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...
Originally Posted by doug555
The use of the word "surrender" implies that you must be Owner of something in some respect in order to "surrender" it.
Reply With Quote