement of Birth, a record which becomes a legal title by definition... All legal title to ALL property is now "HELD" by the State! This is what they mean by the "YOU don't "OWN" anything!... Because it is the State that is holding legal title... The problem with this is people don't understand what the implications of that means (because it is a trust interpretation!)

So I do agree in principle claiming the Birth Certificate is the key (but as always regarding practical application, paperwork and procedure, the Devil is in the details) So in this I am right with Kurt... Because the Registered NAME is not really YOU!... (Ok, now sit down for this part) It is actually the STATE! It is a small piece of the State in exchange for your pledge of your "energy" converted via the bonds and securities as credit and "ledgered" into the Treasury. This is how they access your funds via this "Birth Certificate Account" This is your conduit into the public, this is your source of credit. This is the magical "hidden bank account" that everyone is over literalizing and misinterpreting. A big part of the reason this is so hard for many to grasp is because another important aspect that I have been harping on for many years, is that much of this is all occurring on the private side, according to strict Trust procedures... So yes it is THEIRS (as many like to lament) but it is a representation of your portion of the State... Remember the People own the country, the People are the Government... (of course most everyone has forgotten this...) But this is the actual mechanism of how it is done (my oversimplification maybe, but fundamentally this is the basic model)

This is WHY WE ARE THE CREDITORS OF EVERYTHING YOU SEE AROUND YOU!!! The government and banks DON'T CREATE ANY WEALTH, They manage, the process of converting our energy into credit that creates ALL the money that is used (and pay themselves way too much imo, largely because of our ignorance and incompetence...) Thus why all lawyers are involved in government, they intuitively know how to operate legally, even if not necessarily having studied trust law specifically (...the lie is different at every level...) Which is why we can catch them "off guard" once in a while, especially the morally corrupt ones... BECAUSE the bedrock of the foundation is TRUST INTERPRETATION!... going right back to Roman Times and Covenant between the Romans and the Christians... And the institutionalization of "Christianity" (the biggest coup d'etat in history) by Rome (and the beginning precepts of trust law?) Civil Law vs God's Law (Natural Law applied to Man, philosophy, etc) And I won't go further into the historical precedents, Freemason historical interpretations, which ironically I agree with a lot of ...

The Birth Certificate is NOT identification. It is Indemnification... Just as someone from the UK shared... what it says on the back of their Birth Certificates... It's almost like they are giving British citizens a leg up in terms of their rights being protected...


"This extract is evidence of an event recorded in a register of births. It is not evidence of the identity of the person presenting it"

However all this talk about real living men and women and fictional legal entities, being "owned" by the government, operating in a fictional legal environment (like a world of commerce for example) confuses people into thinking the sky is falling and all is lost... because they don't understand all the jurisdiction and liability is on the Corporation! (to protect living men and women... IF they would only learn how to recognize and accept it, which is what Kurt and me and many others are trying to simplify... We all know it's there... hidden in the System...

When it comes to trust interpretation ramifications/implications... It's NOT ABOUT OWNERSHIP!!! It's about control... like Rockefeller told the whole planet 100 years ago...
(i.e. "Own nothing, control everything") The registration process creates all the necessary elements that creates proper trust interpretation. And in that interpretation, the party holding the CERTIFICATE is the holder of the "EQUITABLE TITLE" That is the superior claim, the HOLDER Of the LEGAL TITLE is the TRUSTEE with LIABILITY... (The State)

It's a circular system. Since at the end of the Day the State or Government is WE THE PEOPLE!

But because people don't understand this... They claim ownership to everything in the public, when they should be claiming holding equitable title status in the private. The reason why this was set up this way, was to create a "Perfect Reflection" of the Real World... i.e. This interpretation assumes there IS A GOD... (there is no "god" in a fictional man made commercial environment...) And this next one shouldn't be too hard for everyone to grasp, but we ALL came into this world with NOTHING... And we will ALL be leaving the world the same way! With NOTHING... (surprise!!) Thus the Vatican set themselves up as the current Trustee of God (Vicar of Christ) and all the Countries and States are acting as Trustees as well supposedly under them (why they think they are the bomb!) Thus the State is the "Owner" or really just another trustee in a chain of trustees... This whole system is a reflection of that interpretation... That's why the Godless and Atheists are considered incompetents in trust... They are embracing citizenship and its jurisdiction, and denying the freedom of their Birthright, which is still to this day defined as a "God given right" Think about it, if you are not under the jurisdiction of another man or corporation, where does your jurisdiction lie? If you are honest, it shouldn't be that hard to imagine there is SOMETHING in this universe GREATER then YOU! (I wonder if this is why originally all Freemason were required to have some kind of belief in God?)

And by the same token this is a kind of similar circular logic in the ethos of "Godliness" where is God? God is everywhere, God is within us... therefore when we are in alignment with his principle our conscience, our consciousness is speaking according to the will of God... don't poo poo this, this is critical! This is the basis of the power of trust law and expressing trust. Expressing your will, in such a way that you are expressing his will. (Religion is philosophy, equity makes the law, or equity follows the law...)

re: Johah Bey, exactly, why I don't generally find it appealing, and also because it appears his explanations are superficial or shallow, because he has started by using others information (True Freeman if I am not mistaken, and who from the sounds of it is not very happy, because he wasn't as aggressive in the sales and marketing... which seems to be the main focus of their platform... and given the technical prowess in building an internet platform, and the number of sales they seem to be making, they are conspicuously absent any large group of supporters or testimonials... o.O?

btw thank you for your excellent homework on Kallenbach, I will now go back and take a closer look... It's just those kinds of summations from others that sometimes make me look for certain clues and information in others works... ;-) (I guess you can get used to listening to anyone if you listen long enough and steel your hard enough and zone into their 'world'... o.o

[sigma6]

And now here is a plug for Winston and what I was referring to above http://www.wssic.info/

What I am specifically focusing on, is his two presentations... the upcoming webinar...
Whose Property is This? Reclaiming Your Status & Assets
http://cdn6.bigcommerce.com/s-dz2ux/products/223/images/514/Blast_art__98781.1438651030.490.588.jpg?c=2
and also
*NEW* Authentication & Reversionary Interest DVD

What I find particularly interesting. Winston's group, although getting a little bureaucratic and overpriced, and partly because of that... i.e. it's becoming a bit of an "institution" itself... (do you think ol' Winston has learned a thing or two in all these years?) In any event because of their extensive organization, I think they have been able to keep abreast of current events, one thing I notice of the older and more sophisticated groups are doing is sending their people out to research and study other groups and "Big Names" in particular Winston and Jack Smith, as I have seen their members online here and there... and these two events and in particular, the Authentication and Reversionary Interest clearly goes to the work of Boris...

And Winston gives direct reference to the work of Christian Walters regarding some trust interpretation... This 'cross pollination' of Gurus and groups I have been advocating for years as another one of the criticisms I have always maintained. It almost happened at Sam Kennedy's Albany Workshop, but blew up in everyone's faces with the disclosure of Tony King aka Duane Johnson aka possible government agent? Anyhow that event became like a Tower of Babel moment and all the gurus scattered never to come back again... it was that close (there were over a dozen gurus at that event!!!) I even remember one guy showing me a bullet proof vest he had brought because he was so apprehensive!! So now it is finally being recognized and done independently under the radar, as they still compete with each other both philosophically and commercially (the latter being the biggest impediment imo) for better or worse ;-( But at least I am grateful there is more of this cross pollination... of "knowledge" It is a sign to me that the knowledge base is growing and becoming more sophisticated. On the other hand some of these groups are charging too much to make it mainstream which was the very complaint and problem to begin with (i.e the Elitist attitude...) There is more information and research now going on than one man or group can handle, be it what it may.

re: Jonah Bey - has been capitalizing on it too with his niche, I still think it touches on some of Boris' research and sharing of the last 9-10 years, which really came into a focus a year or two back first when Boris did calls with a character named Batman, then he started some correspondence with Jaguar and Jade. (and yes in this movement, there are alot of people who avoid using their real names, for safety and legal reasons ;-) Anyhow, even if Jonah's original source came from True Freeman, I'll bet he was studying Boris videos) And now a guy named Neo is working with Jack Smith, and changing Jack's whole paradigm more to something I would agree with. Neo is focusing on "Who you are" with an emphasis on actual practical implementation (finally!!!) This is what I have stated for the last few years as "Understanding the nature of your relationship to the Registered NAME" (which I think is more transparent ;-) He is starting a training program, that is pricey and will be ongoing for over 9-12 months. (and yes I am tempted... although it will be American codes and practices, because it will also be trust interpretation, it will be universally applicable with little translation) And I even heard in one of his "Sizzle" talks, a direct reference to Boris, and a kind of chiding and patronizing way, but there was no denying it.

I would also add, I'll bet they also got a copy of my "BC trust Diagram" my own epiphany that came in the form of an image map of how the trust was set up... I intuit this because I know a member of their group and he shares and acts as a conduit of information to Jack's group... (I know my 2¢ is in there somewhere... and it is really a re-iteration of portion of Boris' material as interpreted by Vic Beck aka Adam Beck (don't ask...) And I have stated since I created it, that it is so fundamental, that no progress can be made without acknowledging it, and it cannot be broken down more fundamentally (and I haven't seen any takers to date...;-)

Now if you are wondering what is the point of all this "Name dropping" because that is the nature of how scientists conduct themselves when they are the authors of research. It is a standard protocol and natural system of categorization that I have been aware of but never quite appreciated until I finally realized the problem with the current CR movement. The mistake (and sin imo) is that many researchers refuse to acknowledge the source of their own research and interpretation, for fear of being criticized, attacked, or for ego reasons, and sometimes because they have so many it's just too difficult to sort out... (but that shouldn't stop them...)

If you look at the research journals of any scientific library, the Journals of published works are always accompanied by the date and names of the researchers and any other researcher's work that they used as part of their own research. This isn't just for ego purposes (as I originally surmised when I was a teen...lol) It is for historical and organization purposes, to retrace the history and logical development of various research articles... Simple as that.

In my case, what I did mostly was isolate out what I saw as a misunderstood concept. Or one that I (still) feel people can't see very well, and blew it up, so close up, enough so that people would be able to see this one part, and understand the mechanism and its implications in interpreting how and why the Cestui Que trust operates and how it is expressed in the public... An arrangement that explains the relationship between the living soul in the private, to the issuance of the Birth Certificate, how it was created and registered (as the Registered NAME) and how it was used to establish the registration of all property in the public therewith... A logical coherent interpretation that starts at Birth, creates the record and provides a public "Name" for the living man to be able to "use" physical property, while the legal titles are all held by the State. Which is kind of what I think Kurt has zeroed in on as well... I see many people converging on various aspects of this... and I think a lot of that had to do with Boris, as we slowly started to realize what he was onto. In my eyes Boris was the true "intuitive genius" (if you are out there man, accolades to you... I would like to thank you personally!... )

btw... If anyone is interested in the above webinar and wants to contact me regarding 'more information' private message me... in the next 3-4 days as it is happening next week ';-)

[genevieve]

Howdy, Sigma6!

Thank you for your (ongoing) in-depth explanation of how you see things. It seems that what you're saying aligns with what Kurt Kallenbach is saying, but he's taking it a bit further by saying it's not the newborn baby that's registered and on whom the trust is based, but rather it is the DNA of the afterbirth, which has been abandoned or "lost at sea." This makes weird sense to me because it is so f****** outrageous! Who'duthunkit?

He also focuses on the behind-the-scenes involvement of the Catholic Church (which seems to think it has the right to own everything and everyone--grrr), and until we claim our DNA (the physical expression of our spiritual essence) as well as our physical body, we are not whole and the Church/State can continue messing with us, because it claims our essence (via the afterbirth DNA) and our name (via the Certificate of Live Birth). What's missing is the live man/woman--you, and me--who is presumed lost at sea.

Therefore, according to my interpretation of KK's approach, we must claim our DNA so that we are whole again. We must claim our life so that we are no longer considered to be lost at sea and presumed dead. And we must disassociate our live-being-self from the name/legal entity on the Certificate of Live Birth in order to get out from under the Church's assumption that it, rather than us plus "God," is the head honcho.



"The part people miss is that through this Certificate, everything else you are doing is being registered through it, you aren't the actual party on any contract or registration from that point forward, the "Corporate Sole" is. You are the "operator" of a Corporate Sole in the public, and you are inadvertently taking on the liability of it unnecessarily and not allowing the trust to operate" Sigma 6, Post 37 above).

I think this is a crucial piece to comprehend. We're not the 2-D name. We're a 3-D living being. Not comprehending this is what keeps us entangled with the State because, as many have said, we think and act as if we are the name that's on the pieces of paper we get (e.g., traffic ticket). I think that KK's angle of claiming the DNA/afterbirth and THEN clearly showing up as the live man/woman who is only acting ON BEHALF of the name--but is NOT the name--is key. Once we stop acting as if we are the name--stop pretending to be something we aren't--we'll fare much better.


I've run out of time. There's more I'd like to say, but it'll have to wait. It seems that what KK is saying is in alignment with what you and others have said, and hopefully his angle regarding the Certificate of Live Birth/afterbirth DNA is the missing piece. How much more basic than DNA can we get?

Lately some people have been talking about authenticating the Birth Certificate and being able to somehow show up as the alive true owner of it, but it's confusing and I need more info on it. Any suggestions?

Anything you have to say/add would be greatly appreciated (others as well, of course).

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve


P.S. What is "CR?"

[sigma6]

I'm not saying the newborn baby is registered. A record of an event is registered. You may be confusing me with Grip... A record can become a title in trust... The Deputy Registrar General was very clear in her communication by saying "We don't register people" (but she didn't say they don't register Persons) Again some people are stuck on the concept of "res" which is the thing or property that the trust is supposed to be about... It doesn't have to be an actual physical thing. For example a song, idea, invention, concept (such as the value equated with the lifetime of someone's labour for example (hint, hint) I wouldn't get too stuck on this DNA thing... Does Kurt actually have concrete proof of this... I don't think so... I am going to guess it is largely circumstantial based on his interpretation/speculation... It's just not necessary from a trust interpretation point of view and so violates the Occam's Razor principle of parsimony. Because it is unnecessary.

Ironically everything you seem to be saying about Kallenbach is fundamentally accurate and I agree with it, i.e. the idea of the acceptance is a very key concept I am currently studying myself, so I do agree with his basic premises... except this unprovable and unnecessary idea of DNA... I haven't delved into the intricacies of what I know will undoubtedly be mysterious and ambiguous information... And I don't think they would borrow and create money over a piece of DNA (imo)...

Consider that compared to the financial value of someone's lifetime of labour... Make sense? This idea is nothing new... It's like a Futures contract... Futures are traded all the time... Futures have values, are bought and sold, used as hedges, investments, etc. etc... keep it simple... this DNA thing is unnecessary and maybe belies Kallenbach's lack of general business and financial understanding??? (just a guess...) Can you see how someone's lifetime of labour could be treated like a Future? securitized and bonded and sold on a private security exchange? The DNA thing just feels like a dead end to me... If he would drop the DNA thing, it wouldn't be such a distraction from what I essentially agree with...

I see the Vatican as the current manifestation of the Roman system of Law and culture which comprises modern Western Culture. It's success is much like the English language in it's ability to incorporate other cultures and resources... (think like the Movie "The Thing") The Bible is the story of the integration of the Greco-Roman culture (which was a take over in itself) and the integration of Egyptian Culture culminating in the murder of Julius Caesar and the "suicide" of Cleopatra (duhhh... couldn't have been a murder could it? ... naaaaa! Romans murdering the Egyptian woman (with offspring) who could have taken over the helm of the Caesership of Rome?) Anyhow... that's how I look at the Vatican... i.e. Pure evil... plain and simple... Deception is their currency

You've got the right idea (you are probably a big picture visionary type thinker) and that is good. but don't underestimate the messy detail of all this information... I use the phrase "the Devil is in the detail..." for good reason, because really that is the biggest deal... application, process, the more you learn, the more you realize you need to learn... and it's going to be that way for some time yet... (no shortcuts that I see...)

The Name is a necessary entity, that is used to operate in the public world of money, accounting and records... simplified it's just a corporation... fiction means it's a practical tool just like having an "avatar" in a video game (for a dramatic metaphor) you can't physically be in that world... there is a lot of over interpretation of what is going on... it's actually much more functional and boring then most people think...

What everyone is missing is how to properly use it... without being presumed to accepting a surety position... this is what I try to focus on because this is where I see people (both in the movement and outside) endlessly failing...

CR means Commercial Redemption, a term Winston Shrout came up with, that is the best generic term for all info related to this movement... (I don't know what else to call it... although my own private focus is on Trust and Equity)

[sigma6]

Karen Hudes - Network of Global Control
TDMOdaJMruM

Wow, Karen upping her image and presence... have to give her credit she just keeps plowing forward... I posted this because she is talking about the very thing I have been harping on. YOU DON'T HAVE LEGAL TITLE to anything... She actually is bringing this up and putting it on the table... Karen understands trust interpretation VERY WELL (as I always suspected... )

Educational commentary... Share this video, I would like to see it go out to CR ('Commercial Redemption') oriented people, as it validates things that many wouldn't believe otherwise unless it came from someone of Karen's professional and legal stature, this is Karen trying to educate us using a series of presentations...

[sigma6]

More information on how the REAL World works (sorry no magical ferries here...) :D

Recommended by Winston Shrout, several years ago, Winston's very first webinar presentation, probably one of his best, before his "team" decided it was too much work to sit on their butts listening to him for more then 2 hours (probably a union based regulation they democratically voted on or something!) Anyhow... he gave a decent 6 hr webinar, (4hrs minus breaks and lunch) of solid information on the concept of A4V R4V, one of the most difficult concepts for many people to grasp. This is largely because Winston never got into the fundamental mechanism what is happening when you employ it, and what is the basis of it's origin (where did the idea come from, and why does it work...) (that is if done properly, within in the proper context, and with the proper understanding... it definitely takes some persistence and follow through... consider what you are dealing with...)

In it, he gave never before insight, that he only referenced in previous weekend seminars (a major missing key and question in my mind for several seminars) and also gave out information about the global bank accounts, and mentioned a guy named R.C. Damm, who was the arbitrator of this entire system...

In this YouTube, a guy that was involved in this for over 30 years gives a 2 hour interview... Keith Scott (sounds Australian) It is difficult for people to grasp this stuff because it is so removed from "everyday" life... but what is "everyday life" comprised of.. (let's not even go there... lol) But the fact of the matter is everything operates according to trust interpretation and this is no exception, and sure enough at various points he even speaks about equitable trust references... i.e. this, the BC, A4V R4V cannot be properly understood without having some understanding of trust equity and how things operate in the public vs the private. But you might pick up some of that sense from listening to this conversation... It's a little dry, but for any commercial redemption 'students' (I think there is at least 1 or 2 out there... ) This is a most worthy and timely interview ; )

AAE tv | An Insider's Look At The Global Financial System | Keith Scott | 9.5.15

-UqSjQOd1Gc

So many interesting comments, at one point Ethan sheepishly asks if he believes in the "Illuminati" his response is telling... something like "...no question, it is a given..." apparently they are an ever present and negative force and he explains how they have attempted to disrupt and dismantle what they are doing, except for Dr R.C. Damm's refusal to accept any money from the U.N. (their headquarters of control and manipulation...)


Published on Sep 7, 2015

If you've ever wondered how the global financial system came into being and how it works, this episode of Awake And Empowered TV will enhance your understanding. Ethann Fox is joined by one of the leaders and foremost financial expert, Keith Scott. Keith is a former director of the Office Of International Treasury Control, an organization that underpins the banking and financial structure of the world. In our conversation, we talk about the OITC and it's purpose and function. We also delve more deeply into how banks lend money, and the role of gold backed and fiat currencies. In addition, Keith and Ethann talk about the future of the global financial system, impending and immediate changes coming within the next few months and into the following decade.

Awake and Empowered TV with Ethann Fox

As the energy of our planet is shifting and changing, many who are awakening have come to realize their world is quite different than they were taught and had imagined. Societal institutions, religious traditions and mainstream media focus on our physical reality, materialism and other negative aspects of our reality, blocking our spiritual connection to the Divine. To support an emerging shift of consciousness in the world, now more than ever, people are in need of real world tools, and inspiration to cause positive change and support a higher vibration. Awake and Empowered TV is the impetus for raising vibration and increasing awareness of the positive aspects of this transition and where we are headed as a global consciousness.

...

Ethann Fox is a spiritual teacher, energy healer, the founder of the Flower of Life Center for Human Evolution and the visionary behind the Awake and Empowered Expo. His background in the business and financial markets as a professional trader and business owner is coupled by over 20 years as an accomplished astrologer and numerologist. Walking both the spiritual and business worlds, Ethann’s experience has given him an unconventional view and approach to personal happiness and professional success, melding the two as one.

[genevieve]

I'll be watching this in the next few days. Thanks for posting!


Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve

[genevieve]

Watched the vid last night and found it fascinating. Finally getting info from "the horse's mouth" (where'd that expression come from?).

Keith Scott is clear and easy to listen to. If my calculation is correct, he was involved with the Office of International Treasury Control for 17 years and must have a deep comprehension and an enormous amount of info, and yet he was able to be clear and concise when sharing.

I knew a scam has been perpetrated on all of us by bankers, and now I have a much better comprehension of how it's done. (GRRRR)

I HIGHLY RECOMMEND this interview to anyone who's trying to figure out the Game.

Thanks for sharing this, Sigma!


Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
genevieve

[sigma6]

some more exposure of 'the' concept... Karen directly references "courts of equity" among many other things (finally people are talking about this, I knew this day was coming going back to 2009 when I first heard CW talk about it... ; =)

World Banker Karen Hudes Reveals Secret US Constitution
eMSF8mCR6M0
maybe I will add a good Tube on this constitution she is talking about... o.O



update: well didn't get the constitution one yet, but I did bump into this one, a Greg Szymanski (of Svali fame) interview of Tony Gambino... The Vatican runs the show, this is a gem of an interview because it actually has Eric John Phelps (author of Vatican Assassins, who today is now delving into equity and trust interpretation...) on it too, asking his own questions... a slight divergence (I just threw this in for good measure so I will be able to find it in the future) and it does support Karen Hudes

Tony Gambino says Vatican runs the Mafia
GZc0ZA85oRI

[sigma6]

Double hitter, actually a plethora of information...

...but it does talk about the secret constitution of 1871 and I actually found the principle that Winston Shrout had explained so long ago... that there are in fact TWO kinds of slavery... involuntary servitude and VOLUNTARY servitude... (as in by your CONSENT) finally! ...good to hear someone else articulate this, check it out at around 34:40 and all the profound implications that follow...

As always with topic matter of this scope, I don't agree with every dotted i and crossed t... there are a few small errors, but by and large, it covers a lot of the main points very well, and there are plenty more Tubes on this topic... re: the interpretation of the "Jurisdiction" Of "Washington, District of Columbia"

definition: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.)

Washington, D.C., formally the District of Columbia and commonly referred to as "Washington", "the District", or simply "D.C.", is the capital of the United States. The signing of the Residence Act on July 16, 1790, approved the creation of a capital district located along the Potomac River on the country's East Coast. The U.S. Constitution provided for a federal district under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress and the District is therefore not a part of any U.S. state.


Do You Know About The Act of 1871 Teach this in your School
6P318bELif8

Are you consenting? have you figured out how to give proper expression of "Notice of Waiver" of your consent? ... if not, then you have consented (by acquiescence...)

Modern Money Mechanics - Federal Reserve Bank Of Chicago
http://www.4shared.com/office/fc4X4Sy8ba/Modern_Money_Mechanics_-_Feder.html





For people new to 4shared:
may vary slightly as 4 shared is constantly updating, and different file types have different options... but the basics are still the same... have these instructions handy BEFORE you go to page!

Typically you will be provided with a link similar to this...
http://www.4shared.com/folder/vo3VIWx9/Trust.html (example link)

Warning! - beware 4Shared "POP UP WINDOWS" and "FAKE DOWNLOAD" buttons are all over = advertisements (you have been warned!)
i.e. read CAREFULLY and follow instructions to bypass ALL advertising


(1) ]To Start: click 4shared link provided ... (add password if requested)

It may be for a specific file which will be displayed at the top or...
a List of folders or
a List of files (contents of a folder)

If a list of folders or files select until you have chosen the file you wish to view/play/download

Window will "refresh" displaying file selected near the top and...
- if an audio or video file, a display window will show automatically playing the file...
- if a text file, usually you will see the file name near the top,

Note: a "pop up" window may appear - CLOSE and GO BACK to page


To Download:
- Look for 3 Buttons below (side by side)
"Download" ... ... "Share" ... and ... "Add to my account"

Note: EVERYTHING ELSE IS ADVERTISING and will only sidetrack you off the page!


(2) Select "Download"

another "POP UP WINDOW" may appear in front - it's ONLY MORE ADVERTISING!
(again CLOSE "pop-up window" - STAY ON original page)

The file name will be at the top of the page... below you will see a blank video display window (may load an advertisement (depending on your browser) and a box/button beside it that says "FREE DOWNLOAD" (will say "20 [to 60] seconds" in the same box)


(3) Select "FREE DOWNLOAD" box/button (your almost there!)

a Sign-in 'box' will appear...
Look for 4shared account access at bottom (in fine print)
- Sign Up (left) - or Log-In (right)
(Don’t download anything to sign up...
by-pass "social media" signup - requires additional info)


(4) Login: (username, password)
- "download, save, save as, etc" should appear
a count timer will appear (wait 20 [to 60] seconds)
if another pop up window appears - close it AGAIN



Notes:
You can sign into your 4shared account first, and skip step 4

also... I have seen on occasion 2 options that say "Priority Download" and "Download" always avoid "Priority" (it's a pay option) and just select the free option

[sigma6]

Karen Hudes is the energizer bunny... in this one she makes reference to the global trust and more insight in the US debt, and if you listen closely she supports my interpretation, that despite China holding some of the debt, WE ARE THE REAL CREDITORS... and that's on the public side of things as far as interpretation goes...

Criminal Banking Cartel Will Soon Be HISTORY -- Karen Hudes
sIepFcIrkco

"... It's the Banking Cartel that's going down... not the United States..."

...worth giving your focus of attention to...



and as I stated in another post: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?87546-Benjamin-Fulford-15-Dec-2015-Canadians-ready-to-arrest-Fed-Gangsters&p=1029933&viewfull=1#post1029933


regarding Canada's ability, legal right and moral obligation (?) ... the same principle applies to the US... since the "US dollar is actually a global currency, not a national currency... but again the solution and understanding lies in the fact that we the people already have the power... but not the education to understand it, and that is what they hold against us... [rightly or wrongly...] this system of trust is not going to change and is not going away... we will first... or we should at least die trying to start educating ourselves on trust principles... there is no escaping this absolute fact...

or I would reword that as "this absolute reality based on 'operation of law' " which is how trust operates (i.e. with or without your knowledge... in similar fashion as natural law or scienctific principles... and yes... it must therefore be based on certain universal absolutes...

[sigma6]

Winston does another interview with Ethann Fox (a new age business guru o.O?) ...at 46 min about, Winston confirms what I have said... that many government institutions, including cities, police dept, court houses, etc... are listed as "for profit corporations" in this one Winston says he found the corporation, called "THE JUSTICE COURTS OF THE STATE OF UTAH" ...That's "running the court system" ...which then lists the "places where they were doing business"... which he said corresponds to all the addresses of ... you guessed it ... local courthouses!... o.O!

And some other courts operating as private corporations, that taxpayers don't support and don't have any control over... (lots of interesting stuff as usual...) the system is overwhelmingly controlled by corporations (fascism)

Also the idea that people paying tickets and going to jail are doing so, based on an "interpretation" (by the courts) that they are doing it "by their own consent"...

History And Financial Basis Of The Legal System | Winston Shrout | 11.14.15
pAwTDaVU6Xs

many nuggets in this interview... Ethan just let's him talk! Winston is known for long extended speaking engagements, it is his strong suit... his singular one and two hour presentations, never do justice compared to his original weekend lectures, it has to do with warming to his topic, the context that he provides... Winston never reads from a script... the audience and energy is important in this type of circumstance, just letting him speak freely without time constraints, and keeping him on focus, probably gets the best presentation... (Ethan's smart ; -)

Interestingly he gives a trust interpretation example around 1:15:00 which was quite insightful, a woman defending herself against her attorney husband in a divorce! she took on a Settlor position and turned the tables, one can always benefit from listening to Winston multiple times... ; -) good to hear and see these confirmations...

[seah]

forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but isn't it impossible to live in the world without being registered after your birth/no birth certificate? Impossible in the sense that you can't go to school, travel, etc...I know, who wants to attend school and be dumbed down, but just what is the alternative, or is there none?

btw, doesn't Karen say that the popes wear the long hats to hide their elongated heads?

[sigma6]

it's insane, we now live in a time where you need to the expertise of a lawyer to figure out how to say "No, do not violate my body" with foreign material... this is truly insanity...

Re: Lawyer: How to Stand Up Against Mandatory Vaccination
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86375-Lawyer-How-to-Stand-Up-Against-Mandatory-Vaccination&p=1031847&viewfull=1#post1031847

This is a good post that sums up my continuing effort to more aptly describe this concept ("Commercial Redemption" or "Escape from the Matrix"... or maybe mastery over your vessel while in it... we (a motley crew of underdogs, who still manage to communicate and share ideas) are slowly beginning to realize this is the "final frontier"... it is both exhilarating and daunting... to travel through all these years, watching all the sacrifices people have made, and for what? ...to find out what is being hidden from us... by a group of sophists... secret society members... treacherous territory indeed, too many have fallen by the wayside...

Bt there is a light at the end of the tunnel... we have finally arrived at the last "impasse", what I call the "final frontier" I have no doubt that we are finally identifying what needs to be understood... (so many dead ends, misinformation, and poorly interpreted explanations...) However this last step is a huge, many more years journey in itself... (understanding the 'law of trusts') it's a BIG venue, a paradigm shift in thinking... As it should be I guess... since it underlies everything that is built on it... which is almost everything we see in the world today... i.e. commercial institutions, religious institutions, "legal" institutions, the structure of corporations, the historical tie ins, etc...) the matrix is real...

but no regrets... I already caught on to this several years ago, and a good thing I did, given my "slow build up" learning style. With the help of numerous others, I now know we are finally pulling all the pieces together... there's a lot of sub topics of learning required because there is so much inter relationship... UCC, common law, rules of civil procedure, IRS/CRA, etc, even history and religion... but without a frame of reference, it's too overwhelming... the "trust interpretation" key is finally bringing all that into focus... you have "cracked the code" when there is less confusion, more insight), mysteries are finally solved... more pieces fit together... more confirmation... excitement and commitment replaces anxiety and confusion or blind faith in endless guru lectures... cops, lawyers and courts treat you differently, (like they are afraid of something you might do...)

"Knowing" has a different feel from, desperately "wanting to believe..." no more "forcing" of ideas, no blindly believing something that you can't justify or even reason out yourself... instead... you know exactly where you have to go, what you need, and a good idea of how you are going to get there... (no short cuts)

All that said... it is also sobering to think a new area of study is going to require a few years to master... but hey, no one said it would be easy... my goal is full mastery of the legal vessel that was issued to me, that I may live in and act in the full spirit of equity. Turns out that is a worthy goal in this lifetime... that is has both an "internal" aspect as well as an "outer" application in the world of commerce, government, law, etc

[sigma6]

For Future Reference This is another Example that alludes to an application of how Equity in Trust and in this case specifically administration of the Registered Legal NAME Estate can create bizarre effect in the general public world...

Elvis, Michael Jackson... Now David Bowie... Only explanation - Trust Estate Law
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?88542-Elvis-Michael-Jackson...-Now-David-Bowie...-Only-explanation-Trust-Estate-Law&p=1041881&viewfull=1#post1041881

[sigma6]

I just found out Christian Walters died... the man who figured out the Matrix... the real deal... if it wasn't for him, we'd all be banging our heads against an inpentrable bubble... not even knowing we didn't even have a chance... what he offered wasn't a short cut... but the real and hidden path to what is essentially the secret knowledge of the elite... that everyone else missed or detoured around... or had checked it out, and found nothing... (how ironic) or in the case of others, simply couldn't wrap their heads around it enough to actually speak to it in a cogent and descriptive manner (so subtle and slippery it can be at times...) he discovered the final frontier... what I liked to call the bedrock... where the buck stops... where philosophy, religion, law and commerce all take their root from... the one true way to the real key to the whole system... the implications of his research, what he discovered and brought to the common man is simply mind boggling... and the way he was able to bring back the ancient texts from the 18th century, decode their meanings, bringing it all back to life for us today... pure genius... what can I say... the man was an intuitive genius in that regard... he could see, way ahead of everyone else... he had already studied Winston, and Jean, and Sam, and many others no doubt... he had already been there and done that... was already looking farther and deeper... a true visionary... way ahead of all the game, way ahead of the other gurus... you knew, when you were listening to him pour over texts, that here was someone he could see the "big picture"... someone who had found the root to the whole tree...

For me, he was the first to draw the correlation and explanation of A4V... where A4V came from (turns out it is an important key itself, yet still, as is often the case, only part of a piece to an even bigger picture (equity and trust)... and the relationship to signatures, and how they relate to the interpretation of the 3 fundamental categories of trust... i.e. expressed, resulting and constructive... or expressed and implied... and orated and presented in a way that just blew my mind... this man was surfing on the edge of a tidal wave... digging into and sharing unbelievably profound stuff... what Winston had never even come close to articulating... he barely hinted at it maybe once or twice... (in all the dozens of dozens of hours I have listened to)

If it wasn't for him... there would be no real fighting chance... the only guru, who never ever charged anyone for his knowledge... never... and right to the end... he really was a giant in this movement... his research is already starting to change the entire understanding and goal of the whole commercial redemption movement... there is no way around it... this really is the foundation and bedrock... no foundation, no house... it really is that fundamental... and to study equity and trust is to apply yourself to a lifetime of learning... it changes your whole life and outlook... it's that big... thank you Christian Walters...

http://www.gendronfuneralhome.com/obituaries/Christian-Walters-2/
http://d1t3gia0in9tdj.cloudfront.net/photo/tributes/t/8/r/207x207/3780025/Christian-Walters-1465823053.png

[ozmirage]

... Isn't it impossible to live in the world without being registered after your birth/no birth certificate?
Impossible in the sense that you can't go to school, travel, etc...I know, who wants to attend school and be dumbed down, but just what is the alternative, or is there none?

A birth certificate is NOT some monstrous document of doom, contrary to the mythologists and fabulists.
Do not believe me - go read the law and court decisions.
It's not even proof of citizenship if the holder objects.
It's a convenience.
Anything a certificate is needed for can be substituted with two affidavits of witnesses attesting to your birth and parentage.
Go check the State department about applying for a passport as an American national / noncitizen.

. . .
As to exercising privileges offered to citizens versus the exercise of endowed rights by nationals, that's entirely different.

[] Attend school - if that is a reference to public funded education, generally one will need to verify one's status. Private schools may or may not require evidence of nationality / citizenship.
[] Travel - that's a liberty unless you've surrendered that for some privilege that bars travel without license.

Check your own state constitution and statutes to verify that non-resident inhabitants do not need permission (license) nor register property.
. . .
Hope that helps.

[sigma6]

the key point you mentioned is "status"... the reason why "status" is important (the hot topic of late) in the 'Commercial Redemption' movement... is because it defines who you are... "who you are" is important because it defines the Nature of the your relationship to the birth certificate... (what I have described in a diagram) This isn't automatic, but still you have to establish your status (as a NON citizen... a private person/citizen) This is still the best way to describe a very subtle understanding... there are different relationships... one is an indemnified party... the other is a party "identified" which will ultimately lead to a presumption of suretyship... (i.e. liability for the legal entity) one is beneficiary... the other is trustee...

thus "status" is the new "hot topic" ...but at the same time, it is just a smaller piece of a bigger picture of understanding... it is not a silver bullet on it's own... it's just another piece.. albeit, a very important piece...

[sigma6]

Excerpt from another post... http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?94018-Property-The-story-of-THAT-THING&p=1108223&viewfull=1#post1108223 sometimes I write something so profound it stuns even myself... i.e. I can't claim all the credit to these muses... just that some data points I read, trigger them is all I can say and that causes me to try and write some of these concepts down, while I can articulate them relatively clearly... posting for reference and to update my "concept" thread...


Re: 'Property': The story of THAT THING
Quote Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
.
Yes, good questions here. (From way back in 2010!)

My mother, who was an author, had once drafted a book called Life as a Tenant. She had spent most of her life living in houses she or her family did not own, but the metaphor was much wider... she was pointing out that we're also temporary tenants of our bodies, and merely temporary caretakers of everything we tell ourselves we 'own'.

The entire concept of 'ownership' is basically a temporary legal convention, and in ultimate terms means nothing. Even if I was certain that 'I owned' something in a past life, which still existed, 'I' could have no legal claim to it now.

The discussion is really (also) what "I" means.
Note: "You" is often times being used in the general plural sense (so I don't have to go through it and change the grammar... as all this applies to EVERYONE...

Excellent point Bill, I don't think the connection is coincidental either, I have been trying to stress, the whole concept hidden in the interpretation of "ownership" or "owner" is really a short form of "beneficial owner" which is really a term which connotes a "beneficiary" in a trust relationship, aka known as a cestui que trust, which is really a reference to the corporate fiction that you were issued at birth... in order that you would have the "option" to do "commerce" in the public (while you remain in the "private"... where your inalienable rights exists, and must be exercised from...) ... the caveat being, 1) If you are sufficiently aware of and 2) able to exercise/execute this fundamental right... this is a birthright "option" that pretty much all the "general public" "waives" due to (sheer ignorance and ) lack of proper education unfortunately... trust interpretation in equity is not taught in any public schools I know of, including most law schools, although some lawyers do know of it, and the books written on the subject and the records of it, dating back centuries are all there... (waiting in posterity for heirs to rise up and take advantage of it...)

The huge implication of the above, btw, (if you followed the logic) is that, in fact, YOU are not even the "tenant" listed as the "property holder" at the Land Registry (for example)... Instead, the registered NAME (corporate legal person) that was issued to you at birth is...

So where do YOU fit in? (This is where many in the "B.C. is not you" crowd fall down...) You DO have a RELATIONSHIP with that certificate! (in trust in specifically...) To hear some people claim it has "nothing to do with them, etc..." defies logic and is denial of reality...

YOU are the "holder" (by virtue of the certificate that was issued to you, as proof of the NAME your mother registered on your behalf...) of that corporate legal entity... So yes, it IS your "property" the general public just doesn't truly understand what is meant by "owner"... or the word "property" for that matter... (because it is all, as Jordan Maxwell so elegantly... and now I can see, so profoundly, revealed... it is ALL "occult"! I can now see so clearly what he meant when he called his famous lecture "the Occult World of Commerce" He couldn't have been more profoundly accurate, "Occult" is a latin term meaning "hidden" and used in science and medical terminology today exactly based on this definition (independent confirmation, if you will...)

PROPERTY:
Before I go too far off... For me "property", boiled down to it's most fundamental interpretation, means "right to use" It can be that simple! It's a word about a RELATIONSHIP (as ALL trust terms are)... NOT necessarily "the thing" defined in the relationship... But how the term is casually used, in "common parlance" makes it perfectly understandable why all the confusion exists (I think it is purposeful and intentional that most are completely ignorant of all these subtle "super impositions" of these apparently, general terms, with their more fundamental (and hidden) trust interpretation meanings...) and it (the true underlying trust interpretation of how things are really set up...) was set up this way specifically to reflect this very real and higher reality that you speak of... i.e. for example, that man was given "dominion" over the earth (which was always meant to imply custodianship) This in turn implies benefits and responsibilities (in trust as opposed to commercial contract, for example...) and it reflects the true nature of reality at the most profound level of existence and consciousness... i.e. that we came into this world with nothing materially, contribute nothing materially (that wasn't already here) but our "will" or "intention" imposed on material things, and we will all be leaving very shortly... and we won't be taking anything material from this world with us either... this is in fact, the simple logical truth of the matter... so simple, so true...


For better or for worse...(depending how you look at it...) the Pope in the Vatican, (as the power behind the building and continuation and maintenance of "Western Society" (Greco/Roman Empires...and Egyptian "Empire" too (the hidden component, that I think is a definite contributing source to much "Christianity" )) is the "Vicar of Christ" (a trust term...) meaning "standing in his place"... the Kings and Queens are also trustees (such as "Defender of the Faith", a "title" assigned to the Queen of England, this is loaded with trust terminology, concepts, etc... and everything in the (Western) world subsumes under these trusts... including the corporations (like "United States of America", "Canada", "Australia", etc, etc...) And all corporations within them subsume under them as sub corporations... right down to each individual "corporation" (Corporate Sole... Sole/Soul... get it? ;D) Thus why you (or more properly, the Registered NAME you use) are listed as a tenant... if you follow the complete logical chains of trusts and titles, back to their origins... Corporations btw are a form of martial organization (military dictatorship) this should make sense according to what we see "growing up" around us... (encroaching one world government...)

The corporate world of "fictional" commerce ("fiction" meaning something more like "symbolic" in the computer programming sense, since the entirety of this "system" (the worlds of commercial contract and the underlying foundation of trust that underlies it...) what we often call the "Matrix" is like a huge virtual "Operating System" trying to be a virtual reflection of reality, much like "Half Life" is a virtual reflection, albeit simpler in principle, regardless how sophisticated technologically, of the general public, "super fiction" if you like ;o ...) Anyhow this system of governance, was created to deal with the "material" world (distribution of material wealth as one example) using "principles" commerce established eons ago) ...for people who choose not to be part of the world of trust in equity

Equity, for better or worse has been encoded into a "Biblical" interpretation/philosophy which has a fundamentally different interpretation and model (non commercial) The world of commerce didn't appear from nothing, it was derived from and has "borrowed" extensively from and was ultimately "refashioned" into what we know as the world of commerce. The public cannot exist without a private, and so the world of commerce can't exist without a deeper foundation... It wasn't supposed to be all evil... (although it sure seems that way more often than not... and I would even that is to the degree it deviates from equitable maxims...) In any event, it is both superimposed upon (as a "cover" i.e. aka "fiction") and extends beyond, this foundation of trust interpretation... we don't "own" anything in this world... in the sense most people understand it (and now you know why... ; ) - because we don't properly understand the true fundamental meanings of "own", "owner", "ownership" etc... or "property" for that matter... at best we do have "property" (right)

In the simplest terms (now that you have the historical context above... when we "register" property in the "public"... the "Registrar" (usually an agency of the State) holds documents with original ink signatures on them... These are treated as both "property" and records... (signatures represent an expression of your intention in trust, and your energy in commerce) Records can be used as titles in trust (Trust 101) Thus the State is holding what can be considered the original and only "legal title... In turn the State issues a certificate, as evidence (and in fact proof, according the State) which acts as a proof of the "transactional" process which has occurred (Registration of the property, record, title) thus, the Certificate (Receipt) can also be considered a form of title... but what kind? This would be representative or equivalent to an "equitable" title... This means the holder is entitled to "use". This is what denotes evidence of "property right". Note: "use" is a clear and unmistakable "trust" term. (and a very large and deep definition, in legal texts... o.O!) Thus I have been trying to explain, to even my cohorts and fellow trust law students) this subtle relationship between public, private, trust, commerce and Registration. That Registration is what creates the elements of trust, and is the cornerstone of the entire system of governance... Thus why I don't speak in terms of "ownership". It is irrelevant and inapplicable... Instead I can only different levels of interest, based on different levels of title... and in its most simplest interpretation, equitable title is always superior interest to legal title ... in Equity... (and equity is always superior to and supersedes statutory "at law", when properly "invoked" ...and this is the KEY... and most concise and accurate way I can describe, what is going on at the very "bedrock" level of public commerce vs private trust... regarding "what is property, and what is really going on...


Use the term "property" in your conversations with government servants and notice the difference in their eyebrows, and the more cautious "tone" (in case you actually know what you are saying...) Karl Lentz discovered this (his claim to fame, in defining children as "property" instead of "children", a statutory term that means something else entirely...) I sometimes wonder if he fully understands what he seems to have stumbled on...) anyhow, it's all there, if you can "see it" This is what is meant by CW when he said "being able to see with Equity Eyes"...


Definition of Equity (the jurisdiction where all private trust is applied and operated from) according to John Bouvier:
Institutes of American Law 1882 - Vol 2 - Section 3724 - 4th paragraph – Pg 457:
“The Law is nothing without equity, and equity is everything, even without law. Those who perceive what is just and what is unjust, only through the eyes of the law, never see it as well as those who behold it with the eyes of equity. Law may be looked upon in some manner as an assistance for those who have weak perception of right and wrong, in the same way that optical glasses are useful to those who are shortsighted, or those whose visual organs are deficient. Equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the soul and spirit of the law; positive law is construed [presumed] and rational law is made by it.”

The "at law" jurisdiction (statutory, commercial, admiralty, martial, at law...) is mutually exclusive and separate from the principles of "equity" by which these "laws" were derived and formulated from, much like corporate policies, and not the same as the fundamental principles that they are "derived" from... This is the hardest thing I find, that others have trying to grasp... the exclusive and independent nature of private trust interpretation, or trust in equity... even the Bible hints at this... One of the best terms, and a scripture I actually introduced into CW's NTT, Moving Titles in Trust Group, and now being referenced by Roark and Eric Jon Phelps, if I am not mistaken, is the following...


1 Timothy 1:8-10 Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; 9 knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;


Use "ownership" at your own "risk" (and/or peril... since you are attaching yourself to the corporate legal person and being presumed to be the surety, worst a "volunteer surety" (but that's another story, beyond the scope of this post ; ) ... in either event, something completely unnecessary, if one realized that the certificate issued to you at birth, represents an estate, structured to be held in a trust arrangement (should you choose to "recognize" it...) and was/is already indemnified, by virtue of the registration, all this because the State IS responsible (entrusted) to provide the means by which to recognize your birth right, we DO HAVE inalienable rights... (if you properly "accept" them...) All this exists in the private, another delineation used to separate these two jurisdictions... private/public... Our domain/Ceaser's domain, or God's domain/Man's domain...

The truth is, there is no separation between Church and State... except on the most superficial level... (to satisfy the general public, yet again with another "fiction"... just had to throw that one in... )

I no longer "love" or "hate" the "system" (the Matrix) it just is (a vast Operating System that goes back into antiquity, based on profound wisdom and philosophy greater than one can fathom... and it is a system that has a place for everyone, good or evil (your choice...) wealthy or poor, educated or uneducated, private or public... and so on...

I still love to 'jokingly' give some hint of the antiquity of this philosophical tradition (Equity Jurisprudence) that I have been told, according to Roark, has a recorded history that goes back at least 600 years!

Question: What are two 'hidden themes' inserted (that form the backdrop) in the "Nativity Story"?

Answer: Registration and Taxation, these are two necessary components required to create the elements needed for both the establishment of trust (splitting titles), the Cestui Que and the Public Trustee (and Probate) system... hmmm.... o.O!

my understanding to date...

[Bill Ryan]

I also posted this on the Sean David Morton (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?88821-Sean-David-Morton) thread. Sean has fallen very seriously foul of the American judiciary system, maybe through every fault of his own. It seems likely he may be spending quite a long time in jail when he's sentenced in June.

This document, which is a formal response from the judge who dismissed all of Sean's motions, contains some interesting explanations and perspectives in plain English, that anyone reading this should be able to understand.

Go to Section II : Factual and Procedural Background, where the judge begins:

"This case is complicated both procedurally and factually due to the Defendants' alleged beliefs in a theory about how taxes and other debts can be paid using the value of one's strawman identity established by the government. (read on from there)
And in section VIII : Conclusion, the judge summarizes:

"This case is extremely unusual due to the Defendants' beliefs about the legitimacy of the government and its institutions." (read on from there)


http://ufowatchdog.com/judgesdecision.pdf

http://ufowatchdog.com/judgesdecision.pdf

[The Freedom Train]

"The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House." - Audre Lorde

Never has this quote rung more true for me than after reading your most recent post on this thread, Bill.

[sigma6]

SEAN DAVID MORTON - INTERVIEWED BY KERRY CASSIDY - AUGUST 15, 2017

Wow this is awesome (with tragic part too...) Sean is confirming everything I have said for years... an'a he's gone done it!... in court! (unfortunately, he is missing some fundamental interpretations... that are deadly critical... ouch!) I wish I could get in touch with Kerry... to transfer some of this interpretation... he is still pursuing the commercial redemption principles introduced in American Bulletin's Redemption manual, and similarly espoused by Winston Shrout... and many others (but Winston foremost, has been the most 'successful'(at least commercially) for this category...)

Too bad I missed this interview when it was live... this is serious... if Sean doesn't get the right help... he can't hide forever...and it only makes his case worse...(like running from debtors...) but I am amazed at how he nails insight, after insight... of stuff I have said...
- The courts are listed as "for profit" corporations on Dunn & Bradstreet
- Court cases are actual accounts like bank accounts, he claims each case has an actual cusip number (I didn't know this, but I know they are like commercial bank accounts with a securitizable value via bonds, etc. as per Jean Keating...
- Jurisdiction is everything (but he doesn't handle this part well...)
- more stuff will fill in after a second listening (... still listening to it right now!... )

What he is not realizing... the biggest thing being the common law court is actually a commercial statutory martial court... so it doesn't matter him calling them out for technical faults... they can and will lie, deceive... it's military and they are presuming jurisdiction over the registered NAME, and he is not properly establishing his relationship to it... because he is not properly rebutting and establishing his status, etc... as much as he thinks he is... but still I admire his apparent never ending energy and brilliance... I wish I had half his energy... lol...

XcFA1MjlCJI


Addendum:
btw I would add I have now heard two people make reference to my interpretation about the Nativity story which is REALLY interesting... one from a guy named Burk Wagner who works (hides) under Winston Shrouts skirt imo... (and no I can't stand this guy... and I forget where I heard the other reference (cause I don't care that much) but why it's profound is because I didn't get it from anywhere, except it came to me as an epiphany studying trust law... i.e. was a completely original creative interpretation... so I find it quite ironic, that Burk of all people would "borrow" it and make reference in his 'interpretation' of trust under Winston's publication ($$$) Postliminium... and no I'm not recommending it... I would go to CWs original works if you want to get a fundamental education (and it's no shortcut... sorry...)

and I would add his interpretation of trust law in Postliminium is pitiful... Lol... precisely because he wasn't part of CWs original group... (hehe...)


...Also I know that Winston did finally change his customer service policy after I claimed (and still claim) his staff pro-actively blocked me from making a gratis request of one of his titles, and preventing me from making any contact with him to make complaint!... even after asking several dozens of times... and I do believe it was sometime just after me posting a rant about this 4-5 month 35 email correspondences (I did my due diligence, there was no mistaking their ignorance, bias and prejudice, or their hypocrisy regarding their own policy... so I don't think it was a coincidence that Winston changed his customer service policy setup, so that is a plus to him, just sad he had to get it from my rant on PA!!! (and unfortunately, I haven't ordered since then, as it has left that bad a taste in my mouth... and their understanding of trust is limited because they followed CW only loosely... (his recorded audios of over 3000 hours over 5 years...)

Also note... just noticed Bill's post to my thread... (thumbs up and thank you for that small recognition Bill!... I am glad you thought of my post when you placed that... even if... and I'm not sure, if you think it was a mark against this interpretation... but that's all good just that you were thinking on this topic... But I can only say as brilliant as Sean's mind is... this interpretation is bigger than Sean and his approach and case... I can clearly see his errors in my opinion... why this post...) Unfortunately when you are in the arena of the court... being close doesn't win you the proverbial 'cigar' and as I have said many times, this can be a very serious game, especially when he is doing bonds and IODs... the consequences of learning and testing things can be life and death... (i.e. jail...)

They are coming down so hard on Sean because he is so tantalizingly close, I must say... but I bet I can get his ear now... enough to listen to someone like me (who prefers to remain out of range of their commercial attacks... just sayin'... ; )


Historical related Posts I have connected together: (should answer many questions): explain my model in a "series of nutshells"...
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?76397-The-Concept-of-Legal-Person&p=895317&viewfull=1#post895317

[sigma6]

forgive me if this has been mentioned already, but isn't it impossible to live in the world without being registered after your birth/no birth certificate? Impossible in the sense that you can't go to school, travel, etc...I know, who wants to attend school and be dumbed down, but just what is the alternative, or is there none?

btw, doesn't Karen say that the popes wear the long hats to hide their elongated heads?

wow seah... that was a bit simplistic but I get the gist... but in a nutshell... Karen said the style of the hat came from a history of some people having those large heads... and yes it may be possible to not have your birth registered, but that tells me you don't understand what it means to have it registered in the first place... registration creates the elements of trust... the question is what you do with that... there is a birth right inheritance we are each given in the commonwealth nations... and by definition in every country that has a birth registration and a "fiat currency" (it's not really completely fiat...) because trust law is universal... very much like scientific laws... and like learning any scientific discipline, there is an investment of homework and study to really understand it, and than years of practice to actually do anything with it... [end of nutshell] hope that helps... ;- )

[sigma6]

"The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House." - Audre Lorde

Never has this quote rung more true for me than after reading your most recent post on this thread, Bill.

Interesting quote, but my immediate interpretation from reading that, is that, that is also the reason we can never have our inalienable rights taken away from us... it is only our ignorance that creates what appears to be a vast canyon between us and our inheritance... i.e. our God given right... (and yes that connotes some kind of Biblical understanding as source of understanding where all this came from... and the basis of the covenant and the trust interpretation that follows... and yes the majority of people today, don't even have an awareness of any Biblical understanding other than their local church and television... because they have the mistaken belief it's against the law to pick up the book themselves and read it...

Think about it... society, the laws, philosophy, even scientific foundations, at least going back to the Renaissance of the 1600s and the introduction of the KJV are all trying to touch on this... and just because we are living in a bad time... i.e. this secular new age degeneracy, left, politically correct, pro muslim (of all things!?) doesn't change this foundation... and yet I can barely find anyone who has even considered to pick up this one book and read it for themselves... let alone study it, contemplate their own interpretation and understanding of its literary metaphors, symbolism, philosophy, etc... other than singular sentences taken out of context to attack it and support their own denial of ignorance of its deeper subject matter... why I respect people like Sean... one can study the text as an intellectual pursuit... just like one can read the Trilogy of the Lord of the Rings... (which is 3 to 4 times more text btw...)

[Journeyman]

Although I knew the general gist of the scam by which 'birth / berth' certificates and the incorporation of people has been effected, I've found it easier to get info on the history of the US implementation than the UK one which predated it, until I found this site on 8Kun QResearch:

https://societyandnature.org/cqv.pdf

There's a background on the Cestui Que Vie act of 1666, where Parliament took advantage of plague and fire to declare everyone legally dead and ripe for transformation into a corporation which could own them from there on out:


Understanding Cestui Que Vie Act 1666
Existence of Life
Cestui Que Vie
London 1666, during the black plague and great fires of London, Parliament
enacted an act behind closed doors, called Cestui Que Vie Act 1666.
The act being debated was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning
all men and women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. (back then
operating in Admiralty law, the law of the sea, so lost at sea).
The state (London) took custody of everybody and their property into a trust. The
state became the trustee/husband holding all titles to the people and property,
until a living man comes back to reclaim those titles, he can also claim damages.
When CAPITAL letters are used anywhere in a name this always refers to a legal
entity/fiction, Company or Corporation no exceptions. e.g. John DOE or Doe:
JANE
1) CEST TUI QUE TRUST: (pronounced setakay) common term in New
Zealand and Australia
2) STRAWMAN: common term in United States of America or Canada
These are the legal entity/fiction created and owned by the Government whom
created it. It is like owning a share in the Stock Market, you may own a share…
but it is still a share of the Stock.
Legally, we are considered to be a fiction, a concept or idea expressed as a
name, a symbol. That legal person has no consciousness; it is a juristic person,
ENS LEGIS, a name/word written on a piece of paper. This traces back to 1666,
London is an IndependentCityState, just like Vatican is an IndependentCityState,
just like WashingtonDC is an Independent City State.
The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated? It’s private.
The temple bar is in London, every lawyer called to the “bar” swears allegiance to
the temple bar. You can’t get called without swearing this allegiance.
PO Box 9144
Harris Park NSW Australia
turikatukuiii@gmail.com
2
Our only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown
created, become the executor and then collapse the called Cestui Que Vie trust
and forgive yourself of your debts and then remove yourself from the admiralty
law that holds you in custody.
When London burned, the subrogation of men’s and women’s rights occurred.
The responsible act passed… CQV act 1666 meant all men and women of UK
were declared dead and lost beyond the seas. The state took everybody and
everybody’s property into trust. The state takes control until a living man or
woman comes back and claims their titles by proving they are alive and claims for
damages can be made.
This is why you always need representation when involved in legal matters,
because you’re dead

[Brigantia]

Although I knew the general gist of the scam by which 'birth / berth' certificates and the incorporation of people has been effected, I've found it easier to get info on the history of the US implementation than the UK one which predated it, until I found this site on 8Kun QResearch:

https://societyandnature.org/cqv.pdf

There's a background on the Cestui Que Vie act of 1666, where Parliament took advantage of plague and fire to declare everyone legally dead and ripe for transformation into a corporation which could own them from there on out:

There's a lot of legalese to wade through in that link, but some things don't quite sit right on a quick look at some things that I did understand:

"This is why you always need representation when involved in legal matters, because you’re dead."

That's incorrect, as in the UK you do have the right to represent yourself in court. However, if you don't have a good grasp of the law, a lawyer is a good idea in order to avoid the clink. You can even do your own conveyancing in a house purchase if you know what you're doing; I used to work in land law so I could have done it myself, but it's time-consuming and I couldn't be bothered with the hassle.

"The Birth Certificate issued under Roman Law represents the modern equivalent to the Settlement Certificates of the 17th century and signifies the holder as a pauper and effectively a Roman Slave."

Scotland's legal system is based on Roman law, but in England and Wales it's based on Anglo-Saxon law.

On capital letters on a birth certificate; my name isn't capitalised on mine, nor on my other half's. I don't think that's common in the UK.

There are apparently links to the 'Canons', but they don't work.

[Journeyman]

Although I knew the general gist of the scam by which 'birth / berth' certificates and the incorporation of people has been effected, I've found it easier to get info on the history of the US implementation than the UK one which predated it, until I found this site on 8Kun QResearch:

https://societyandnature.org/cqv.pdf

There's a background on the Cestui Que Vie act of 1666, where Parliament took advantage of plague and fire to declare everyone legally dead and ripe for transformation into a corporation which could own them from there on out:

There's a lot of legalese to wade through in that link, but some things don't quite sit right on a quick look at some things that I did understand:

"This is why you always need representation when involved in legal matters, because you’re dead."

That's incorrect, as in the UK you do have the right to represent yourself in court. However, if you don't have a good grasp of the law, a lawyer is a good idea in order to avoid the clink. You can even do your own conveyancing in a house purchase if you know what you're doing; I used to work in land law so I could have done it myself, but it's time-consuming and I couldn't be bothered with the hassle.

"The Birth Certificate issued under Roman Law represents the modern equivalent to the Settlement Certificates of the 17th century and signifies the holder as a pauper and effectively a Roman Slave."

Scotland's legal system is based on Roman law, but in England and Wales it's based on Anglo-Saxon law.

On capital letters on a birth certificate; my name isn't capitalised on mine, nor on my other half's. I don't think that's common in the UK.

There are apparently links to the 'Canons', but they don't work.

Yes there's some anomalies alright. It would be better if those links worked.

Name is capitalised on passport. Think birth certs are handwritten still?


Scotland's legal system is based on Roman law, but in England and Wales it's based on Anglo-Saxon law.

I wonder about all those 'elites' who own so much of Scotland (famous scene in Trainspotting comes to mind) maybe it suits them to have a retain a separate legal structure so they're not caught in their own net?

As an aside, Certificates etc are interesting. Attended a wedding a little while ago and had to promise to delete a photo I took of the signing of the marriage certificate taking place, there was a separate dummy signing for taking photos. Registrar was very clear on that.

Also found this: https://prepareforchange.net/2020/12/09/the-cestui-que-vie-act-of-1666/


Legally, we are considered to be a fiction, a concept or idea expressed as a name, a symbol. That legal person has no consciousness; it is a juristic person, ENS LEGIS, a name/word written on a piece of paper. This traces back to 1666, London is an Independent, City, State, just like Vatican is an Independent City State, just like Washington, DC is an Independent City State.

The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated? It’s private. The temple bar is in London, every lawyer called to the “bar” swears allegiance to the temple bar. You can’t get called without swearing this allegiance.

Our only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown created, become the executor and then collapse the called Cestui Que Vie trust and forgive yourself of your debts and then remove yourself from the admiralty law that holds you in custody.

[Brigantia]

I did some training at the Register Office when I worked for a council a few years ago and sat in on a couple of registrar's appointments. They're no longer handwritten but generated from a computer, but I'm pretty sure that the details weren't capitalised.

It's always been the case that you can't photograph the signing of a marriage certificate, I remember that from way back; I don't know why that is though. That was even the case at a wedding I attended in the Netherlands in the 1980s.

It was probably the terms of the Act of Union that kept the Scottish legal system separate, also Northern Ireland has a separate legal system to that of England and Wales. Maybe it would have been too chaotic to alter their legal systems to synch with England's? They became part of the United Kingdom much later than Wales, which was grabbed by Henry VIII in the 16th century.

Yeah, the status in law of the monarchy is shrouded in mystery to all the masses... at least they no longer claim divine right since Charles I had his head chopped off. The monarch's private wealth is also kept hidden by a trust managed by the Bank of England.