To start my thoughts here, lets lay the foundational subject here.
- One is of the higher usufruct, natual law, the divine from a supreme being.
Original organic with dominion given to man in their flesh and bone capacity.
Also noted by catholics as the Vicar of Christ the pope or for the rest of us
in special appearance Yahovah / MOST HIGH.
- Another is of the lower usufruct, paper creations in legal trusts. A lower estate.
made made laws / mammon, whom has a Vicar General, the army of Christian
Crusaders.
One emulating the other, but the after thought of man mammon is well aware
of the king of kings when recognized by one applying his rights to self determination.
think about it ... is the law with respect to land in nature the same as the law with respect to water in nature or do they merely operate in the same manner?
By itself, can a fish "survive" on land?
By himself, can a man "survive" under water?
Do both follow "laws" specific to the nature of their environment?
Beneath the surface, do both sets of "laws" operate exactly the same?
Just because something you perceive isn't "natural" does not mean it does not have a set of "natural laws" specific to that "environment" ... A dude from Venus will have a different set of "natural laws" than a dude from Earth because the "environment" differs, however, in the grand scheme of things, both sets of "laws" will operate EXACTLY the same.
The plain and simple jist of it is man would not be here if "god" did not "surrender" the usufruct.
God surrendered the usufruct to universe;
Universe surrenders the usufruct to nature;
Nature surrenders the usufruct to man;
Man surrenders the usufruct to "his creation" as man is made in the "image of god".
If one does not, then how does one's "creation" "be live" if it does not have use of "one's fruit"?
Further discussion on the secondary usufruct;
The difference is that their venue is not natural law so even the natural law might need
to be expressed in a language they understand, what good is dominion if it is not used?
Where does it say biblically that we were to own something ?
natural law is merely the natural way a law operates within an environment ..... the "operation of law" in a court (or world of fiction) is EXACTLY the same as the "operation of law" in nature. "As it is above, so shall it be below."
The "In Jure Cessio" or "In Iure Cessio" (both the same) hearing is in operation of the natural law of that environment, it is "words" and "language" "they" "understand" and "comprehend" as is the "usufruct".
It is a hearing to surrender something and a usufruct can only be surrendered "In Jure Cessio".
Usufruct is susceptible only of in iure cessio. For an owner can cede in iure to another person the usufruct of his thing, so that the other gets the usufruct whilst he himself retains bare property - The Institutes of Gaius (F. de Zulueta ed. & trans., 1946, vol. 1) pg.16
[gives new meaning to standing "naked" before "god", huh?]
Am I mistake or is it said, All roads lead to Rome?
Am I mistaken or are the courts operation of "Roman Law"?
Am I mistaken or did that book you call a "bible" have its origins in Rome, as well as Egypt, Mesopotamia, Sumeria, etc..... same story, different "environments"?
I am "the apple tree" .. I wish to "surrender" "my fruit" to whomever wishes to "claim" "ownership" (usufructuary interest) of the "fruit" with the understanding "the tree" is not to be harmed nor altered in any way ... in accordance with the "natural laws" of both "environments": "As it is above, so shall it be below."
I also suggest doing this under CIPA (Classified Information Procedures Act) and Executive Order 13526 1.3(e), exceptional cases as a "certificate holder" and belief this is a matter pertaining to national security.
Also, the statute in Florida 697.02 "nature of a mortgage" just confirms the "mortgage" is actually just a "usufructuary interest" in the "property described"; the warranty deed "guarantees" the one using the name possession and use.
All statutes do is govern an "usufructuary interest" "surrendered" to the "public".
"dominion" is not ownership. It is an exercise of control or governance over something: a usufruct.
"I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self evident, "that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it." - Thomas Jefferson
The lower usufruct then serves the higher usufruct or lower estate serves higher estate. This is why accepting oath of office is so vitally important, a man's word is his bond.
Continuing on I have been doing some experimentation with some stuff again,
very interesting topics:
self determination / will of man / an interest creates an estate.
Have been able to get a couple government forms put through without signing
anything, just leaving the signature line blank, how did i know it worked because
it was used for a duplicate ssn card and 3 weeks later I got the card.
The only thing done differently was at the bottom next to where you normally
sign instead of checking off beneficiary I checked other and then on the line
next to that wrote in Grantor.
Same thing with IRS form 56, filled it out and hand delivered it to the front
office lady, she stamped it and made a copy for me.
a couple other government forms pushed through just by printing the name,
not signing, irs form 8832 elections for entities , for jurisdiction for them
entities I wrote down " one world united nations under the most high yahweh: the covenant ",
a couple weeks later received confirmation that the election was accepted.
Currently working on changing this for another entity and using Yahavah, not Yahweh.
Well there you have it folks a " express interest creating an estate", all for the Glory of God (Yahovah). A living man dong what needs to be done, giving love to thy neighbor then a father pleased with a son the love returned from the one MOST HIGH.
Usufruct comes from the Latin expression usus et fructus, meaning “using and enjoyment.”
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by motla68
