Private Sidewalk Saves Bike Trail

[David Merrill]

Jim and I joindered heritage coherently for peace, by making the end of war the destiny and legacy of the wonderful quasi-public art, located on irrevocably private land.

Attachment 4659

Attachment 4660


Even if the steps elude you, I at least think you might find it entertaining how to get to the conclusions in that identification acknowledgement. The Olympus Ordeal (biocosmetric sonoluminescence) finally described things accurately to China and Israel.

I really think that to make this more interesting you should integrate that part about my Certificate of Baptism from a charismatic Foursquare senior administrator authorizing my "removal" from the zigurat on the obverse of the US dollar bill as a supporting brick.

But more interesting yet is that Foursquare has merged into Messianic Judaism and has married charisma with rapture eschatology filtered through Christian mysticism (Book of Revelation) wrapped in Jewish tradition for entertainment purposes. My point being that all this was plagiarized off me! The classical theft of intellectual property is to make the Creator feel like an idiot so he will think it is his idea to part ways, before implementing his ideas into a very successful business plan.

As I watch the LOSHON HARA (gossip) unfold, I cannot help but laugh out loud how this whole reality, filtered through genome over infinite eternity is so wildly entertaining. It seems the curse of Futurism that anybody would think there is a better Kingdom awaiting where the spiritual potential for enlightenment will grow any better than the right here and now.



P.S. One of the tenets of Pragmatism, adopted for (then) Bishop Castle - (now) CASTLE CHURCH TRUST on September 28, 2014 is that Jesus was crucial in authoring the Book of Mark to prepare for the "return of the King" simply because the craven people did not rally and overthrow Babylonian Rule on the Temple Mount (Pharisees and Saducees) that very day He overturned the tables of the moneychangers. By understanding the culture and political climate around Jesus' life, one finds a much more exciting read of the Bible. - Especially when one watches a pastor ousted because the Christian Qaballah is just too bizarre for the business plan. Even a God who knocks up virgins and blinds people is getting over the top.

[David Merrill]

But from top down, one must ask, where did law come and of whose grant shall it be used?

Upon SIMCHAT TORAH - Rejoice in the Law; one begins again at Genesis 1:1. I began to understand the accusation of blood on the ground, against Cain for killing Abel did not equate to a capital crime because the law had not been issued. Therefore Cain became aware that no law protected him from the same fate. God marked him with "OWTH". - The same mark on the Israelites at Exodus 13:16.

From the top down...

[Michael Joseph]

Upon SIMCHAT TORAH - Rejoice in the Law; one begins again at Genesis 1:1. I began to understand the accusation of blood on the ground, against Cain for killing Abel did not equate to a capital crime because the law had not been issued. Therefore Cain became aware that no law protected him from the same fate. God marked him with "OWTH". - The same mark on the Israelites at Exodus 13:16.

From the top down...

Wonderful exposition. Therein is exactly the point. Adam/Eve were naked. Same concept. When I began to view the named characters in the Bible not as historical figures but as archetypes in thought/desire it was then that Aaron's Rod budded. Cain being a "tiller of the ground" scratches out his existence subject to the wisdoms and philosophies he develops by and thru his five sense limited mind. Esau being a man of the field typifies this limited consciousness and thusly it was said of God - Esau I hated. And later by Paul:

Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
Rom 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
Rom 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

We can also see another one named Abraham who is the archetype of Faith striking an oath with one called Abimilech with seven (7) ewe lambs. This same story plays out on a Spiritual plane in the N.T. between the "rich man", Lazarus, and Abraham. Reflecting on the pillar raised as a memorial, Abraham relates there is a chasm of which I nor you can pass. Abimilech too symbolizes the lust, desire, envy, greed, gluttony, laziness of the flesh nature. Nevertheless we gain much more information later of Jacob and Esau upon their interaction. For Jacob [Higher Mind] and Esau [Lower Flesh Consciousness] make peace.

Thus it is as you say. Returning to Genesis 1:1 one begins to see Gen 1 as the transformative process of God working in the natural man to bring the natural man into a Spiritual Estate. And then of Genesis 1:2 of the transformative process of God working in the Spiritual man to bring him into a Celestial Estate.

The natural man is selfish - hedonistic - envious etc. And you could say that the lower serpent rules him [central nervous system] by and thru his five senses. Thus he is subject to the five lords of the Philistines.

The Spiritual man is a man whereof Faith is dominant and any love generates from the womb of faith. Or you could say in a different analogy that Faith and Love are married and Faith is husband and Love the wife.

The Celestial man is a man whereof Love is dominant and any faith generates from the womb of Love. Or you could say in a different analogy that Love and Faith are married and Love is husband and Faith the wife.

In the C.M. all faith is perceived from love and thusly from Good. And thusly from God. It is not so in the Spiritual man for even here he thinks to generate love of his own and in this stage of development he has yet to send the bondmaid out of his house. He is Abram. And it is in this stage of development that he cannot bring forth the child of promise.

------

If you are truthful in your contemplation of Cain, he did appear before God with a sacrifice; therefore, he was seeking to please God. Cain of course if the lower and Abel the higher aspects in man. Cain thinks to please God in the Flesh. Remember Romans 8:8? They that are in flesh [consciousness] cannot please God.

Romans 8:8 said those in the Flesh cannot please God. So dear reader if you are a literal one GIVE IT UP - your efforts to please God are futile and will all lead eventually to the grave. So why even try? See how these want it both ways? Well they can't have it both ways. Therefore there must be different aspects in consciousness. And this is exactly the story of Abram. God said get up and move to a new country. And the term "country" is a change in conscious thought/desires.

And now we see the natural man comes first and will be last. And we see the Spiritual / Celestial man comes second but will become first. And between the two God desires CHARITY which is to say MERCY which is the Womb of Love.

I wonder if anyone can prove that Cain is the son of Adam? I think not. For Adam being an archetype of Church/State births a different philosophy that that of Cain. And yet both societies oppose each other somewhat. Each symbol has many different meanings when viewed from different perspectives. For they placed "fig leaves" over their groins - a symbol of thought/desire and manifestation [Husband/Wife/Son].

The nexus is PERCEPTION and specifically of the nature of the WOMB that births the son [manifestation]. Which is to say the nature and character of the consciousness of which are manifest states of being.

Indeed sir. Who granted the Law? Is the grantor subject to Law? Consider carefully planes of consciousness and you may come to see that law acting on the person of flesh is not the same law acting on the Spirit. Perception being key. For the law in perspective of flesh of do not do murder speaks to the flesh does it not? But St. Paul relates "we know the law is Spiritual." And it is at this nexus that Cain always seeks to kill Abel in every man. For the natural man desires his own "body" first. And in doing do, remains natural and carnal and therefore a brute beast meet for destruction. For the natural man lives solely by five senses and thusly he remains in Babylon [confusion].

Abel does not need to experience bad to know good. Abel stays in the good. The two relate to different natures/character in conscience.

Rom 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit

The Spiritual man is in Christ [ALIVE]. The natural man is in Christ [DEAD]. Thusly Abram was told "get up and move to a new country." And we see the ancient struggle in man.

Thank you David Merrill.

Shalom,
MJ

[allodial]

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so {that gets you into trouble}." - Mark Twain

Divided title vs Allodial title.

“The federal citizens has a right to hold property, but due to his status and his use of legal tender [Federal Reserve Notes] it appears he cannot hold the absolute title to or estate in the land as can white citizens and free inhabitants can (if they pay for the property rights with a lawful tender of gold or silver coin I would suspect.)”

Paying with gold or silver is not necessarily a perfect solution because you can’t buy what another man does not own. That there was a slap.

That is why they have more than one type of currency in circulation: scrip is for the plantation worker and lawful money is for 'off-base (i.e. military base) transactions'. Again just like political status can limit the title claim a person can enjoy, political status can afford one the opportunity to (using appropriate process) assert a claim based on that political status.

[David Merrill]

The three girls in jumpsuits remind me. I read a cheap romance novel while in jail about the Freemen...

It had allegedly fictional conversations in it between President BUCHANAN and Territorial Governor GILPIN that fit this all exactly. Like the author had come across some research; probably in a Mason museum. I think that the '59'er's made Colorado a lot more attractive. Murdering for gold is a lot more romantic anyway, according to the paperback.


Click Here to read Initiative in Washington state.


P.S. A conversation with a suitor who buys and sells paper is turning up some interesting discovery about persons and corporations.

The $20M lien publication produced a real revelation. This is already around here from years ago. Mr. DREW for whatever reason required that the Secretary return the approval to the Republic of Colorado. This caused a breach of trust while the Secretary was refusing to publish my UCC-1 and threatening to charge me with a class 5 felony for using the Great Seal, without being affiliated with the State business. So I adopted the bastard then and there, and the Secretary published the lien.





I had forgotten how bold I am...

"The State of Colorado is the collateral..."

See what I mean, I am a self-licensed pirate! Resulting trustee with a God-given Letter of Marque. I amaze myself sometimes.



So Michael Joseph;

I am finally understanding the concept you have been putting across, about my being able to collect an inheritance thirteen generations down the line. I think this piece will help resolve the precept with trust law.

The foundation is piracy. I am basing my license (Letter of Marque) in the Book of Mark and its plain text decoding. See Mark 4:34. The Truth shall set you free. But this is the piece that I meant. I was watching some videos at the Bible study at the Messianic Jewish synagogue about the history of the modern state of Israel. In the opening breath we find the Dutch East Indies Trading Company mentioned. I will get a search engine on finding the video series...


Outside the scope of piracy, and the licensing of privateering - 'perpetual inheritance' makes no more sense than Zionism on the land of Palestine.

[Michael Joseph]

So Michael Joseph;

I am finally understanding the concept you have been putting across, about my being able to collect an inheritance thirteen generations down the line. I think this piece will help resolve the precept with trust law.

If the Estate is held in Abeyance upon the arrival of an eligible heir, then one must know his pedigree [generations]. It was said of Noah that he was perfect in his generations [pedigree] - we may infer that Noah was aware of his lineage.

It may also be said that a Hebrew may only eat fish with scales - "Fish" being Truth and "Scales" implying righteous living or justice. It seems the custodians of the Estate know full well who they are dealing with - the only question is does the heir know to make a claim? You might ponder that one a bit David Merrill - if you believe that the lady [church] is holding your inheritance, would it not be prudent to issue your claim upon her doorstep?

Interesting TANGENT: My business partner [engineering] is in the VAN PELT family tree. He can remember his rich ole uncle of whom they affectionately called Uncle Van. Verona I. Miller Van Pelt [1913-1990]


------

A Declaration of Trust is by its very nature God given. For we live, move and have our being in God.

[David Merrill]

I recall Grandpa Van;

He was a musician but interestingly he had some of the same notions about Bible interpretation. Somehow, without SkyGlobe he knew that the Magi visited Jesus when he was a toddler (15 months). He was doing research about it at the university library and when he got up for a moment, came back and found his work stolen.



He left me the Moffat Bible I treasure for translating the Book of Mark so nicely for the Gospel of Pragmatism. I like any bible the notes where the Book of Mark ends and editing begins.

Where Mark Actually Ends

The Moffat rendition of the Book of Mark is very revealing with the footnote found at Mark 16:8:

The following appendix represents a couple of second century attempts to complete the gospel. The passage within brackets in the first of these epilogues originally belonged to it, but was excised for some reason at an early date. Jerome quoted part of it, but the full text has only been discovered quite recently in codex W, the Freer uncial of the gospels.

So there was a passage in the first of these two “attempts”, that reads, starting around verse 14 of the KJV and all modern renditions:

But they excused themselves, saying, “This age of lawlessness and unbelief lies under the sway of Satan, who will not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God; therefore,” they said to Christ, “reveal your righteousness now.” Christ answered them, “the limit of years for Satan’s power has now expired, but other terrors are at hand. I was delivered to death on behalf of sinners, that they might return to the truth and sin no more, that they might inherit that glory of righteousness which is spiritual and imperishable in heaven.”

Imagine that! In the conversion of the Gospel of Mark into a business plan such slurs against Futurism were removed. – It would not do for Jesus to be saying that, Christ answered them, “the limit of years for Satan’s power has now expired…

More significant to Pragmatism is that reading only what is written in the original Book of Mark renders it quite plausible that Jesus survived the Cross, and that Joseph of Arimathaea paid Pilate and one of Pilate’s guards to pronounce Jesus dead when somebody caused Jesus to black out in pain by dousing him in vinegar. Expecting Mary, His wife and Mary His mother would be coming by the tomb to prepare his body for the rotting process Jesus left a messenger to let them know which way to go to find Him.

Interestingly in other gospels Jesus meets up with His Apostles hungry and showing his wounds yet Christians still believe that He was resurrected from the dead.

[allodial]

Let the reader decide for himself.....

Well at least you are now being specific and concise as to which realm, reality or construct you are referring. The discussion previously was trusts generally and real estate generally.

However, 'land trust' (word of art) refers to what is widely regarded to be a purely statutory construct--like a corporation. The fact that specific requirements must be undertaken to even be recognized under a state's statute is telling: "Well call it a trust if you do this, that, the other and if the land is 'in this state'". Depending on the asset or property focus, a 'land trust' is really not a de jure trust. However if you consider the state as landlord doing the authorization and approving you might have a kind of delegation or agency rather than a real trust relationship especially if probate is triggered.

Most will at first, when looking at land trusts, will probably fixate solely on the title to real property as being the totality of a land trust when in fact the proceeds, rents, fruit, productivity of the land would be also be part of the totality of the 'trust estate(s) associated with a land trust. That 'fructive' portion could sit separately in trust on 'occurrence' and be held in de jure trust: when and if it manifests.

So if you are talking about the statutory construct called 'land trust' then the discussion is on those specific terms. Being that is possible to have capital and revenue separated in a trust you get how the revenue or 'fructive' side of a trust package can be in a trust-trust while the capital equipment can be in a separate sham trust (for example it could be a requirement that as long as its generative of the fruit its treated *as if* its not a sham). So saying "one part of the trust is held with legal title and equitable title" so "neener-neener its a trust I done told ya!" isn't quite on point.



In fact anyone who knows about land trusts will see that they typically arise out of two separate documents (meaning two separate trusts--of which only one is probably de jure): a deed and a trust agreement. The grantor trust is widely regarded as a 'sham trust'. But if the federal or non-federal state (Garn Act, local statute) wants to treat a grantor trust as a trust-trust its still a sham though they agree to pretend otherwise. If the real property side of the land trust (special arrangement which might in many cases be two separate trusts put together in a single package) is a sham and the state (landlord) says Okee Dokey its still not really a trust. However, the trust arrangement on the fructive side, on occurrence of the fruit/revenue can be de jure.



If I didn't give MJ such a hard time, how much fun would this be?

To recap, if I were to assign Bubba Skillz some equipment for making Formula Z that sells for $100 an ounce and tell him that the only reason he will hold the equipment is to produce Formula Z for my cousin's company and he'll get paid 10% per ounce and my cousin gets the rest, you see how the equipment is still mine (grantor trust/sham trust--not a trust really) but the Formula Z as it is produce is in fact in trust. To fixate on the title to the equipment is to miss the point that the de jure trust surrounds the title to the Formula Z as it is produced. The state calling non-trusts trusts with respect to title to the equipment is besides the point. The terms might be that once Bubba Skillz retires, the equipment reverts back to me and my will or the like might pass the equipment on to my sons or daughters--so much for the trustee having allodial title.

It may be that with analysis that the equipment or real property side of that trust arrangement is allowed to operate more like an perpetual estate as if the grantor were deceased. If the state has allodial title to the real property in the state of Florida or in the state of Illinois then, hmm the smell of a delegation or side-band principal-agency type of arrangement might not be far off. The restriction that the typical trustee has with respect to real property concerning a land trust doesn't sound like full title. One or both halfs of the legal title are very weak--too weak to be de jure full title. The fact that point #1 in your first PDF suggests that a beneficiary has title interest in bankruptcy is also telling.

Of course the topic of 'land trusts' varies from state to state. Also, its worth considering that in one jurisdiction or another, according to statute a beneficiary's equitable title in the real property associated with the land trust trust collection is treated as if personal property can mean that the trustee doesn't really have equitable title but is only treated AS IF having such. If the beneficiary's consent is built into it, again that can give rise to something else like principal-agency type relationship rather than a trust. Its probably not unheard of for rights to be treated as real property.

On another note, if one were to analyze the nature of corporations, one just might find evidence of a trust agreement lurking in there somewhere upon incorporating.

[David Merrill]

You might ponder that one a bit David Merrill - if you believe that the lady [church] is holding your inheritance, would it not be prudent to issue your claim upon her doorstep?

That sounds strange to me.

Nobody is holding my inheritance. I have made my claim and accepted my election in MELCHIZEDEK, which is the inheritance. The $23M is payment of acting fees. - For a performance.

I feel no pain or fear.

I recall an author Joseph VINING who wrote Legal Identity - The Coming of Age of Public Law wrote about Total Theory. And it sticks with me how this might happen.

[David Merrill]

Sleeping helped reconcile.

The birthright is to waiver of tort, according to the municipal priestcrafter's code.





This authority comes from the inheritance of Levi, sometimes referred to as the Aaronic Priesthood - at I Chronicles 6. And this is why the Dutch East Indies Trading Company is mentioned in the first passages of the British Accreditation for the Modern State of Israel. - The same charter. Let's admit it, the definition for pirate/privateer/mercenary at sea etc. is by definition, fuzzy. Delovio v. Boit proclaims for Justice STORY that should I present a bucket with a corncob floating in it to STORY, he would proclaim it admiralty jurisdiction and all those unclaimed notes; those are insurance policies being passed along in bottomry with the trustees ignorant that somewhere, somebody is going to keep them in the vault - special deposit by making that demand/claim. Just not today.

Rambling on a roll.

At the same time (1611) we find that the King James Version was chartered and dedicated to "Our Sion":







So I circle back...