Usufruct Surrender Remedy

[Anthony Joseph]

The use of the word "surrender" implies that you must be Owner of something in some respect in order to "surrender" it.

Why else would they even be sending you a "bill"?

Boris uses "naked owner" to describe why they are approaching you for the "NAME".

In Trust, and in military seizure, ownership has been split into legal and equitable title.

The State seized (by pledge or military conquest) LEGAL title only.

The COLB is evidence of equitable title (indemnification), which title you are holding now when you appear to be alive on the record (via UCC-1 or other county record).

This equitable title is the 'reversionary interest" that re-vests to you upon your "appearance to be alive", and this equitable title is what you indeed "surrender" to State, which then now holds BOTH Legal and Equitable Titles, causing the usufruct to end (page 407, point II "Merger") and distinguishing the associated debt by operation of law (12 USC 95a(2).

IMO, this is how I see Boris's technology working...

Thank you Doug; excellent summation.

[Keith Alan]

The use of the word "surrender" implies that you must be Owner of something in some respect in order to "surrender" it.

Why else would they even be sending you a "bill"?

Boris uses "naked owner" to describe why they are approaching you for the "NAME".

In Trust, and in military seizure, ownership has been split into legal and equitable title.

The State seized (by pledge or military conquest) LEGAL title only.

The COLB is evidence of equitable title (indemnification), which title you are holding now when you appear to be alive on the record (via UCC-1 or other county record).

This equitable title is the 'reversionary interest" that re-vests to you upon your "appearance to be alive", and this equitable title is what you indeed "surrender" to State, which then now holds BOTH Legal and Equitable Titles, causing the usufruct to end (page 407, point II "Merger") and distinguishing the associated debt by operation of law (12 USC 95a(2).

IMO, this is how I see Boris's technology working...

If that is the case, then he do you see it working in conjunction with making demand for lawful money?

[doug555]

Thank you Doug; excellent summation.

Thanks Anthony!

Your contributions are helping me find more clarity as I meditate on them.

Here are some more insights that hit me as I meditated on your comments about "adverse claims":

1. When companies, as sub-corps under the charter of the US Corp, send us bills, they cannot be "charging" us as that would be making an "adverse claim" against itself, and making itself an "enemy of State". So, if the "bill is not a bill" (a charge, an adverse claim), then what is it? Perhaps it is exactly as it says on most bills... a "PAYMENT"... a credit voucher that is capable, upon indorsement, of transferring (surrendering) a portion of the equitable title to the public credit that you are are "entitled" to as "one of the people" who are the source of the credit of the nation.

2. If money is essentially just a medium of exchange, then why couldn't "bills" simply act AS money, once indorsed as "Received" and signed on the front with lawful money demand, and then, on the back, just write, "For Deposit Only to the account of United States Treasury (12 USC 342)" [or to each State's treasury/clearinghouse as #3 proposes]?

3. I just watched about an hour long presentation on http://endofamerica.com (Snapshots here) which explained how soon the US Dollar will lose its power as the international reserve currency. If that happens, we will desperately need a replacement domestically, just as internationally it is already being replaced by the BRICS countries. Perhaps each of the united States could agree to use "indorsed bills" as "currency", and form trade agreements among themselves just as BRICS did. Just form State clearinghouses to process this "currency", and grant every man and woman over 18 a $10,000/month credit limit to stimulate this new economic paradigm with a currency that is "labor-backed". To qualify for this "credit limit", one would have to provide proof monthly that one is actually working and truly producing an economic benefit so that inflation does not undermine the State's local economy, and its exchange rate with other States in their agreements.

All it would take to get this started would be a brave Governor who would simply declare a "State of Emergency" and implement this policy, and undertake a State-wide educational campaign explaining this policy to its inhabitants and its neighboring States. This emergency truly may occur as a result of what happens July 1, 2014.

Can you imagine how immediately popular this first State would become overnight! Everyone who was unemployed would immediately move there so they could "pay" their "bills", and work at a job they truly enjoyed and was effectively contributing a product or service that is abundantly in demand because of the last 20 years of people going without things because they couldn't afford them?

This model would stimulate local economies, since the currency is local-based. It would restore manufacturing to America. And if suppressed inventions were released, it would change the world!

This model has been proven to work already. The George Rapp Harmony Society is one example. Lincoln's "Greenback" Monetary Policy is another.

Maybe ex-Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura needs to be approached with this proposal...

[JohnnyCash]

I don't see the need for replacement "bills" when we have all this bitcoin, gold & silver, and lawful money available.

[David Merrill]

Find the asylum state (Image and Likeness of God) and abide there. This is why the Libel of Review prevents irregular extradition from the asylum state.

[David Merrill]

I sense that MJ and Allodial understand my last post, maybe quite a few readers do...

I play chess with a fellow who has lived peacefully for almost 15 years, completely off the Grid, on my mathematics. You have to pay attention to who came into the Courtroom:

My point though is that over the chessboard we are naturally confrontational, in fact I have to admit it; he has won every conversation that we have ever had!

I looked at what Boris does and thought, This guy is fighting his way off the actual theater of war. The song remains the same...


[In other words, this fellow I play chess with resides in My Peace - Charter of Freedoms and Exemptions Granted to Patroons; 1629.]

[Anthony Joseph]

Thanks Anthony!

Your contributions are helping me find more clarity as I meditate on them.

Here are some more insights that hit me as I meditated on your comments about "adverse claims":

1. When companies, as sub-corps under the charter of the US Corp, send us bills, they cannot be "charging" us as that would be making an "adverse claim" against itself, and making itself an "enemy of State". So, if the "bill is not a bill" (a charge, an adverse claim), then what is it? Perhaps it is exactly as it says on most bills... a "PAYMENT"... a credit voucher that is capable, upon indorsement, of transferring (surrendering) a portion of the equitable title to the public credit that you are are "entitled" to as "one of the people" who are the source of the credit of the nation.

2. If money is essentially just a medium of exchange, then why couldn't "bills" simply act AS money, once indorsed as "Received" and signed on the front with lawful money demand, and then, on the back, just write, "For Deposit Only to the account of United States Treasury (12 USC 342)" [or to each State's treasury/clearinghouse as #3 proposes]?

3. I just watched about an hour long presentation on http://endofamerica.com (Snapshots here) which explained how soon the US Dollar will lose its power as the international reserve currency. If that happens, we will desperately need a replacement domestically, just as internationally it is already being replaced by the BRICS countries. Perhaps each of the united States could agree to use "indorsed bills" as "currency", and form trade agreements among themselves just as BRICS did. Just form State clearinghouses to process this "currency", and grant every man and woman over 18 a $10,000/month credit limit to stimulate this new economic paradigm with a currency that is "labor-backed". To qualify for this "credit limit", one would have to provide proof monthly that one is actually working and truly producing an economic benefit so that inflation does not undermine the State's local economy, and its exchange rate with other States in their agreements.

All it would take to get this started would be a brave Governor who would simply declare a "State of Emergency" and implement this policy, and undertake a State-wide educational campaign explaining this policy to its inhabitants and its neighboring States. This emergency truly may occur as a result of what happens July 1, 2014.

Can you imagine how immediately popular this first State would become overnight! Everyone who was unemployed would immediately move there so they could "pay" their "bills", and work at a job they truly enjoyed and was effectively contributing a product or service that is abundantly in demand because of the last 20 years of people going without things because they couldn't afford them?

This model would stimulate local economies, since the currency is local-based. It would restore manufacturing to America. And if suppressed inventions were released, it would change the world!

This model has been proven to work already. The George Rapp Harmony Society is one example. Lincoln's "Greenback" Monetary Policy is another.

Maybe ex-Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura needs to be approached with this proposal...

A smart man I sometimes speak with says, "EVERY claim in a conventional court setting is 'United States' vs. 'United States'.

Think about that for a minute and then ponder the 'adverse claim' philosophy as it relates to that paradigm.

[David Merrill]

A smart man I sometimes speak with says, "EVERY claim in a conventional court setting is 'United States' vs. 'United States'.

Think about that for a minute and then ponder the 'adverse claim' philosophy as it relates to that paradigm.

Thank you AJ!

[Anthony Joseph]

The presumption in EVERY court case is that both parties are adverse claimants, unless the 'Plaintiff' is 'UNITED STATES' or ''STATE OF XXXXX'; then only the 'Defendant' is presumed an adverse claimant 'Enemy of the State'. EVERY 'NAME' in 'Plaintiff' vs "Defendant' scenarios are 'United States' creations and/or vested interests. The theater of war is the commercial realm and every transaction made within that realm absent the sole and direct administration by an 'United States' officially sworn representative signifies belligerent commercial activity (war-like stance) amidst the extant military occupation on this land.

Peaceful acknowledgment/surrender of what has already been seized is the only viable option to overcome the default presumption of "Enemy of the State" status. It is the possibility of 'reversion' (a claim that TITLE is "mine") that keeps most people in said default 'Enemy' status.

It is known that the people are the 'spoliated owners' and that said people have been seized of all TITLES. If we continue the illusion that we are the current OWNERS of these seized TITLES, we are treated as enemy combatants in the commercial theater of war. Hence the thousands upon thousands of codes, statutes, ordinances, etc. to keep the 'enemy' at bay and under control. Only an OWNER or TITLEHOLDER is subject to said codes,... etc. If we continue to act as if we are, we will be held liable as if we are - that is similar to 'trustee de son tort' as Michael Joseph has offered in the past. In other words, if you want it, you got it, and; that means ALL of it - liability, obligation, responsibility for the 'NAME' and everything TITLED/OWNED in said 'NAME.

A proper and recognized surrender of the 'Usufruct' (via UCC-1 & UCC-3) declares the default presumption as erroneous and remands the State as Usufructuary of the 'NAME' and EVERYTHING in said 'NAME'. Any and all use of, and in, 'NAME' benefits the 'State' in the commercial realm and hence 'State' should also bear the FULL liability. The 'USE' of our energy and labor has been appropriated via TITLE seizure so we owe NOTHING; we are FULLY immune and our use of the 'NAME' is FULLY indemnified and acquitted of ALL charges. The 'State' is responsible for discharging ALL debt and claims against its own 'NAME'.

[Keith Alan]

"All property belonging to the debtor/bailee belongs to the secured party"

Could it all really be that simple?