Reply – Re: Now I am confused --- Maybe
Your Name
Subject
Message
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: Now I am confused --- Maybe
— by Tony Tony
OK, I fully get what you all are saying and MAYBE I am a bit anal in my understanding.  So here it goes, again, I do not want to argue - I simply want to get a real understanding if this concept.

The birth record, instrument, title is to a "piece of property" owned by the State of XX [generally speaking].  It is dead paper.  The "smart ones" devised a scheme to trick the people, but the people have freewill - as ignorance of the LAW [whether Universal or Man's] is no excuse.  

The people are "franchisees" of this piece of property owned by the state for the purpose of doing commerce.  In a sense, ignorantly, the people have accepted liability for property that vests in the State, which benefits the State and its operations,  Under the rule of usufruct, the State receives benefit subject to liability.  However, how does one find the appropriate State official to discharge "ALL state obligations"?

With this said, as part of a "legally permissible deception", the State took the given name, John and the family name, Doe and created a "title".  As far as I can tell by my studies, truly all the State took from us is "our energy, a future potential", leaving us naked owner of that energy or natural rights to "fictionally fund" its operations.  I am not quite seeing how if one does an affidavit of Life and presents it to the PTB, how the title to a name vests back to us as beneficiary?  I CAN SEE TELLING THEM - HEY, what makes you think I am an UNPAID public employee acting as trustee for State property?  I made a mistake, I unknowingly accepted liability which I had no business accepting but NOW, public official, you are paid to do the business of the State, take care of your property under the rule of usufruct!  

HERE IS THE FINE POINT - and I could be wrong, this is why I am asking -- We are separate from the person yet by necessity, we must USE a person in order to have the necessities of life on this planet.  OK, THUS there is no "people's debts" but rather a "person's debts".  Persons = State and its internal property.  Man = spoliated/naked owner of HIS Natural Rights or HIS ESTATE freely given to each of the Creator's children NOT the property or "individual public estate" [tax class #5] of the State's Name.  

The Cestui que Vi says - and I get what you all are saying -  "If the supposed dead man prove to be alive, then title is revested.  Action for mean profits with interest."  But what I am not bridging or understanding is how can State property - as a State created factitious entity for the purpose of INTERNAL State business ever ben deemed "an individual [man's] property"?  

I get what you are saying and again, I am not looking to argue, but do you see my point?  If anything, the rule of usufruct is the answer, it keeps the fiction separate from the man except as USER.  But to continue onto a claim of property, then to do a irrevocable trust, with beneficial interest, making the Executive branch, SOT, Catholic church as trustees - how does on enforce this any better than by surrendering the usufruct to the one "making the claim"?  

I hope I said this well?