I found this on the Internet, nothing about all upper case letters:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oa...ffice2009.aspx
Printable View
I found this on the Internet, nothing about all upper case letters:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/oa...ffice2009.aspx
TRUST exists under LAW. Law is copyrighted intellectual property of those who pledged the State by Declaration and Claim. Thusly since trust contemplates property and estates trust must be administrated by law. And thusly trust is subject to law. And thusly trust contemplates a State. Wherein is your Trust Lodged?Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
Trusts are administered in equity. If they were administered in law, the beneficiary would be shit out of luck.
What is the point of the highlighted clause, MJ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkin
This explains a lot, it does!
However it does not explain the obfuscation, changing the So help me God to SO HELP ME GOD. Or does it? Is that the point you make?
P.S. Maybe you apologize for the ability to understand the point being beyond anybody without a law degree?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Joseph
I believe that MJ's point is supported at Article I, Clause 10 of the Constitution about no state can legislate away the obligations of contract.
hi David,
I found this: https://johnhenryhill.wordpress.com/...hn-henry-hill/
havnt read all of it yet but it is on the topic of oaths.
pumpkin you are right. At law the trustee is not compelled to transfer property [rights, interests, titles - hereinafter "Interests"]. Once said Interests are in the possession of the Trustee, then said Interests may be seized by force - now enters the Conscience of the King in Chancellery. But don't be fooled pumpkin, Trusts exist UNDER law. But you are correct they are "these days" administrated in Equity.Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkin
Let me be clear, if I come to your court and tell you that you lack jurisdiction to hear my case, who is the bigger fool , me or you? Can a judge hear his own cause? What if you lack an oath as prescribed and ascribed in the Minutes [Congressional Record]? Is it still not your court? It is. But now you sit de-facto and according to CONSENT. He who would challenge your office of judge says "I don't trust you." Produce now the evidence of your office. But then again, consider the argument. One standing before a judge in his court demanding he prove he is a judge. See it is almost impossible for remedy. BECAUSE remedy must be sought on appeal.
The men who created the Unincorporated Association called the United States did it for themselves and their heirs. And that is the cold hard facts. It seems many minds were captured in the many wars. Many were fooled into thinking they somehow Pledged in support of the State. Unfortunately that is false. For the original Settlors, Creators pledged to EACH OTHER and to no other!
I wonder where they would find such a model?
ENOCH CHAPTER VI.
1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters.
2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.'
3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.'
4. And they all answered him and said: 'Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.'
5. Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.
6. And they were in all two hundred; who descended ?in the days? of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it.
7. And these are the names of their leaders: Sêmîazâz, their leader, Arâkîba, Râmêêl, Kôkabîêl, Tâmîêl, Râmîêl, Dânêl, Êzêqêêl, Barâqîjâl, Asâêl, Armârôs, Batârêl, Anânêl, Zaqîêl, Samsâpêêl, Satarêl, Tûrêl, Jômjâêl, Sariêl. 8. These are their chiefs of tens.
Comment: Many already have allowed themselves to be swayed from the path. Look and stay on the bolded words. They were of ONE WILL an they were not going to give up what they started. One Thought, One Desire, One Will - mutually bound to each other for their own mutual benefit! They swore an Oath to themselves - and they "payed their vows". They "married" each other in CONTRACT.
Seems some others are eating some different Manna. Each according to his own appetite. Those who are not a party to the contract cannot argue about political rights in the Contract - because they have none. He who is not a party at best has civil rights granted - and said grant can be revoked at any time.
Nevertheless there is an agreement in place and those who take "public office" leave private capacity and are subject to the bylaws which govern said office. But remember he who is debtor is slave to the lender. And the lender will dictate to the debtor what the debtor will do. Enter the Judge as debt collector - stage left.
In order to keep matters straight I like to create circles [sets] and I see law as sets within sets - for at Trust the Trustee can be a Trust Organization and the Beneficiary can be a Trust Organization and the Board of Directors can be a Trust Organization.
Trust accounts can be created and the people can be "taught" to make their use. Thus the people subject themselves to the Administration of those who created said accounts.
===============
If the trust created under law is irrevocable, it can still be repealed by those who administrate the law.
However, what of the ability for the private man to contract? Is there any sanctity to the contract? Well, yes and no. Notice the ones in Enoch 6 formed their THING by Declaration and Mutual Pledge to each other. Sound familiar? Their thing was a New Thing. He who created Under an existing Contract is subject to the laws of the higher power. Thusly, if the contract contemplates property/estate within the law boundary of the higher power, then the lower contract can be annulled. For the Husband can annul the contract of the wife. However, the situation should warrant such grave actions. For a contract is Qodesh. For it is based on the Word of Men [Minds]. He who issues a false witness brings tribulation upon his own head UNDER Divine Law. No Legislative or Judicial action can save one from Divine Law. Govern thyself accordingly!
Shalom,
Michael Joseph
I wish to encourage you to share what you glean.Quote:
Originally Posted by george
Attachment 3656
I have some perceptions to share from the image alone. Sorry to judge a book by its cover but I would like to update/revise the Gospel of Pragmatism today - just for having a little time between projects. I mention that because this treatise you share seems along those lines.
My disagreement with HILL stems from the ACIM Authority Problem. I will provide a quotation at the end of this post and my interpretation of ACIM is unique - maybe best in a word - POLTERCHRIST. - A biochemical gateway was lowered and so Helen was compelled to host the Voice by LSD dosing. There is something elegantly scientific about that, like double-blind.
My point is that the issue of ownership of the Fed is solved by discovering the owner of the Fed. That is to say, Congress and the People assembled therein own the Fed because We created the Fed in 1913. Sure, the bill was formed out of meetings on Jekyl Island but everything I need to know about the Fed is in the Act because that is my ownership and it is My Creation. I have control over the Fed and am currently Trustee for the resulting trust. - Quite literally BELIEVE IT OR NOT. I even think that many in disbelief make my life a lot more enjoyable and safe.
It is true that the IRS is not an agency of the federal government. It is however an instrumentality because of the charter:
Attachment 3658
See that? The Fed's purpose is by and large to furnish elastic currency. This means that these stock certificates (bills) are actually designed for redemption, like the stock certificates that they are. More to my point of instrumentality though, these stock certificates are designed to go down in value; against all sense of fiduciary responsibility. Therefore the Fed cannot be a regular corporation.
Attachment 3659
Recently on Godlike Productions a troll engaged some of the more ignorant by titillating their desire to believe in private law. Well, if you want to sum up David Merrill the Trustee, there is no such thing; private law. Any engagement in secret bills (NESARA comes to mind) is breach of trust.
Therefore you can believe in private law. I cannot stop your belief set from accepting the existence like John-Henry HILL seems to have adopted, that the Fed has private ownership. And I think that you are much more likely to find yourself helpless against the wind and tide, like a cork blown about the sea. By creating private law, you become subject to such trolls like linked.
I have attached the formation of the Fed Act as found in the Statutes at Large. Also, I have the full Act of 1913 on my gdrive for anybody to examine my words, and hopefully discover the truth. I feel that the Authority Problem, and thus the ownership of the Fed is solved.
Quote:
VI. Judgment and the Authority Problem
T-3.VI.1. We have already discussed the Last Judgment, but in insufficient detail. 2 After the Last Judgment there will be no more. 3 Judgment is symbolic because beyond perception there is no judgment. 4 When the Bible says "Judge not that ye be not judged," it means that if you judge the reality of others you will be unable to avoid judging your own.
T-3.VI.2. The choice to judge rather than to know is the cause of the loss of peace... 7 One of the illusions from which you suffer is the belief that what you judged against has no effect. 8 This cannot be true unless you also believe that what you judged against does not exist. 9 You evidently do not believe this, or you would not have judged against it. 10 In the end it does not matter whether your judgment is right or wrong. 11 Either way you are placing your belief in the unreal. 12 This cannot be avoided in any type of judgment, because it implies the belief that reality is yours to select [from.]
T-3.VI.3. You have no idea of the tremendous release and deep peace that comes from meeting yourself and your brothers totally without judgment... 6 In the presence of knowledge all judgment is automatically suspended, and this is the process that enables recognition to replace perception.
T-3.VI.4. You are very fearful of everything you have perceived but have refused to accept. 2 You believe that, because you have refused to accept it, you have lost control over it. 3 This is why you see it in nightmares, or in pleasant disguises in what seem to be your happier dreams. 4 Nothing that you have refused to accept can be brought into awareness. 5 It is not dangerous in itself, but you have made it seem dangerous to you.
T-3.VI.5. When you feel tired, it is because you have judged yourself as capable of being tired. 2 When you laugh at someone, it is because you have judged him as unworthy. 3 When you laugh at yourself you must laugh at others, if only because you cannot tolerate the idea of being more unworthy than they are. 4 All this makes you feel tired because it is essentially disheartening. 5 You are not really capable of being tired, but you are very capable of wearying yourself. 6 The strain of constant judgment is virtually intolerable. 7 It is curious that an ability so debilitating would be so deeply cherished. 8 Yet if you wish to be the author of reality, you will insist on holding on to judgment. 9 You will also regard judgment with fear, believing that it will someday be used against you. p47 10 This belief can exist only to the extent that you believe in the efficacy of judgment as a weapon of defense for your own authority.
T-3.VI.6. God offers only mercy. 2 Your words should reflect only mercy, because that is what you have received and that is what you should give. 3 Justice is a temporary expedient, or an attempt to teach you the meaning of mercy. 4 It is judgmental only because you are capable of injustice.
T-3.VI.7. I have spoken of different symptoms, and at that level there is almost endless variation. 2 There is, however, only one cause for all of them: the authority problem. 3 This [is] "the root of all evil." 4 Every symptom the ego makes involves a contradiction in terms, because the mind is split between the ego and the Holy Spirit, so that whatever the ego makes is incomplete and contradictory. 5 This untenable position is the result of the authority problem which, because it accepts the one inconceivable thought as its premise, can produce only ideas that are inconceivable.
T-3.VI.8. The issue of authority is really a question of authorship. 2 When you have an authority problem, it is always because you believe you are the author of yourself and project your delusion onto others. 3 You then perceive the situation as one in which others are literally fighting you for your authorship. 4 This is the fundamental error of all those who believe they have usurped the power of God. 5 This belief is very frightening to them, but hardly troubles God. 6 He is, however, eager to undo it, not to punish His children, but only because He knows that it makes them unhappy. 7 God's creations are given their true Authorship, but you prefer to be anonymous when you choose to separate yourself from your Author. 8 Being uncertain of your true Authorship, you believe that your creation was anonymous. 9 This leaves you in a position where it sounds meaningful to believe that you created yourself. 10 The dispute over authorship has left such uncertainty in your mind that it may even doubt whether you really exist at all.
T-3.VI.9. Only those who give over all desire to reject can know that their own rejection is impossible. 2 You have not usurped the power of God, but you [have] lost it. 3 Fortunately, to lose something does not mean that it has gone. 4 It merely means that you do not remember where it is. 5 Its existence does not depend on your ability to identify it, or even to place it. 6 It is possible to look on reality without judgment and merely know that it is there. p48
T-3.VI.10. Peace is a natural heritage of spirit. 2 Everyone is free to refuse to accept his inheritance, but he is not free to establish what his inheritance is. 3 The problem everyone must decide is the fundamental question of authorship. 4 All fear comes ultimately, and sometimes by way of very devious routes, from the denial of Authorship. 5 The offense is never to God, but only to those who deny Him. 6 To deny His Authorship is to deny yourself the reason for your peace, so that you see yourself only in segments. 7 This strange perception [is] the authority problem.
T-3.VI.11. There is no one who does not feel that he is imprisoned in some way. 2 If this is the result of his own free will he must regard his will as not free, or the circular reasoning in this position would be quite apparent. 3 Free will must lead to freedom. 4 Judgment always imprisons because it separates segments of reality by the unstable scales of desire. 5 Wishes are not facts. 6 To wish is to imply that willing is not sufficient. 7 Yet no one in his right mind believes that what is wished is as real as what is willed. 8 Instead of "Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven" say, "[Will] ye first the Kingdom of Heaven," and you have said, "I know what I am and I accept my own inheritance."
Quote:
Comment: Many already have allowed themselves to be swayed from the path. Look and stay on the bolded words. They were of ONE WILL an they were not going to give up what they started. One Thought, One Desire, One Will - mutually bound to each other for their own mutual benefit! They swore an Oath to themselves - and they "payed their vows". They "married" each other in CONTRACT.
Thank you Michael Joseph;
This pegs the reason I feel so misunderstood. Matthew THORNTON returned too late to sign on the July 4, signing...
Attachment 3660
Yet there it is, the precedent that I have signed my bond of Life, Fortune and Sacred Honor along with them. Look at the last signature.
Attachment 3661
We are all bound together by oath.
Attachment 3663
"pumpkin you are right. At law the trustee is not compelled to transfer property [rights, interests, titles - hereinafter "Interests"]. Once said Interests are in the possession of the Trustee, then said Interests may be seized by force - now enters the Conscience of the King in Chancellery. But don't be fooled pumpkin, Trusts exist UNDER law. But you are correct they are "these days" administrated in Equity."
Only equity can protect an equitable interest of the beneficiary. Trusts are formed under law, but the equitable interests, once the trust is formed, has no protection in law. The one holding the title has full ownership in law. At least that is how things are supposed to work. But they don't. I don't really claim to know exactly what has happened, but I do know that it is spiritual and it is deceptive. If indeed the founders tricked us, you would think those in power would have to be aware of that in order to protect their interests and not cave into the unalienable right demands of the people. I would think some would have come forward with proof positive out of disgust. Maybe their demons assist in the mind control, I don't know. It looks like to me the ones in power do not honor God, and are therefore prone to deception and honor the state as their god.
I agree that one must learn to tend to his own vineyard first. As for myself, I do not identify with "We the People" that group was Special in regard to the formation of the Unincorporated Association. If was was a heir of that group, I would know. I use the term Special in juxtaposition against General.Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkin
As for myself I do not relate to angels or demons or other such beings - I consider myself and try to understand the Kingdom within. That comprehension is primary to me - I do not lend thought to powers without my ability to know. Thusly I do not relate to any trickery. The matter in my mind is about honor and responsibility for Self. It seems to me if one was so upset about the manner in which the State is run, then one would either attempt to effect change by causes established today or one would just leave the State and create a new State. For one to complain about the current "State of affairs" is to waste time. For the present is a function of the past and what is established today will compel the future effects.
Satan means Adversary. St. Paul relates that the Carnal Mind [man in the analogy if it must be personified - Herod/Pharaoh, etc] is "enmity" or hatred against God it is not subject to the Law of God neither can it be. Thusly I do not think of Satan as a being - I think of Satan as the Carnal Mind. Thusly demons are Carnal Thoughts that plague existence. You may have another view.
Sons of God = Thoughts of God
Daughters of God = Desires of God
These are the "Flocks" of God. Abel "Shepherds the Flocks" of God. It is the Shepherds "watching over the Flocks" who first see Jesus! The alters that T.V. / Radio etc. have built in your mind must be tore down. Along with the alters which Religion has built. For Abraham [Higher Mind] built an Alter at the separation place between he and Abimelech [Lower Mind]. And Seven Ewe Lambs were given. Seven Chakras on the backside [spine] of the book.
I don't know what those in power honor. I know what I honor. So let them do what they do. As for my house - we shall walk in The Way. I express my trust in words and in deed. For the poor we have with us always.
Unalienable Rights - are those which cannot be transferred - these are inherit to Man [capitalized Noun] do you know what that capitalized noun means or did you just think it means everyone? Those who Create the State are clothed in Royalty - Political Rights. The commoners are granted civil rights.
I gave a speech recently to the Raleigh Republican Liberty Caucus. Personally, I could care less about that agenda because I don't vote nor do I support those who would kill another to protect their luxuries. But I said to them that they should quit with this Change mess and start to individually get involved in their local community - who amongst you can farm? Who can build? Who can barter? Who can do anything save what they do to fish out of the admiralty? I told them they had best start building their Ark for it is sprinkling now but a hard rain is gonna fall.
One of the fella standing near me said "noone speaks to these representatives like this - will you come back in a few weeks?" BE THE CHANGE yourself. For the poor in Spirit you have with you always!
The collective Judas thought to usher in the Kingdom by "pushing it along". The collective Judas thinks that Jesus will come and set it all right. But Jesus was VERY clear - He said My Kingdom is not of this world. Thusly there is INVOLUTION in Christ JESUS which is Spirit "couched" in matter. And there is EVOLUTION in Jesus CHRIST which is the ascension of Spirit from Matter. For Jesus is the Lamb slain [in the Skull] from the foundation of this world.
The unenlightened being fishes all night [in ignorance] and catches nothing [even though he knows how to fish] but when the Dawning of the Day comes Jesus appears and says "fish out of the right side. And so the unenlightened man does as told and he catches so many GREAT FISHES he is barely able to haul into the Boat. Thus comes enlightenment for - Morning has Broken and the Sun of Righteousness dawns in the heart of Man [middle sub-conscious Mind].
Ceasar is merely a reflection of the collective consciousness in Carnality. As for myself - I create - and that which I create may be done with other Creators - said Creators consider our relationship Special - for we did the work. Those who did not work to create are not privy to the fruit of our labor [creation]. This is equity and this is fair. I see no trickery there.
Best Regards,
MJ
The State was also known as "cult of the emperor" in Roman law and antiquities.Quote:
Originally Posted by pumpkin
Hey shikamaru, if you created a new State - I hope there would be honor in it. I know there would be!Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
I see it as fractals. The State creates its persons whereof said persons are administrated by and thru the different offices of State. Trust accounts come to mine.
For these three are One. Legislative, Judicial, Executive. I AM the Good Shepherd.
Luke 18:19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
Interestingly this might be influenced by the fantasy we can access 100% of our brain cells. - Inspired by the movie and TV series "Limitless" with a magic pill called NZT-48...Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Joseph
Quote:
[8:15:47 AM] David Merrill: It would seem you and I are discussing "plasticity" appertaining to career judges? You of all might get the two-clocks, the fighter plane clock being one-millionth of a second slower... Where does the pilot "snap" into a separate timeline? - Come back into a "reality" where he is talking to older people, who are amazed that he has not aged?
[8:17:28 AM] David Merrill: WOLSKI is facing the mortality of his career. How easy it is for me to say, "Since you cannot explain WHY, WHERE or WHEN this deviation to ALL UPPER CASE letters came into your bond, I cannot consider you competent from your vacant office. That would be irresponsible of me as Trustee for XXXXXXXXXX TRUST...
[8:19:41 AM] David Merrill: The plasticity is how threatened should he be that not only is his office void, and all his "judicial officer" utterances are void; how does this affect all the other pretend judges and prisons full of convicts, wrongfully convicted and even those who confessed to what they thought was authority? Where does this all snap into the alternate "reality".
So I do not have the hope of getting my hands on NZT and it looks like one of those plastic pads on the corner of cupboard doors I was taught early not to put in my mouth. However...
Attachment 3671
Attachment 3672
But I still attribute my "genius" to the brain trust, including here and Lawful Money Trust like Allodial, Brian, Michael Joseph, Pumpkin, Shikamaru... Walter, xparte... - incomplete and in alphabetical order. How many people have thought of this?
I was calling it "Open-Faced Email Broadcasts" maybe fifteen years before anybody thought of "bursts". But even then, cultivating all the members of the burst into courts of competent jurisdiction beforehand? We even had a formal rule about broadcasting way back. You had to have a LoR Default Judgment in place to broadcast.
The Patriot Delusion entertains a fable/legend/myth/parable/hallucination (illusions) that there will be a meltdown or collapse... That Armageddon and Rapture will solve this elastic problem - that God will always honor "MY" reality and that I will stay true to fact, history, truth and law... That we will get a Vacation soon. I have been waiting for the value of the DOLLAR alone to somehow snap, for the "plunge protection team" to make such a big mistake that God or OBAMA will fire their sorry asses... - For so long that I begin to wonder if I might be looking at the whole thing wrong!
Revaluation is Quantitative Easing?
Is it simply like MJ says?
We just focus on the emotional condition of whatever womb we have selected, often within ourselves or in our lover, and Forgive so that it is a godly womb bringing forth loving creations. WOLSKI is not going to go kill himself or be killed by the many angry convicts imprisoned by his vacant office...
The following thought occurred to me just recently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Joseph
If it should be its own thread, I can craft it so not as to detract from this current thread of discussion.
Is or can a name be the "mark of the beast"?
A name, in my opinion, is an account. This account can be used to create other accounts in other systems .... sounds like districts and district overlays in a sense.
An account, at law, is a chose in action (right to sue for recovery which typically would be recovery of money owed (of debt).
Recently I asked a suitor (phone conversation), What is your name? I thought he would say his first and middle names.
He responded, after some thought, My name is my voice.
If you start it then I have much to add to it. Start a new thread and lets enter into the discourse. There is much to be said about name. The short answer is yes, but that is a qualified yes. Man has TWO legs upon which he stands. Thusly there is a higher and a lower aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru
Am i are we just the axis of the archery target and its archer,a NAME featuring evenly spaced concentric circles that surround a "bullseye". Kepler's cosmological model formed by concentric spheres and regular polyhedra. In geometry, two or more objects are said to be concentric, coaxal, or coaxial when they share the same center or axis.Concentric NAMED what is at the center why is property valuable and to who,s physical being are we preserved. I cant be much more than the beast in the field. God gave names to all the animals in the begining long time ago Dylan's slow train its on the rails.What preserved evildoers NAMES
It seems I repeat myself. I started a prior thread on just that question some time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Joseph
Here is the thread:
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ght=mark+beast
Here is the thread:yep one of the best . marketing the NAME for a commercial forced indemnification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Add please: Inside David Merrill's Head.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
hi David,
I still have not read all of that page i linked, seems you havent either though lol
ownership and authority are both difficult concepts for me. the ACIM stuff seems to right but bizzare how it came to be. that helped me see the authority problem better though.
thanks