Presumed Dead

[allodial]

A Joint Declaration by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, China, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Poland, South Africa, Yugoslavia
....

Having subscribed to a common program of purposes and principles embodied in the Joint Declaration of the President of the United States of America and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland dated August 14, 1941, known as the Atlantic Charter.

Being convinced that complete victory over their enemies is essential to defend life, liberty, independence and religious freedom, and to preserve human rights and justice in their own lands as well as in other lands, and that they are now engaged in a common struggle against savage and brutal forces seeking to subjugate the world,

DECLARE:

(1) Each Government pledges itself to employ its full resources, military or economic, against those members of the Tripartite Pact :and its adherents with which such government is at war.

(2) Each Government pledges itself to cooperate with the Governments signatory hereto and not to make a separate armistice or peace with the enemies.

Human resources?

[Michael Joseph]

I saw a comment by a Michael-Joseph on a recent thread. Is that Michael Joseph here?

That blog though, it has a lot of promises that something big will happen very soon! That strikes me familiar because of some RAP/RuSA tones. I do not have enough to go on though.

Be Careful.

I do not post on that site. Someone recently sent me an email telling me they saw my writings on this site. but they are not my issue.

Shalom,
MJ

[David Merrill]

I do not post on that site. Someone recently sent me an email telling me they saw my writings on this site. but they are not my issue.

Shalom,
MJ

Thank you MJ;


I guess it's a big world out there - cyberspace!

[outlierquest]

Here's my take on the presumption of death in the relationship to the alleged Cestui Que Vie trust. Your thoughts will be appreciated. Peace, Phillip Michael

[Michael Joseph]

Here's my take on the presumption of death in the relationship to the alleged Cestui Que Vie trust. Your thoughts will be appreciated. Peace, Phillip Michael

Phillip Michael,

I base my whole existence in the Scripture. Therefore I will answer you from Scripture.

Chavvah [Eve] was NOT the first woman. She however was the woman made from The Man [eth-ha-aw-dawm] - the English is LAZY as it recognizes The Man as Adam which is really Aw-Dawm [to show blood in the face]. Now there is ONLY one race that can show blood in the face and that is ruddy complected. If you think me a racist then you have not studied the Word for Elohim [Family] Created and said it is VERY GOOD. Each is called to duty in the Earth but few recognize the calling if they hear it at all.

But I digress. Chavvah is the mother of All Living BECAUSE thru her DNA [she and The Man], their VINEYARD, comes forth Yehoshuah - Yehovah Saves. Did you get that? That DNA was PURE and undefiled from Yehoshuah all the way to The MAN. And The MAN was son of God. Therefore you are either DEAD in the World, surrounded by Thorns, or you are Alive in Yehoshuah.

It is a Choice, that ONLY you can make for you. For man IS NOT immortal, neither is his soul - but the spirit is. therefore man became a living soul - MORTAL TO DIE.

Yehoshuah gave men who are BEGOTTEN in the Spirit but not yet BORN a power of attorney. Now I know that former statement is a bit confusing so I will elaborate.

A mother holds an egg within her and in it holds life. But life cannot be imparted unless The Man issues forth his sperm. When the egg and the sperm unite there is a Begetting of Life, but the Life is not yet BORN. The Child remains within mother for 40 weeks.

When a man or woman receives Salvation in Yehoshuah, they are BEGOTTEN children IN the Spirit, but they are not yet BORN as Yehoshuah has yet to return. Therefore we LIVE AND MOVE AND HAVE OUR BEING IN HIM [YEHOSHUAH]. Now it is the woman, thru her waters, that is ONE rerequisite to Salvation - the Nephilim are excluded - they did not come thru waters of a woman - but the OTHER requisite for Salvation, is Repentance, which is a way of saying that you are actively conforming to the Character of the Family of GOD.

Now it is the Holy Spirit that Begets children. For do you not know that Yehoshuah was begotten in the flesh by a Flesh woman [waters of a woman] and in the Spirit by the Holy Spirit of GOD. Therefore in the analogy, we are the woman, and the Holy Spirit is the Man - begetting Life - but we hold Life within us IN CHOICE.

Therefore absent Yehoshuah you are dead - Dry Bones.

Eze 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of Yehovah and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,

Eze 37:2 And caused me to pass by them round about: and, behold, there were very many in the open valley; and, lo, they were very dry.

Eze 37:3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Yehovah ELOHIM, thou knowest.

Eze 37:4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of Yehovah.

Do you not see that the plan of the family ELOHIM is to produce progeny - begotten of the Holy Spirit. But I look to another time, now in the Earth we are witnesses to the Glory of ELOHIM [family of GOD].


Will you keep your vineyard, clear of throns, or will you allow Jezebel to transfer your vineyard to Satan [Ahab]? That would be Jezebel daughter of eth Baal = emphatically THE BAAL. - The Great Whore - a United Church - as Agent of Satan - come to our Church [state] whatever.


She is Royalty - has it made in the shade... don't you want what she has, I HOPE NOT.

Rev 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

Rev 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

Shalom,
Michael Joseph

[Chex]

Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11

But some seem to want the law changed: The government should change the law to make it easier for families of missing people to deal with their affairs, the Commons Justice Select Committee says.

At present in England and Wales there is no time limit on how long financial affairs remain in a person's name where there is no death certificate. This means life insurance policies that would pay off mortgages cannot be used.

In Scotland it is assumed a court will grant presumption of death after seven years, a system which has "worked cleanly and clearly", committee chairman Sir Alan Beith told BBC Radio 4's Today Programme.

Read more here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17114868

Read more here: http://www.publications.parliament.u...663/166302.htm

3. When a person dies the executors of the will, anyone named in the will or, in the absence of a will, next of kin are able to obtain a grant of probate (or letters of administration if the deceased died without making a will) on production of the death certificate. Death certificates state that two doctors are satisfied that the deceased died from an identified cause. When a person goes missing, however, even if the circumstances of the disappearance strongly suggest he or she has died, the impossibility of a death certificate being issued leaves their affairs unresolved.

This type of document does not constitute a UK death certificate and does not replace a locally issued death certificate. Consular death registration is not a legal requirement but it means: an entry will be made in the death register by the British Consulate in the country concerned; an applicant will be able to obtain a British style certificate; and a record of the death will be held by the General Register Office in the UK

[David Merrill]

Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11

But some seem to want the law changed: The government should change the law to make it easier for families of missing people to deal with their affairs, the Commons Justice Select Committee says.

At present in England and Wales there is no time limit on how long financial affairs remain in a person's name where there is no death certificate. This means life insurance policies that would pay off mortgages cannot be used.

In Scotland it is assumed a court will grant presumption of death after seven years, a system which has "worked cleanly and clearly", committee chairman Sir Alan Beith told BBC Radio 4's Today Programme.

Read more here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17114868

Read more here: http://www.publications.parliament.u...663/166302.htm

3. When a person dies the executors of the will, anyone named in the will or, in the absence of a will, next of kin are able to obtain a grant of probate (or letters of administration if the deceased died without making a will) on production of the death certificate. Death certificates state that two doctors are satisfied that the deceased died from an identified cause. When a person goes missing, however, even if the circumstances of the disappearance strongly suggest he or she has died, the impossibility of a death certificate being issued leaves their affairs unresolved.

This type of document does not constitute a UK death certificate and does not replace a locally issued death certificate. Consular death registration is not a legal requirement but it means: an entry will be made in the death register by the British Consulate in the country concerned; an applicant will be able to obtain a British style certificate; and a record of the death will be held by the General Register Office in the UK

From a bigger perspective allegedly one can view the entire UPPER CASE NOMENCLATURE as treating somebody dead. I think it is speculated mostly by an Internet guru named Robb Ryder. It would mean that in secret the Bar Associations have treated one not objecting or rescinding the registration of the birth certificate after seven years that the ESTATE then reverts to a usufruct of the state. This is allegedly supported by the old rules for probate court but I doubt that it is valid anywhere today.

I really don't buy into it myself but do not want to discredit somebody just because I am not interested enough to learn about their theories. I have said recently though about Robb that if I get interested I know where the Probate Court is downtown and will start by picking up the published Rules of the Probate Court. Or just find them online. I respect the brain trust of suitors and some of them are mildly entheusiastic about Robb Ryder videos. But even so, even after trying his theories out all they get are non-responsive blank stares.

I believe it is mostly his software and voice. He has a deep assuring voice and a video program that can produce a video as he surfs. Therefore he can produce a video off what is basically a surfing excursion without any source material. It is just a cyberspace daydream that he records and puts out there on his blog. It is the product of too much information by search engine. He can collect confirmations that are baseless.

Here is another example of the phenomenon I am describing. This fellow has some face recognition software that he plays on Google Pictures and has deduced by the hits that there are professional witnesses that are hired to run to the scene of events and are given scripts to recite to the News Crews! In my opinion he is just getting way too many hits. As I brought you his home page link it looks like today's news is that James BROLIN is actually President BUSH, by the identical earprint! Do you see my point?

With Robb though, he really needs to play his theories through source material instead of Wiki and other cyber-searches.




Regards,

David Merrill.

[David Merrill]

P.S.

I have found another example.

Looking through the page of directions/advice this looks real sweet! It smacks of the reality check with "satisfy all the liens" and you clear up your property title. This is the sort of thing that suitors in the brain trust try out for all of us. It is part of the brain trust.

Now that it is out there we may hear back about it. If not, either nobody got interested or it just did not turn out to be as interesting as Robb makes it sound in the initial post. Most of the time as I gather from experience with Robbs (I believe that is actually Robert RYTLEWSKI) blog is that somewhere in the actual application of the instructions you will be stonewalled by a clerk that has absolutely no idea what you are talking about.



I believe that this may be akin to the concept of a cestui que vie blanket trust. My mental model always comes back to the man being in contract with the US central bank (Fed) or not. Extraneous symptoms of being in contract will verify all sorts of profound theories too.

Today in ACIM class (A Course in Miracles) we were going over some of the ego thought system and viewing it through the lens of the Holy Spirit as the only one line of thought.

The only safety lies in extending the Holy Spirit, because as you see His gentleness in others your own mind perceives itself as totally harmless. 2 Once it can accept this fully, it sees no need to protect itself. 3 The protection of God then dawns upon it, assuring it that it is perfectly safe forever. 4 The perfectly safe are wholly benign. 5 They bless because they know that they are blessed. 6 Without anxiety the mind is wholly kind, and because it extends beneficence it is beneficent. 7 Safety is the complete relinquishment of attack. 8 No compromise is possible in this. 9 Teach attack in any form and you have learned it, and it will hurt you. 10 Yet this learning is not immortal, and you can unlearn it by not teaching it.

T-6.III.4. Since you cannot [not] teach, your salvation lies in teaching the exact opposite of everything the ego believes. 2 This is how you will learn the truth that will set you free, and will keep you free as others learn it of you. 3 The only way to have peace is to teach peace. 4 By teaching peace you must learn it yourself, because you cannot teach what you still dissociate. 5 Only thus can you win back the knowledge that you threw away. 6 An idea that you share you must have. 7 It awakens in your mind through the conviction of teaching it. 8 Everything you teach you are learning. 9 Teach only love, and learn that love is yours and you are love.

IV. The Only Answer

T-6.IV.1. Remember that the Holy Spirit is the Answer, not the question. 2 The ego always speaks first. 3 It is capricious and does not mean its maker well. 4 It believes, and correctly, that its maker may withdraw his support from it at any moment.

Now that looks like ego-bashing, I know. But elsewhere in the book we are promised:

Spirit need not be taught, but the ego must be. 2 Learning is ultimately perceived as frightening because it leads to the relinquishment, not the destruction, of the ego to the light of spirit. 3 This is the change the ego must fear, because it does not share my charity. 4 My lesson was like yours, and because I learned it I can teach it. 5 I will never attack your ego, but I am trying to teach you how its thought system arose. 6 When I remind you of your true creation, your ego cannot but respond with fear.

I pondered a parallel with the Federal Reserve System as a thought system. It's ego however is not inherent because it is not alive and capable of a real spirit - except maybe greed of the bankers and their $10M bonuses etc. The utility is to create the illusion through unwitting endorsements of its private credit that government debt is money. To convince the average man to overlook the absurdity that one can buy and sell debt at all! China buys Australian farmland though, with this illusion of American debt (SDR's = Special Drawing Rights) the measure of how conditioned we are to sign that naked contract of endorsement on the backside of our paychecks.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Anthony Joseph]

Actually it is Robert Allen.

I believe he does realize and recognize that Robert Allen is his true name from what I have read. He uses "Robb Ryder" as a cyberspace handle much like "allodial" and "Treefarmer". His family name is RYTLEWSKI however I have not seen him use the format Robert Allen RYTLEWSKI in order to separate and distinguish the True Name from the Family or Surname. Much like Team Law, the "Robert Allen Rytlewski" is only distinguished from "Robert Allen Rytlewski" by a qualifier after; (a trust), (a sovereign man). That doesn't quite "cut it" in my book.

Robb also is always missing the key element of being "redeemed" by declaration and demand of lawful money of exchange pursuant to, while absent benefit from, Title 12 U.S.C. ?411.

His theories and offerings are always given freely and with the caveat that he is new to it and just providing information for others to ponder and utilize if they find it worthy. He is not a self-proclaimed "guru" for hire and freely admits often that he is on a exploratative journey and welcomes anyone who offers clarity and truth.

I do believe however that he is missing the boat on redeeming lawful money as remedy. He does dig up many law definitions and citations much like a member on the old sui juris forum named after a dog; "law hound", "law puppy" something like that, and he always highlighted in the same way with either bold blue or red type. He was a good resource for digging up info.

[David Merrill]

Actually it is Robert Allen.

I believe he does realize and recognize that Robert Allen is his true name from what I have read. He uses "Robb Ryder" as a cyberspace handle much like "allodial" and "Treefarmer". His family name is RYTLEWSKI however I have not seen him use the format Robert Allen RYTLEWSKI in order to separate and distinguish the True Name from the Family or Surname. Much like Team Law, the "Robert Allen Rytlewski" is only distinguished from "Robert Allen Rytlewski" by a qualifier after; (a trust), (a sovereign man). That doesn't quite "cut it" in my book.

Robb also is always missing the key element of being "redeemed" by declaration and demand of lawful money of exchange pursuant to, while absent benefit from, Title 12 U.S.C. ?411.

His theories and offerings are always given freely and with the caveat that he is new to it and just providing information for others to ponder and utilize if they find it worthy. He is not a self-proclaimed "guru" for hire and freely admits often that he is on a exploratative journey and welcomes anyone who offers clarity and truth.

I do believe however that he is missing the boat on redeeming lawful money as remedy. He does dig up many law definitions and citations much like a member on the old sui juris forum named after a dog; "law hound", "law puppy" something like that, and he always highlighted in the same way with either bold blue or red type. He was a good resource for digging up info.

Thank you. Without the redemptive model as foundation I believe meandering through is hit and miss. I made comment elsewhere:

Delovio v. Boit (STORY 1815) is the difinitive doctrine in case law. All insurance is admiralty (bottomry). What the video lacks, causing skewed doctrine to develop around that misunderstanding is that endorsed Fed notes are insurance policies. When you redeem them you are making your claim. Even if you get the form, residual from a 1971 Treasury policy, not laws from Congress, Federal Reserve notes you did not make your claim and redeem the notes if you signed the naked contract of endorsement. Therefore the notes are still waiting claim and fall into admiralty as insurance policies.

So you are either in contract with the Fed which is not a government agency or you are not. That is the diversity of citizenship in the Libel of Review. Back when I saved Jim's castle for him (his usufruct) we did not know about redeeming lawful money but if you find the links [Link 1. Link 2.] to the Certificates of Search you find the clerk of court intentionally changing Jim's name from James Roland to James (nmn) ROLAND. No Middle Name!

If you redeem the note it is no longer like an insurance policy (bottomry) and no longer awaiting claim.

Hopefully we can come across some first hand account of a homeowner cleaning up his title.


Regards,

David Merrill.