Results 1 to 10 of 159

Thread: Usufruct Surrender Remedy

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by doug555 View Post
    Why even issue a birth certificate and let the man hold it?

    What is the man holding?

    It certainly is not LEGAL title... that is obvious.

    Then it must be some interest in EQUITABLE title.

    The pledge of the labor of the child was registered under the INFANT.

    The Certificate of Live Birth (COLB) is evidence of that pledge.

    When did the man ever make good on that pledge? Ever????

    Must not the man, in the name of the INFANT, authorized by being the HOLDER of the COLB, divest the INFANT of all interest in that labor in order to ratify and complete that pledge? Much like making good on a pledge to United Way by writing them a check? Except the man is truly exchanging substance (labor) for substance (goods/services) by demanding lawful money for the exchange transaction.

    So, how is that divestiture done?

    Does not the method outlined in Post #92 accomplish that divestiture, and make good on the birth pledge?
    Okay let me flip the argument - a child born to a man and woman thru the office of a midwife absent a BC - is that child a citizen of the State? Flip it over, a child born in a hospital thru the use of a nurse/doctor is that child a citizen of a State?

    When and where did the child or man make a pledge to the State constitution? So this certificate does have value as it is an access easement as it were into the State. I have heard that one can even travel abroad using a BC and DL in the stead of a passport.

    I did not say the BC had monetary value - but I said it was valuable in terms of benefit in State. I have traveled all over the world and I can tell you there are places I have been that when I got back home I went into my prayer closet and THANKED GOD I live where I do.

    I don't buy assignment of a BC. One lady I know listened to some guru who talked her into "closing the account". She received a letter stating it is a felony for her to use the SSN assigned to that Name. Another young man that I know did this as well before he was 18 and he received the same letter.

    While I do agree an Interest IN an estate is assignable I wonder why? I suppose that under common law the father would have the right to pledge his child. We see this in Samuel, yes? He was pledged to God's service. Did anyone ask Samuel? No.

    What INFANT are you talking of - the heir or the child that received the BC? Of course you realize this is all being done under PERSOPHONE - Queen of the dead! Her arms pointing east to Rome. For she stands upon the Image.

    Birth Cert.pdf

    So let me see if I have this right. The government sells bonds to foreignors - that would be me and you - and then they tell us that the bond represents a claim upon the Treasury. Now then IF I am subject to that government then if I buy a bond does not that make me a Lender? And what does the Scripture say? Does it not say the borrower is slave to the lender?

    I find peace in simplicity.

    Now then I have a friend who listened to a "guru" who told him to ASSIGN all of his interests in the SSN account to the SSA. So my dear friend wrote the SSA as he was "under the influence" if you get what I mean and he tried to assign his interest. Well years went by and recently he called me and showed me what he had done. Laughing I asked him if he thought he could assign something that did not belong to him. Puzzled I asked him if he made a copy of both sides of the SSN card - the guru told him to do so which was good. Turning it over I read the card was PROPERTY - but dear Reader - Property is NOT Estate and it is NOT interest in Estate.

    So we just called up the SSA and because he had worked 40 Quarters, we asked for a written agreement, we made the demand for lawful money and BAM the check was in the mail.

    Doug you have studied the Bible. Do the sons of Cain strike you as ones who might share the wealth? Slavery is their way of doing business. Let me rephrase. Only a few can truly buy and sell - BECAUSE they have the Mark.

    Please would someone tell me what is the goal?

    You keep mentioning the INFANT - this must be the heir. So I think it is pretty safe to say that it is assumed that everything I do for gain is to enrich my estate for the benefit of MYSELF and MY HEIRS. So in that framing [in regard to the Estate in Name] - I would be Trustee as I undertake in the Public and Grantor in regard to the Cestui Que Trust. As my heir has an interest. Beneficiaries are my heirs and/or assigns.

    I am reminded at once of the Prodigal Son who told his dad - I wish you were dead! Give me my inheritance now - I don't want to wait. Perhaps that son is disinherited by his dad. Under Roman Civil Law I might assign my estate to a stranger without my posterity.

    Where did I gain access to Property? I lack a claim. Do you suppose I pledge the entire Estate to the Treasury? For what cause? And what assurances do you have for me such that I might perform the office of husband and father to my wife and family?

    Wherein is the Agreement? Where are the terms made known? All I see for the past eight years is men grasping at straws. In the hope of a utopian society. I wonder who might be compelled to farm [grow food] in this society? I am reminded instantly of Rome.

    The guru's that say a Trust ALWAYS splits titles are not correct. I can think of many Trust Agreements that do not split titles. In fact in many cases the Trustee holds BOTH the Legal and Equitable Titles and the Beneficiary is left with Personalty by Contract/Covenant. The trustee will issue a Certificate to the Beneficiary to indicate interest in the Trust but it is up to the discretion of the Trustee to make any disbursements if any.

    I will read that post. If it is a long one give me some time to comment - this is a busy week.

    Shalom,
    Michael Joseph

    P.S. I believe Cain understood blood atonement. And he was discouraged when he brought his very best - but it was absent blood. Don't you think it strange that Cain was not put to death for Murder? I will put it to you - I think Cain thought he would kill Abel as the ultimate sacrifice - shedding of blood. I think this is so because we don't see Cain in any way showing himself as guilty in regard to his conscience. I think he believed he was righteous in his slaying of Abel.

    Clearly the Law was explained in Eden so why wasn't Cain guilty of Murder? He planned it, he lied in wait and he executed the killing of his brother Abel. Yet he, Cain was not sentenced to death. Seems strange, yes? For God's Law is the same, yesterday, today and tomorrow. So was Cain's conscience clear? I think so. I believe Cain thought he was pleasing to God in the slaying of Abel.

    What else about Cain - Eve certainly noticed something DIFFERENT about Cain for she did not have the same report concerning his twin - Abel.

    Consider now where you place your trust. Those who are "led by the Spirit of God may call themselves the sons of God". The engineer in me sees that name as a Check Valve. Information flows in one direction only. I think a day comes when the controllers will back flush the line and open up the valve and prosperity will be poured out on the people - but this too is a snare.
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 05-28-14 at 12:06 AM.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    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
  •