Re: The law is the witness and external deposit of our moral life.
This post was updated on .
All that shit is just where the dead go to be judged; operating thru the language of the dead: The world one is currently witness is the RESULT of what happens when God Almighty is removed from the equation. Either Man kicked God Almighty from the garden or vice versa, it is irrelevant.
This means that when any of those things you listed below address one, one is being addressed/recognized/identified/whatever AS-IF one were Dead = Illiterate = ignorant = steak on the table by choice and consent = surety
The result? there is only one jurisdiction: over the estate of the dead man … However, if the supposed dead man makes a personal appearance, how can this jurisdiction be maintained?
But Turnabout is ALWAYS Fair Play
What happens under the Cesuti Que Act of 1666 when the dead shows up living? Does the ENTIRE estate then revest automatically unto the one so identified as the DEAD-DUDE for DEAD-DUDE is no longer dead? Does the personal appearance of the supposed dead man cure this condition and revoke all letters of administration ab initio?
And is it written "be surety for no man?", so if one denies being surety, with whom would the burden be to prove one consented?
Be not thou one of them that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts.
He that is surety for a stranger shall smart for it: and he that hateth suretiship is sure.
A man lacking in sense pledges And becomes guarantor in the presence of his neighbor.
Now, read their Laws:
27 C.F.R. 19.170(a)
27 C.F.R. 19.171(c) and 27 C.F.R. 19.172(b)
27 C.F.R. 19.173
It appears the Law and "the fiction" both reconcile ... 27 CFR is where the surety is PRESUMED; one becomes surety for performance under the SSN Contract by choice and consent for this world, right now, is the land of the dead and the PRESUMPTION is one rejects Jesus Christ as surety, thus rejects everlasting life, and when one in fact fails to deny for under international law, PRESUMPTIONS are considered FACTS until rebutted.
So, when one appears living and denies being surety, the usufruct the "synagogue" is attempting to avoid by PRESUMING the beneficiary dead and you trustee over the estate comes due immediately because that is the Estate revested: the State is usufructuary and the inhabitant (one so identified and/or recognized thru and/or via NAME) is naked owner as beneficiary and SSN is used to account for the usufruct in the proper manner: State as proprietor (holder of property as usufructuary) UNLESS one enters into an ALTERNATIVE-AGREEMENT.
Why is this so hard to comprehend? When one is addressed as-if one were dead, the very fact that one is standing in front of the other is proof one is not dead and expressing one's will to deny being surety results in the other having zero authority to continue for that would be a violation of Natural Law and then the FICTION people hate so much would take over by way of operation of Law to balance the resulting usufruct created by the violation.
This is the result of the natural defense mechanism of the public trust created to prevent tyranny, but since we all had our heads so far up our asses, we had to get punched in the stomach enough for our heads to pop out.
No one can separate them-self from the FICTION, the FICTION exists by way of operation of Natural Law for one either governs them-self from within or one WILL be governed from without; one can not escape being governed.
The problem people appear to have is their attachments to the physical world.
You are correct, there are the only two "convenient administrations" so, exactly whose kingdom are you trying to establish?
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.