PDA

View Full Version : Boris



David Merrill
04-24-14, 03:17 PM
I recall watching this fellow and enjoyed his style. But my exposure is quite minimal. What I recall is that I disagree with him on some points but admire his confidence and his technique.

I have attached a UCC-1 Claim.

doug555
04-24-14, 11:37 PM
I recall watching this fellow and enjoyed his style. But my exposure is quite minimal. What I recall is that I disagree with him on some points but admire his confidence and his technique.

I have attached a UCC-1 Claim.

Here is his entire UCC-1 (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson+baby&fn=&rn=245946&ii=Y&ft=&epn=). Click Document Number link at bottom of page. Page 2 has significant collateral description

Anthony Joseph
04-25-14, 12:16 AM
Here is his entire UCC-1 (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson+baby&fn=&rn=245946&ii=Y&ft=&epn=). Click Document Number link at bottom of page. Page 2 has significant collateral description

When I click, I get a .tiff file to download; how are you able to see "Page 2"?

doug555
04-25-14, 12:34 AM
When I click, I get a .tiff file to download; how are you able to see "Page 2"?

The .TIFF file invokes Windows 7 Photo Viewer on my PC. On bottom is a page# view button.

But I also uploaded it HERE (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8BdR0w2oZY_UDRKZFhiY1lxejQ&usp=sharing).


Read this Outline (http://iamsomedude.com/outline.html) too.

Anthony Joseph
04-25-14, 12:48 AM
The .TIFF file invokes Windows 7 Photo Viewer on my PC. On bottom is a page# view button.

But I also uploaded it HERE (https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8BdR0w2oZY_UDRKZFhiY1lxejQ&usp=sharing).


Read this Outline (http://iamsomedude.com/outline.html) too.

For the life of me, I can't find "page# view button"; but thanks for the alternative link.

Anthony Joseph
04-25-14, 02:44 AM
Doug,

Boris mentioned he signed the back of the UCC-3 Assignment "Pay to the Order of the United States". Can you see if you can pull that from the UCC filings as well?

doug555
04-25-14, 09:05 PM
Doug,

Boris mentioned he signed the back of the UCC-3 Assignment "Pay to the Order of the United States". Can you see if you can pull that from the UCC filings as well?

Anthony,

I cannot find his UCC-3 online... but I do remember him saying what you cite above.

Here is a previous UCC-1 (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=5&sot=Filed/Lapsed%20Actual%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=Boris+Petkoff+Inferno%2c+Corp&fn=&rn=496589&ii=Y&ft=&epn=) filed in July 2012.

Here is a list of results (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResults.aspx?sst=&sov=5&sot=Filed/Lapsed%20Actual%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=Boris%20Petkoff%20Inferno,%20Corp&fn=&rn=1&ii=Y&ft=&epn=) in Florida UCC dept for "Boris Roger Erickson".

Perhaps the "indorsement" should be "For Deposit Only to the account of the United States" ??? and let the United States indorse it?

allodial
05-12-14, 11:17 AM
There are two separate filings: # 201308755849 and 201400717971. Again he might know something but I don't get the impression he wholly knows what he is doing. One might do better looking into Winston Shrout's teachings since they are very much tried.

David Merrill
05-12-14, 01:10 PM
Anthony,

I cannot find his UCC-3 online... but I do remember him saying what you cite above.

Here is a previous UCC-1 (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=5&sot=Filed/Lapsed%20Actual%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=Boris+Petkoff+Inferno%2c+Corp&fn=&rn=496589&ii=Y&ft=&epn=) filed in July 2012.

Here is a list of results (http://www.floridaucc.com/UCCWEB/SearchResults.aspx?sst=&sov=5&sot=Filed/Lapsed%20Actual%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=Boris%20Petkoff%20Inferno,%20Corp&fn=&rn=1&ii=Y&ft=&epn=) in Florida UCC dept for "Boris Roger Erickson".

Perhaps the "indorsement" should be "For Deposit Only to the account of the United States" ??? and let the United States indorse it?

Phone the Secretary of State's office and inquire about the backside. They might not publish the backside of Forms so that is a pretty lame tactic.

Moxie
05-12-14, 01:37 PM
I am wondering: why not do an Accepted For Value and call it a day. No UCC filing necessary.

What is the benefit of the Bill Indorsement over A4V?

allodial
05-12-14, 05:50 PM
I am wondering: why not do an Accepted For Value and call it a day. No UCC filing necessary.

What is the benefit of the Bill Indorsement over A4V?

Exactly. It looks like UCC redemption in error and a defective kind of A4V.

Anthony Joseph
05-12-14, 07:50 PM
Phone the Secretary of State's office and inquire about the backside. They might not publish the backside of Forms so that is a pretty lame tactic.

Wrong again.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8BdR0w2oZY_SDU0c2pJUmw3SHM/edit?pli=1

Anthony Joseph
05-12-14, 07:52 PM
There are two separate filings: # 201308755849 and 201400717971. Again he might know something but I don't get the impression he wholly knows what he is doing. One might do better looking into Winston Shrout's teachings since they are very much tried.

# 201308755849 has nothing to do with the theory and process being discussed here. In fact, I cannot even find that file number or bring it up to view.

David Merrill
05-12-14, 09:07 PM
Wrong again.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B8BdR0w2oZY_SDU0c2pJUmw3SHM/edit?pli=1

Again?

I am not going to defend! I had a phone conversation with somebody who has been through this a few years ago and we agreed this is a pretty consistent way to end up on prison.

So just watch it everybody. Tapping into the stock of the United States is a serious crime. Assuming the birth certificate is in any way a stock certificate is reckless.

Anthony Joseph;

You are not portraying this tactic in light of the many pioneers doing it that have been sent to prison.

Anthony Joseph
05-12-14, 09:14 PM
Again?

I am not going to defend! I had a phone conversation with somebody who has been through this a few years ago and we agreed this is a pretty consistent way to end up on prison.

So just watch it everybody. Tapping into the stock of the United States is a serious crime. Assuming the birth certificate is in any way a stock certificate is reckless.

Anthony Joseph;

You are not portraying this tactic in light of the many pioneers doing it that have been sent to prison.

Your ignorance precedes you.

If you deem it beneath you to actually find out what this theory is all about, that is fine; but your continued misinterpretation of the theory is getting childlike.

THERE IS NO TAPPING INTO THE STOCK OF THE UNITED STATES.

Your phone conversation with whoever has ZERO to do with this subject matter but you are too narcissistic to even realize it.

David Merrill
05-13-14, 12:08 AM
No. I am experienced enough to spot this style of financial manipulation at a glance. It is obviously based in a mythology that the birth certificate has value.

ag maniac
05-13-14, 01:12 AM
# 201308755849 has nothing to do with the theory and process being discussed here. In fact, I cannot even find that file number or bring it up to view.


That's because the file # ends in 5749 --> 2 pages http://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson&fn=&rn=246232&ii=Y&ft=&epn= (http://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson&fn=&rn=246698&ii=Y&ft=&epn=)


Filed 13 months ago.....looks to be the beginnings of the process filed Feb 2014....who knows....time & research made him do it differently in 2014

Pg 1
- call himself "Protected Purchaser"....address where he presumably rests his head at night
- lists Upper/Lower Boris as debtor w/ an address of the State Registrar's office in Tallahassee, an unknown SSN/EIN, and an organization ID # as birth cert #
- lists ALL CAPS BORIS as creditor with an address where he presumably rests his head at night
- lists collateral as "any or all interests now due or to become due"
- Alternative designation "non UCC filing" checked
- box checked "File in the real estate records"

Pg 2
- This finance statement covers [checked] "fixture filing"
- Description of real estate "Reference State file number 109-1971-095559, book entry number 109-71-095559"
- Name and address of record owner of above described real estate "State Registrar, State of Florida, [Tallahassee address]
- Check only if applicable "Debtor is [checked] "Decedents Estate"

jukegs
05-30-14, 02:17 AM
Doug,

Boris mentioned he signed the back of the UCC-3 Assignment "Pay to the Order of the United States". Can you see if you can pull that from the UCC filings as well?

The back is indorsed "pay to the order of the United States
without recourse"

David Merrill
05-31-14, 10:42 AM
Welcome jukegs;


I have seen nothing to secure any confidence in the process by Boris. But then he has failed to attract my attention too...

george
02-12-15, 08:17 PM
That's because the file # ends in 5749 --> 2 pages http://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson&fn=&rn=246232&ii=Y&ft=&epn= (http://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResultsDetail.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson&fn=&rn=246698&ii=Y&ft=&epn=)


Filed 13 months ago.....looks to be the beginnings of the process filed Feb 2014....who knows....time & research made him do it differently in 2014

Pg 1
- call himself "Protected Purchaser"....address where he presumably rests his head at night
- lists Upper/Lower Boris as debtor w/ an address of the State Registrar's office in Tallahassee, an unknown SSN/EIN, and an organization ID # as birth cert #
- lists ALL CAPS BORIS as creditor with an address where he presumably rests his head at night
- lists collateral as "any or all interests now due or to become due"
- Alternative designation "non UCC filing" checked
- box checked "File in the real estate records"

Pg 2
- This finance statement covers [checked] "fixture filing"
- Description of real estate "Reference State file number 109-1971-095559, book entry number 109-71-095559"
- Name and address of record owner of above described real estate "State Registrar, State of Florida, [Tallahassee address]
- Check only if applicable "Debtor is [checked] "Decedents Estate"


any updates? the link brings up an empty page for me and the next button on the search page after clicking the agreement check box does nothing.

thanks

ag maniac
02-13-15, 12:57 AM
any updates? the link brings up an empty page for me and the next button on the search page after clicking the agreement check box does nothing.

thanks

....still there george......look for ucc filing with last 4 of "5749"

http://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/SearchResults.aspx?sst=&sov=0&sot=Filed%20Compact%20Debtor%20Name%20List&st=erickson&fn=200202294011&rn=246698&ii=Y&ft=&epn=

xparte
02-13-15, 02:18 AM
A Birth Right vs Its Certification at Birth ones now becomes Bank Note PAPER obviously a Title and who owns the paper and how its use are regulated under title.How the paper trumps Birth Right or was it created to enhance a Title if so Many flourish and so many fail under its certification of Birth it has to be a commercial gain or a loss A Banking instrument drawn on Title. Books Balance Men hang on what balance a commercial title or a spiritual void monetized birth right is not a wealthy soul .what is left for barter is the lawful money or legal tender just two sets of Books that adjusts to its Entitled on any banking . again two sets of Law and books.against all ridicule for silence never comes in pairs.

NONOFED
02-26-15, 11:55 PM
Does this UCC or AV4 thing work? People indicate that through some laws people are supposed to pay off debts this way.

ag maniac
02-27-15, 02:05 PM
Found this someone posted in the comments section on the "Peaceful Inhabitants facebook page

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=70198698928493624

Chex
02-27-15, 02:54 PM
DONE and ORDERED.

[1] The Secretary delegated the authority to issue third-party summonses to the IRS, which, in turn, re-delegated that authority to its agents. Anderson v. United States (http://www.iahushua.com/WOI/US.html), 236 F. App'x 491, 496 (11th Cir. 2007); La Mura v. United States, 765 F.2d 974, 978-79 (11th Cir. 1985); 26 U.S.C. §§ 7602, 7609, 7801; 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701-9.

After reading this (there is no freeman on the land (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2257))

The Government can summon any person having possession, custody, or care of records or other documents relating to the tax liability of the taxpayer being investigated.

The district courts of the United States have the authority to enforce summonses issued by the IRS, See 26 U.S.C. §§ 7402(b), 7604.

The government may apply to a district court judge for an attachment against the taxpayer as for a contempt. 26 U.S.C. § 7604.

What happened and why didn't he use 12 USC 95a(2) (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/12/95a) ???????

If, after hearing the application, the judge finds that the government presented satisfactory proof, the judge has the duty to issue an attachment for the arrest of such person, and upon his being brought before the judge to proceed to a hearing of the case.

The judge shall have the power to enter an order he or she deems proper, not inconsistent with the law for the punishment of contempt, to enforce obedience to the requirements of the summons as well as to punish the taxpayer for his default or disobedience.

Notwithstanding the court's (really the Judge, Virginia M. Hernandez Covington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgini...ndez_Covington) ) inherent power, 18 U.S.C. § 401 provides that a court of the United States has the power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion.

The Government indicates: "Because of [Erickson's] evasiveness (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1392-We-re-here-to-help-you&p=16043#post16043), indifference and pococurante attitude to the Government and this Court's Order, the undersigned attorney recommends incarceration to compel [Erickson's] compliance with the summons." (Id. at 3).

This burden of production is not satisfied by a "mere assertion of inability." Id. (quoting United States v. Hayes, 722 F.2d 723, 725 (11th Cir.1984)). Rather, in this Circuit, a party subject to a court's order demonstrates inability to comply only by showing that he has made "in good faith all reasonable efforts to comply."

Argument by assertion (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion)is the logical fallacy (http://www.logicalfallacies.info/)where someone tries to argue a point by merely asserting that it is true, regardless of contradiction.

Popular guy Shatraw . Betty J. Patriot met with the IRS Revenue Officer assigned to her case, John Shatraw, on August 23, 2006, to determine the options available to her in order to satisfy the amount the IRS said she owed. She asked him about submitting an offer in compromise or a payment plan, and she was told that neither would be accepted by him or the IRS. http://www.patriotnetwork.info/Object_2_Pet_4_Judic_Approv_oflevy.htm

Why didn’t he just go forward to what he was doing?

Hummm.
Judge working the system for Founded in 1989, Psychiatrist Donald R Taylor Jr M.D. Pa is a small physician in Tampa, Florida. (https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEV1nShPBU3HcA8RlXNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2 NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA2llOARncHJpZAMEbl9yc2x0AzAEbl9zdW dnAzAEb3JpZ2luA3NlYXJjaC55YWhvby5jb20EcG9zAzAEcHFz dHIDBHBxc3RybAMEcXN0cmwDMzcEcXVlcnkDRG9uYWxkIFIgVG F5bG9yIEpyIE0uRCBUYW1wYSwgRmxvcmlkYQR0X3N0bXADMTQy NTA0ODc4OA--?p=Donald+R+Taylor+Jr+M.D+Tampa%2C+Florida&fr2=sb-top-search&fr=ie8) It has 3 full time employees and generates an estimated $170,000 in annual revenue.
3450 E Fletcher Ave # 250
Tampa, Florida 33613-4655
United States

IMHO, Kickbacks anyone?

Another victim (http://www.hourofthetime.com/wordpresstest/)

David Merrill
02-27-15, 03:38 PM
Robert SHULTZ exposed that albeit inadvertently. There never has been any authority to these summonses! Well, except what banks and employers breathe into them. I should point out that one of the more common Miscellaneous Case files found on PACER is the IRS/DoJ petitioning for authorization of a summons...

If you challenge or ignore the unauthorized rendition the IRS agent knows how to rectify that for $46 of Taxpayer funds.

Chex
02-27-15, 05:02 PM
David do you agree? All these 26 USC codes are written by and for the federal reserve bank for an IRS agent to target the usage of the federal reserve notes.

Nice link.

Youtube.

Schulz to Judge Nap - "WHAT IF" A Massive Constitution Lobby.m4v https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBQuq8jkM48#!

5 Minute Speech that Got Judge Napolitano Fired from Fox News https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgGnBCDfCLM

allodial
02-27-15, 07:24 PM
Does this UCC or AV4 thing work? People indicate that through some laws people are supposed to pay off debts this way.

Acceptance ~= promise to pay. According to the Supreme Court of Canada et. al. an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain in money is money.

Chex
02-27-15, 08:00 PM
Its all about the monetary policy, who prints it and what does it cost to use it and who is exempt from it.

EZrhythm
03-29-15, 07:34 AM
Does this UCC or AV4 thing work? People indicate that through some laws people are supposed to pay off debts this way.

No, no method or process "works", it's up to each one to do the work and see a lawful process through until satisfation is achieved. Personally, I have witnessed applications of the UCC and A4V followed through to satisfaction. Accounts have been discharged.

allodial
03-29-15, 12:24 PM
To accept a draft is to promise to pay it. From observation, a bond or something is needed to back the acceptance such as hmm a bond or some assets or something.

looking for truth
04-26-15, 10:24 AM
hi all, its been a long time between drinks.

I don't want to step on any toes regarding whether the birth certificate has any value, but my feel of it is that when 'they' took away substance backed currency 'they' then gave us birth certificates, so i expect that a connection exists. obviously that is not satisfactory in regards to the concrete evidence that this site requires, and that is the charm of this website.

from my perspective, in regards to Boris' approach (although David makes the good point that no doubt his approach has been put forward earlier by others), Boris makes the point that he would "accept for honor" not "accept for value". the distinction being that when you accept for value you are creating new currency in the private; but via the view of Boris, everything is already owned by the corporate government, so why would you create new currency to accept that offer? he accepts for honor in the case that the corporate government defaults on settling the account in 'their' public. (the likelihood of which is nil without giving their their game away)

on an aggregate level, I like Boris' approach. essentially he is saying to assign all of the property to the de jure government in the corporate government public, so if the corporate government, or its licensed private pirates, should then make a claim against the property, they are then facing treason charges from their licensing authority by the attorney general, who is still of the dejure government, so they back right off.

essentially the nuance I am picking up is that there is still a de jure government, or at least that there are specific positions are still held by them. the REST is the corporate government and 'somehow' the corporate government seems to have thread the eye of the needle and created their trust bubble legitimately under the de jure constitution, and then created their own de facto constitution within that bubble that contravenes whatever they like about the de jure constitution...
and as long as they don't then attack the de jure government then they themselves have very little to worry about.

via the current approach, the corporate government supposedly securitises our offers, making ridiculous gains, via this process (from new zealand) : http://itnabit.com/assets/downloadable/OFF%20BALANCE%20SHEET%20BANK%20INSTRUMENTS.pdf

those gains go toward increasing 'our' national debt. BUT, via the approach of Boris, we give back our offers and its interest to the de jure government, thereby reducing the national debt and stopping us from bequeathing 'our' debts to the next generation.

anyway, i know this site is a place of fact, not conjecture, so I am simply putting forth how it seems to me. apologies for polluting your site David.

looking for truth
04-26-15, 11:28 AM
hi ag maniac,

some points to ponder:
"COMMANDED Erickson to appear at a hearing before this Court on February 13, 2014", isn't commanded a term that would be used BY a trustee? (or is it a co-trustee)

"Dr. Taylor rendered his opinion as follows: "It is my opinion within a reasonable degree of medical certainty that THE RESPONDENT IS CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE AND CONSEQUENCES of the proceedings against him and is capable of assisting properly in his defense", is it not amazing how a doctor can surmise this without a question answered, thereby bringing into question the supposed claims of the previous State courts? (and of course that word UNDERSTANDING once again rears its ugly head)

"Specifically, the Government seeks Erickson's incarceration to COMPEL his compliance", isn't compel a term that would be used AGAINST a trustee (or a co-trustee)?

to me, it looks very much like the proposition that the corporate government is co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the estate (possibly the birth certificate estate?) and with the joinder of the living being to the person involved in that estate, allowing them to construe the "living being-person" as co-trustee and co-beneficiary, seems valid.

"They" are co-trustee when they are dealing out the punishment, of a discretionary trust whereby they do not have to treat each beneficiary similarly, and the person is also the co-trustee and deemed responsible for the upkeep/cost/fines/offers of the property, and when they do not pay, the person is THEN construed to be the co-beneficiary of the benefit/detriment, with the concordant benefit of securitisation going to themselves, who are then conveniently construed as the lucky c0-beneficiary...

the point of this in regard to this thread is, Boris is overtly (expressly perhaps?), in the defacto governments public, assigning the legal ownership (title) over to the de jure governement, making them the trustee. meaning that the private mercantile agents/pirates are now trying to steal from the master, which is not going to go down very well when the master is noticed... so they drop the matter like a hot potatoe.

anyway, once again its subjecture, not fact. i think i might grow tired of apologising David, alot of how i view this stuff is from sources from everywhere and is not supported in an A to B style format; please be frank with me if you want me to stop posting without supporting evidence.

looking for truth
04-26-15, 11:40 AM
that is very cute. and it shows how the system plays it out until the very end before providing remedy/relief.

being in australia makes it largely useless to me, however, it's heart warming to know such a provision exists.

looking for truth
04-26-15, 12:20 PM
hi EZrhythm,

i wonder if it has truly "worked" if it has only been discharged, and not set-off? in theory if it was set-off, then it will be as if it never existed.

from my humble current perspective, it would appear that we are all still operating in commerce, and signing with either an unrestricted signature, or a (commercially) restricted one, like "without prejudice", "all rights reserved", "agent" etc... ALL of which allow 'them' to construe us as in commerce, and as debtor. From that they can construe themselves to have our power of attorney. When we then try to revoke/rescind our signature, with our intent balanced against their construed power of attorney, they trump us with their claim of legal title over the implied trusts. (foreign situs trust = birth certificate, cestui que trusts = social security or tax or bank accounts or drivers license or passport etc....). That means they do not have to do what we ask them, as they believe as our power of attorney that it is not in our best interests.... a sick joke to be sure.

this is the work of Christian Walters, and it makes sense. we desperately need to be signing all corporate government and bank and court documents as "by (our signature) GRANTOR/SETTLOR". This undeniably expresses the document to be a trust, with us in the controlling position of settlor, for later clarification as to the express terms of the deed. It also blocks them from construing as as operating in commerce, or being a debtor, or them having our power of attorney.

with this approach we 'should' then be able to achieve set-off. there is more to it naturally, but that is the fundamental beginning of it.

anyway, again i provide no verifiable proof for my beliefs, but it feels right.

looking for truth
05-17-15, 06:38 AM
this is more from the Boris camp, but it is mainly from a guy named Eddie, and it is a step by step process of reclaiming the recognition of being a man.

i think this forum would like it, it references specific acts etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7AG9FqunN0

best of luck to all!




hi EZrhythm,

i wonder if it has truly "worked" if it has only been discharged, and not set-off? in theory if it was set-off, then it will be as if it never existed.

from my humble current perspective, it would appear that we are all still operating in commerce, and signing with either an unrestricted signature, or a (commercially) restricted one, like "without prejudice", "all rights reserved", "agent" etc... ALL of which allow 'them' to construe us as in commerce, and as debtor. From that they can construe themselves to have our power of attorney. When we then try to revoke/rescind our signature, with our intent balanced against their construed power of attorney, they trump us with their claim of legal title over the implied trusts. (foreign situs trust = birth certificate, cestui que trusts = social security or tax or bank accounts or drivers license or passport etc....). That means they do not have to do what we ask them, as they believe as our power of attorney that it is not in our best interests.... a sick joke to be sure.

this is the work of Christian Walters, and it makes sense. we desperately need to be signing all corporate government and bank and court documents as "by (our signature) GRANTOR/SETTLOR". This undeniably expresses the document to be a trust, with us in the controlling position of settlor, for later clarification as to the express terms of the deed. It also blocks them from construing as as operating in commerce, or being a debtor, or them having our power of attorney.

with this approach we 'should' then be able to achieve set-off. there is more to it naturally, but that is the fundamental beginning of it.

anyway, again i provide no verifiable proof for my beliefs, but it feels right.

walter
05-17-15, 08:14 PM
this is more from the Boris camp, but it is mainly from a guy named Eddie, and it is a step by step process of reclaiming the recognition of being a man.

i think this forum would like it, it references specific acts etc...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7AG9FqunN0

best of luck to all!

Interesting video.
But I see errors.
There is no way in hell that by claiming your natural status makes you a nation in your own.
That is only done by self determination.
The state still holds the original "Statement of Live Birth" and until you make your own compact and deposit the SOLB in it you will always have an obligation. If not as a public citizen to the federal government but as as a man to the territorial state.

Michael Joseph
05-17-15, 09:40 PM
Interesting video.
But I see errors.
There is no way in hell that by claiming your natural status makes you a nation in your own.
That is only done by self determination.
The state still holds the original "Statement of Live Birth" and until you make your own compact and deposit the SOLB in it you will always have an obligation. If not as a public citizen to the federal government but as as a man to the territorial state.

I got news for someone who wants to reclaim being a man. If you want me to acknowledge your manhood then you are already bowing your knee to me. For at once I will not recognize your standing BEFORE ME and what are you left with? The command to the Israelites was to go in and begin to possess the land. But they were afraid for they thought themselves to be mere grasshoppers in the "eyes of their [mental] giants".

Rather, I see your feeble petition as suppliant before my court. Since you ask you must trust in me. Therefore you are my subject.

A living man is a mighty God.

It is simple - Declare Thyself. Stake a Claim. Undertake to steward said Claim serving others. Sit in your court as Sovereign under Christ in I AM.

If this is your will and not the Will of I AM in Christ, then most likely you will fail. If this use is placed in you by God, then nothing can stop you. For I do not count it robbery to be equal with God.

Nevertheless, it is not about me in what i can get to set my weary mind at ease. It is about what I can give by and thru the hands of God.

walter
05-17-15, 11:18 PM
Declare Thyself. Stake a Claim.

and yet who does?
oh wait...they did

allodial
05-18-15, 03:22 AM
...from my humble current perspective, it would appear that we are all still operating in commerce, and signing with either an unrestricted signature, or a (commercially) restricted one, like "without prejudice", "all rights reserved", "agent" etc... ALL of which allow 'them' to construe us as in commerce, and as debtor. From that they can construe themselves to have our power of attorney. When we then try to revoke/rescind our signature, with our intent balanced against their construed power of attorney, they trump us with their claim of legal title over the implied trusts. (foreign situs trust = birth certificate, cestui que trusts = social security or tax or bank accounts or drivers license or passport etc....). That means they do not have to do what we ask them, as they believe as our power of attorney that it is not in our best interests.... a sick joke to be sure.

this is the work of Christian Walters, and it makes sense. we desperately need to be signing all corporate government and bank and court documents as "by (our signature) GRANTOR/SETTLOR". This undeniably expresses the document to be a trust, with us in the controlling position of settlor, for later clarification as to the express terms of the deed. It also blocks them from construing as as operating in commerce, or being a debtor, or them having our power of attorney.

with this approach we 'should' then be able to achieve set-off. there is more to it naturally, but that is the fundamental beginning of it.

anyway, again i provide no verifiable proof for my beliefs, but it feels right.

Manufacturing (i.e. making things) or provision of labor is not commercial. As in, artificers are not merchants. Merchants do not necessarily manufacture anything and only buy, sell or speculate in things made by others.

Michael Joseph
05-18-15, 07:28 PM
and yet who does?
oh wait...they did

That's right. It's called Unam Sanctum. And the benefits of that claim are doled out to different kingdoms. If you think about the earth as a Cartesian coordinate system, then you will see that surveys can be made upon the same earth but at different Z coordinates. That way the planes do not intersect in trespass. When it becomes necessary to interact with another dominion an agreement must be made.

Dominion is birthed out of Claim.

Chex
06-07-15, 01:33 PM
Keokuk & Hamilton Bridge Co. v. Wetzel, 228 Ill. 253, 81 N.E. 864 (1907) (which held that a Plea denying that the plaintiff is a corporation is a Plea in Bar, but a Plea denying that the defendant is a corporation is a Plea in Abatement.); Koffler/Reppy, Common Law Pleading, 423 n. 67 (West, 1969).

The standing of State Citizens to invoke any Title 42 [Municipal] remedies, in part because these remedies originate in the 1866 Civil Rights Act — a federal municipal statute.

State Citizens are not subject to federal municipal law.

At all times, “this state” acting in the name of the State of ______ having legislative jurisdiction gives cause for (Your name normal ) to reserve His/Hers right to move to a common law cause of action for the appropriation of His birth name to be bastardized for commercial purposes and may be pleaded by alleging

(1) “this state’s” misuse of (Your name normal) identity;?

(2) the manipulation of (Your name normal) proper name to “this state’s” exclusive advantage, both commercially and otherwise;?

(3) lack of consent to craft a likeness of my birth name for commercial and other purposes and to the extreme prejudice of (Your name normal) to wit:(YOUR NAME ALL CAPS);? and

(4) the resulting and ongoing injury, both commercial and otherwise.

Also, consideration is likewise reserved to move for a RICO investigation regarding the issue of bastardizing the birth name on STATE OF _________ commercial instruments as a for profit enterprise and thereby, a taxable event.

Thanks again TJ

Source (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/darron-t-smith-phd/the-silent-campaign-by-th_b_7521228.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592)

walter
06-07-15, 05:53 PM
That's right. It's called Unam Sanctum. And the benefits of that claim are doled out to different kingdoms. If you think about the earth as a Cartesian coordinate system, then you will see that surveys can be made upon the same earth but at different Z coordinates. That way the planes do not intersect in trespass. When it becomes necessary to interact with another dominion an agreement must be made.

Dominion is birthed out of Claim.


Unam Sanctum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unam_sanctam

The bull also declared that the Church must be united, the Pope was the sole and absolute head of the Church:
“ Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster.[6] ”



MONSTER

An animal which has a conformation contrary to the order of nature.A monster, although born of a woman in lawful wedlock, cannot inherit. Those who have however the essential parts of the human form and have merely some defect of coformation, are capable of inheriting, if otherwise qualified.No living human birth, however much it may differ from human shape, can be lawfully destroyed.


Could Unam Sanctum be the two headed monster (human being) that was created by-law?
The PERSON. Dual personality. Body of Christ acting as a political body.

allodial
06-08-15, 04:31 AM
One thing is that the "earth" and the Earth aren't the same. The earth (synonymous with 'the land' --land can be synonymous with 'estate') is a generic term for a land or expanse of land or territory. The "earth" is not by default a reference to a planet--clearly a planet is also inclusive of seas, river and sky rather than soil or dry land alone. The Earth is a name for a planet a/k/a or f/k/a "Terra". This is important as there are those who deceptively expand the term "earth" to mean far more than it does--i.e. it is taken out of context for deceptive purposes by some especially as pertains to the Holy Bible. If your uncle gave you "the entire earth" in his will with the term "earth" referring to his entire expanse of land, wouldn't it be quite a deception to get others to believe that he meant the entire planet? Imagine if you and your brothers or sisters could convince others to fall for it.


Unam Sanctum
[url]The bull also declared that the Church must be united, the Pope was the sole and absolute head of the Church:
“ Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster.[6] ”

Regarding the term "the Church", what is being referred to might be the "Church of Rome" rather than an all-encompassing term referring to Christ's lawful assembly wherever they are. The word 'bull' is much the same as the word "bill" (used by legislative assemblies) or billet (French term but also used for military orders) (see also "will"). To knowledge, the Holy See/Vatican and/or Roman Catholic system has two Popes--one is referred to as the "Black Pope", the other is referred to as the "White Pope". Furthermore, 1929, it is said that two entities rose out of the Lateran Treaty (which some suggest to be defective for want of consideration), the Holy See and the Vatican.

To knowledge Rome neither created the faith or doctrines of the Hebrews nor the that of Melchizedek. Rome didn't arrive on the scene until around 500 to 600 BC.

The Bible says that Christ is the head of his church. On Pentecost day, instead of power being given to one single man, power was given to those believers present on Pentecost day (i.e. they were endued with power from on high). Anointing and were known of and practiced before Rome ever existed.

Furthermore the term "Christian" is known to be used to refer to two distinct groups: (1) the followers of Jesus Christ were called "Christians" at Antioch (see book of Acts)--the term Christ to knowledge is relate to the term 'anointing' (metallic crowns might be an attempt to simulate the brilliant and glorious radiance of a strong God-given anointing)---to knowledge they referred to themselves as "chosen of God" or "the people of the way" or "saints" (i.e. holy ones/hagios in Greek); (2) Simonians (i.e. the followers of Simon Magus (from Samaria)) called themselves Christians. Those who hate #1 like to meritlessly and deceptively blend them in with #2 while knowing the truth of the distinction.

There are authors such as Warder Cresson who make an attempt to link Jesus with the Simonians-called-Christians and who attempt to make the link between England and Rome when in fact non-Roman monarchies and governments existed before Rome got to the British Isles archipelago and the Picts weren't Romans and were converted. Also the Romans eventually lost hold of Britain and never totally gained a foothold on Ireland. Thusly the believers on the organic doctrines could not possibly owe their doctrines to Rome. The Britons and Anglo and Saxon people were on those islands before Rome found those Isles and yet still Rome didn't take it all at first, then lost much of for a while.

1 - St. Patrick was neither a Roman Catholic nor a Roman Catholic missionary;
2 - the Roman Empire persecuted the followers of Christ so who can claim Rome or the Roman Empire and true believers had anything to do with one another
3 - there is much evidence that Joseph of Arimathea and Jesus were at Cornwall or other areas long before Augistine and others arrived
4 - The Picts were converted by non-Roman-Catholics who had ties to the original believers back at Jerusalem who came to the area called that is now called England long before before 70AD;
5 - Constantine and the Roman Empire didn't even begin to "embrace" the Christ Jesus until hundreds of years after the resurrection of Jesus Christ--but the some suggest that to have been a ruse to ensare the saints;
6 - There is much evidence of name Iesua/Jesus/Joshua having significant etymological links and meanings even in the OT --even that the name means 'salvation' or 'savior' or the like in Hebrew (further hints: Joshua the high priest in the Book of Zechariah; Joshua that took the promised land from the Canaanites in the Book of Joshua)
7 - Ptolemy II was (around 285BC) involved with translating the scriptures (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint) long long before Constantine or Augustine arrived--thusly we have very good and reliable manuscripts for the OT books and we have good linguistic proofs for Hebrew/Chaldean to Greek translations;
8 - the Samarians or Samaritans notoriously called themselves "Jews" though they were not (the term "Jew" could be a reference a Judean or one who was of the tribe of Judah--the Edomites or Assyrians that went to Judea when Israel or Judah were in captivity [Shalmaneser V and Sargon II around 720BC] also called themselves Judeans or Jews);
9 - the terms "Jew" and "Christian" have been highly subject to borrowings, manipulations and counterfeiting in the past two thousand+ years;
10 - 1260 years passed from Justinian's decree 538 to the Pope being taken captive by Napoleon's/France's General Berthier in 1798--from 1798 to 1929 the Papacy and the Vatican were regarded to no longer exist or to have lost its political status (until 1929).

With all the counterfeiting, deception by syntax and obscurement you really have to dig in to get at the truth.

Related:

Validity of Lateran Treaty Brought Into Question Then and Now (http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showthread.php?1152-Validity-of-Lateran-Treaty-Brought-Into-Question-Then-and-Now)
Simon Peter versus Simon the Sorceror (http://www.reformation.org/simon_peter_versus_simon_magus.html)


P.S. The link-up between Rome and the Babylon and the Chaldean mystery schools as some call it didn't occur until Attalus III (in Pergamum) died heirless and bequeathed his kingdom to the Romans. Julius Caesar may have been the first Roman Emperor who carried the combined Roman and Babylonian monarchies/systems.

Bible-based saints, people of the way or chosen/elect of God who are called "Christians" are not of the same cloth as the Simonians who call themselves Christians.

looking for truth
07-13-15, 10:22 PM
Interesting video.
But I see errors.
There is no way in hell that by claiming your natural status makes you a nation in your own.
That is only done by self determination.
The state still holds the original "Statement of Live Birth" and until you make your own compact and deposit the SOLB in it you will always have an obligation. If not as a public citizen to the federal government but as as a man to the territorial state.


Part of the approach that they discussed in passing is the work of jonah bey and the authentication of the birth certificate/certificate of live birth. I am loathe to put a link to another site which discusses these things, especially given the factual nature of this website and the speculative nature of the other website, so here is a link to a google search relating to it : https://www.google.com.au/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=6DikVfG4Asfu8we37JTgAw&gws_rd=ssl#q=jonah+bey+and+the+authentication+of+t he+birth+certificate

the only reason i mention it is because of one of the sections that it relies on is : 28 U.S. Code § 1733 - Government records and papers; copies
(b) Properly authenticated copies or transcripts of any books, records, papers or documents of any department or agency of the United States shall be admitted in evidence equally with the originals thereof.

so the concept is, when we authenticate the certificate of live birth, we are now holder in due course of the instrument, placing us back to the point before our parents signed us up, or essentially we are recognised by their system as being a man, with diversity from our person.

walter
07-14-15, 01:16 AM
so the concept is, when we authenticate the certificate of live birth, we are now holder in due course of the instrument, placing us back to the point before our parents signed us up, or essentially we are recognised by their system as being a man, with diversity from our person.

Authentication is certifying a government document as valid by verifying the signatories oath of office.
What can be done with it is something else.
Over riding the original is highly unlikely.
A possible split might be at the best.

Moxie
04-21-16, 11:59 PM
I've listened to some of Boris' audios.

First thing I noticed is, he compares the remedy to certain passages in the bible, then habitually breaks the 3rd commandment during the call.

Then when someone calls in with a question, and they don't comprehend something to his liking, he starts yelling at them while breaking the 3rd commandment and using other nasty language toward them.

The vibe seems to be "let me show off how much I know." instead of "let me share with you what I know."

Thank you, Doug, for creating your usufruct blog. Nicely done, with God at the center.

xparte
04-22-16, 03:34 AM
Batman and Boris the shipping news back when one WISHed a buck was STILL silver and a joint was a bad place to be song source THE ASTRAL HAG now memorialized in song. "let me show off how much I know." thats how knowledge seems to explain most men boris was no bigger than a Fla.welfare cheque now hes no wiser than a lottery cheque the winners and the gamers never interested me.now batman was interesting but My favorite site was the QUATLOOS crew and the air conditioning they payed him the lawful silver foundation and forget the wish HIS bucks is lawful MERRILL isnt the HAG but he takes those records of the shelf onced formed this suitera has many chart topin hits minus the nashvilles superpickers or BORISH shoes to fill. 1990 /12mb mega bytes of ram was a pacers dream ELVICK the Montana cafe teddy roosevelt hemingway whoever QUATLOOS is quantifying a measured fear using quantifiers [like all, some or none] or handicapping the complement ok a Great kisser for a hairlip. Humility 101 never rise above the occasion the big air balloon how bigs the basket folks on the ground cant see who's in the basket its whats on the balloon. FBI warning fair use rider. A none basket endorsement . Moxie u and Doug both post clean 101 is my opinion .

doug555
04-29-16, 09:41 PM
Thanks Moxie and xparte! You may be interested in my latest research then, at: http://www.wearethebanks.org/

3962

Michael Joseph
04-29-16, 10:29 PM
Our trust is being sold. Trust expressed and pledged is valuable for it represents labor. And even more it represents a promise to pay. Get it?

allodial
04-30-16, 02:38 AM
Our trust is being sold. Trust expressed and pledged is valuable for it represents labor. And even more it represents a promise to pay. Get it?

Consider the U.S. Marshalls making arrests over student loans. But then the borrower might ask "Didn't you guys guarantee the loan? Why are you coming after me?" What do you suspect they guaranteed it with?

Michael Joseph
04-30-16, 03:31 AM
Consider the U.S. Marshalls making arrests over student loans. But then the borrower might ask "Didn't you guys guaranty the loan? Why are you coming after me?" What do you suspect they guaranteed it with?

Amen brother ben! Would they were wise to consider their latter end. War.




http://youtu.be/8s4sKAMgYsU