Why saving to suitors is an asine methodology

[David Merrill]

A testamentary trust is by its name one which the Grantors are now dead. But the Grantors and Settlors established their Survey and made their Claim and the Trust escapes Laws of Perpetuity because Trustee is unnamed and beneficiary is unnamed - Ourselves and our Posterity. As long as there is an Heir alive of the original Settlors/Grantors then the Trust shall survive.

That in context means that the bloodline of the Representatives of the Twelve States are the only Parties to the Constitution in Padelford. - Absurd; Asenine.

The parties to the Constitution are the Signatories. The Signatories are Offices validated by the Officials seated. The original 39 Signers were not men, they were States. The men signing were signing for the States.

Neh 10:28 And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;

Neh 10:29 They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the LORD our Lord, and his judgments and his statutes;

That is where it began to be so. As the Babylonian Jews captured the Israelites of Jerusalem. Conquest. They were signing the first Constitution.

Neh 10:1 Now those that sealed were, Nehemiah, the Tirshatha, the son of Hachaliah, and Zidkijah, Neh 10:2 Seraiah, Azariah, Jeremiah...

Nehemiah was an Official. That oath made him party to the Laws of Moses.

They clave to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God's law...

Tirshatha was a Babylonian Marshal;

Of foreign derivation; the title of a Persian deputy or governor: - Tirshatha.

Even looking at the Original 13th Amendment exposes this revelation.

You read that and you have to wonder, Why would they deport you for accepting a gift from a foreign king or government? Of course they wouldn't! If you were a citizen of the US you were a government employee or official. You would lose your position as an official (citizen) because now you had accepted a gift from a foreign king or government.

The Israelites were the citizens (officials) because they had been captured. They were under the seige of a foreign occupation - the (Babylonian) Jews. So they had to stand there all morning and get their Notice of the Law - the Laws of Moses. Some people think it was the Torah (Pentateuch) but that would take way too long for an oral reading.

At a gist, that is the entire thread topic - about the Lieber Code and such. The Trading with the Enemy Act (1917) was utilized for the War of 1933 (against the Great Depression) and it stood heavily on the Emergency of 1861 for its foundation. But that was lifted in 1976. You can try to explain it in trust structures all you like, the Emergency is still alive simply by virtue that lawful money in America is fiat - the US Note - 1863. The remedy available is to redeem FRNs in lawful money. If you try asserting the Lieber Code it will make no sense outside the scope of the fiat. Read some outdated doctrine:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...8&d=1303519007

Then look at its modern counterpart:

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...7&d=1303519005

You can tell that in the current state of peace, there is required to be some form of riot or insurrection that exceeds judicial power to suppress.

It manifests today in lack of an Enabling Clause. - In the term Necessity.



Regards,

David Merrill.