Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: People's Public Trust

  1. #1

    People's Public Trust

    I have been seeing lots of "The People's Public Trust" info going around lately.
    What does everyone think about it?

    http://oppt-in.com/

    http://www.peoplestrust1776.org/

    http://wakeup-world.com/2013/02/18/a...losed-by-oppt/

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    I have been seeing lots of "The People's Public Trust" info going around lately.
    What does everyone think about it?

    http://oppt-in.com/

    http://www.peoplestrust1776.org/

    http://wakeup-world.com/2013/02/18/a...losed-by-oppt/
    Scam .... possible honey pot.
    I would avoid.

  3. #3
    When Were Our Governments Corporatized?

    It all started with the introduction of the Reserve Bank system. When the Federal Reserve Act was implemented in the United States in 1913, Congressman Charles Lindberg warned the US Congress in a Congressional Record dated, December 22, 1913 (vol. 51) that an inevitable consequence of instituting the Federal Reserve system was that – using their power to inflate and deflate an economy – corporations would take control.

    ......

    Source: http://wakeup-world.com/2013/02/18/a...losed-by-oppt/
    Now that right there is a load of bull ....

    Compare and contrast it with this:

    The first exception was, 'that, at the time of the offence charged, the United States were not a body corporate known in law.' But the Court are of a different opinion. From the moment of their association, the United States necessarily became a body corporate; for, there was no superior from whom that character could otherwise be derived. In England, the king, lords, and commons, are certainly a body corporate; and yet there never was any charter or statute, by which they were expressly so created.

    Respublica v. Sweers (1779)
    We've been dealing with corporations the entire time since all the way back to England.

    I imagine the rest of the site has more of such nonsense as well ....
    Last edited by shikamaru; 02-20-13 at 09:56 PM.

  4. #4
    Can we forget James Timothy Turner and his Republic for the United States of America (RuSA)??

  5. #5
    Check out this article about Timothy GEITHNER.

    "We are thrilled to welcome Tim back to the Council on Foreign Relations," said CFR President Richard N. Haass. "Both at Treasury and at the New York Federal Reserve, Tim was a tireless, creative, and responsible custodian of the public trust. His coming to CFR only strengthens our capacity to produce thoughtful analysis of issues at the intersection of economic, political, and strategic developments."
    Now look at the Custodians of the Record:




    Then examine Article VI of the Constitution.

    (3) Oath to support constitution. The senators and representatives beforementioned, and the members of the several legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound, by oath or affirmation, to support this constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
    Now take a look at the trust within the trust. (attached below) And note this sketch is of WASHINGTON's inauguration:


    So you might ask yourself how can there be no religious test for any position in Government when there is a definite religious test to get into the Masons?

    Are you starting to see the light?
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  6. #6
    Let's look at it like this as well....

    The constitutions of the U.S. and the several States are public trusts.

    How well are those going for anyone?

  7. #7
    It always seem to be that once a year there is something that comes out that sounds to good to be true.
    Promising the moon.
    Like Pastor Tony King did with the DTC.

    Maybe the "peoples public trust" is the next one.

    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Let's look at it like this as well....

    The constitutions of the U.S. and the several States are public trusts.

    How well are those going for anyone?
    They worked pretty darn good for the folks that signed them.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by walter View Post
    They worked pretty darn good for the folks that signed them.
    Indeed ....

  9. #9
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,427
    Quote Originally Posted by shikamaru View Post
    Scam .... possible honey pot.
    I would avoid.

    I like your style. Show me the Trust and I will then decide if i want to place my Trust in the OPPT. This is so basic.



    So now, where were the UCC filings made? Were they made within a Sovereign States Registry? Now consider this in light of this so called OPPT. This OPPT might have its own UCC and its own Registry. If the filings are made in another's UCC well then see CHOICE OF LAW AND FORUM......




    § 5-116. Choice of Law and Forum.

    (a) The liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser for action or omission is governed by the law of the jurisdiction chosen by an agreement in the form of a record signed or otherwise authenticated by the affected parties in the manner provided in Section 5-104 or by a provision in the person's letter of credit, confirmation, or other undertaking. The jurisdiction whose law is chosen need not bear any relation to the transaction.

    (b) Unless subsection (a) applies, the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser for action or omission is governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the person is located. The person is considered to be located at the address indicated in the person's undertaking. If more than one address is indicated, the person is considered to be located at the address from which the person's undertaking was issued. For the purpose of jurisdiction, choice of law, and recognition of interbranch letters of credit, but not enforcement of a judgment, all branches of a bank are considered separate juridical entities and a bank is considered to be located at the place where its relevant branch is considered to be located under this subsection.

    (c) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser is governed by any rules of custom or practice, such as the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, to which the letter of credit, confirmation, or other undertaking is expressly made subject. If (i) this article would govern the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser under subsection (a) or (b), (ii) the relevant undertaking incorporates rules of custom or practice, and (iii) there is conflict between this article and those rules as applied to that undertaking, those rules govern except to the extent of any conflict with the nonvariable provisions specified in Section 5-103(c).

    (d) If there is conflict between this article and Article 3, 4, 4A, or 9, this article governs.

    (e) The forum for settling disputes arising out of an undertaking within this article may be chosen in the manner and with the binding effect that governing law may be chosen in accordance with subsection (a).


    =======

    But lets just say the OPPT has filed their UCC filings in the United States - and they claim the United States is bankrupt and there is no government - IS THIS NOT DOUBLE MINDED?

    Either the framers of this OPPT are ignorant or this is something other than it is being propounded. It is my contention it is the latter.

    The OPPT have Trustees - sign up - and make them your Sovereigns! If there is just me and the Creator, then I am under the Creator's Law. And my status depends on my relationship with the Creator. So lets stop pretending! I don't need a catholic priest or any trustee to speak to the Creator for me. I desire to return to my mother's house and sit down under the Apple Tree.

    Son_8:5 Who is this that cometh up from the wilderness, leaning upon her beloved? I raised thee up under the apple tree: there thy mother brought thee forth: there she brought thee forth that bare thee.

    Having said the foregoing, I would fully expect the masses to run like mad to something like OPPT. It sounds so good.

    ================================================== ============================

    PEE WEE COAL vs U.S.A which shows you all of those Persons are the Children of the U.S. As such the U.S. has both the profits and the liability for its persons.

    So then, you being free, Choose.

    What? do I need another Moses to do this for my? Why don't I do it myself! Isn't that taking full liability for myself?

    See now the OPPT is just MEDIATING a Trust Agreement For You. Just like Moses did for Israel.

    continuing.....

    Those who create Constitutions want to engage in commerce - therefor a Uniform Commercial Code - makes a level playing field - and it can be varied by agreement. Therefore all the States must have this in their code and they do.


    Quoting Missouri Revised Statutes
    Chapter 400
    Uniform Commercial Code
    Section 400-001.102

    August 28, 2012


    Purposes--rules of construction--variation by agreement.
    400.1-102. (1) This chapter shall be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies.
    (2) Underlying purposes and policies of this chapter are
    (a) to simplify, clarify and modernize the law governing commercial transactions;
    (b) to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage and agreement of the parties;
    (c) to make uniform the law among the various jurisdictions.
    (3) The effect of provisions of this chapter may be varied by agreement, except as otherwise provided in this chapter and except that the obligations of good faith, diligence, reasonableness and care prescribed by this chapter may not be disclaimed by agreement but the parties may by agreement determine the standards by which the performance of such obligations is to be measured if such standards are not manifestly unreasonable.

    (4) The presence in certain provisions of this chapter of the words "unless otherwise agreed" or words of similar import does not imply that the effect of other provisions may not be varied by agreement under subsection (3).



    § 1-302. Variation by Agreement.

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) or elsewhere in [the Uniform Commercial Code], the effect of provisions of [the Uniform Commercial Code] may be varied by agreement.

    (b) The obligations of good faith, diligence, reasonableness, and care prescribed by [the Uniform Commercial Code] may not be disclaimed by agreement. The parties, by agreement, may determine the standards by which the performance of those obligations is to be measured if those standards are not manifestly unreasonable. Whenever [the Uniform Commercial Code] requires an action to be taken within a reasonable time, a time that is not manifestly unreasonable may be fixed by agreement.

    (c) The presence in certain provisions of [the Uniform Commercial Code] of the phrase "unless otherwise agreed", or words of similar import, does not imply that the effect of other provisions may not be varied by agreement under this section.



    § 5-116. Choice of Law and Forum.

    (a) The liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser for action or omission is governed by the law of the jurisdiction chosen by an agreement in the form of a record signed or otherwise authenticated by the affected parties in the manner provided in Section 5-104 or by a provision in the person's letter of credit, confirmation, or other undertaking. The jurisdiction whose law is chosen need not bear any relation to the transaction.

    (b) Unless subsection (a) applies, the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser for action or omission is governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the person is located. The person is considered to be located at the address indicated in the person's undertaking. If more than one address is indicated, the person is considered to be located at the address from which the person's undertaking was issued. For the purpose of jurisdiction, choice of law, and recognition of interbranch letters of credit, but not enforcement of a judgment, all branches of a bank are considered separate juridical entities and a bank is considered to be located at the place where its relevant branch is considered to be located under this subsection.

    (c) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser is governed by any rules of custom or practice, such as the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, to which the letter of credit, confirmation, or other undertaking is expressly made subject. If (i) this article would govern the liability of an issuer, nominated person, or adviser under subsection (a) or (b), (ii) the relevant undertaking incorporates rules of custom or practice, and (iii) there is conflict between this article and those rules as applied to that undertaking, those rules govern except to the extent of any conflict with the nonvariable provisions specified in Section 5-103(c).

    (d) If there is conflict between this article and Article 3, 4, 4A, or 9, this article governs.

    (e) The forum for settling disputes arising out of an undertaking within this article may be chosen in the manner and with the binding effect that governing law may be chosen in accordance with subsection (a).


    § 5-103. Scope.

    (c) With the exception of this subsection, subsections (a) and (d), Sections 5-102(a)(9) and (10), 5-106(d), and 5-114(d), and except to the extent prohibited in Sections 1-302 and 5-117(d), the effect of this article may be varied by agreement or by a provision stated or incorporated by reference in an undertaking. A term in an agreement or undertaking generally excusing liability or generally limiting remedies for failure to perform obligations is not sufficient to vary obligations prescribed by this article.

    (d) Rights and obligations of an issuer to a beneficiary or a nominated person under a letter of credit are independent of the existence, performance, or nonperformance of a contract or arrangement out of which the letter of credit arises or which underlies it, including contracts or arrangements between the issuer and the applicant and between the applicant and the beneficiary.

    CONTINUING...
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    https://www.lawfulmoneytrust.com

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  10. #10
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,427
    CONTINUED from previous post

    =======================

    So now you see the Monopoly Board - do you want to play? And, if so, do you see how you can vary the rules but only by agreement - which means if you claim rights, then you agree to certain obligations.

    We all want Equity, right?


    NC General Statutes - UCC

    § 25?1?302. Variation by agreement.

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this section or elsewhere in this Chapter, the effect of provisions of this Chapter may be varied by agreement.

    (b) The obligations of good faith, diligence, reasonableness, and care prescribed by this Chapter may not be disclaimed by agreement. The parties, by agreement, may determine the standards by which the performance of those obligations is to be measured if those standards are not manifestly unreasonable. Whenever this Chapter requires an action to be taken within a reasonable time, a time that is not manifestly unreasonable may be fixed by agreement.

    (c) The presence in certain provisions of this Chapter of the phrase "unless otherwise agreed," or words of similar import, does not imply that the effect of other provisions may not be varied by agreement under this section. (1899, c. 733, s. 193; Rev., s. 2343; C.S., s. 2978; 1965, c. 700, s. 1; 2006?112, s. 1.)


    ====================

    HAVE YOU PUT THIS TOGETHER YET? What all of the forgoing is telling you is that if you make a use of FIRST MIDDLE LAST, then you cannot disclaim certain obligations - you might try - but it will simply be ignored. However this in no way diminishes the Right [LEGAL RIGHT] to make a Demand for Lawful Money - because FRN's are NOT money.

    Now then ask yourself a question - WHO SETTLED THE U.C.C.? See a higher Law? If you make a New State, THEN you must also make a UCC for that State if you desire to do commerce with other States! Else the new State is BARRED in Commerce.

    So Pray Tell - where did the OPPT file its UCC claim and also has anyone seen the Trust?

    Oh, one other item: If the government has been foreclosed upon OR if the banks have been foreclosed upon, which in fact means the government is is default - BECAUSE banks get license from governments - so then WHO FORECLOSED? And am I so slow as to claim UNDER a bankruptcy or claim AGAINST a bankruptcy? I think not. That would be me providing evidence against myself.



    Rights flow from Obligations. This is the ONE WORLD TRUST that everyone is so against except it has been RE-FRAMED from "New World Order" to "here is your 5 Billion Dollars". This is exactly the Greed, Lust and Fear response being manifested without - by those who would seek to pacify the baby - who are creating a NEW WOMB of security. Now this may not be THE One World Trust, as there are other possibilities - but it is all the same.

    Jacob married four women - Wisdom, Understanding, Knowledge and Prudence. All four are telling me - RUN FOREST RUN.

    Shalom,
    MJ
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    https://www.lawfulmoneytrust.com

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •