What's in a NAME?

[salsero]

The trust in question is the Social Security Trust, established by FDR, and into which he placed all the assets of the US government, pledged as collateral for the national debt. The pledge is in favor of the bankers who held the debt, now identified as the IMF. When a child is born, the Labor Department registers the birth certificate as property of the government, Accepts it For Value, and pledges it to the debt by putting the NAME into the trust. The IMF, through the Federal Reserve, can now issue more debt, as they have more collateral. The Trustee (Sec of Treasury, an employee of the IMF, as the US has no Treasury, ie, the US is in bankruptcy receivership) makes the presumption that the child will want to be obligated for the (odious) debt, and thus will later confirm the presumption, or at least will be too ignorant to rebut it. The legal title to the estate belonging to the NAME is held under a security agreement, because of the debt to which it has now become an obligee. You the natural person still 'own' the NAME; actually you are the accommodation agent for the NAME, so you control it, which is the primary feature of ownership. And you can write to the Trustee at any time and tell him to dissolve the trust and return the res to you, except that it has these liens against it due to the debt you agreed to be responsible for. So you have to discharge those liens first, by rebutting the presumption that you wanted to be responsible for the debt, and then demanding that all those transactions which incurred the debt, through endorsing debt securities of the Federal Reserve, should have been transacted in lawful money, which fully discharges all debt. Then you tell the Trustee to dissolve the trust and return the res to you. Now you have no trust in the federal government, no obligations for the debt, and no contract with the Federal Reserve. And now you are not a US citizen, but a free American citizen, with Constitutional rights clearly acknowledged by the government, ie, you are now above the federal government, as it should/must be. Now all the federal rules, codes, and regulations do not apply to you; these codes, rules, and regulations only apply to US citizens, ie, citizens identified as part of the res, subject to the trust (obligees of the debt), and thus 14th Amendment citizens, who have given up their constitutional rights to become wards of the state, as it were. Once your trust is dissolved, by your instructions in writing to the Trustee, you only acknowledge and consent to be governed by common law.

Freed

A few things stick out - a natural person is still a person, meaning property. All property is vested in the state. As stated in Senate Doc #43, page 9, second paragraph, April 1933: “The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called “ownership” is only by virtue of Government, ie, law, amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.”

I do not agree that you, the man own that property commonly referred to as a Name. Do you have evidence to support such a claim? I agree you are an accommodation party - or let's call a spade a spade, simply said, a presumed surety, then by your claims, consent to that fiduciary position. I agree, you have USE, control, possession of that Name but you are not the owner or beneficiary, creditor or for that matter debtor. These titles all fall under the jurisdiction thereof.

I do not agree you get to "tell the trustee" anything, as that would be intermeddling. You, the man get to inform the trustee or executor or whatever that government fiduciary's title is to ADMINSTRATE ACCORDING TO THEIR LAW, THEIR OATH AND THEIR JOB DESCRITPION to take care of state property accordingly under the rules of usufruct. Control and possession and use is not the same thing as ownership. I never occurred any debt, the entity's Name that I use incurs debt. See? Man has no debt, persons have debt. See? The trust has nothing to do with me - really. The trust or estate [per IRS] has to do with their property that they MUST administrate according to law. The entity I use is a resident and citizen of the US. That entity was created and accepted by one of the subsidiaries of the US and the US purchased an interest in that entity for the US government's benefit.

There is more but that is enough for the moment Tony