A birth certificate is USEd as a form of evidence.
A record is created on one's behalf.
Would the NAME in fact be the name of the trust?
If it is a trust, would the beneficiary be the general public?
A birth certificate is USEd as a form of evidence.
A record is created on one's behalf.
Would the NAME in fact be the name of the trust?
If it is a trust, would the beneficiary be the general public?
Last edited by shikamaru; 07-20-11 at 01:16 PM.
As I understand it, the birth certificate is a form of evidence of an event. What event? The creation of a new trust vessel by the STATE in which the event occurred. How did the event occur? The natural mother and father of the new born baby identified themselves as fiduciaries and volunteer trustees by providing the NAME of the trust vessel formed around their own nativity. Then, the information provided (Given Name + Family Nomen) was taken by the hospital and turned into the STATE so as to from and create yet another and distinct trust vessel around the new born baby: First Middle LAST. The hope is that when this baby becomes of age to produce sweat equity, that he/she will take on the same role as mommy and daddy and offer him/herself as the fiduciary for the First Middle LAST STATE creation in order for the STATE to harness and harvest that energy and sweat equity unto itself. I say "hope" in jest because there is little hope involved when there is total control of information, education and societal conditioning. It is virtually a "slam dunk" success 95-98% of the time - I wonder why???Originally Posted by shikamaru
The trust NAME is created and a volunteer to take on the burdens of that vessel is conditioned into that role. The STATE would otherwise be the trustee with the burden, obligation and liability of that trust vessel. We have the choice to volunteer into that role/office or to decline that character even though we may be a mere user of it at arms length. We have the right of use since it was created around our nativity, however, we cannot be forced into the STATE's obligation and liability without our consent or silent acquiescence.
The beneficiary question, I imagine, will bring many answers and opinions.
If one believes that the United States of America is a private TRUST by and for only the 55 signors of the Constitution and their direct descendants, then the "Posterity" of those signors are the beneficiaries of anything created from within that Trust structure.
If one believes that the United States of America is the servant and governing force for all people on this land, then the people at large are the beneficiaries of that Trust structure.
I have not yet determined the actual nature and original intent of the Trust structure known as The United States of America.
Absolutely. The property (name) is pledged and held in trust. The beneficiary is the corporate STATE.
http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/showt...ledge-Document
Oh snap! I forgot the name being property. So, the name is the asset.
Thanks, EZ.
I believe we must keep our focus on the Oaths of Office. Article VI of the federal constitution is where the trusts begin. And they end there too. An official must subscribe an oath of office, or an affirmation to be in a position of trust.
I Second .
Not to be construed as Legal Advice, nor a recommended Course of Action. I will stand corrected.
Heh.... office of trust vs. office of profit
My favorite question for any "Executive" Agent . Will I ever get an answer from one of them ?Heh.... office of trust vs. office of profit
Not to be construed as Legal Advice, nor a recommended Course of Action. I will stand corrected.
No. Their goose is cooked either way they answer.
Use the question to compel judicial performance - Click Here.
Sorry Anthony Joseph;
I imagine your leg is healed up enough for a good laugh!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote