In Reply To
If usufruct means...the right to enjoy the use and advantages of another's property short of the destruction or waste of its substance; and then one surrenders usufruct doesn't that conclude any/all use of whatever the property or thing being used?
If one surrenders, in this example, the BC, doesn't that give up its use and therefore the implied indemnification of the bc, if it is the receipt expressed in the Lieber Code?
I've been reading damn near everything I can regarding usufruct and re visiting all the links on the iamsomedude site. Usufruct can and does appear that when the mother or informer provided information, which information the mother probably presumed was hers, doesn't it make that information the property of the mothers that another is going to use and ACCORDINGLY must keep it in good condition? Or, did the mother SURRENDER thus giving up interest thereof?
Who is the usufruct of what? Seems "government" is the usufruct of man's stuff however appears man is "paying" for everything because man is usufruct of a legal entity created he/she is totally unaware of.
Perhaps over thinking this stuff however in order to grasp what is actually going on usufruct is an element needed to be comprehended which I'm confused. Seeking the kingdom of God hasn't shed light other then "God," said he, "has created heaven for himself and his saints, and has given the earth to mankind, intending it for the advantage of the poor as well as of the rich. The roads are for their use, and God has not subjected them to any taxes."
By virtue of the mothers acts and our existence onto the earth we have some interest in whatever the occupying forces are doing, thus the creation of the indemnification instrument (BC) for our safe passage. By virtue of surrendering the BC, does not that "kill" off or cause the estate created to no longer exist? Why would we do that? Is this where the assignment of reversionary interest comes into play. We surrender the BC (kill off the estate) and accordingly assign our interest (see reversionary interest below) thus creating another entity? Where does the indemnification come into play and doesn't the occupying forces still have some oversight in this newly created entity?
Reversionary interest is the interest that a person has in a property when a preceding estate ceases to exist. It means any interest the enjoyment of which is postponed. A reversionary interest can be either a vested interest or contingent interest
Not exactly sure why the enjoyment of interest is postponed?
Appears to me, the surrender and assignment of interest, kills off the NAME, creates a new deal (NOVATION) and falls under the protection of the occupying forces, right to contract and the will of God of all done in Gods glory and good of mankind.
This is open to anyone's comment or words of enlightenment