– Now I am confused --- Maybe
In Reply To
I decided to write the county of Ramsey, MN and request the documents Boris did. I am referring to the one dated 09-27-2016. The point of this was NOT to copy what Boris did but rather see where I have gone wrong. This filing has been turned 180 degrees from my understanding - MAYBE? I did not have my paperwork apostilled, I did do an affidavit of Life. I have the authenticated BC. I do not understand how Boris can make a claim "Affidavit of ownership"? How does one make a claim to property not owned? I see Boris used the words: "registered owner of record, entitlement holder and authorized signatory, with fully vested title... and beneficial interest in said title" OUCH. I do not mean to disagree - I just want to understand - how one can be sent a "COPY" and then take ownership of said title where the original is still retained by the "owner", State of XX. This stuff reminded me of Jonah Bey. I fully understand the presumption of abandonment, but I do not see the bridge to "claim ownership". I see the purpose of rebutting the presumption of death. I like the affidavit of correction.
Another thing, I do understand the defining the difference between JOHN DOE - the John Doe, corporate soul BUT I was under the impression courts do not care if it is JOHN DOE, John Doe or john doe. All caps, no caps, the courts STILL take jurisdiction over it property. All the courts are interested in is the two titles put together to make up the "person".
The next item is the bankruptcy court - The affidavit of correction - I am guessing this was filed under a MISC FILING with the bankruptcy court AFTER all the documents were notarized and apostilled by the SOS in GA?
First I want to say, all my paperwork was about surrender, release, etc, to and for the account of the US. I have used scriptures, international law, case law, etc. All I got was zero back. With all this said -
WOW -- some of my [un] educated analysis with what Boris did which I hope will be confirmed or denied by someone who can help me understand.
I am SUSPECTING that there is some evidence that by making an affidavit of ownership, one is HOPING that the State of XX or the US will DARE to open their mouths attempting to rebut this false statement. If the state were to open its mouth, chaos in the streets. So I am guessing that this is how one can make such a claim to property he does not actually own. Is this correct thinking?
I guess too, I am a little confused as to the various USC, case law, etc references in the various pages. I see the disclaimer for "illustrative purposes". I got away from using those references in attempt "not to steal" private property lol
I like how Boris defines Corporation Sole - Oath. I get what he was doing - I ATTEMPTED to clearly separate me with the person [but still with USE rights for the public good], here Boris does that but still uses the name. I see this as tricky, but this is why I am asking questions now to clear up.
I do not understand the purpose of being a minister in this process? Is it not enough to use the appropriate scriptures, rebut presumptions, and correct mistakes?
Obviously, there is more to just recording these documents, there is still the irrevocable trust part - which I still need some clarity on as well.
Anyway, Boris do not be mad with me obtaining this info. I have just been in the twilight zone on what more I can do. Everything you, Boris have taught and info provided is appreciated more than you realize - I sense we all in the same "zone" just a little different way to see it but just not over the hill.