A Question from me to everyone else

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
Locked 1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A Question from me to everyone else

iamsomedude
Administrator
Question from me to everyone else
posted Jan 18, 2016 by some_dude

Now that the site has been active for a while and you have some insight into my reasoning and deduction in regards ... this is my explanation with respect to the WHY?? of the mortgage from the main menu page of the website ....



The ATTORNEY for the plaintiff entered the UCC Filing after finding it within the County Record and then contacted the Hospital through the Secretary of State as Hospital was in Michigan while DEFENDANT was located in Florida at the time. Then promptly withdrew the matter because the LIVE BIRTH RECORD is the INDEMNIFICATION and the UCC Filing CLAIMED the BC SECURITY INTEREST creating a BOND by way of OPERATION OF LAW (FL Stat 648.442(1)(d) or even 28 USC 3206 ... possibly BOTH, possibly neither) underwriting the DEFENDANT (as BORROWER) causing the matter to be ACQUITTED and DISCHARGED with SATISFACTION AND ACCORD and the reason we have not been able to duplicate is that we have been trying to enter the evidence ourselves, thus are attempting to be a witness in our own cause.

The LICENSED fiduciary submits the evidence of security for the bond to issue pursuant to operation of law and thus the CHARGES against the PROPERTY (ie: HOUSE, BODY, CHILD ...etc) and now LEVIED against the SECURITY for the BOND and the PROPERTY is now RELEASED FROM LIEN.



This is why I built the site ... to answer the question WHY?? with respect to THIS mortgage. WHY?? and no one has yet to offer ANY OTHER VIABLE REASON as to WHY?? yet, I keep dealing with people who wish to argue.

So, here it is guys. The entirely of iamsomedude.com and my own reputation is on the line. To all those who wish to tell me how fucked up I am, how wrong I am, how stupid or retarded my thinking appears ... Here you go ... come and get it bitches !!

Show me ... show the world how screwed up I am. Show everyone how wrong I am. Show everyone how right you are. Come on, bring your best. I'm begging for it ... time for the battle of wits or do I face unarmed opponents?

Anna? Can't sue your way outta this one OR are you just there to rile the people up and stir the pot?

Kurt? It appears the mortgage company didn't get the memo about us being enslaved by the afterbirth.

Phelps? It appears the Vatican didn't do this, so what happened?

Shrout? Time to put what you don't use to work.

Gentry? I have heard you guys over there on Creditors in Commerce. This should be right up your alley.

Stark? or How about ANY of Stark's guests?

Hey Jonah, you Bugatti an answer?

How about the angry moor nation?

OR about them guys running them conspiracy sites? You all really don't like REAL TRUTH, just vomit out what other people wrote about. Time to put them supposed top-notch investigative skills to work.

how about all them "fuck the government" people?

How bout you Miller? You laughed at and ridiculed the New Mexico seminar. Claim a 200 IQ and still quantum figure it out?


Where the fuck have you guys been?? I've been waiting.

... is anybody out there? HELLO ... HELLO ... IS THERE ANYBODY ........ OUT THERE?

And do not try to convince anyone with what you THINK is going on conspiracy wise, we all can do that shit. I make up crap all the time. AND I am not here to argue, you are here to present your best analysis of THIS MORTGAGE

Also, you can only use the same evidence we used: THIS MORTGAGE

I am not here to argue, you are here to present your best analysis of THIS MORTGAGE using whatever fucked up bullshit philosophy you think you have a grasp on and EXPLAIN THIS MORTGAGE with what you claim to be your cognitive thought process and make sure you include the part that once the evidence was entered into the record, that action AUTOMATICALLY got the PLAINTIFF to ACT ON THEIR OWN ACCORD to withdraw and then settle with accord and satisfaction in favor of the DEFENDANT.

... either you put up or you APOLOGIZE and REFUND all the fucking money you have bilked from the people over the years who have sought nothing more than the truth by KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY selling them BULLSHIT offering FALSE HOPE and admit you guys are nothing more than snake oil salesmen and hucksters for by your fruit you shall be known.

I already accept the fact that I could be mistaken ... have you?
[Last edited Feb 29, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.



Ethan Edwin said Jan 20, 2016
Boris,

I never really looked at this before. Are you saying that others have filed a UCC in this manner, and then entered it as Defendant into their case and did not get similar results?

Were their UCC's done EXACTLY as this man had done?

I see that he checked the box- Debtor is a TRUST, did the others do this or did they check the box for TRUSTEE acting with respect to property in Trust?

I say this, because the way this man did this EXPRESSED a Trust, maybe making him the beneficiary? Maybe that invoked 12usc95?? Maybe by naming the Hospital as debtor, the Hospital paid the mortgage for NAME to stay in honor, or to protect a credit rating, or to avoid a lien?

I also see that it was the SoS of Florida that was served for a Hospital in Detroit, not the Michigan SoS. Could Full Faith and Credit have played a part?

Is there anything that the man did himself in this case, any filings?

I don't know if I have enough information to chase the trail down to why the mortgage was cancelled and discharged here.

I worked on quite a few mortgages down in your neck of the woods in about that time frame and had lots of Voluntary Withdraws, but never with a cancellation and discharge.

Has the man tried sending any so called bills to the Hospital administration with a copy of his UCC to see if they would also be discharged?

Curious indeed.

-Howie



some_dude said Jan 20, 2016

the dude did NOTHING ... we found the result by ACCIDENT. Actually a friend of ours found it.

We have tried to enter this information into other cases and matters, without the same result and I think it is because we did not use one of their LICENSED agents of whom can CONVERT the private equity into public credit

I don't know if I have enough information to chase the trail down to why the mortgage was cancelled and discharged here.


We still a not real sure what happened ... what you all have is my best guess based on what has been revealed to me during this journey and I just try to describe the images and such I see in words that hopefully you all can comprehend because there really is no describing these thoughts and images.

[Last edited Jan 20, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Boris,

We are on the same page or I wouldn't be here.

Ya, this is a weird case, and I have never seen that result.

Could it be simply because the lawyer for the Complainant, who entered the UCC in the case, has standing because he is a member of the bar, and it is private bar business once one passes through the bar? I think that is what you are getting at. And, they are ALWAYS telling us to get a lawyer. Is the lawyer a pass through, a boatman, from the world of the living to the world of the dead (dead ink on dead paper)? And, if one attempts to cross the river styx himself he is deemed a meddler, a volunteer in the ORDER of things?

What about the standing one gains by acting through his (public) DBA as (private) Man? Has anyone with a DBA come in for the Defendant to enter the UCC? That would rule out standing as one of the variables.

What I find the hardest to get my head around is that this guy on the mortgage was claiming to be the Secured Party on his UCC filing. Well, the secured party is LENDER. This guy didn't have anything to lend (in relation to the mortgage), or did he? Did he "lend" the Hospital something of his, and they were the borrower? If they were the borrower then maybe they had to pay for what was done in NAME?? If that is the case, then exactly what did he lend the Hospital that they would be obliged to "pay" the mortgage?

Questions, questions on this one Boris. I will continue to ponder....

-Howie




some_dude said Jan 20, 2016
Could it be simply because the lawyer for the Complainant, who entered the UCC in the case, has standing because he is a member of the bar, and it is private bar business once one passes through the bar?


This does sound plausible and fits with the fact we have yet to replicate for it appears we have been trying to come in as the man, thus entering evidence on our own behalf.

What about the standing one gains by acting through his (public) DBA as (private) Man? Has anyone with a DBA come in for the Defendant to enter the UCC? That would rule out standing as one of the variables.


Have yet to do this and I just put 2 and 2 together this past few days regarding the ucc and that mortgage. But we can always try this route.

What I find the hardest to get my head around is that this guy on the mortgage was claiming to be the Secured Party on his UCC filing. Well, the secured party is LENDER. This guy didn't have anything to lend (in relation to the mortgage), or did he? Did he "lend" the Hospital something of his, and they were the borrower? If they were the borrower then maybe they had to pay for what was done in NAME?? If that is the case, then exactly what did he lend the Hospital that they would be obliged to "pay" the mortgage?


Actually, his thinking was "what was the last place where the VALUE was seen?" and his answer was "the hospital" ... Knight Templar conspiracy stuff of which I am kinda skeptical about, but it appears that truth is stranger than fiction ... so, technically he LENT that CREDIT (USUFRUCT) to the HOSPITAL of which then TRANSFERED THAT USUFRUCT, for a usufruct is FULLY TRANSFERRABLE, to the STATE as a FOUNDLING or for delivery of a purchase under Social Security Act of 1935 that just has yet to be completed as the "acts of an infant can be void at common law, thus equity can not complete the incomplete gift" thus one can not get equity while in public, so must resort to the STATUTORY EQUITY (ie: payment of debt deemed ACCEPTABLE under PUBLIC POLICY), of which keeps one within that Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 ACT OF CONGRESS jurisdiction and this also fits into the time when I talked with an agent within the 9 year case and I told him one day that I was down to one word: usufruct. His response was one question: are you talking to anyone else about this?

Funny, but when you look at the evidence, the WITHDRAW came 2 weeks BEFORE the HOSPITAL was served; 2 weeks AFTER the initiation ... the SATISFACITON and ACCORD filed about 2 3/4 years AFTER the WITHDRAW ... Maybe the WITHDRAW was just that? Like an ATM? After all, there was an affidavit for a LOST/STOLEN/DESTROYED NOTE placed into the record in the name of the Hospital.

That is viable as well, and that would seem to lend credence to the theory I put forth.



I keep telling everyone we KNOW what is going on; we have for some time. How to approach the matter is whole 'nother issue and I am but a philosopher.

... This is where you all come in and I don't intend to be a dick or arrogant, but so far, this is the first real conversation I have had in regards to this mortgage outside the small circle I am associated.

That mortgage tells us everything ... but what is it saying?
[Last edited Jan 20, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Jan 20, 2016
Boris,

This is big, and there is EVIDENCE of a discharge and cancellation of debt.

This part of the UCC filing has my head spinning:

"This FINANCING STATEMENT covers the following collateral:

All property belonging to Debtor/Bailee belongs to Secured Party."

There is a past tense- belonging, and then there is a present tense- belongs.

Also, there is a surrender, acceptance AND delivery all in this one sentence. Could this fella have stumbled across the one sentence that could make the discharge possible?

I have no cases in my scope to try this with. If I did, I would be all over it. If I were in anyone's shoes facing a foreclosure or charge, I would file a UCC EXACTLY as this one is done and then come in with standing (through a DBA) and drop this in the case.

If this can be reproduced then we are free.

I'm led to believe that fireworks and trumpets might be the result.

-Howie






some_dude said Jan 20, 2016
If it were that easy, we would have replicated the event. We have not, but considering recent information, there are some additional variables we did not consider the times we have tried.

Also, there is a surrender, acceptance AND delivery all in this one sentence. Could this fella have stumbled across the one sentence that could make the discharge possible?


Do not think this is the case as we know for a fact that once one does an assignment within the UCC, the assignee becomes the secured party and the reversion has yet to be assigned, but that sentence could be the man coming back to act as TRUSTEE IF HIS AFFAIRS in the matter thus the TRUST is not subject to ADMINISTRATION under "PRIVATE BAR BUSINESS" ... that is a possible explanation.

If this can be reproduced then we are free.


agreed ... this mortgage holds and tells us everything we need. The EFFECT OF THE UCC is the ILLUSION; the TRUTH is what caused the EFFECT? what truth is held and what is that truth telling us?

[Last edited Jan 20, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Jan 20, 2016
"The EFFECT OF THE UCC is the ILLUSION; the TRUTH is what caused the EFFECT? what truth is held and what is that truth telling us?"

Exactly, and with one or two replications of this event we'll start to see how the pedals and steering wheel works that's moving, directing and stopping the car.

Now, back to pondering....

-Howie





Ethan Edwin said Jan 20, 2016
Boris,

A quick thought- could the mere filing of the UCC itself naming the Hospital of Birth as Debtor, and one as Secured Party be perceived as a Notice of "proof of life" to the Hospital itself? After all, if one is lost beyond the seas, and STILL presumed to be DEAD, then he could not have possibly filed the UCC. But, by the Hospital being named, and given Public Notice that there is a "survivor", they must use the usufruct (the Certificate of Live Birth they issued being the collateral for the loan of ones portion of the earth in usufruct) LENT to them by the man to discharge his charges??

This is the same idea as one who is injured going to the Emergency Room at their birth place with nothing for ID but a Birth Certificate and refusing to sign anything but demanding treatment. The Hospital will give treatment, and WILL NOT bill them. And, I have witnessed this first hand. It is the ones who identify themselves with a Driver License etc, and then sign as surety for NAME that get billed. I am led to believe the ones who identify themselves with plastic are PRESUMED to be "dead by consent", barring themselves from the value of the earth in usufruct which is the inheritance FOR THE LIVING.

Galatians 4King James Version (KJV)

4 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child (dead infant), differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;

2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

4 But when the fulness of the time was come (proof of life after the age of majority?), God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.



And,what did Jefferson write to Madison? "I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self evident, "that the earth belongs in usufruct to the LIVING;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it."

Here: http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents/thomas-jefferson/letters-of-thomas-jefferson/jefl81.php 

So, saying all that. What would the move be? How would one go about destroying the presumption of BEING a dead infant child, and come live, gaining access to the abundance of the earth in usufruct? And, if it is what it appears in this mortgage, the usufruct was LENT to the Hospital upon abandonment of the live baby, and subsequent FORMATION into an infant through the hospitals creation of the Certificate of Live Birth, then they are waiting for a LIVE man to appear to make the claim (on the record).

What could be done with that? Any ideas?

-Howie





Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
Boris,

Let's break this down.

What we have in this mortgage that is different from any other mortgage is this one thing:

A UCC-1 was entered into the mortgage case by an attorney for Complainant that named a man's birth hospital as a debtor to him, and him as the lender (secured party). That resulted in a Voluntary Dismissal and eventually to a full discharge and cancellation of that man's mortgage (dead pledge).

On this UCC-1, the man entered in the property description of the collateral of that loan as:

"ALL PROPERTY belonging to Debtor/Bailee belongs to Secured Party."

So, ALL of the property of debtor, the Hospital now belongs to the man.

Ok, but that still leaves the question- what did the man LEND the Hospital to make them the debtor to him? And, whatever he lent them, must have been at least as valuable as ALL of the Hospital's property.

What was taken from us when we were born in a Hospital? Three things. An image of our feet captured on paper, a veil of blood from our right heel and our GIVEN name marked on paper. Could these things be the "proof of life" that deemed us "living" which entitled us to all the value of the earth in usufruct? Were these things "abandoned" (birth means abandoned) at the Hospital, or were they left behind for safe keeping and maybe, administration of the usufruct, until we return from being lost across the seas of illusion? If that is true, then the Hospital itself is the depository of our inheritance. Which would explain how the mortgage in question was discharged.

And, isn't it curious that the papers created from the memorial of the event of our arrival here, the Certificate of Live Birth, goes to Probate to be translated into a Birth Certificate (death certificate)? The baby disappears from the hospital, but the blood remains behind.

And one more curious thing. When you go to a hospital to get some treatment you never hear about being "charged", you get "admitted". But, when you are to leave you get "discharged". This has to be examined further.

Now, what is a Hospital?

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=hospital 

hospital (n.) Look up hospital at Dictionary.com
mid-13c., "shelter for the needy," from Old French hospital, ospital "hostel, shelter, lodging" (Modern French hôpital), from Late Latin hospitale "guest-house, inn," noun use of neuter of Latin adjective hospitalis "of a guest or host" (as a noun, "a guest; the duties of hospitality"), from hospes (genitive hospitis) "guest; host;" see host (n.1).

The sense of "charitable institution to house and maintain the needy" in English is from early 15c.; meaning "institution for sick or wounded people" is first recorded 1540s. The same word, contracted, is hostel and hotel. The sense shift in Latin from duties to buildings might have been via the common term cubiculum hospitalis "guest-chamber." The Latin adjective use continued in Old French, where ospital also could mean "hospitable" and ospitalite could mean "hospital."

Did you catch that? "The same word, CONTRACTED, is HOSTEL and HOTEL". Let's look at HOTEL:

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=hotel&allowed_in_frame=0 

hotel (n.) Look up hotel at Dictionary.com
1640s, "public official residence; large private residence," from French hôtel "a mansion, palace, large house," from Old French ostel, hostel "a lodging" (see hostel). Modern sense of "an inn of the better sort" is first recorded 1765. The same word as hospital.

So, a Hospital IS the "public official residence" OR a "large private residence". Curious. Have we been using the wrong residence in our business dealings? Maybe.

Now, by sending Service of Process for this mortgage to the man's birth Hospital in connection with the NAME on the original Foreclosure Complaint, could that have invoked the WARD-SHIP of the Hospital to it's property (the collateral LENT from the man at birth) which through the UCC-1 was returned back to BE the man's property.

So, to fulfill their duty as administrators of a deposit of the value of the earth in usufruct, with the return of it to the man so he now has access to it (by the UCC-1), they "paid" the mortgage off. Or, maybe they were simply made aware that their ward was damaged on the battlefield of commerce and they "healed" him??

Could it be that sending the Service of Process to the "Public's OFFICIAL Residence", the Hospital, it triggered a cancellation and discharge of the mortgage?

To test that, if anyone has a mortgage right now, what I would do, is file a UCC-1 EXACTLY as this man has done and send a true and correct copy to their Birth hospital administration. Then contact the Servicer of the Mortgage for a change of address for billing to the Birth Hospital, and ask for a payout to be sent.

Hell, after filing the UCC-1, and sending it to the Birth hospital, maybe you could do a change of address for every utility and everything else you get a bill from and have it sent to the birth Hospital.

....I will continue to ponder.

-Howie




some_dude said Jan 21, 2016
That could be, but you are adding to the process. I do think the trick is to get the PLAINTIFF to cause the LOST NOTE AFFIDAVIT to issue against the HOSPITAL.

Not sure how we do this other than FIDUCIARY DUTY ... the attorney found it in the PUBLIC RECORD meaning he would have a PUBLIC FIDUCIARY DUTY to SERVICE US INTERESTS as a DEBT COLLECTOR for the UNITED STATES and the DEBT is WHAT? ... aquittance and discharge from further obligation because remember the DEBTOR is the NAME = UNITED STATES ... so the foreclosure would have TERMINATED US INTERESTS.

So, on the UCC, when one does a UCC-3 assignment, the SECURED PARTY would be the UNITED STATES; the DEBTOR TRADE NAME, DEBTOR. But since DEBTOR TRADE NAME = UNITED STATES, then BOTH DEBTOR and SECURED PARTY would be UNITED STATES.

So, the DEBT COLLECTOR is suing the one FOR WHICH and WHOM he collects the DEBT ... the attorney would now be the bully taking the fist of the little boy, hits him in the face with it, and then tells him to stop hitting himself.

[Last edited Jan 21, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
But, did the man in the mortgage do a UCC-3?

I get where you're coming from, and as you are trying to fit this in to your paradigm, I'm doing the same.

Let's keep after this till we find the middle, there will be the answer.

-Howie





some_dude said Jan 21, 2016
no, he did not do a ucc-3, but that is what happens when you file a ucc-3 full assignment into the UCC filing ... the secured party switches in the record ... found this out by accident when I did one of my last UCC filings ... the secured party was Erickson, Boris Roger and then I went and did a full UCC-3 assignment and THE SYSTEM removed Erickson, Boris Roger from secured party and put United States in its place.

https://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed Compact Debtor Name List&st=Erickson&fn=&rn=269053&ii=Y&ft=&epn= (gonna have to copy and paste link)

we also did a 3-way transfer of a bail bond ... from the one who paid for the bond, to the one of whom was bonded, to the united states and for a moment, the debtor and creditor were the same name. We did not have this "understanding" when we did it ... so we really did not know what to do with it when we were done.

https://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed Compact Debtor Name List&st=Enright&fn=&rn=266930&ii=Y&ft=&epn= (gonna have to copy and paste link)



Live and Learn.

[Last edited Jan 21, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
That's the thing Boris, let's just stay within what we can see, and what the result was. If we start adding to what was done here we are going to lose the cause, we need to keep taking variables away until we find the causality. When we stop looking for the Key-maker and find the causality, really understand the WHY, we will be there. Then we are at the truth. From there we just move to repeat the result.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR3fSL9WMdg 

-Howie





some_dude said Jan 21, 2016

you are preaching to me?

Been at this a while and have found evidence that fits that mortgage backwards, forwards, upside down and inside out ... I can see where it all fits


just need to replicate ONE VARIABLE of which I can not seem to replicate: The actions of the PLAINTIFF's ATTORNEY ...
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
Nope, no preaching. Just staying within your parameters in the beginning. "Also, you can only use the same evidence we used: THIS MORTGAGE".

I too have been at this a long time with many successes including a release of levy and a restoration of a man's property from the IRS AFTER a judgment, using 12usc95a(2). I called you after you got out of jail to tell you as much.

But, this is different.

It leads down a different path, a more fundamental path. A more easily understood path. So, I'm keeping my magic out of this and just asking why?

That's it. No preaching at all, and certainly no judgment.

-Howie


Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
And if that's the only variable you are after, that's simple. Whatever the case may be- civil or criminal, it is a debt collection.

You are presumed to be the debtor and that's why you are there. The Ucc-1 is proof that you are "in fact" the secured party, and not the debtor.

Do a counterclaim, with anything you can come up with, and hire a lawyer. Have him put in you UCC-1 into the record and name the birth Hospital on the counterclaim as co-plaintiff. Hire a service processor and you are done. All variables reproduced.

But, that still doesn't answer the why?

-Howie




some_dude said Jan 21, 2016
SECTION 4. Homestead; exemptions.—
(a) There shall be exempt from forced sale under process of any court, and no judgment, decree or execution shall be a lien thereon, except for the payment of taxes and assessments thereon, obligations contracted for the purchase, improvement or repair thereof, or obligations contracted for house, field or other labor performed on the realty, the following property owned by a natural person:
(1) a homestead, if located outside a municipality, to the extent of one hundred sixty acres of contiguous land and improvements thereon, which shall not be reduced without the owner’s consent by reason of subsequent inclusion in a municipality; or if located within a municipality, to the extent of one-half acre of contiguous land, upon which the exemption shall be limited to the residence of the owner or the owner’s family;

(2) personal property to the value of one thousand dollars.

(b) These exemptions shall inure to the surviving spouse or heirs of the owner.

(c) The homestead shall not be subject to devise if the owner is survived by spouse or minor child, except the homestead may be devised to the owner’s spouse if there be no minor child. The owner of homestead real estate, joined by the spouse if married, may alienate the homestead by mortgage, sale or gift and, if married, may by deed transfer the title to an estate by the entirety with the spouse. If the owner or spouse is incompetent, the method of alienation or encumbrance shall be as provided by law.

History.—Am. H.J.R. 4324, 1972; adopted 1972; Am. H.J.R. 40, 1983; adopted 1984; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.


Could it be the filing of the UCC with the individual as the SECURED PARTY my have indicated the NATURAL PERSON filed a HOMESTEAD upon the house and "shall be exempt from forced sale under process of any court" and "and no judgment, decree or execution shall be a lien thereon, except for the payment of taxes and assessments thereon, obligations contracted for the purchase, improvement or repair thereof, or obligations contracted for house, field or other labor performed on the realty", but since the NATURAL PERSON ALSO CLAIMED the BIRTH NAME (TRADE NAME) the HOSPITAL is "on the hook" for the TAX upon the TRANSFER of the USUFRUCT under CESTUI QUE VIE (see IRM 5.17.14) which is why the AFFIDAVIT FOR LOST OR STOLEN NOTE in the name of the Hospital of which would in reality be the VATICAN operating THRU the HOSPITAL (NEUTRAL TERRITORY) ... fulfillment of the promise?

the blood and afterbirth is taken not to enslave, but keep track of their obligations as trustees for the ESTATES OF MAN within HIS KINGDOM, that is the OFFER and all one need do is ACCEPT of which is one the moment one makes use of that JURIDIC PERSON (dba TRADE NAME)

Is it their fault if man is fucking retarded?

(if this is the case, would this mean I would owe Kallenbach an apology since I got the idea from an email regarding one of his shows? then again ... he didn't come here ... )
[Last edited Jan 21, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
"Could it be the filing of the UCC with the individual as the SECURED PARTY my have indicated the NATURAL PERSON filed a HOMESTEAD upon the house and "shall be exempt from forced sale under process of any court" and "and no judgment, decree or execution shall be a lien thereon, except for the payment of taxes and assessments thereon, obligations contracted for the purchase, improvement or repair thereof, or obligations contracted for house, field or other labor performed on the realty", but since the NATURAL PERSON ALSO CLAIMED the BIRTH NAME (TRADE NAME) the HOSPITAL is "on the hook" for the TAX upon the TRANSFER of the USUFRUCT under CESTUI QUE VIE (see IRM 5.17.14) which is why the AFFIDAVIT FOR LOST OR STOLEN NOTE in the name of the Hospital of which would in reality be the VATICAN operating THRU the HOSPITAL (NEUTRAL TERRITORY) ... fulfillment of the promise?"

Dam Boris, now we're getting somewhere. That sounds just about right. Now, to apply that idea outside "their" court. Then again, a man in private, is ALWAYS holding his own court. How about issuing orders and judgments from that court?

If one is acting as CEO of his DBA then he would by default have the ability to EXECUTE orders and judgments. Maybe filing them in a misc. file at the District Court would give them force and effect?

Where would one send that for enforcement- the Us Marshals maybe? What code was that that they operate in the several states with the same power as the Sheriff? And don't Sheriffs carry out the judgments of the court?

-Howie





Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
Boris,

This could be the key right here: "but since the NATURAL PERSON ALSO CLAIMED the BIRTH NAME (TRADE NAME) the HOSPITAL is "on the hook" for the TAX upon the TRANSFER of the USUFRUCT under CESTUI QUE VIE"

If the filer of the UCC-1 done in this way is no longer seen as a "foreigner" the he/she would be tax free. But, someone is liable for the Tax- the Hospital?

The Hotel/Hospital houses what? Guests? What are guests?

guest (n.) Look up guest at Dictionary.com
Old English gæst, giest (Anglian gest) "an accidental guest, a chance comer, a stranger," from Proto-Germanic *gastiz (cognates: Old Frisian jest, Dutch gast, German Gast, Gothic gasts "guest," originally "stranger"), from PIE root *ghos-ti- "stranger, guest; host" (cognates: Latin hostis, in earlier use "a stranger," in classical use "an enemy," hospes "host," from *hosti-potis "host, guest," originally "lord of strangers;" Greek xenos "guest, host, stranger;" Old Church Slavonic gosti "guest, friend," gospodi "lord, master"); the root sense, according to Watkins, probably is "someone with whom one has reciprocal duties of hospitality," representing "a mutual exchange relationship highly important to ancient Indo-European society." But as strangers are potential enemies as well as guests, the word has a forked path.

Look at that last line closely. The Hotel/Hospital which has guests don't know if those guests are potential enemies. They don't know if you will be a peaceful inhabitant or a belligerent. So they hold ones inheritance, the earth in usufruct, until one dies or does SOME-THING (satisfy the Cestui Que Vie Act by completing the UCC-1?). Now, the man is no longer in need of ward-ship, he has told the world through the filing of the UCC-1 that he is of the age of majority and able to handle his own affairs.

But, just like Indian Jones, one can not take the Holy Grail out of the place that it is being held or it will collapse the Trust. So, he directs it's administration through Orders to the Hospital administration, or lets the public fiduciaries handle it through their system. Either way, the man is now TAX and DUTY FREE.

And, if everything is pre-paid by the blood, then all this so called money being passed around is only for accounting purposes to keep track of the taxes.

26 U.S. Code § 508 - Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations
(c) Exceptions
(1) Mandatory exceptionsSubsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
(A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches, or
(B) any organization which is not a private foundation (as defined in section 509(a)) and the gross receipts of which in each taxable year are normally not more than $5,000.
(2) Exceptions by regulationsThe Secretary may by regulations exempt (to the extent and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed in such regulations) from the provisions of subsection (a) or (b) or both—
(A) educational organizations described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii), and
(B) any other class of organizations with respect to which the Secretary determines that full compliance with the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) is not necessary to the efficient administration of the provisions of this title relating to private foundations.

That last line is key.

-Howie





some_dude said Jan 21, 2016

and if sheriffs and those others carry out orders of the court, then under 28 USC 3206, they would also have to accept the BOND FOR INDEMNIFICATION (UCC Filing per Florida Statute) since there really are no FEDERAL FORECLOSURE LAWS and the STATUTES read:

12 USC 95a (2)

Section 95a, act Oct. 6, 1917, ch. 106, § 5(b), 40 Stat. 415; Sept. 24, 1918, ch. 176, § 5, 40 Stat. 966; Mar. 9, 1933, ch. 1, title I, § 2, 48 Stat. 1; May 7, 1940, ch. 185, § 1, 54 Stat. 179; Dec. 18, 1941, ch. 593, title III, § 301, 55 Stat. 839; Proc. No. 2695, eff. July 4, 1946, 11 F.R. 7517,69 Stat. 1352; Pub. L. 95–223, title I, §§ 101(a), 102, 103(b), Dec. 28, 1977, 91 Stat. 1625, 1626; Pub. L. 100–418, title II, § 2502(a)(1), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1371; Pub. L. 103–236, title V, § 525(b)(1), Apr. 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 474, which related to regulation of transactions in foreign exchange of gold and silver, property transfers, vested interests, enforcement and penalties, was omitted because § 5(b) of act Oct. 6, 1917, is also classified to section 4305(b) of Title 50, War and National Defense.

Section 95b, act Mar. 9, 1933, ch. 1, title I, § 1, 48 Stat. 1, which related to ratification of acts of President and Secretary of the Treasury, was omitted because § 1 of act Mar. 9, 1933, is also set out as a note under section 4305 of Title 50, War and National Defense.

... (2) Any payment, conveyance, transfer, assignment, or delivery of property or interest therein, made to or for the account of the United States, or as otherwise directed, pursuant to this section or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder shall to the extent thereof be a full acquittance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same; and no person shall be held liable in any court for or in respect to anything done or omitted in good faith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and in reliance on, this section, or any rule, regulation, instruction, or direction issued hereunder.

so, the UCC FILING would be EVIDENCE FOR

§3206. Discharge (Added Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXVI, § 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4959.)

A person who pursuant to an execution or order issued under this chapter by a court pays or delivers to the United States, a United States marshal, or a receiver, money or other personal property in which a judgment debtor has or will have an interest, or so pays a debt such person owes the judgment debtor, is discharged from such debt to the judgment debtor to the extent of the payment or delivery." ... in fact all officers of the court would.

and as we all know:

28 U.S. Code § 3002 ((Added Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXVI, § 3611, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4933.)

(8) “Judgment” means a judgment, order, or decree entered in favor of the United States in a court and arising from a civil or criminal proceeding regarding a debt.

because

1 U.S. Code § 112 - Statutes at Large; contents; admissibility in evidence
(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 636; Sept. 23, 1950, ch. 1001, § 1, 64 Stat. 979; Oct. 31, 1951, ch. 655, § 3, 65 Stat. 710; Pub. L. 98–497, title I, § 107(d), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2291.)

... The United States Statutes at Large shall be legal evidence of laws, concurrent resolutions, treaties, international agreements other than treaties, proclamations by the President, and proposed or ratified amendments to the Constitution of the United States therein contained, in all the courts of the United States, the several States, and the Territories and insular possessions of the United States.

and Florida Statute 648.442 allow a UCC to be used for a BOND in a CRIMINAL PROCEEDING but we all know the pursuant to Rules of Procedure there is only ONE FORM OF ACTION - CIVIL

and Florida Statute 713.24 (3) Any party having an interest in such security or the property from which the lien was transferred may at any time, and any number of times, file a complaint in chancery in the circuit court of the county where such security is deposited, or file a motion in a pending action to enforce a lien, for an order to require additional security, reduction of security, change or substitution of sureties, payment of discharge thereof, or any other matter affecting said security.

so, therefore the a DEBT is DISCHARGED the moment the DEBTOR becomes the BORROWER of which is just a DEFENDANT for the COUNTY is the UNITED STATES and the TRADE NAME is its PROPERTY INTEREST.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.






Ethan Edwin said Jan 21, 2016
...The end.

Now, to put this into practical application.

Here's what I have so far:

Put it back in the box:

1) An Assignment Separate From Certificate in Blank for the Birth Certificate naming the Attorney General of the United States with this language on the Assignment: "...hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Loretta E. Lynch acting as Attorney General of the United States and/or United States Attorney General attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named United States with full Power of Substitution in the premises." Like this:


Stock Assignment Separate From Certificate

For value received, I, a private man called (first name) hereby sells, assigns
And transfers unto BIRTH HOSPITAL
All Shares of the Capital Stock of the United States Standing in (name EXACTLY as on Birth Certificate) name On the books of said United States represented By Certificate No. (cusip number on birth certificate) herewith and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Loretta E. Lynch acting as Attorney General of the United States and/or United States Attorney General attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within named United States with full Power of Substitution in the premises.
Dated _______________________________
(Signature)_______________________ (must sign exact name on birth certificate)


State of New York)
)
) ss.:
County of Seneca)

On the 21st of January in the year A.D. 2015 before me personally appeared (first name only), personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office as follows:


Notary Signature ________________________________ Notary Seal:

2.) SS Card back to Social Security administration with a simple note describing how I found the Card and it does not belong to me etc. (read the back of SS Card for instructions).

3.) All licenses surrendered.

4.) A note to my local Post Master rescinding my ability to receive Service of Process for the NAME on Birth Certificate.

Now, I am no longer the holder of United States Property acting as surety for it. It's all back in the box.

Next:

1.) A DBA done naming me, in GIVEN name, as the CEO, and the name of the business the same as the name on the Birth Certificate. The Date of the Doc having A.D. written into it like so- January 21, A.D. 2016. A new name on a white stone, existing in the timeline of the living.

2.) A change of address form filled out for the new business, directing mail to go to the Birth Hospital.

3.) A Bank Account opened up for DBA, and on the signing statement it has the phrase, "Demand for Lawful Money Pursuant to 12USC411. This keeps one from stepping in the debtor minefield.

4.) A UCC-1 done EXACTLY as the man in this mortgage did.

From there, I would Notice the Hospital that I, a man called John, CEO of JOHN JAMES SMITH, accept the offer of the host to administrate the deposit formally abandoned by me as necessary and/or Ordered. I would include the DBA and the UCC-1 for their records.

From there, I'm just rolling with the punches and remaining on the private side.

Boris, anything to add?

-Howie





Gavilan said Jan 21, 2016
You guys are reading too much into that mortgage discharge. For all intent and purposes the lawyer could have been given notice that the note and mortgage could not been successfully prosecuted.

To limit liability, they could have filed their notice of satisfaction.





some_dude said Jan 21, 2016

Then why issue the affidavit of lost note to the hospital? 2 weeks AFTER the withdraw?

WHY was it the note and mortgage could not be successfully prosecuted? I've seen them prosecute on the affidavit alone, they could have done the same with the dude who filed the UCC; he did nothing and did not know it was commenced.


each time someone tries to just dismiss this, the more questions it raises.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 22, 2016
Gavilan,

You wrote, "For all intent and purposes the lawyer could have been given notice that the note and mortgage could not been successfully prosecuted."

Who would have given the lawyers Notice that they couldn't prosecute? The man didn't even answer the complaint, let alone put in a Motion to Dismiss or a Counterclaim. So, the question is- what happened here?

You also wrote, "To limit liability, they could have filed their notice of satisfaction." You do see that the original Complaint was in 2009 and that the Release of Mortgage was in 2012, don't you? A long time for lawyers to be on retainer for a bank that they could not help back in 2009, right?

So, this case is a bit mysterious.

Using the Case only, speculate on what could of happened here. That's all Boris is asking. Who knows what ideas might pop out just by speculating, huh?

-Howie






Gavilan said Jan 22, 2016
Ok, look at the affidavit of Florette Lawson, it reads that she has been appointed to coordinate the service of process for that matter. Who does she work for? It does not say, but from the document it implies she works for the Plaintiff. Next, it reads that the original "summons" has been lost, misplaced, or destroyed. It does not read "note" or "mortgage".

Now, if you have been sued or if you have sued someone and have some experience into resolving disputes or controversies, you know that a lot of things go on the background that are not filed nor make it into the record.

I am not saying you guys are wrong, as I believe Boris has figured out how they may have engineered the system to keep the Republic alive once war threatened the Republic's destruction. They needed money and Lincoln had to issue green backs to run prosecute the war, they went from a monetary system into a credit system.

Now, if the mortgage was in favor of the United States and the creditor is the United States and the debtor is the United States, they had to discharge the debt, a nullity if you will.

What you guys want to know seems to me is, why did the Plaintiff's lawyers filed the Notice of voluntary dismissal.
avatar
Ethan Edwin said Jan 22, 2016
What you guys want to know seems to me is, why did the Plaintiff's lawyers filed the Notice of voluntary dismissal.


That's part of it. The other part is the Release of Mortgage. That is not a Satisfaction of Mortgage, but a Release. Different? And the timing is odd, so?

Now, what I would be interested in myself at this point in the speculation is- did the foreclosure happen on the Mortgage at a later date then the the Original "Complaint? If it did, then there may have been errors, or un-proveable claims in the Original Complaint. Hence the Voluntary Withdraw.

Was that error the bringing in of the UCC-1 by the Attorney? Was the error the naming of the Hospital on the Original Complaint?

If it was that, by comparing the Original Complaint to a future Complaint, then we can see that the Hospital being involved was important. If it was, why? If not, the trail goes cold.

-Howie






some_dude said Jan 22, 2016
I wish to know as well, unfortunately when we contacted the parties involved the people were like "oh yea, let me go check that out", then the voice on the other side of the line sounded like they had seen a ghost. The infection within the tonality of the voice was amazing. From such a bubbly 'Hi!' to a somber "I am not able to discuss that matter."

One time, we were ever "offered" a "do you wish to re-open the matter?"

Tell the truth, it was rather funny to hear 'em squirm when we inquired, but those trysts did nothing to help us comprehend what happened and why they suddenly did a withdraw 2 weeks after the initiation.

We have been searching ever since ... but I did listen to Kurt's call last night and while his whole view on the afterbirth is a bit fucked up in my opinion, the take on the homestead appears to hold merit.

From what I see, the afterbirth is the EVIDENCE of an abandoned LAND INTEREST, that INTEREST is the USUFRUCT because the PLACENTA is the ILLUSION, the result of a NATURAL USUFRUCT the BABY had with the mother because the child follows the substance of which is the mother ... I never did see anything regarding the afterbirth in the Summa Theologica he referenced, but it does state:

According to civil law (xix. ff. De statu hom. vii., cap. De rei vendit.) the offspring follows the womb: and this is reasonable since the offspring derives its formal complement from the father, but the substance of the body from the mother.

So, the FATHER is the FORM; MOTHER, the function. The unification of the FORM with the FUNCTION is what is required to unify one's House within, thus recognized without. The FATHER is the IMAGE and the MOTHER is the USUFRUCT because the PLACENTA is a usufruct of the mother with the beneficiary being the baby or the baby would not live. This is the essence of Life, the feminine energies surrender usufruct to fulfill the dream of the Masculine. For it is also written in the Summa Theologica:

If a man sows on another's land, the produce belongs to the owner of the land. Now the woman's
womb in relation to the seed of the man is like the land in relation to the Sower.


So, we surrender one usufruct back to it source (Mother) in exchange for the usufruct of the Father upon his earth ... the foundation of our house within the House of the LORD ... and this is protected by the First Amendment and it is the CLAIM one makes to the House of Last that brings the ABANDONED PROPERTY INTEREST out from that Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 ACT OF CONGRESS jurisdiction and back onto the PROPER FOUNDATION and COMPLETES DELIVERY: the House is no longer divided: the BODY POLITIC and BODY CORPORATE are re-united within that House while the USUFRUCT transfers so the NATION that PROTECTS the STATE is FOUNDED and FUNDED.


but it is beginning to appear the claim via the UCC is sufficient to establish a HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION for the House of Last while operating in PUBLIC for the private ONE using that TRADE NAME PROPERTY.

all of this has already been created. There is no reason to reject anything, just accept what is and understand it all operates in accordance with the spiritual nature of the participant: give equity to get equity.
[Last edited Jan 22, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.






Ethan Edwin said Jan 22, 2016
Boris,

I don't think it is the afterbirth or placenta that is the deposit, I think it is the veil of blood taken from the heel.

Genesis 3:15King James Version (KJV)

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.


Look here:

The placenta is an organ that your body creates to give your soon-to-be-baby oxygen and nutrients while in the womb. But once the placenta has done its tour of duty, are you done with it? For some moms, the answer is no. Some moms want to keep the placenta to eat at home as a way to potentially stave off some of the less enjoyable after-effects of birth. Others want to plant it with a tree to commemorate the birth.


http://www.parents.com/pregnancy/my-body/pregnancy-health/take-placenta-home/ 

But, I think you are on the right track. I'll explain in a bit, but "chew" on what is posted above for a bit.

-Howie





some_dude said Jan 22, 2016
Ok, it appears the homestead option is off the table ... sorry Kurt ... NO APOLOGY FOR YOU

Talked with a buddy of whom explored this avenue for a while. he came to the conclusion that the homestead would be recognized on the 2nd of Neverary.

Also, my take on the whole blood thing is that "the powers and principalities of this earth" are taking the blood to identify the one of whose estate "the powers and principalities of this earth" are holding as trustee until such time when the PRODIGAL SON RETURNS. Until then, "the world according to JOB" seems to reign supreme.

The whole of the contract is "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's in order Caesar be bound by the covenant, of which the VATICAN EXERCSIED BENEFIT of by the CREATION OF THE JURIDIC PERSON and we by the USE OF SUCH, to render unto God's that which is God's in FULFILLMENT OF THE COVENANT."


One day we are going to find out that all of this is the result of a wager God made with 'the Devil' wherein God WAGERS man will build a society based on love and do so under free will adherence to and embrace of the golden rule. God would only provide a path to follow while 'the Devil' would only be able the ENTICE man to stray from that path. The prize would be the Throne of the Kingdom.

And on that day, we will know why the wind blows.
[Last edited Jan 22, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.






Ethan Edwin said Jan 22, 2016
Boris,

Batman is sounding dangerously right in his simple premise of "don't claim shit" isn't he? But, most especially don't claim the NAME, that belongs to Caesar (the Devil).

So, what do the so called authorities want when one identifies himself? NAME, Address and birth date.

How about Given name only, Hospital address for residence, and "the sixth day" for birth-date. Those answers pass the test I think.

I used to know this millionaire, he's passed on now, but he was a 32nd degree mason. Whenever we would get into a discussion about anything to do with the world, he would answer my questions with a question. That question was- "What's your name?"

It used to piss me off to no end, but....I think he may have been answering my question after all.

-Howie




some_dude said Jan 22, 2016

I am lead to believe everything Bats was teachin' and preachin' all them raucous drunk nights is still 100% balls out, spot on ACCURATE and ain't none whom can convince me otherwise.


I just had to know WHY!! Just like the mortgage ... iamsomedude.com is the result.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Anthony Joseph said Jan 23, 2016
Here's something to ponder which may be of use to those who are "transplants"...

Born on Brooklyn ground, but...

https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#hl=en&q=victory+memorial+hospital+new+york 

and now...

http://www.downstate.edu/bayridge/index-urgent-care.html 

Also, moved to Florida in the late '80's and been here ever since.

Should still contact the same address for NOTICE of UCC-1 / UCC-3 process?

Or should it be http://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/services/birth-certificates.page since the hospital was closed and this is the new "record keeper"?

thanks in advance




some_dude said Jan 23, 2016

we just used the information from the birth record. For the one I filed, I used the hospital on the live birth certificate but the Hospital was no longer there, however, the birth records could still be accessed thru the new hospital because I actually located the original record with footprints and shit like that and it was the new hospital that I had to contact.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Jan 23, 2016
I think the following quote is very telling on who "owns" the hospitals. It appears that hospitals are "immediately subject to The Holy See" and that they are, "exempt form episcopal jurisdiction (protestant jurisdiction)". And, I think the most important thing the papacy does is, "...compels the restitution of its holdings where these have been unjustly alienated or seized."

Now, what could those "holdings" be?


Action of the papacy

Innumerable pontifical documents attest the interest and zeal of the popes in behalf of hospitals. The Holy See extends its favour and protection to the charitable undertakings of the faithful in order to ensure their success and to shield them against molestation from any source. It grants the hospital permission to have a chapel, a chaplain, and a cemetery of its own: exempts the hospital from episcopal jurisdiction, making it immediately subject to the Holy See; approves statutes, intervenes to correct abuses, defends the hospitals property rights, and compels the restitution of its holdings where these have been unjustly alienated or seized.
From here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07480a.htm 

-Howie





Gavilan said Jan 24, 2016
Just a comment from me.

Have you guys heard Karl Lentz?

In the release of mortgage it reads a "unmarried man".

Like Lentz says, you need a man to testify in open court to a claim. I have used this myself is open court where I had them either bring forth the man or woman making a claim against me and they couldn't proceed.

In this particular case, the legal entities of the Plaintiff's couldn't have anyone testify as to the validity of the claim.

I know you guys are on to something, because I have tried several issues as trustee and beneficiary and I stumped them.

I suspected my actions would stall then, but not to stop their prosecution.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 24, 2016
Gavilan,

Where I have seen reference to married man or unmarried man is on the Title Insurance paperwork. So, I concluded that the use of "man" vs "person" has something to do with the Title to the property vs the Deed of Trust or Warranty Deed.

I once had a "married man" invoke the Title Insurance Companies "duty" to protect the title to his property. They responded that he had given up right to enforce his "interest" in the title by the nature of the mortgage he had signed.

I didn't push any farther. But, something to ponder in reference to what I am led to believe is our inheritance as "man", and that is DOMINION.

Dominion

Perfect control in right of ownership. The word implies both title and possession and appears to require a complete retention of control over disposition. Title to an article of property, which arises from the power of disposition and the right of claiming it. Sovereignty; as in the dominion of the seas or over a territory.

In Civil Law, with reference to the title to property that is transferred by a sale of it, dominion is said to be either proximate or remote, the former being the kind of title vesting in the purchaser when he or she has acquired both the ownership and the possession of the article, the latter describing the nature of the title when he or she has legitimately acquired the ownership of the property but there has been no delivery.


From here: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/dominion 

-Howie





Ethan Edwin said Jan 24, 2016
Gavilan,

I would like to be more clear on what I mean by DOMINION. I mean usufructuary dominion. Another term for that is Dominium utile.

Here from Bouvier's Dictionary:

DOMINIUM, empire, domain. It is of three kinds: 1, Directum dominium, or usufructuary dominion; dominium utile, as between landlord and tenenant; or, 2. It is to full property, and simple property. The former is such as belongs to the cultivator of his own estate; the other is the property of a tenant. 3. Dominion acquired by the law of nations, and dominion acquired by municipal law. By the law of nations, property may be acquired by occupation, by accession, by commixtion, by use or the pernancy of the usufruct, and by tradition or delivery. As to the dominium eminens, the right of the public, in cases of emergency, to seize upon the property of individuals, and convert it to public use, and the right of individuals, in similar cases, to commit a trespass on the persons and properties of others, see the opinion of chief justice McKean in Respublica v. Sparhawk, 1 Dallas, 362, and the case of Vanhorn v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. Rep. 304. See, further, as to dominium eminens, or the right of the community to take, at a fair price, the property of individuals for public use, the supplement of 1802 to the Pennsylvania compromising law, respecting the Wyoming controversy; also, Vattel, l. 1, c. 20, §§244-248; Bynkershoek, lib. 2, c. 15; Rousseau's Social Compact, c. 9; Domat; l. 1, tit. 8, §l, p. 381, fol. ed.; the case of a Jew, whom the grand seignior was compelled by the mufti to purchase out, cited in Lindsay et al. v. The Commissioners, 2 Bay. S. Car. Rep. 41. See Eminent domain.


And here, from Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominum_directum: 

Dominium utile (Feudal): the right of use and utility of an asset, and to keep the benefits (such as the right to live on the land, and to keep the profits from agriculture).
and
The terms derive from Latin dominium (domain, dominion), directum (direction, in the sense of leadership), and utile (use, utility).

An asset is defined to mean itself and those things that naturally go with it. For land, that would include buildings, trees, underground resources, etc. It would not include "movable" property, such as wagons or livestock.

The holder of the dominium directum is considered the superior (i.e., the lord); the holder of the dominium utile is considered the inferior (i.e., the vassal).
Dominium utile includes the right of the holder to keep any income or profit derived from the asset.
The transfer of the dominium directum does not affect the rights of any holders of dominium utile. The holder of a dominium utile has no right of transfer (however, there were usually conditions allowed for, such as transfer to a son in the event of death)


So then, as one does a UCC-1, what should one list for the "collateral"? I am led to believe that one should list "usufructuary dominion; dominium utile". The question becomes- who should one list as the DEBTOR? I'm starting to think that some entity made a "(blood)sacrifice" to pay all of ones debts as one enjoys the earth in usufruct. Who could that have been? Is there some PUBLIC DOCUMENT, a book perhaps, that sets forth that offer? Who could that LORD be, what was his name?

If one were to discover the DEBTORS NAME, then what would one list for that entities address? What if that DEBTOR has disappeared? Could there be some VICAR for that entity that made the offer to be debtor? Could that VICAR have an agent operating in the State where one is, so that one would know which Secretary of State to file the UCC-1 with?

What would that UCC-1 look like? And remember, a UCC-1 only requires 3 pieces of information:

Pursuant to the standards set forth in the UCC, the financing statement need only contain three pieces of information:

the debtor's name and address
the creditor's name and address
an indication of the collateral, which may be very genera


From here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UCC-1_financing_statement 

So, again, what would that UCC-1 look like?


-Howie






some_dude said Jan 24, 2016

In the release of mortgage it reads a "unmarried man" ...

In this particular case, the legal entities of the Plaintiff's couldn't have anyone testify as to the validity of the claim.


This is a valid point, and it could the UCC is public notice of such by the man coming in via last, middle first of which I am told that represents a man (natural person) within that world. And since that evidence was brought in though a Licensed Agent, he had a duty to NOT MISREPRESENT any fact or law before the court??

Florida Bar Oath: ... I will employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided in me such means only as are consistent with truth and honor, and will never seek to mislead the judge or jury by any artifice or false statement of fact or law

So, would that mean NAME is a man until it is not a man with respect to the DBA/TRADE NAME registration also holds weight ??

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Gavilan said Jan 25, 2016
Howie,

Can a man in the present economic system acquire dominion over property? Specially if he uses Federal Reserve Notes to acquire property?





some_dude said Jan 26, 2016
Yes, this guy is a buddy and this is why people don't share information. We redact documents to NOT HAVE THE NAME OUT and you fuckers come along and undo that against the wishes as evidenced by the redaction. I loathe that shit.

Why do people just refuse to respect the wishes of other people?

Why are people not content with the information as provided?

Can you NOT see the self-evident trust as evidenced by the redaction?

Anyhow, enough of my rant ... I removed the name and the ucc filing link, since it referenced a separate ucc done for a separate purpose.

Also, the court case you so gratuitously posed, evidently without actually researching, is from a CURRENT case we are cleaning up, not the one regarding the foreclosure. This too will be removed as it is irrelevant to the discussion.

Get the facts right before posting information and respect the wishes of those who CHOOSE to redact personal information ... you'd swear the people in this process are sometimes worse than the one's they are trying "keep at bay"

<insert excuse or justification here - just press reply> 

[Last edited Jan 26, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





karipori said Jan 26, 2016
Sorry about that boris





some_dude said Jan 26, 2016


no worries ;) ... gotta keep things in line and lay the Law of Boris down every now and then (ain't no one escaping that one !!!) .... the decisions of those who share information is paramount, so I have a duty and obligation in regards.

apologies if I offend.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Gavilan said Jan 26, 2016
Boris,

Something I have been meaning to point out that we usually leave out without specifically pointing out.

The United States of America is a mixed jurisdiction,http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/tetley.html 

Trusts are common law, while the similar concept Usufruct is Roman civil law.

The U. S. federal government is based on Roman civil law, while the individual U.S.A. states are based on common law with the exception of Louisiana.




Gavilan said Jan 26, 2016
Link

http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/tetley.html 


Very enlightenment article on mixed jurisdictions.




Gavilan said Jan 26, 2016
Regarding natural persons

https://books.google.com/books?id=aooG4sMgyoMC&pg=PA166&lpg=PA166&dq=%22correct+identifier+for+natural+persons%22+uncitral&source=bl&ots=T8rmNi_8O3&sig=Ng-UjfgSh8zn_eIcgUjdBngxzOw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjewobkmMnKAhXjs4MKHdkTCTwQ6AEIHTAA 

Read the guide lines for identifying a natural person...


some_dude said Jan 27, 2016
Boris,

Something I have been meaning to point out that we usually leave out without specifically pointing out.

The United States of America is a mixed jurisdiction,http://www.cisg.law.pace.edu/cisg/biblio/tetley.html 

Trusts are common law, while the similar concept Usufruct is Roman civil law.

The U. S. federal government is based on Roman civil law, while the individual U.S.A. states are based on common law with the exception of Louisiana.



This is correct.

United States is a MIXED JURISDICITON, meaning it exists as a DUALITY, meaning it will recognize the COMMON LAW once you settle the CIVIL LAW because the CIVIL LAW is the ADMIRALTY and ADMIRALTY is INSRUANCE. Right now, since the ACCEPTANCE OF CHRIST in that "legal world" has not occurred, then the presumption is YOUR ASS is the insurance; hence the surrender of the usufruct to INSURE the PUBLIC OPERATION of the LEGAL TRADE NAME since you are an ACT OF GOD and "illegal to insure" in that ADMIRALTY WORLD. This is why one becomes subject to those STATUTES and such; mini-insurance claims and YOUR ASS is the PUBLIC POLICY (at this moment in time)

The surrender is the way of the peacemaker; FILFILLS THE (CIVIL) LAW; the most perfect way to walk with Christ ACCORDING TO the ULTIMATE ADMIRALTY INSURANCE PROVIDER: the VATICAN, and the usufruct similarly appears in the common law in two ways:

First, there's the profit à prendre: right to take something off the land of another person. A profit includes the power and privilege to acquire, through severance, ownership of some part of the physical substance included in the possession of the land that is subject to the profit, or by reduction to possession, ownership of some substance which, were it not for the existence of the profit, could be appropriated only by the possessor of the land that is subject to the profit.

A profit à prendre is an incorporeal hereditament and unlike an easement it is not necessarily appurtenant to a dominant tenement but may be held as a right in gross, and as such may be assigned and dealt with as a valuable interest according to the ordinary rules of property. It is in effect a grant of the ownership of such portions of the land as are conveyed.

The other similar right is the life estate. A person who owns a parcel of land can split the ownership, by giving one person a life interest in the land, and the remainder to someone else. For example: husband leaves a life estate in the land to his wife, remainder to their children.


Once you surrender the usufruct (since United States is that ROMAN CIVIL JURISDICTION) to the United States (usufruct = equity), that is render unto Caesar that which is Caesar (give Caesar EQUITY to BIND Caesar to give EQUITY (render unto God's that which is God's)), that action basically CONSOLIDATES the LICENSE ("false" usufruct; "false" in that this usufruct is of society and not of nature: a secondary or nested usufruct, not that it is "evil" or "wrong") back to the ESTATE from which it AROSE, which would be your EQUITABLE INTEREST. This FREES that interest from the GENERAL DESPOSIT BAILMENT by OFFERING A SACRIFICE to that OLD TESTAMENT jurisdiction: surrender = sacrifice .. the USUFRUCTUARY INTEREST is the sacrifice put upon the altar to appease OLD TESTAMENT God. This usufruct is NOT the gift from God; The VATICAN is holder in due course of that interest as TRUSTEE.

Now, you take that EQUITABLE INTEREST and surrender it AGAIN with the VATICAN to release the LEGAL INTEREST, of which exists as a LEGAL interest for each interest is an ABOMINATION unto themselves, but re-united, they re-form the WHOLE ESTATE. Thus, you receive the crown of life as per the WORD the NEW TESTAMENT God for you were faithful unto death; surrender of the usufruct to Caesar.

The DARK CRYSTAL has its SHARD returned, thus the CRYSTAL becomes whole and ENLIGHTENED so life can return to the LAND: your Estate.


Now we have taken the GENERAL ANY INTEREST from that Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 ACT OF CONGRESS jurisdiction and replaced with a SPECIFIC USUFRUCTUARY INTEREST of which the United States can now LEASE and generate revenue to reduce the public debt; keeping with the spirit and intent of that Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 ACT OF CONGRESS jurisdiction and thus ENSURING the exercise of inalienable rights be INSURED and now the Vatican is duty bound to protect because this is the acceptance of Christ and FIRST MI LAST is the VATICAN PROPERTY INTEREST as trustee of the estates of man in the kingdom of heaven once the man comes of age of majority and accepts the Christ consciousness, thus becomes an Ambassador for Christ.

And should the VATICAN refuse, then the VATICAN and its POPE lose all temporal authority of which THE VATICAN CLAIMS due to the BREACH OF COVENANT made with the INHABITANTS OF THE EARTH; ACCEPTED by the SURRENDERER, by NOT rendering unto God's that which is God's when Caesar's hath already been rendered; they can now go fuct themselves.

[Last edited Jan 27, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Gavilan said Jan 29, 2016
Ok, so once you have internalized the fact that the name registered/informed on the birth certificate creates a trust, an entity separate from the child that will become a man, then what?

If you comprehend that the trust that has been created has a similar name to the one that is used to call on the baby/future man does that preclude the future man from creating another trust and using that other trust to engage in commerce?





Gavilan said Jan 29, 2016
While searching to confirm the term "legal: the undoing of God's law" I came across this tidbit:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dBVJOFTVa0U/VquLW2OHVxI/AAAAAAAAABU/t6hu_f_v4RE/s1600/english%2Blaw.jpg 

The above just confirms the mixed jurisdiction that we face in the USA.
[Last edited Jan 29, 2016]





Ethan Edwin said Jan 29, 2016
Gavilan,

For the sake of clarity, I would say that this form of trust is created for the "minor", or even more clearly, the infant:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_business_trust 

...and when that minor is ready to "handle his own affairs", and "come live in spirit at the time appointed by the Father", he rises out of the prior arrangement into a Private Living Trust, here:

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/living-trust.asp 

He goes from the world of the dead, to the realm of the living.

Galatians 4King James Version (KJV)

4 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;

2 But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.


And, I am led to believe, that is what Boris is shining the light on.

-Howie







some_dude said Jan 29, 2016

actually, just go look at 1 USC 8, definition of PERSON

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/1/8 

1 U.S. Code § 8 - “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant

(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.

(b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.

(Added Pub. L. 107–207, § 2(a), Aug. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 926.)

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.







Ethan Edwin said Jan 29, 2016
And, for a more complete picture, including the "construction of words", see:

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title1/pdf/USCODE-2011-title1-chap1-sec1.pdf 

-Howie






some_dude said Jan 29, 2016

The NAME will ALWAYS be an INFANT for that is how the National Security Apparatus operates. The INFANT is moved into the Living Trust FOR PROTECTION and now and in accordance with Corpus Juris Secundum, Infants § 166: Whoever intermeddles with the INFANT ESTATE without authority is liable therefore.

People need to STOP thinking in terms of living and dead with respect to PERSON NAME. This is patridiot thinking and will destroy you because each one of us is an Act of God and UNINSURABLE, thus you DESTROY the INFANT and ALL DEBT COMES DUE and must be settled before you can "access the estate"

The NAME is your CHRIST in THAT LEGAL WORLD and will remain an INFANT at all times to ensure its protection.

the time appointed by the Father is when you come of age of majority to CLAIM that property interest: you are the prodigal child and the INFANT is the Father's Estate; a JURIDIC PERSON created by an Action of the Papacy to ensure the Estate of Man be protected and secured within the Kingdom of Heaven ... all it is awaiting is an "Ambassabor" to step forth to complete the Adoption into the Kingdom: residence within the House of the Lord: Psalm 91.

Law Dictionary: What is JURIDICAL PERSON? definition of JURIDICAL PERSON (Black's Law Dictionary): Entity, as a firm, that is not a single natural person, as a human being, authorized by law with duties and rights, recognized as a legal authority having a distinct identity, a legal personality. Also known as artificial person, juridical entity, juristic person, or legal person. Also refer to body corporate (NOTE: United States exists as BOTH a body politic AND a body corporate AT THE SAME TIME)

The JURIDIC PERSON is the PUBLIC INTERFACE within the CORPORATE GOVERNMENT and NOT A POLITICAL ENTITY ... so, when the people elect, they are participating in CORPORATE BOARD ACTIIVITES ... Read the Attorney General Opinion of 1868 in regards to the Reconstruction Acts: Election is a VOLUNTARY FRANCHISE and an action within the Military Government (democracy) ... hence, the REVOCATION OF ELECTION from participation in the Democracy and TERMINATION OF RESIDENCY from the Article IV Section 3 Clause 2 Act of Congress jurisdiction (Federal Trust)

The JURIDIC PERSON is also created by way of Canon Law to account for the Action of the Papacy: a CESTUI QUE TRUST created for your benefit, but the Untied States is the BENEFICIARY of your USE of such as USUFRUCTUARY, and the VATICAN holds the LEGAL TITLE as TRUSTEE. So when you complete the removal of the EQUITABLE INTEREST: CESTUI QUE TRUST, you now turn around and "request" the VATICAN restore the LEGAL TITLE and now, the JURIDIC PERSON is under your care, custody, and control while the VATICAN STILL REMAINS trustee as the VICAR OF CHRIST and you are an ambassador for the Christ and now VATICAN serves to protect the DICAHRGE of your DUTIES as AMBASSADOR.





[Last edited Jan 29, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.






Gavilan said Jan 29, 2016
Ok, hold on Boris. Let me see if I can get this right.

What happens to the boy/girl when a name is registered as it may pertain to the boy/girl's given name?

Is the body of the boy/girl abandoned at law?

Is a legal entity created when a name is registered as it pertains to the boy/girl body?

Does upon registering a name as regards the boy/girl transfers the boy/girl's body property right out of the parents?

In other words do the parents abandon the boy/girl body as property at law? Leaving it for someone to come along and claim that property as found, salvage?






Ethan Edwin said Jan 29, 2016
Boris,

At the end of this road, it will be simple. So, from a simple perspective, wouldn't it be simpler to just head to the Cathedral of one's local Diocese, and ask to speak to "counsel" or an "instructor".

From the Pamphlet given to Pilgrims who come to the Cathedral in this Jubilee, we find the duties of the Officers of the Church:

corporal Works of Mercy
* Feed the hungry
* Give drink to the thirsty
* Clothe the naked
* Shelter the homeless
* Visit the sick
* Visit the imprisoned
* Bury the dead

spiritual Works of Mercy
* Admonish the sinner
* Instruct the ignorant
* Counsel the doubtful
* Comfort the sorrowful
* Bear wrongs patiently
* Forgive all injuries
* Pray for the living and the dead


http://www.dor.org/tasks/sites/home/assets/File/YearofMercy_PrayerBook_online.pdf 

So, head to the Cathedral, ask for instruction and counsel, and then hand them the BC, and accept the offer to BE an Ambassador For Christ, and request that they provide the OFFICE from which to conduct those activities.

Could the mere arrival of the Prodigal Son be the Act that satisfies the Cestui Que Vie?

After all, a very small percentage of people will grasp anything of what we are discussing here. There must be a more simple path. And, I don't think the Jubilee has anything to with the offer for a Plenary Indulgence for us, I think it is a chance to SEE if one will answer the CALL.

What do you think Boris, could it be that simple?

-Howie







Gavilan said Jan 29, 2016
Which jurisdiction is which? The U.S. as a single entity is a romantic civil law nation with persons being it subjects and citizens as members of its body politic.

The U.S.A. as an entity made up of the U.S. with its persons and citizens under Roman civil law, and the individual states with men under a Republican government with common law?

So, a man can have a person to operate within the U.S. Roman civil system while living in a Republic state?

So, where does surrendering take place?






Gavilan said Jan 29, 2016
*Roman, not romantic. I get booted of when trying to edit.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 29, 2016
Boris,

I can't find this:

Corpus Juris Secundum, Infants § 166: Whoever intermeddles with the INFANT ESTATE without authority is liable therefore.


Do you have an original source? Link?

-Howie







some_dude said Jan 30, 2016
Ok, hold on Boris. Let me see if I can get this right.

What happens to the boy/girl when a name is registered as it may pertain to the boy/girl's given name?

Is the body of the boy/girl abandoned at law?

Is a legal entity created when a name is registered as it pertains to the boy/girl body?

Does upon registering a name as regards the boy/girl transfers the boy/girl's body property right out of the parents?

In other words do the parents abandon the boy/girl body as property at law? Leaving it for someone to come along and claim that property as found, salvage?




DAMN PATRIDIOT THINKING ?!?!? ... ON IAMSOMEDUDE.COM FORUMS? ... please say it ain't so.


FIRST: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE

... I have been yelled at by Vital Statistics about this more than one time: at least a half dozen times.

SECOND: GOD DAMN PATRIDIOT THINKING HAS NO PLACE IN THIS WORLD NOR ON THIS FORUM AND DEFINATELY NOT WITHIN THE IAMSOMEDUDE.COM WEBSITE!

... the Retardation is strong in this question. I can see the WELCOME MESSAGE was not read .. or maybe just ignored?

THIRD: ALL PATRIDIOTS SOHULD BE SHOT FOR THEIR DISSERVICE TO HUMNAITY (but vengeance is not mine)

... all these guys do is FUCK UP THE THINKING OF THE PEOPLE and since these same groups REFUSE to EVEN CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE VIEWPOINTS, I am led to believe ALL PATRIDIOT GROUPS ARE DISINFORMATION OPERATIONS!!

FOURTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Brothers don't let Brothers think patridiot-style.

FIFTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Brothers don't let Brothers think patridiot-style.

SIXTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Brothers don't let Brothers think patridiot-style.

SEVENTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Friends don't let friends think patridiot-style.

EIGHTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Friends don't let friends think patridiot-style.

NINTH: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Friends don't let friends think patridiot-style.

AND LASTLY: STOP FUCKING THINKING THE BOY AND GIRL ARE REGISTERD; The registration of the birth event DOES NOT REGISTER LIVING PEOPLE
.... JUST STOP !!! Friends don't let friends think patridiot-style.



HOW MANY GOD DAMN TIMES DOES THIS HAVE TO BE REPEATED ?!?!?!?!?!?

no one is taking the body of the boy and girl. When it does occur, it is because the mom and dad AGREED to the taking by TAKING IT PERSONALLY, thus AGREED it was a such and now do everything in their power to give this agreement its life. RECOMMENDED: Read the Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz ... FANTASTIC BOOK !!!

The NAME REGISTERED AT BIRTH is of a CESTUI QUE TRUST of which is used to INTERFACE with the PUBLIC TRUST and until you REDEEM THE COAT CHECK TICKET, one does not get one's COAT or MASK (PERSON) to operate in that CORPORATE GOVERNANCE duality of Government. The BIRTH EVENT created a TRUST INTERFACE and one failed to claim it because one did not even think about questioning anything thus CHOOSE TO BE A STEAK ON THE TABLE BY CHOICE AND CONSENT and AGREED TO BE A BEAST OF BURDEN and TRAINER OF THE SAME ... This is as simple as it gets folks.

What, did you think you were going to be told by a group of people controlling an entity of which history has proven will ultimately seek to enslave those it protects??

The TRUST was CREATED so the PEOPLE would actually take some god damn responsibility for the direction and security of their own NATION ... so the people would GROW THE FUCK UP.

It is the PEOPLE who do not comprehend because the people are looking at this matter through SELFISH EYES, only thinking of themselves.



Time to REPENT (change your way of thinking).

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Gavilan said Jan 30, 2016
Boris,

It's funny the way you seem to react to trying to make sense of all this.

Let me point out that unless you are studying law, there is no other way to learn about jurisdiction and law other than to take it upon yourself to seek it out at the libraries or online.

You use the term trust and usufruct as if they were the same thing, they are not.

Trust is the realm of Equity law, Usufruct is Roman law.

Now, you tell me where anyone will tell you that the United States (as the federal gov. entity) is a Roman Law nation? Where as a common man can you find that we are living in a country of mixed jurisdictions?

You are right, one as an individual that wishes to live in liberty must seek out the knowledge.

Now, can you imagine that there are people out there that are not able to think in the abstract and the concept of representation is very difficult to grasp? They are screwed.

Then we come along, after being abused and on a hunch and instinct we begin the journey to figure out what's going on, eventually trying to figure out and reverse engineer a system that has been going on for thousands of years. Once you grasp some of it, you may feel haughtily superior to others, then if you go further you may become humbled and finally comprehend that all this is nothing more than a temporary state of being and you will eventually pass on. You may even feel a bit of pity for those that are afraid of death because they would have to let go of their material possessions.
[Last edited Jan 30, 2016]





Ethan Edwin said Jan 30, 2016
They said repent..repent..repent...I wonder what they meant. I've seen the future baby, and it is murder.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbT-l3-GmUw 

-Howie


Gavilan said Jan 30, 2016
Now, look at this act:

Cestui Que Vie Act 1666
1666 CHAPTER 11 18 and 19 Cha 2
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11 
An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the Deceases of Persons beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, upon whose Lives Estates doe depend.

X1Recital that Cestui que vies have gone beyond Sea, and that Reversioners cannot find out whether they are alive or dead.

Whereas diverse Lords of Mannours and others have granted Estates by Lease for one or more life or lives, or else for yeares determinable upon one or more life or lives And it hath often happened that such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene granted have gone beyond the Seas or soe absented themselves for many yeares that the Lessors and Reversioners cannot finde out whether such person or persons be alive or dead by reason whereof such Lessors and Reversioners have beene held out of possession of their Tenements for many yeares after all the lives upon which such Estates depend are dead in regard that the Lessors and Reversioners when they have brought Actions for the recovery of their Tenements have beene putt upon it to prove the death of their Tennants when it is almost impossible for them to discover the same, For remedy of which mischeife soe frequently happening to such Lessors or Reversioners.

Cestui que vie remaining beyond Sea for Seven Years together and no Proof of their Lives, Judge in Action to direct a Verdict as though Cestui que vie were dead.

If such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene or shall be granted as aforesaid shall remaine beyond the Seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this Realme by the space of seaven yeares together and noe sufficient and evident proofe be made of the lives of such person or persons respectively in any Action commenced for recovery of such Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners in every such case the person or persons upon whose life or lives such Estate depended shall be accounted as naturally dead, And in every Action brought for the recovery of the said Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners their Heires or Assignes, the Judges before whom such Action shall be brought shall direct the Jury to give their Verdict as if the person soe remaining beyond the Seas or otherwise absenting himselfe were dead.

If the supposed dead Man prove to be alive, then the Title is revested. Action for mean Profits with Interest.

[X2Provided alwayes That if any person or [X3person] persons shall be evicted out of any Lands or Tenements by vertue of this Act, and afterwards if such person or persons upon whose life or lives such Estate or Estates depend shall returne againe from beyond the Seas, or shall on proofe in any Action to be brought for recovery of the same [X3to] be made appeare to be liveing; or to have beene liveing at the time of the Eviction That then and from thenceforth the Tennant or Lessee who was outed of the same his or their Executors Administrators or Assignes shall or may reenter repossesse have hold and enjoy the said Lands or Tenements in his or their former Estate for and dureing the Life or Lives or soe long terme as the said person or persons upon whose Life or Lives the said Estate or Estates depend shall be liveing, and alsoe shall upon Action or Actions to be brought by him or them against the Lessors Reversioners or Tennants in possession or other persons respectively which since the time of the said Eviction received the Proffitts of the said Lands or Tenements recover for damages the full Proffitts of the said Lands or Tenements respectively with lawfull Interest for and from the time that he or they were outed of the said Lands or Tenements, and kepte or held out of the same by the said Lessors Reversioners Tennants or other persons who after the said Eviction received the Proffitts of the said Lands or Tenements or any of them respectively as well in the case when the said person or persons upon whose Life or Lives such Estate or Estates did depend are or shall be dead at the time of bringing of the said Action or Actions as if the said person or persons where then liveing.]
avatar
some_dude said Jan 30, 2016
It's funny the way you seem to react to trying to make sense of all this.


maybe people should read what I put into the site because most of this stuff has been gone over in the articles and within all the scans and other stuff ....

but it appears people still want others to think and put it all together.... well here goes.

You are correct Usufruct is "roman law" and I talk trust .. I combine them because ALL LAW WORKS IN TANDEM with each other. It is you and your faulty thinking that makes it otherwise.

International Law will now be implemented as PUBLIC POLICY (see Nuremburg Principles): Executed thru the Laws of Moses (ie: Jewish Law: Talmudic Law) ... punished via Islamic Law (ie: UN/Sharia Law) ... Redemption thru Trust Law (ie: Christian/Biblical Law) ... all running under Ecclesiastical Law (all laws running as one) and operating through Admiralty/Maritime Law (law of contract and insurance) to achieve Equity under the Common Law (ie: heaven or hell on earth) ... http://iamsomedude.com/new_order.html



THERE IS NO DIVISON with the BODY nor the LAW ... USUFRUCT creates what I call a "Split equity trust"; two beneficiaries, with one beneficiary, the usufructuary, being TRUSTEE with respect to the DUTIES of the USUFRUCTUARY with respect to the NAKED OWNER. That simple.

I am not learned in law, I follow a philosophy and consciousness that appears to run through ALL THE LAW ... did you really think divide and conquer only applied to the people?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the LAW has also been DIVIDED so the people can be CONQUERED more easily because they seem to reject anything that ain't all lined up in some nice neat A-B-C format ... thus the people REJECT PART OF THE LAW and thus REJECT THE WHOLE OF THE LAW, thus TURN THEIR BACK ON GOD AND THUS THEMSELVES?

Critical Thinking obviously has been forgotten


Now, can you imagine that there are people out there that are not able to think in the abstract and the concept of representation is very difficult to grasp? They are screwed.

Then we come along, after being abused and on a hunch and instinct we begin the journey to figure out what's going on, eventually trying to figure out and reverse engineer a system that has been going on for thousands of years. Once you grasp some of it, you may feel haughtily superior to others, then if you go further you may become humbled and finally comprehend that all this is nothing more than a temporary state of being and you will eventually pass on. You may even feel a bit of pity for those that are afraid of death because they would have to let go of their material possessions.



Are you upset with me or yourself for allowing yourself to be deceived? You come on this forum an assume I act superior when in fact I tire of repeating myself over, and over, and over ... especially when this information can be found in the articles and on the audios. I do not give two shit what people think of me.

If you all wish to hate me, then hate ... not my problem, that would be yours and I have thick skin.


besides, I do not answer to any of you.
[Last edited Jan 30, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.



Ethan Edwin said Jan 30, 2016
Boris,

Thanks for bringing up the divide and conquer concept. That is exactly what I have been pondering.

Just as the law was divided, so too was the estate. Look:

California Civil Code Section 2924(a) Every transfer of an interest in property, other than in trust, made only as a security for the performance of another act, is to be deemed a mortgage, except when in the case of personal property it is accompanied by actual change of possession, in which case it is to be deemed a pledge.  Where, by a mortgage created after July 27, 1917, of any estate in real property, other than an estate at will or for years


The estate has been divided into an estate in real property, an estate at will and an estate for years.

I see where you are going as far as an estate in real property and an estate for years, but I can't see (yet?) where what you present has addressed an estate at will.

I have my ideas on the estate at will, but, if you would, can you speak on that?

-Howie




Gavilan said Jan 30, 2016
Are you upset with me or yourself for allowing yourself to be deceived? You come on this forum an assume I act superior when in fact I tire of repeating myself over, and over, and over ... especially when this information can be found in the articles and on the audios. I do not give two shit what people think of me.

If you all wish to hate me, then hate ... not my problem, that would be yours and I have thick skin.


Whoa, Boris. You got me all wrong. I come in peace. I have nothing to demand from you, I am just another fellow traveler comparing notes.

Just a comment from me. Do you think TPTB really gives a shit if one or two of us figure this out. These are people that have deleted presidents and other much more gifted men. Didn't Ed Mandell House said they would have "plausible deniability"?





some_dude said Jan 30, 2016

ok, get your heads out of those online definitions and take a look at the CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM section under SCANS AND OTHER STUFF .... http://iamsomedude.com/pdf/usufruct/estate%20and%20usufruct_corpus%20juris%20secundum.pdf 
.. this is the LAW, not some division within it ... you all are making way to fucking complicated. I have everything you need on this site in the articles, the audios, the scans, the videos ... wtf??? Do you all actually read this shit or am I just wasting my time? ... because ALL the answers to ALL the questions you guys have asked (minus the quote regarding the legal definition) IS ON THIS SITE ... seriously, wtf ???


Now READ THE DEFINTION OF ESTATE and it reads right there on SECITON 1:

"in its primary and technical sense, "estate" refers to an interest in land; a usufruct is the right of enjoying and using property belonging to another ... THE FIRST SECTION. You all do not have to look that hard. It is right there.


how hard is that to comprehend? This appears to be the LAW.

please, stop asking questions that are already answered within the site ...


~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 30, 2016
Boris,

That may APPEAR to be the LAW, but others may see that differently. From Wikipedia:

While legal encyclopedias like CJS were at one time heavily used by the courts, the growth of statutory and regulatory governance has had the effect of eroding this reliance. As such, rather than being used as sources of authoritative statements of law, legal encyclopedias are now more often used as tools for finding relevant case law.[1]

Volumes 82, 97, and 98 of Corpus Juris Secundum appear in the closing credits of the Perry Mason television series.
See also

Secondary authority


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_Juris_Secundum 

...and:

Some secondary authority materials are written and published by governments to explain the laws in simple, non-technical terms, while other secondary authority materials are written and published by private companies, non-profit organizations, or other groups or individuals. Some examples of secondary authority are:

Law review articles, comments and notes (written by law professors, practicing lawyers, law students, etc.)
Legal textbooks, such as legal treatises and hornbooks
Legal digests, such as the West American Digest System
Annotations published in statute books, codes, or other materials, such as the annotations in the American Law Reports series
Legal encyclopedias (such as Corpus Juris Secundum, Encyclopedia of Law and American Jurisprudence)
Legal dictionaries (such as Black's Law Dictionary). See Law Dictionary
Restatements of the Law published by the American Law Institute
Legal briefs and memoranda;
Tax forms and instructions published by governments
Government publications explaining or summarizing the laws
Government employee manuals (such as the Internal Revenue Manual for employees of the Internal Revenue Service)
Course materials from continuing legal education seminars
Debate in legislatures, including such commentaries published in the Congressional Record (this may reveal legislative intent)
Other similar materials


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_authority 

The Statute quoted above from the California Civil Code, which is a PRIMARY AUTHORITY, reads that the ESTATE is broken into three parts. Divided and Conquered.

You do not see that as a valid point?

I could pull the definition of LAW out of Black's Law, a secondary source, but that GENERAL DEFINITION would not be as concise as:

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the LAW has also been DIVIDED so the people can be CONQUERED more easily because they seem to reject anything that ain't all lined up in some nice neat A-B-C format ... thus the people REJECT PART OF THE LAW and thus REJECT THE WHOLE OF THE LAW, thus TURN THEIR BACK ON GOD AND THUS THEMSELVES?


Does it make sense for one to be redeemed of his estate, held unto he appears live to make the claim, that he may have to be aware that the estate may have been divided as was the law that he must use to redeem it?

Am I making this incredibly complicated matter more complicated, or am I simply seeking without preconceived notions the way to be free, and bringing observations into the discussion?

-Howie






some_dude said Jan 30, 2016
Ok, so California splits something up in to three ... you know what they did and how to undo, what is stopping you? Why sit here an argue with me over what is or is not the law? Corpus Juris Secundum is the body of the law ... those statutes you like to quote are nothing but unbonded insurance policies existing within an admiralty jurisdiction of Article IV Section 3 Clause 2, so they are the law, in THAT jurisdiction.

The SURRENDER nullifies all that crap and this apparently has been forgotten and it frustrates me.

Just tonight, I received a call from a guy who got pulled over by the police. No insurance, expired DL. Cop ran the name and then came back and said, have a nice night. What did he do? He SURRENDERED the BC to the Rosie and informed here he was appointing her his liaison.

That is it. That is ALL HE DID. You guys are making so fucking complicated. WHY?

Who are you trying to convince? Me or yourself? I already KNOW what to do, I just have duties to a higher source to attend after this, so my path is a bit different and I don't even like discussing the law, it is a waste of time and energy.

So, if you guys want OUT or whatever, then SURRENDER the BC to ROSIE and NOMINATE her as your Liaison: you gotta get rid of the power of appointment any how.

So, you can sit there and tell everyone how California split something into 3 parts or what is or is not the law using some source that high schools won't even allows a reference, when in fact the SURRENDER nullifies it all ...

When single shines the triple sun, what was sundered and undone, shall be whole, the two made one by gelfling hand or else by none. The "prophesy" still stands as truth.
[Last edited Jan 30, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Jan 31, 2016
Boris,

Can you see how someone might get confused when they see two contradictory statements? Here:

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the LAW has also been DIVIDED so the people can be CONQUERED more easily because they seem to reject anything that ain't all lined up in some nice neat A-B-C format ... thus the people REJECT PART OF THE LAW and thus REJECT THE WHOLE OF THE LAW, thus TURN THEIR BACK ON GOD AND THUS THEMSELVES?


...then here:

Ok, so California splits something up in to three ... you know what they did and how to undo, what is stopping you? Why sit here an argue with me over what is or is not the law? Corpus Juris Secundum is the body of the law ... those statutes you like to quote are nothing but unbonded insurance policies existing within an admiralty jurisdiction of Article IV Section 3 Clause 2, so they are the law, in THAT jurisdiction.


Just saying.

But, more importantly, the guy who called you- why the Treasury Secretary, and not the Secretary of the Treasury?

It looks to me, and forgive me for quoting some bullshit "law", that the Secretary of Treasury is the transfer agent one would want to appoint liaison. Here:

31 U.S. Code § 3128 - Proof of death to support payment-
A finding of death made by an officer or employee of the United States Government authorized by law to make the finding is sufficient proof of death to allow credit in the accounts of a Federal reserve bank or accountable official of the Department of the Treasury in a case involving the transfer, exchange, reissue, redemption, or payment of obligations of the Government, including obligations guaranteed by the Government for which the Secretary of the Treasury acts as transfer agent.


The BC being a death certificate (patriot mythology?), and the officer of the US Government being the Registrar of Vital Statistics or the County Clerk, it makes sense to me in light of 12usc95a(2).

Can you get that guy to post on here and tell his story and the thinking behind his nomination? And, did he send a Authenticated BC, or one just the way he received it? Also: Is this the first time he was pulled over, or has this been his experience before (to rule out a fluke)? How does he plan to move across borders? Will he send his so-called bills to Rosie for discharge, or does he have some other plan? How big does what he did reach? I'm sure others have more questions.

Or, do you have some insight?

-Howie






Ethan Edwin said Jan 31, 2016
I found the answer to my question on why the Treasurer and not the Secretary, pursuant to 31usc3128. Here:

In 2002, the Office of the Treasurer underwent further reorganization. The U.S. Treasurer advises the Secretary on matters relating to coinage, currency and the production of other instruments by the United States. In addition, the Treasurer serves as a senior advisor and representative of the Treasury on behalf of the Secretary in the areas of community development and public engagement.


But, I'd still love to hear the fella who was pulled over give some first hand ideas on what he is up to.

-Howie






some_dude said Jan 31, 2016

how about the people on this forum begin doing things and then report back and now people have first hand evidence??

I like that better.

From now on, you guys give first hand knowledge of matters instead of going through the "law" and engaging in mental masturbation. ACIONS speak louder than WORDS.

go do something and THEN come back and analyze the theory or hypothesis you are acting upon ... this is how I did it and then the understanding came after the action.

TAKE ACTION, DO SOMETHING other then spooge grey matter all over these forums, then report back with YOUR FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE. If you wait until you have a full and complete understanding, your are a fuct, because the understanding NEVER ceases to distill itself.

I went down to one word and uncovered a WHOLE UNIVERSE that I am still trying to comprehend, and it all came about form ONE ACTION TAKEN: the use of the four corners in court a few years ago.

Do you think this happens if I just sit there and engage in mental masturbation, spooging grey matter everywhere??


You shall no longer take things at second or third hand, not look through the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the specters in books. You shall not look through my eyes either, nor take things from me, you shall listen to all sides and filter them for yourself --- Walt Whitman, Song of Myself (from the movie: With Honors)
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Gavilan said Jan 31, 2016
Boris,

I have court coming up on the third of February. I have gone in four times as a man, and they are trying to have me accept representation.

Coming to understand jurisdictions was very important to me, and this article open up the door to me :

http://www.barefootsworld.net/sui_juris/uccconnection.html 

It didn't explain about mixed jurisdictions though, I found that in other articles. It did explain the use of federal reserve notes, and it's implications on the choice of law. One thing that left me confused with was the banksters being the creditors, when on a subsequent reading it dawned on me that it's the people that are the ultimate creditors since they are the ones that provide the energy to redeem the debt, and the federal reserve just being one giant bookkeeping operation.





some_dude said Feb 01, 2016
One thing that left me confused with was the banksters being the creditors, when on a subsequent reading it dawned on me that it's the people that are the ultimate creditors since they are the ones that provide the energy to redeem the debt, and the federal reserve just being one giant bookkeeping operation.



Due to the failure to complete delivery through surrender of the INTEREST, the people are DELINQUNET CREDITORS in an international bankruptcy making the bankers DEBTOR IN POSSESSION and any payment to the bankers in regards is only for the INTEREST which is why the "private contractors" come and service THAT debt obligation thru enforcement of Statutes, Codes, Rules, and Ordinances: interest returns to the principal and the Federal Reserve is the principal by DEFUALT because the people don't have any interest.

And this is WHY California splits the estate up into three parts, not that is the "law", but that is part of an attempt to SALVAGE INTEREST on behalf of the DEBTOR IN POSSESION.
[Last edited Feb 01, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.






Estaban Sanchez said Feb 01, 2016
So, head to the Cathedral, ask for instruction and counsel, and then hand them the BC, and accept the offer to BE an Ambassador For Christ, and request that they provide the OFFICE from which to conduct those activities.

Could the mere arrival of the Prodigal Son be the Act that satisfies the Cestui Que Vie?

After all, a very small percentage of people will grasp anything of what we are discussing here. There must be a more simple path. And, I don't think the Jubilee has anything to with the offer for a Plenary Indulgence for us, I think it is a chance to SEE if one will answer the CALL.

What do you think Boris, could it be that simple?

-Howie



Attempted to do so this morning. Talked with a priest for a few minutes. Left my number for him to schedule a sit down meeting. I left with the understanding of the BC being rendered to CAESER and at least not directly to the Church.




some_dude said Feb 01, 2016

that is correct ... render unto Caesar ... the church is the body of Christ.



The Church is called “one body in Christ” in Romans 12:5, “one body” in 1 Corinthians 10:17, “the body of Christ” in 1 Corinthians 12:27 and Ephesians 4:12, and “the body” in Hebrews 13:3. The Church is clearly equated with “the body” of Christ in Ephesians 5:23 and Colossians 1:24 ...
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Estaban Sanchez said Feb 01, 2016
I agree. We are the church, Each individual that has accepted Christ makes up the body of Christ. Our bodies are the temple of the in dwelling spirit which is God's spirit which then make the Church as " one body in Christ" because we are all alive in Him.


Ethan Edwin said Feb 01, 2016
Estaban,

I have a meeting with the Church next week. I planned to go tomorrow, but it appears as if the Vicar General of the diocese where I am at has been sent off for "special training". I will speak to him as soon as he returns.

Here is a description of the Vicar General:

A vicar general is the principal deputy of the bishop of a diocese for the exercise of administrative authority and possesses the title of local ordinary.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vicar_general 

I have an idea that by Nominating the Pope as my liaison and surrendering MY WILL to him, it may well prove to be the last part of the novation I have been looking for.

novation
1 in English law, an agreement between at least three parties allowing an original contracting party to be released and another party to be brought in as obligant. It is a commonly used method of rescheduling loans.


http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/novation 

The Pope has accepted the moniker of "Vicar of Jesus Christ" (See: ANNUARIO PONTIFICIO), which is different than other Popes who simply took the Title- "Vicar of Christ".

The other parts to complete the NOVATION are the surrender of the BC to the TREASURER of the United States, and the surrender of the Authorized King James Bible to the LORD MAYOR of the City of London, THE CROWN. And the surrender of the SS Card to the Social Security Administration.

The surrender of the BC to the Treasurer of the US completes the delivery of the Pawn Ticket you have been holding (a Pawn is a pledge is bail), and should relieve you of all CHARGES. If you didn't know, you have been out on Bail since roughly three days after you arrived on earth, accused of ORIGINAL SIN. For more info on that, here is a link to a few papers I put together:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzC9kaF040gGXzR5VVZxYlduSkU 

The surrender of the KJV Bible, a protestant bible, should end your IDENTIFICATION as a GENTILE, or PAGAN. The CROWN has a perpetual copyright on the KJV Bible, and by you holding it, you are presumed to be in protest to God having the power to punish you on earth (through the POPE and CHRIST'S church)- making you an infidel, and incompetent.

There are three seats of power in this world- Vatican City (Christian), the City of London (Muslim) and Washington D.C.(Judea)

There are three major law forms- Admiralty/Merchant Law (water), Common Law (earth) and Canon Law/Sharia Law (air). The FIRE is in your action, or inaction.

There are three parts to the estate- an estate of real property, an estate of Will and an estate for years.

There are three foundation documents- the Birth Certificate, the Social Security Card and the KJV Bible. What I call the father, the son and the holy ghost of the i-magi-nation, respectively.

I am led to believe that a complete surrender on the battlefield of commerce takes this:

1.) Surrender Social Security Card the SS Administration- on the back of the card you will see that it reads- this card belongs to the Social Security Administration, if you find a card that does not belong to you please send it to... Well, if the card belongs to the SS Administration, then it doesn't belong to you- send it back. That is what I did.

2.) Surrender the BC. Thanks to Boris' friend, this piece was finally solved for me. Surrender it to the Treasurer of the US. This makes perfect sense in light of the (holding of the) BC being the source of fiat money, which you will find with careful study.

3.) Surrender the KJV Bible. For evidence of this, read Hebrews 8 in the same book, and you will find that, either YOUR BIBLE is written in your heart, or not. If it is, then send the book back to it's owners- THE CROWN headquartered in the City of London.

If you remain the holder of any of these three documents then you are still at war. By surrendering these three documents you will have redeemed your estate in years and your estate of real property, but there is still a third part that must be done. You have surrendered to Caesar what is Caesar's. But, have you surrendered to God what is God's?

Matthew 22:20-22King James Version (KJV)

20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.


To make a surrender to God one must do the Will of the Father over his own Will. What is your Will? That is the separate estate of Will (under Probate) in the California civil code.

No one comes to the Father, but by me. The me is the son. The son has left this plane, and in his stead he left his power to his apostle. His Apostle was Peter. Peter holds the keys to loose or to bind. To free, or to bond.

Peter, in his current form, is the Pope. The Pope is the Vicar of Jesus Christ.

Surrender your Will to the Father, through his son, with the Pope acting as his Vicar and you become free in-DEED. You have completed your counterdeed, a secret (private) deed that obliterates a public one.

Colossians 2:13-15King James Version (KJV)

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.


So, by a complete surrender, and a nomination of the Pope to be one's liaison, you have accepted the offer of Christ to be your guarantor, your advocate and your savior- all on the temporal realm.

Does that make sense Estaban?

-Howie




Estaban Sanchez said Feb 01, 2016
Indeed it does. That is a very clear picture you have drawn. Sounds fairly simple leg work wise. The spiritual work is the hard part. This is the year to do it and accept the mercy ,grace and forgiveness of our Father.



Ethan Edwin said Feb 01, 2016
Estaban,

When you get a chance to talk to the Church, let us know here what happened. I hope to record my conversation and post it as well.

We're are almost there, and this is a small window to get it done. The door to the Ark closes on November 16th, from there the rain will start and turn into a perfect storm.

Unless....

-Howie



Estaban Sanchez said Feb 01, 2016
Will do. I did read the back of the SS card and will mail that in. Also will mail BC to the US Treasury with a simple note asking them to deposit it into the US Treasury to assign the reversion...After that I will surrender the KJV Bible.




Gavilan said Feb 01, 2016
Ethan,

So, once all has been surrendered, what do you do to trade with others that have not come out of the system? And may incur a liability by trading with you since they are still a part of the system?





Ethan Edwin said Feb 01, 2016
Gavilan,

I can not answer that question for you.

By you nominating the Pope to be your liaison (to the world), you have effectively made him your agent, and you BECOME the principal.

Have you not witnessed the power of the Papacy?

I am led to believe that whatever you dream can become reality by directing your agent to fulfill what is necessary to accomplish that dream.

Be the dreamer. Dream us into a new reality.

Didn't anyone tell you that that is what you were born to do?

-Howie





Ethan Edwin said Feb 01, 2016
Estaban,

Keep your words simple when executing your surrender. It is good to know the mechanism of how it works, but it is not necessary to accomplish your goal.

For example, you may want to know how a car works, the engine and transmission and suspension, but that is not necessary to make it work for you. Put the key in and start it, pull the lever to drive and step on the gas...simple.

Ask yourself what you want to accomplish by your surrender, what is your goal? And then write to them what you wish them to do, as you were speaking to a child.

Words can free you, too many words can bind you.

-Howie







some_dude said Feb 03, 2016
Will do. I did read the back of the SS card and will mail that in. Also will mail BC to the US Treasury with a simple note asking them to deposit it into the US Treasury to assign the reversion ... After that I will surrender the KJV Bible.



COUNTY GOVERNMENT = United States
COUNTY TREASURY = United States Treasury

Tender the surrender; the BC itself is a surrender (a surrender is also the instrument itself), to the County Government and work from there. Why surrender the KJV Bible? The Bible is ALREADY the WORD, so the New Testament is the "will". No need to surrender, just complete the "terms of the will".

the SS Card is just the evidence of the account created for an entity that was "born alive" ... that should be placed into a private, living trust .... then the SS Account becomes a PLEDGOR ACCOUNT which is why the 225 Presentation was put up on the articles.

Once the PLEDGE is completed, via the surrender, that SS Account operates under a DIFFERENT SET OF RULES. This is why we are doing things in certain ways.

It is not ONE thing you do, it is a COMBINATION of events you initiate.

[Last edited Feb 03, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




some_dude said Feb 03, 2016
So, once all has been surrendered, what do you do to trade with others that have not come out of the system? And may incur a liability by trading with you since they are still a part of the system?


Maybe change the way you are viewing matters. It is not that anyone is coming out of the system, you are establishing your position within the event and this is why we use the County Government; it is the United States and you are RATIFYING an OFFICAL ACT: ratification of the ACT so the CONTRACT can commence so the instrument can take effect according to its purport and tenor: a CONFIRMATION.



Simple Definition of confirmation

1: proof which shows that something is true or correct
2: a response which shows that information is received and understood; especially : a response that makes a purchase, appointment, etc., definite or official
3: the act of giving official approval to something or someone

Full Definition of confirmation

1: an act or process of confirming: as
a (1) : a Christian rite conferring the gift of the Holy Spirit and among Protestants full church membership
(2) : a ceremony especially of Reform Judaism confirming youths in their faith
b : the ratification of an executive act by a legislative body

2 a : confirming proof: corroboration
b : the process of supporting a statement by evidence




For all intents and purposes, you will look like everyone else, you will still use a bank account, you will still use "money", but the SOURCE will change. You will be the source and SPEND DEBT OUT OF EXISTENCE because you are using your "private credit", you just have to get an acknowledgement from the one that "controls the switch" ... so, right now, and I know it fucking sucks and it is bullshit and all the other arguments people are going to make, it is what it is, so if you do not like what is, make is not and complete the negotiation that was initiated at birth.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Feb 03, 2016
Boris,

Just sharing what was revealed to me.

You have worked from one word- usufruct. I have worked from one passage in the Bible- Galatians 4, which led me to one word- Novation.

As far as:
COUNTY GOVERNMENT = United States
COUNTY TREASURY = United States Treasury
I would say, County government & County treasurer= subcontractors of United States through METRO. So, I sent the BC to the Contractor, not the subcontractor.

The KJV Bible is KING JAMES' BIBLE, not Boris' Bible, or Howie's Bible. Your holding it, and everyone is presumed to have one in their possession, is evidence to the GLOBAL TRUSTEE, the Roman Church, that you are in protest to their position, and IN FACT an INFIDEL. The KJV Bible is under perpetual CROWN copyright. It may be the Word of God according to Congress, the question is which God? So, I sent it back, with a request to correct the record as to me holding it. Read Hebrews 8 for further clarity.

For the SS Card, you just have to read the back. It doesn't get any clearer than that. If you are holding it, you are holding someones else property. Why would one do that, unless they were a thief? When I sent the card I was holding back, they sent back a letter that they had corrected the record, and the card had VOID stamped across it. An infant contract that was not void, but voidable, was voided. I, a man called Howard, am no longer seen as Debtor in their records.

The Pledge is your Pledge to work according to your conscience (your direct line to God), and that is what your Will does. The Lord's Prayer is a perfect Will. Nothing needs to be added to it. So, I go to the Church to submit my Will. The choice is- are you self-governing, or do you need outside artificial governance? Your actions, your fire, will be the evidence, or not.

As far as moving anything into a Private Living Trust, I see the message at the end of Indiana Jones, The Last Crusade. If you attempt to move the Holy Grail past the Seal, even if done for the benefit of others, the Trust collapses. To leave your inheritance under the care of the Templars, the Hospitalars, is the price of immortality. Look at Rainman, Charlie had to give back his brother to the Trustee, everything was out of balance when IT was in Charlie's care.

Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and render unto God what is God's.

Put it all back in the box, and accept your Kingly, Priestly and Prophetic Office of Christ (the Christ that is within you), whose FURNITURE the Church is holding in Trust for you, and then operate it in your own way. That's what I'm up to. That's my path. That is the return of Christ.

And, the Doors of Mercy are open, for a time.

-Howie






some_dude said Feb 03, 2016
You have worked from one word- usufruct. I have worked from one passage in the Bible- Galatians 4, which led me to one word- Novation.



It is all the same ... the usufruct is the consideration for the novation and the surrender announces the time appointed by the father because that is the evidence one is conscious or live.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.



Ethan Edwin said Feb 03, 2016
Boris,

Agreed. In the end, one must just prove- Good Faith- the rest takes care of itself.

-Howie




some_dude said Feb 03, 2016

The COUNTY has ALWAYS been the GOVERNMENT it is not a sub-contractor ... it is actually a consular office of the United States Secretary of State because the United States is actually an Ecclesiastical Organization; We were told this by the Secret Service and the Sec of State.

In fact ANY building that flies the MIA-POW flag houses a function of the Secretary of State of which ENFORCES TREATIES AND CONTRACTS for the United States and we do this locally, because that is where the books are kept; CAFR Accounts, and each county treasury has a direct access to the Treasury. The COUNTY COURTS are where the "bounty contracts" are fulfilled; prize courts.

If you had an account with Bank of America, do you make deposits with their headquarters or do you use one of their consular offices ??

This is the same premise.

We know this is the way because we have a woman that did the 1009a process as described on these forums and not only did the foreclosure disappear, but also a couple of other court cases she didn't even address.

Have another buddy who did this on a house that was already "sold" to the bank and they put in something like 150K worth of renovation and he filed the 1099a process and re-opened the case and the judge is now "re-considering" ...

Even in your case, the 12 USC 95a (2) was done with the COUNTY and the COUNTY handled the matter form there.

and as far as the living trust, you can think what you wish, but the grail (SSN) never leaves the cave, it is SEALED because that is what you do with the TRUST when you are done, the last step is to SEAL THE RECORD with the "keeper of the grail" so nothing BREAKS THE SEAL.

We also know this is case, because we are following the advice and direction of others of whom have already done as such, in fact, one of 'em got flown out to the Vatican once he finished to complete the "process"

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




Ethan Edwin said Feb 03, 2016
Boris,

Thanks for the clarification, that all makes sense.

-Howie




some_dude said Feb 03, 2016
It just SEALS THE DEAL


keep in mind, I approach this thing as a PURCHASE AGREEMENT wherein there is a BUYER under LEASE and a SELLER under LEASE and each party is both at the same time. This is the nature of the usufruct.

TRADE NAME is usufruct of me in that it spawned from the event. When that PROPERTY INTEREST gets transferred to the STATE, the STATE only receives the usufructuary interest; so the TRADE NAME is a natural usufruct of the one of whom was "born alive" ...

But since that TRADE NAME is "intellectual property" of which I did not create, I am usufruct of the TRADE NAME, I just accept that fact and this allows me to assign that interest and render the STATE usufruct with respect to my use of the TRADE NAME (ownership is a privilege; just a mere user (hjr-192?) .. I think the pope also referred to this), thus the STATE has a usufructuary duty whenever I use that TRADE NAME, it operates under LEASE governed under Article 2A of the Uniform Commercial Code: usufruct of the TRADE NAME leased back to the State in exchange for aquittance and discharge from any further obligation to the TRADE NAME on my part.

All duties under Law of Nations Book 2 Article 014, 105 completed by way of arranging my affairs how I see fit under Law lf Nations Book 1 Article 192, 196 and in conjunction with 11 USC 558 to reorganize the RESULTING ESTATE (INTEREST) with an ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITORS pursuant to 31 USC 3173 (a)(1)(A)(i) of which kicks in the insurance policy more commonly known and described as 12 USC 95a (2) and grants me ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS as a THIRD PARTY under the LEASE in the form of TITLE 18 because the LEASE is a automatic PRIORITY security interest under Article 9-110 of the uniform commercial code.

... a usufruct is fully transferrable and if one party is usufructuary, then the other party is AUTOMATICALLY fee owner, there is no other option, and the State CLAIMS to be administrator AND usufructuary under PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW (Hague articles 43 and 55) and thus the public policy is what? Render the usufruct purchased by Caesar unto Caesar of which is Caesar's so God's can have God's: a HOSTAGE NEGOTIATION and the FALSE USUFRUCT (the usufruct of one's natural usufruct) is the RANSOM PAYMENT to complete the SUIT OF ONE'S LIVERY.

This is how I see it. I do not see all the heir and estate and inheritance shit everyone else sees. I see usufruct and fee owner; masculine and feminine energy transfers. And the LEASE is for the usufruct of the natural usufruct of which I was granted by the universe.

It is just business, nothing personal
(the fourth agreement: take nothing personal)

just the nature of the slavery that the people of this planet grip a hold of with all their might while at the same time trying to fight it ... an exercise in futility: the current state of man.

This is what must change.

[Last edited Feb 03, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.


Ethan Edwin said Feb 03, 2016
Boris,

I suppose I am looking at this from the re-organization that is happening (has happened without announcement?)That is why I am going to the Church (I have no formal affiliation with the Church of Rome or any other Church). They are duty bound during the Jubilee to provide "instruction" and "counsel" to all who come to them. I will present them with what I've done so far, read out the Lord's Prayer in their presence, and then ask them for the FURNITURE of my kingly, priestly and prophetic Office of Christ. Here:

BOOK II : THE PEOPLE OF GOD

PART I : CHRIST'S FAITHFUL (Cann. 204 - 207)

Can. 204 §1 Christ's faithful are those who, since they are incorporated into Christ through baptism, are constituted the people of God. For this reason they participate in their own way in the priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ. They are called, each according to his or her particular condition, to exercise the mission which God entrusted to the Church to fulfil in the world.

§2 This Church, established and ordered in this world as a society, subsists in the catholic Church, governed by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him.

Can. 205 Those baptised are in full communion with the catholic Church here on earth who are joined with Christ in his visible body, through the bonds of profession of faith, the sacraments and ecclesiastical governance.

Can. 206 §1 Catechumens are linked with the Church in a special way since, moved by the Holy Spirit, they are expressing an explicit desire to be incorporated in the Church. By this very desire, as well as by the life of faith, hope and charity which they lead, they are joined to the Church which already cherishes them as its own.

§2 The Church has a special care for catechumens. While it invites them to lead an evangelical life, and introduces them to the celebration of the sacred rites, it already accords them various prerogatives which are proper to christians.

Can. 207 §1 By divine institution, among Christ's faithful there are in the Church sacred ministers, who in law are also called clerics - the others are called lay people.

§2 Drawn from both groups are those of Christ's faithful who, professing the evangelical counsels through vows or other sacred bonds recognised and approved by the Church, are consecrated to God in their own special way and promote the salvific mission of the Church. Their state, although it does not belong to the hierarchical structure of the Church, does pertain to its life and holiness.


http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0017/_PS.HTM 

The important part being:

Drawn from both groups are those of Christ's faithful who, professing the evangelical counsels through vows or other sacred bonds recognised and approved by the Church, are consecrated to God IN THEIR OWN SPECIAL WAY and promote the salvific mission of the Church. Their state, although IT DOES NOT BELONG to the hierarchical structure of the Church, does pertain to its life and holiness.


No need to be PART of the Church to be redeemed of the Furniture of the Office. One must just perform a, "sacred bond recognised and approved by the Church". I am led to believe that the mere walking through the Doors of Mercy accomplishes this.

But, like I said, we can't screw this up. We must just demonstrate Good Faith.

If the Vicar General determines that some-thing else must be done, I will request direction.

By the way, I received a phone call from the Church today from some entity, and they wanted to know the Nature of the questions I had for the Church. When it was told to them that I was indeed a prodigal son who was called to return to gather my things so that I could be about my Father's business, there was pause. Then the entity said, "yes, it certainly is the Vicar General you need to speak to."

Take that as you will, I'll know more next week at the "adjudication" by the Vicar General.

-Howie





some_dude said Feb 03, 2016
and what you have is the secular (flesh) and the spirit joined in one union ... I hope everyone can see the FICTION does follow the Divine Law and this is what I was hoping people see so they would stop rejecting that part of Law and learn how to operate in harmony with such.

This is why I look at it as a purchase because that is the secular version of the acceptance of the Christ and to reject this part of the Law is to reject the WHOLE of the Law, for this is the entrance into the kingdom ... when the two become one.

For until the prodigal son return and accept Christ: he is circumcised and Galatians 5 reads:

3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.

6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.


So, one finds his way by fulfilling the whole of the law pursuant to Romans and repent so the prodigal son can find his way home by way of his faith, for the law will REFLECT the faith and light the way home.

[Last edited Feb 03, 2016]
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





some_dude said Feb 04, 2016
By the way, I received a phone call from the Church today from some entity, and they wanted to know the Nature of the questions I had for the Church. When it was told to them that I was indeed a prodigal son who was called to return to gather my things so that I could be about my Father's business, there was pause. Then the entity said, "yes, it certainly is the Vicar General you need to speak to."

Take that as you will, I'll know more next week at the "adjudication" by the Vicar General.


be careful. We have had a couple of people who went this route and said they wanted out. Well, they got out, but now they have no way to operate in public; no way to interface with society. The Church collapsed the juridical person. Those guys give you EXACTLY what you wish, so make sure you choose your words carefully.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Feb 04, 2016
Boris,

I intend to tread very softly. Wise as a serpent, soft as a dove. That is also why I am stressing the FURNITURE of the office. The office of Christ is the pass-through to be In the world not OF the world, and be able to interact with society. The furniture is the Pass-port, account, embassy, transportation etc.

At least that is the way I imagine it. We'll know a lot more next week.

If the Church proves to be a dead end, then it's plan B- B as in Boris' way.

-Howie





some_dude said Feb 05, 2016

also, we have had others go into the Church only to be told "the Church doesn't involve itself in secular affairs" ... but look forward to what you find.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.





Ethan Edwin said Feb 05, 2016
Boris,

You have done an extraordinary job in breaking down the secular side as to surrender and acceptance, my part is to go to the Church. I am led to believe, for all of the parts of this to come together, we must "perform" a similar "rite of passage" as the Queen did in her Coronation. This requires the state and the church, Caesar and God. More precisely, this requires that YOUR Church and YOUR State become one. How else could one be self-governing? Here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKzlKwpm17U 

The practical things that we are doing are hidden in the symbolism of her Coronation. I can expound if you wish.

-Howie
[Last edited Feb 05, 2016]




WitnessSonnenblume said Feb 14, 2016
ummm...just sayin' Kurt has not charged for any of his information and has actually been a pretty darn humble guy trying to find the fix and sharing with others. I cannot say that about a whole lot of others, though...the people that are truly wanting to be about learning and helping set other captives free are few and far between. There are some with egos bigger than a house...I just feel compelled to speak my experience, strength and hope that Kurt has been very valuable in putting pieces of the puzzle together without demanding anything and he even answers peoples questions, comments and emails.

Let love be the governor...we already have enough war...every one seems to be contributing in some fashion a little clarity. Anna has helped me recognize things although I don't necessarily support her view...that doesn't make her someone completely void of insights. We all must pray for the discerning of spirit and wisdom to know what peg fits in what hole. LOVE...



some_dude said Feb 14, 2016
and what I was hoping for is to prompt some actual discussion, especially from those who keep claiming "slavery" or "fraud" ... I wanted to see how their thought process would assimilate the matter

and each one of them appear to be "peaceful" but then go "on the attack" with their "processes" and this will only serve to provoke matters in the long run as NONE of that stuff seeks to REPENT THE SINNER and PREVENT THE SINS FROM OCCURRING and in my eyes, does everyone a disservice.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.




RichSummers said Feb 22, 2016
Boris, this journey has been the wildest journey of my life. I have you to thank for that. Whenever you have something new come out I'm all over it. All those other people you mention do seem to be selling snake oil, spot on man!!!! My heart is always telling me to listen to you. That's one major thing about this whole journey follow your heart. I have been doing that so everything I have been doing has been from your direction and my interpretation of what you are saying. I am stuck right now at a stand still. I don't know what to do next and I don't want to miss steps. I'm trying to keep up with as much new knowledge as I can. I could really use some guidance in my next move. How do I contact you? I spoke with Ann von Ritz and I got your message across to her to get her in a different mindset I cant believe it but I got her to start asking the right questions. I feel and understand exactly what you are saying and it makes absolutel perfect sense your a fuckin genius Boris!!!! Now it became more clear to me after explaining to her where you are coming from. This is what I told her that made her stop.  

Richard Summers  

You haven't been giving the debt and the responsibility to the United States treasury to return the debt to pay off the debt cause they have to be responsible for all the debt. Forget all the personal stuff cause the end result is your freedom and the rights to it. This a private matter not a public matter the things you are describing (apples) are Public apples and the (oranges) That he describes are private oranges so in a sense you are both talking about the same thing just public and private. Put everything in the living trust and surrender to the those that stole from you. That releases you from the burden they created through stealing from you. I understand and feel similar to you about the theft, but put that past yourself, don't take it personal. Surrender yourself and then let's go set everyone else free. He was right when he said the Patriot movement scared the shit out of those of us that are patriotic but he is on a different level and understands not to take it personal that's what they want. Just like I said about us holding the command to go to war they push and push to get us to walk right into the Web so they can devour us. It is deceptive as hell. Surendering all is the way we beat this machine Anna. It is the removal of self and ego and personal pride that doesn't fight their way and doesn't allow the battle to go on cause you can't have one person at war when the other person has removed itself from the fight. What you have is a selfish asshole child that thinks he won but hasn't. Eventually that one at war will self destruct. Boris has a hard time dealing with people when they don't get the spiritual side of this. Every thing is duality and he goes crazy when that isn't grasped but I understand you that's why I wanted to reach out.  
Anna von Reitz  

What I understand is that a bunch of crooks have contrived to plunder the public trusts they created in our given names without our knowledge or permssion, then used our assets to pay for an army to use against us. That's what I understand.  

Federal Reserve? World Bank? IBRD? IMF? ----- Crooks.  
Rich Summers  

Your right your honor. Now look at what you just wrote and say "SO" now what.  

I'm just as mad as you are  

Yesterday at 6:07pm  

Rich Summers  

But what does that mean? Give it all back tell them you don't want to play.  

That game doesn't look fun anyway  

Yesterday at 6:08pm  

Anna von Reitz  

Stop paying the rats for one. Correct the political status records to recoup control of your copyrights (name), vessels in commerce (more names) and reconvey your property back to the jurisdiction of the land.  

To me, this is just crime.  

Yesterday at 6:09pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

Your pride is angry this is what your not getting. That same pride that is honorable and righteous is all wrong. Guess what your honor they created is what you need to see here. They created a system that steals from us. THEY are also creating your anger and your letting them.  

Yesterday at 6:09pm  

Anna von Reitz  

And if you let criminals get away with it, they just foster MORE crime.  

Yesterday at 6:10pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

When we surrender all of what they create they lose and we win.  

Yesterday at 6:10pm  

Rich Summers  

Anger begats anger  

Yesterday at 6:11pm  

Anna von Reitz  

The easy way out is now and has always been to "accept" and be bought off. That's how they have managed to operate this FRAUD scheme for so long. People who knew either got tired ot dealing with them or decided, WTF, why not just "give in" and take the "money"?  

Yesterday at 6:11pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

They created a system of repetitive residual components that operate in all of us. They know how strong the mind is. They know if they set something in motion that it will take flight and generate over and over and over until it is in full control.  

Yesterday at 6:12pm  

Anna von Reitz  

That is called benefiting from fraud. It makes you an accomplice.  

All this strikes me as mumbo-jumbo, Rich.  

Yesterday at 6:13pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

Once everyone stops they won't be able to keep it up. Our job is to get all to surrender and stop playing the game. Once it gets to a point that is noticeable a take over will happen and we will have prevented the war and jailed the bad guys.  

Yesterday at 6:13pm  

Anna von Reitz  

Some kind of delusional "lets all surrender" and let criminals rule the earth, because then they have to pay for everything"---?  

Yesterday at 6:13pm · Sent from Web  

Anna von Reitz  

Once you "surrender" they don't have to pay for ANYTHING, and they won't, either.  

Everyone stops WHAT?  

Yesterday at 6:14pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

Yes they do case your estate was established and you still utilize it when you transfer it into your own living trust.  

Yesterday at 6:14pm  

Anna von Reitz  

Trusts are fictional bull shit. They have some uses, but so do toenail clippers.  

Yesterday at 6:15pm · Sent from Web  

Rich Summers  

You transfer your interests into your trust when you tell them I'm not interested anymore in your fraud so I want my interests in my own account thank you bye  

Then you teach others.  

Yesterday at 6:16pm  

Anna von Reitz  

Okay, so how, according to Boris, do you tell them to transfer to your own account--- which is precisely what they don't want to do---and how to you force them to do it?  
BABOOM!!!!! See now she is on the right track! Alright hit me up Boris I really want to be apart of calaberating with you! I'm Up in Washington State  
You can contact me through Facebook from your website or email rgavino17@gmail.com  
Thank you Boris!



some_dude said Feb 22, 2016



John 14:12

Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.