Redeem From Public To Private Venue

[allodial]

And the irony is that costs of a non-surgical lobotomy is skyrocketing. That should reveal their intent from the start in overturning true education: debt enslavement. True education to the contrary encourages prosperity of the educated and of all.

^^ This.

Doug Riddle did the same thing with Accepted for Value a few years ago, connecting it to scripture as well.

I recall that. There are potential parallels along the lines of "confession and forgiveness" and "agreeing with thine adversary". However, without reference to Doug Riddle, mixing in scripture is a tactic that some use to sweeten the bait and hide the hook.

From your post I presume that the attorney was after a cut of salvaging your estate from all that escheat and assumpsit.

Thanks what came to mind likewise.

[David Merrill]

Why did those 55 men create a new government [a special ministerial trust]? Because they sought to be set-apart in the Earth. These men Declared themselves and they were acknowledged and as such, they took their Station [Standing].

56 if you count carefully. So Matthew THORNTON set a precedent that people may sign their approbation after July 4, 1776 as well.

[allodial]

56 if you count carefully. So Matthew THORNTON set a precedent that people may sign their approbation after July 4, 1776 as well.

Who would have thought of "time travel" as a means of thwarting "adverse legal positivism"? [Imageshack link not working btw]

On the topic of the Declaration of Independence, it might be worth noting that new state constitutions were created prior to the Articles of Confederation. Each of those constitutions established one of many "free, sovereign and independent states". The Declaration of Independence remaining highly significant, it seems that a new or separate crown resulted with the declaration of war per the Prohibitory Acts of 1775 by which the British Crown and by the British Monarchy put the colonists and/or colonies out of allegiance (they were absolved of allegiance at that point). Where there was successful defense of the new or separate crown, the Declaration of Independence served to formalize and memorialize beyond doubt. The prerogatives of the Monarchy transferred to the people.

[David Merrill]

Who would have thought of "time travel" as a means of thwarting "adverse legal positivism"? [Imageshack link not working btw]

On the topic of the Declaration of Independence, new state constitutions were created prior to the Articles of Confederation being created. Each of those constitutions established one of many "free, sovereign and independent states". The Declaration of Independence remaining highly significant, I would find the new crown resulted with the declaration of war per the Prohibitory Acts of 1775 by which the British Crown and by the British Monarchy put the colonists and/or colonies out of allegiance (they were absolved of allegiance at that point). The war resulted in successful defense of the new crown, the Declaration of Independence served to formalize and memorialize beyond doubt.

Yes!! Note my signature in approbation to the Declaration of Independence!

[David Merrill]

Hi David,


Here's my take on what was different about Boris method. First, some foundation. The Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 talks about those lost beyond the sea. Purportedly, they are supposed to send out three (3) search parties. Well, that never happened. With Boris method you check the box for the filing to go into the REAL ESTATE records, also you check the box for as-extracted. The timing of the filings and the resulting call from the Landsman company notifying me of these interests, was uncanny. The Landsman company works for Apache Corporation and they're trying to save their client some bucks, that's expected. But what this Landsman company did, was surreal. They said they were going to send me an Affidavit of Heirship. But what they sent me in the mail was a Form W-9 for me to fill out and a Ratification of oil, gas and mineral Lease. This Ratification Lease, on this Legal size page, said Owner on it ten times, one of those title of Owner right next to my signature line. So I called them back and said Hey, could you please explain to me how an heir can be an Owner? The attorney hemmed and hawed, stuttered...then said "We'll go ahead and send you out an Affidavit of Heirship." What is kind of embarrassing to me is that my family all readily signed this Ratification Lease, get this, with no facts or figures, nothing showing percentages, all they had to go by was a verbal ball park figure from this attorney. I hate to say this but they're not too bright.

So here's my opinion on it: I think the extent of their so-called search party is simply pulling up a browser and looking at the UCC filings and seeing who has...found themselves and listed their own selves.

Thank you again for your very warm welcome, David.

P.S. I had a really tough time with this at first. It's like one of those stereogram pictures where you can't see anything until you stare at it for a couple/few minutes. But once I saw the picture, there is no going back. I was holding myself back. That is the honest truth, David.

I am grasping pretty clearly - I believe what you show me is very exciting anyway. The clause of the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 about three search parties would be nice. That would help cement some of the wispy concepts for us all maybe. The canon law underneath prompted a pure abstract of title somehow?

I still don't get it quite yet though. More like an abstract of heritage?

It could be I am grasping it because I see holonations inverted anyway! Most people see the bush but it looks like somebody punched their fist into soft clay to me; the background jumps forward!

[allodial]

John Cartwright (1740 - 1824) asserted that "the Americans" were not technically "British subjects" because while they might have been subjects of the (British) King they were not subjects of the British parliament. Perhaps the term "independent crowns" might be more technically appropriate than "new crown".

[adirolfnitsol]

^^ This.

Doug Riddle did the same thing with Accepted for Value a few years ago, connecting it to scripture as well.

The freedom world is a giant network of bunny holes. Boris was probably unaware of A4V or hadn't explored it yet.

Ok, The Bunny wants to type something:

Attachment 1730
Hay yoo freedum peeple keep burrowin n mai bunny hole. if i hadd a carot fur ebry wun a yoo i seen in mai rabbitat in teh las ten yearz

well i'd hab a hyuge pile a carotz

Yes, Doug Riddle did things with A4V a few years ago. He used the bare bones skeleton A4V from HJRBONDS. But there were many, many complaints from people stating it flat out didn't work for them. So I did a lot of research and determined that we are dealing with a discretionary trust, which had discretionary trustees and that if the trust is not expressed then the A4V's would be disposed of in the garbage.

So I created what I call a special A4V which expressed the trust, did 4 A4V's and each one was paid. 2 of those A4V's were for 2 years of property taxes in which entities had purchased tax certificates. The tax certificates were redeemed in full for both years.

I brought this info to Doug Riddle, showed him the results on black and white paper and told him if he really wanted to help people like he said, to treat it as a discretionary trust. I freely gave him mine yet he never brought it up in the calls. I never comprehended why he chose not to give to others, when others major complaint was that his/HJRBONDS A4V method didn't work.

I stopped doing A4V's and went the Boris route. Why? Because why would anyone continue hacking away at the same endless branches with more and more branches popping up at every turn when I can summarily pull out the entire root and be done with it?

My question is, why take the stance of assuming that Boris is unaware or just hasn't explored A4V's?

I apologize in advance if this offends anyone, but it appears a lot of assumptions are being slung around without careful thought. Don't we get enough of presumptions, assumptions, assumpsit in courts already? Don't we have enough? Do we need more assumptions? How about this: How about just asking Boris? Is that not an option in your book?

I'd just like to get to David my response I posted yesterday which is still not appearing on here yet, then I'll leave this thread. No offense, but too many assumptions and snarkiness here for my taste.

[David Merrill]

Thank you Lost in Florida (backwards);


I read your response but did not notice that I was the only one who could. I have approved it so others can read it too.

A lot of time people just get set into what they feel works. I get a lot of thanks from people who get full refunds and find that satisfying. So it is difficult for me to really go into new concepts like variations of A4V and the STRAWMAN REDEMPTION. I might go into some more study about discretionary trust though.

That does sound interesting.

[Moxie]

My question is, why take the stance of assuming that Boris is unaware or just hasn't explored A4V's?

I never heard Boris mention A4Vs in his YouTube seminar. I could have asked him. And he could have responded to this thread, too.

People have succeeded with A4V without filing a UCC-1. Maybe they got away with something?

The Bunny says he wasn't trying to be snarky with what he said.

Sometimes this place is waaayy too serious for its own good. In my opinion.

[Moxie]

Same thing happened with EFTs: people learned how to do EFTs at the Fred and Nina seminars. At first, people had success with EFTs, but as more people started doing them, the powers-that-be became more stubborn.

Were EFTs suddenly less lawful? Nope.

I'll bet the same trend happened with the A4Vs: the more people started doing them, the more the powers-that-be resisted.

That same trend could happen with Boris' method.