The Constitution - An Estate in Trust for the Heirs of Freedom :

[motla68]

By accepting them (the Bill of Rights) for value.

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...YTI5NTIw&hl=en

Thank you, I had heard of someone doing this before, but had forgotten about it. Somewhat of a dot connector, part of that oath being Ecclesiastical and of MJ's find of the Gutenburg deposit into trust via incun. as well as the connection with the ecclesiastical statement on the currency.

Putting more thoughts together from previous scripture quoted:

Psalms 99:4 The king's strength also loveth judgment; thou dost establish equity, thou executest judgment and righteousness in Jacob.

adding on the next verse another thought mj might be able to expand upon:
Psalms 99:5 Exalt ye the LORD our God, and worship at his footstool; for he is holy.

Mark 12:41 And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.

The lineage seems to carry on from ecclesiastical symbolism through the King's tradition as having the " seat " of government, and most likely thought as guardian over treasury.

Now for this story further down in Mark about the old woman who deposited all of her living, how do you suppose her expenses for life, liberty and happiness were taken care of after that?

Mark 12:44 For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living.

[David Merrill]

This post, that post and this one too might best be read together and given some thought for a Mosaic about current events. - Like as of today according to GEITHNER.

I am the Thirteenth Son on a wet ink perpetual inheritance.


The point being a resulting trust has formed by the US Government gambling on American homeowners going into foreclosure - starting today with GEITHNER offering mortgage-based securities for sale.

[Trust Guy]

Thank You MJ, Quite a thoughtful post. Give me something to ponder as I go about the days chores.

Let’s take a quick look at the debate over the Title of the Constitution ( of / for ) the United States of America.

It doesn’t exist. Take a look at the Document in the National Archives and put that debate to rest.

Document starts with We the People.

I invite you all do your own quick study on the pertinent words.

this Constitution for the United States of America

I wish to direct your inquiry particularly to the word “for”.

FOR, prep. [L. per.; The English, for; to forbid. For corresponds in sense with the L. pro, as fore does with proe, but pro and proe are probably contracted from prod, proed. The Latin por, in composition, as in porrigo, is probably contracted from porro, Gr. which is the English far. The Gr. are from the same root. The radical sense of for is to go, to pass, to advance, to reach or stretch.]

1. Against; in the place of; as a substitute or equivalent, noting equal value or satisfactory compensation, either in barter and sale, in contract, or in punishment. "And Joseph gave them bread in exchange for horses, and for flocks, and for the cattle of the herds;" that is, according to the original, he gave them bread against horses like the Gr. Gen. 48:17.

2. In the place of; instead of; noting substitution of persons, or agency of one in the place of another with equivalent authority. An attorney is empowered to act for his principal. Will you take a letter and deliver it for me at the post office? that is, in my place, or for my benefit.

Please do look at the Webster’s 1828 link provided. There are a total of 31 definitions.

The word “of” is not in the online Webster’s. 3 letter minimum was put up. In the bound edition the section goes on for a column and a half. I have typed a very little from it and pointed out what we consider the most pertinent. It’s worth at least one read through if you can access the bound edition.

OF, prep - [ The primary sense is departing, issuing or proceeding from; but this sense has been modified by usage ]

1. From or out of; proceeding from, as the cause, source, means, author or agent bestowing.

About one column down - Of sometimes implies a part or share.
------------------------------------

Well, I've dallied enough. Got work to do.

Be Well All, TG

[motla68]

Thank You MJ, Quite a thoughtful post. Give me something to ponder as I go about the days chores.

Let’s take a quick look at the debate over the Title of the Constitution ( of / for ) the United States of America.

It doesn’t exist. Take a look at the Document in the National Archives and put that debate to rest.



Document starts with We the People.

I invite you all do your own quick study on the pertinent words.

this Constitution for the United States of America

I wish to direct your inquiry particularly to the word “for”.

FOR, prep. [L. per.; The English, for; to forbid. For corresponds in sense with the L. pro, as fore does with proe, but pro and proe are probably contracted from prod, proed. The Latin por, in composition, as in porrigo, is probably contracted from porro, Gr. which is the English far. The Gr. are from the same root. The radical sense of for is to go, to pass, to advance, to reach or stretch.]

1. Against; in the place of; as a substitute or equivalent, noting equal value or satisfactory compensation, either in barter and sale, in contract, or in punishment. "And Joseph gave them bread in exchange for horses, and for flocks, and for the cattle of the herds;" that is, according to the original, he gave them bread against horses like the Gr. Gen. 48:17.

2. In the place of; instead of; noting substitution of persons, or agency of one in the place of another with equivalent authority. An attorney is empowered to act for his principal. Will you take a letter and deliver it for me at the post office? that is, in my place, or for my benefit.

Please do look at the Webster’s 1828 link provided. There are a total of 31 definitions.

The word “of” is not in the online Webster’s. 3 letter minimum was put up. In the bound edition the section goes on for a column and a half. I have typed a very little from it and pointed out what we consider the most pertinent. It’s worth at least one read through if you can access the bound edition.

OF, prep - [ The primary sense is departing, issuing or proceeding from; but this sense has been modified by usage ]

1. From or out of; proceeding from, as the cause, source, means, author or agent bestowing.

About one column down - Of sometimes implies a part or share.
------------------------------------

Well, I've dallied enough. Got work to do.

Be Well All, TG

Yes, lets look at these words at face value. It does not say men and women, it says for the U.S. of A in trust. Who is your trust in?

I would have felt a little better about it if it would have said: "Constitution for Man in the Providence" , why not? The United Nations is in New York, all of the shipping ports are sold out, china owns a good portion of the debts, basically the capital of the world here, what would be the difference?

A man cannot have 2 masters, he will love the one and hate the other. So on this premise does this Constitution have anything do do with us without our consent?

Disparata Non Debent Jungi.

[David Merrill]

Yes, lets look at these words at face value. It does not say men and women, it says for the U.S. of A in trust. Who is your trust in?

I would have felt a little better about it if it would have said: "Constitution for Man in the Providence" , why not? The United Nations is in New York, all of the shipping ports are sold out, china owns a good portion of the debts, basically the capital of the world here, what would be the difference?

A man cannot have 2 masters, he will love the one and hate the other. So on this premise does this Constitution have anything do do with us without our consent?

Disparata Non Debent Jungi.

You speak of the servants who sign oaths of office, or otherwise accept their appointment (accept a job).

The People of the Preamble are not among them. We do not trust in the USA.

[Trust Guy]

motla,

It is a Trust to preserve inherited Status. The Estate of Freedom being paramount. The law of Inheritance, and the order of decent distribution of such, was handed down by God. God's Law is not commercial. God's Gifts are not taxable. Man's law is commercial. Esau sold his Birth Right. Here lies duality.

The word "Posterity" was employed to avoid naming the Heirs. To do so would have been limiting and made the instrument testamentary in nature. Also to express current condition. "to Ourselves and our Posterity" indicates possession being concurrent. Had it been testamentary, the Estate would not pass until the demise of the testator.

Any property taken under a testamentary instrument ( will ) is considered purchased. All purchase is taxable.

Some info on Deeds Testamentary : http://www.jstor.org/pss/1277805 http://www.jstor.org/pss/1068433

[motla68]

motla,

It is a Trust to preserve inherited Status. The Estate of Freedom being paramount. The law of Inheritance, and the order of decent distribution of such, was handed down by God. God's Law is not commercial. God's Gifts are not taxable. Man's law is commercial. Esau sold his Birth Right. Here lies duality.

The word "Posterity" was employed to avoid naming the Heirs. To do so would have been limiting and made the instrument testamentary in nature. Also to express current condition. "to Ourselves and our Posterity" indicates possession being concurrent. Had it been testamentary, the Estate would not pass until the demise of the testator.

Any property taken under a testamentary instrument ( will ) is considered purchased. All purchase is taxable.

Some info on Deeds Testamentary : http://www.jstor.org/pss/1277805 http://www.jstor.org/pss/1068433

I like the first paragraph, no argument there.

Posterity though it has to be specified, posterity of Abraham or posterity in the estate created by man for commercial purposes?
From the Encyclopedia Britannica:
Although the Declaration of Independence mentioned “Nature’s God” and the “Creator,” the Constitution made no reference to a divine being, Christian or otherwise, and the First Amendment explicitly forbade the establishment of any official church or creed.

Purchase has already been made by Yashuwah, if your first paragraph is true then it would make the foregoing statement about any further purchase made a mute issue.
But if you want to go down the path of purchase and tax anyway, that has been done as well, such example is the Louisiana purchase, if all the land is already been purchased then why are some people having to do the dance with bankers?
See page 2 of the following linked document:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...thkey=CMfv6uQO
Se there where is says the money is really not needed?

Not all purchases are taxable, especially if your a native american like myself. Certain places give you exemption cards when making purchases if this is your status.

You can basically call a deed as in the office of the dead as it once was, county records were once kept in the coroners office of accounting. If I am living through the spirit then what liability do I have to dead wood called paper?
Office of the dead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_the_Dead
" The office of Coroner was formally established in England by Article 20 of the "Articles of Eyre" in September 1194 to "keep the pleas of the Crown" (Latin, custos placitorum coronas) from which the word "coroner" is derived.[7] This role provided a local county official whose primary duty was to protect the financial interest of the crown in criminal proceedings."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coroner

[Trust Guy]

I am unable to establish a monetary value to my Inheritance, being absolute yet incorporeal. While some attempt to charge, or lien, a money value for individual time in dealing with “Authorities” , I do not.

For me, their encroachment on my time or Right is in the nature of Trespass. There is no transfer in cash value or like kind involved. They Trespass and I charge / accuse against same. Should they continue in Trespass after written or verbal Notice, the circumstance becomes actionable. I’ve never had an “Authority” proceed beyond the Notice.

Then again, I am blessed with a generally calm demeanor and assertiveness in such dealings. A soft answer turneth away wrath, and all that

[motla68]

I am unable to establish a monetary value to my Inheritance, being absolute yet incorporeal. While some attempt to charge, or lien, a money value for individual time in dealing with “Authorities” , I do not.

For me, their encroachment on my time or Right is in the nature of Trespass. There is no transfer in cash value or like kind involved. They Trespass and I charge / accuse against same. Should they continue in Trespass after written or verbal Notice, the circumstance becomes actionable. I’ve never had an “Authority” proceed beyond the Notice.

Then again, I am blessed with a generally calm demeanor and assertiveness in such dealings. A soft answer turneth away wrath, and all that

Thank you for the clarification, I never used the word incorporeal to describe ones self, I try to stay away from saying I am " not " such as using incorporeal as this is making a claim upon something that Is only by way of proxy through the creator of the universe.
Also am the same way with authorities, the rookie cops though chalk up my calm demeanour as being on drugs or other intoxication it seems until supervisor is called in to correct the mistake.
In all though no, when the chips are down and it comes to that climatical moment they have backed down every time. The last time communicating with a peace officer it was a situation where someone hit me and the officer was literally asking me permission to write a ticket for expired inspection and registration so that the computer would release the information to her insurance company so that she could get her car fixed. I took the peaceful inhabitant route and let him do it because i knew it was easily reversible charges with the clerk of court.

I think it is coming clearer now that you are actually separating yourself from that system, but for the benefit of the forum attempting to explain your interpretation of how the system works? seems we are mostly within the same conscience in actions.

Bless you brother.

[Trust Guy]

Considerable further reading from one of the under appreciated American Political Philosophers.

"It is only by considering the granted powers, in their true character of trust or delegated powers, that all the various parts of our complicated system of government can be harmonized and explained".- John C. Calhoun, ( 7th Vice President of the United States )
A Discourse on the Constitution and Government of the United States

A Disquisition on Government

John C. Calhoun an Introduction