Reversionary Interest

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Reversionary Interest

Mermaid19733
I have no problem assigning my full, faith and credit over to 'Canada'. My only reservation is that the people currently representing that corporation are killing our brown brothers and sisters in other parts of the world.  Is my 'pledger' account then indirectly supporting this bloodshed somehow?  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Reversionary Interest

iamsomedude
Administrator


voluntary surrender of usufructuary interest may not be used for war nor harm of a populace.

The surrender is an act of peace in acceptance of the offer to come to peace under international and ecclesiastical law. This is the "remedy" for all the bullshit for once you surrender usufruct, you agree to be 100% responsible for you acts, actions, and inactions for you are now a controller of the fruit tendered into the public trust from which those actors and agents shall draw from to govern those who refuse to or choose to not govern themselves
~ 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.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Reversionary Interest

Monarch
In reply to this post by Mermaid19733
Hi Boris,

After participating in a State Sponsored Foreclosure Mediation Program, I received a letter authorizing the issuance of a Certificate of Foreclosure and Trustee's Sale (in a non-judicial state).  I documented the surrender of the BC, assignment of reversionary interest, a Waiver of Claim (not recorded), 12 USC 95a (2) and also cited the State statute that recognizes Federal statutes as "law subject to judicial notice".  This information was also sent to the Deputy Director of the State Foreclosure Mediation Program.  A written response from the Deputy Director simply states that I have a right to seek a Petition for Judicial Review with the District Court:

"The court will not reverse or set aside the decision of an administrative agency unless there were procedural or legal errors, abuse of the agency’s discretion or, the decision exceeds the agency’s authority.  According to State statute, following are reasons the court may find an administrative agency’s decision invalid in whole or in part. As the petitioner, you must prove that the administrative agency’s final decision is invalid."
 
STATUTE:  The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of evidence on a question of fact. The court may remand or affirm the final decision or set it aside in whole or in part if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the final decision of the agency is:

      (a) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;
      (b) In excess of the statutory authority of the agency;
      (c) Made upon unlawful procedure;
      (d) Affected by other error of law;
      (e) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record;
      (f) Arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion.

My question is, in addition to (a), which of the above would best apply for a Petitioner who has surrendered the BC and assigned the reversion?  I also have a DBA but that was not submitted.  Come what may, I would really like to complete this walk of faith straight through to the very end.

Thank you for sharing so much of yourself and your gifted insights.  I have learned a great deal about myself and the world I have created.  ~ Peace ~
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Reversionary Interest

iamsomedude
Administrator
ok, so now you use the ICCPR (self-determination and freedom of "religion") and the Treaty of Peace and Amity 1814 in conjunction with what you have already done and stand on it.

Now, you make your counterclaim to the matter for peace under the treaty and pursuant to 12 USC 95a (2) for it is the same as putting the tithe into the storehouse pursuant to Malachi 3:10 of which instructs you to challenge God in order to receive the blessings.

So, the recourse would be to what? "Petition for Judicial Review with the District Court" or in other words: challenge God for the blessings of the new covenant.

In order to "win", you need to show where god's law and man's law consolidate and merge, thus extinguish obligations and the ICCPR and Treaty of Peace and Amity are constitutional obligations binding on all courts, thus Part a would be the logical path, or am I mistaken?

This is the essence of the surrender of the usufruct to account for the "purchase" (taking of the usufruct) under Articles 38 and 134 of the Lieber Code and the assignment of the reversion to ensure the "last jot and tiddle" be accounted for in order none of the Glory (profit) done in his name comes back unto you for that would render the entire estate taxable (with heavy burden) whereas one's burden is light.

You also may wish to "revoke the person" with the Post master and the Registrar. This is just where you inform them there is a mistake and you revoke and rescind the "office of person".
~ 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.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Reversionary Interest

Monarch
In reply to this post by Mermaid19733
Boris,

Thank you for framing the process and intent behind each reference ~ much appreciated.  Because the ICCPR is not self-authenticating and the official process requires some time, I hope I can still invoke some type of recognition.

I also went back to the counter claim on your site (below).  This describes in perfect detail, the very unique circumstances of my situation - right up to, and including their dishonor of the authenticated indemnification receipt and 12 USC 9 (a)2.  I just want to ensure I come in peace, not controversy.  Thanks again for your response!  ~ Peace ~

Mandatory Counter-claim against actions taken = SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP (17 stat 15: 42 U.S. Code § 1986): John Doe, civilian citizen operating by and thru NAME, coming in peace as a sick and wounded POW suffering injuries (22 Stat. 940; Treaty Series 377 (Red Cross Convention: 1864: Article 5)) at the hands of senior officers and agents using their positions of power and authority in the host nation for private profit and gain through forced commercial intercourse, pillage, and plunder resulting in the wanton destruction of private and public property without authority in violation of Article The First of the Treaty of Ghent 1814 (8 stat 218) and Articles 42, 44, 46, and 47 of the Lieber Code with dishonor of the Authenticated Indemnity Receipt issued by the Commanding Officer under Article 38 for surrender of the usufruct in violation ofTrust (RE ############## of bond issued to county)

Relief Requested: As J Doe, civilian citizen, has been subject to indentured servitude and slavery since DOB and under Article 43 of the Lieber Code stands entitled to the rights and privileges of a freeman