Page 7 of 17 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 165

Thread: What's in a NAME?

  1. #61
    Thanks for your clear delination, Salsero. I admit my error: I have no claim on THE NAME. It is a legal fiction created by the state, for their benefit. What had me buffaloed was their 'claim' on the name, which carries with it the strong presumption that the user of the name is a debt serf, an employee of the socialist government corporation, and thus subject to jurisdiction under Roman (contract, lex mercatoria, UCC) law. Obtaining that jurisdiction is the entire purpose of the state's claim on the name. The state created it (first), thus they own it, and I can only use it; I have no right to tell the trustee what to do with his property. More importantly, I am not the beneficiary of the trust, and I have no obligation to use THE NAME. But now there is a problem; the 2nd dimension legal fictional jurisdiction that overlays the real world. I the natural man (people, not person) cannot contract with corporations; I must act within the office of a corporate person. So how to get electrical service, phone, bank account, etc? The whole purpose of the state claiming THE NAME is to establish their right to tax the property held by THE NAME. Just using THE NAME carries the presumption that 'you' (the people who acts as accommodation agent for legal person THE NAME) are a card-carrying employee of the trust, and that all you acquire in THE NAME belongs to the government.

    Suppose that I create another NAME for my use, not owned by the government. I can easily file for a dba with the state, and that corporate person will be recognized, and the legal system will recognize that I own it (I recognize that I did not create the legal system, so let's say that I own the exclusive interest to use this new corporate person, at least free of any presumption that it suffers from some prior claim by the government). It will also fall under the jurisdiction of the UCC legal system, but without all the baggage of the presumption that I am a US citizen, ie, debt slave. This should greatly simplify proving the claim that 'I am not a US citizen, subject to your jurisdiction.' I (as agent for the NEW NAME), am still subject to the UCC, but now only for actual contracts, thus shedding all the presumptions associated with using the NAME that the state has assigned to me (think of it as going off the grid). I perceive that the use of a NAME provides the contracting parties with the basic presumption that certain rules (the UCC) are in effect, and that your NAME has agreed to accept service of process there. But at least creating your own NAME would take the government's interest out of the contract. Then you get the DMV to issue an identity card in your own NAME, and you drive on that. Now there is no presumption that you are in contract with the state or federal rules, codes, and regulations. Only common law applies.

    My understanding of the Bankruptcy Act of 1933 is that the US government pledged all its assets to the bankers as security collateral for the debt. But the US corporate government did not own all the property in America. By using the debt obligations created by the endorsement of private bills of exchange (FRN's), the corporation perfected its claim on more and more of America, but it does not have a claim on privately held property. Some have said here on this blog that the people are deprived of money, thus cannot 'buy' anything. The stated benefit for the debt slaves is described by the corporation as being indemnified from having to actually pay for anything, ie, join us in this bankruptcy fraud (but we get to tax you for the privilege). But there is lawful money. Today it begins to look like a black market, but by using lawful money you can buy property and discharge all debts on it, including previous claims to it held by the corporate government. But if you put that property into YOUR NAME, you just re-create the government's claim on it, and they will still want to tax it... and you will have to take positive steps to rebut their presumptions. So maybe put it in the NAME you use that acknowledges God's trust, ie, your given name.

    btw, Doug Casey calls FRN's "I owe you nothing"s. He calls Euro notes "Who owes you nothing"s... only gold is honest money, honest weight.

    ps to Chex: gold is not currently money, due to the usurpation of fiat everywhere, but gold is wealth. It represents stored labor and resources in the real world.

    Freed

  2. #62
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Freed:

    That is called DECLARATION OF TRUST and TRUST AGREEMENT. And yes the IRS fully recognizes that you will no longer be under 1040 rules. In fact you will fall under 1041 - Complex Trust. Learn it and you don't even need Lawful Money. you can reduce the tax burden to as low as five percent. Nevertheless, Lawful Money is the ticket in conjunction with Trust.

    DECLARE THYSELF.
    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!

  3. #63
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    study what went down just prior to Hitler taking power and you will most likely see some very similar patterns forming in America. Very similar indeed.
    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!

  4. #64
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    people...

    who can make a claim but one with living voice?

    do you claim property or ownership/title?

    the former is expressed in living voice, the latter must be expressed by way of paper

    i care not of ownership or titles; my claim of property stands as true and verified until someone will step forward and disparage and/or deny my living voice claim

    end of story

  5. #65
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    And now back on target. IDENTITY is impossible to prove. Therefore TRUST must be expressed or implied. As it were I can tell you trust by watching what fruit your produce.

    The premise is quite simple really:

    Rom_6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

    This is IMPLIED TRUST. Since Identity cannot be proved. But I will not beat that horse anymore. Some folks THINK they can prove it - but they only fool themselves. With their images - which prove nothing at all.


    Heb 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, in order that He might sanctify the people by His own blood, suffered outside the gate.

    Heb 13:13 Let us go forth therefore to Him outside the camp, bearing His reproach.

    Heb 13:14 For here have we no continuing city, but we seek the coming one.

    Heb 13:15 By Him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips confessing to His name.

    Shalom,
    MJ
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 01-30-14 at 12:12 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!

  6. #66
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    people...

    who can make a claim but one with living voice?

    do you claim property or ownership/title?

    the former is expressed in living voice, the latter must be expressed by way of paper

    i care not of ownership or titles; my claim of property stands as true and verified until someone will step forward and disparage and/or deny my living voice claim

    end of story
    title and ownership are derivatives of Property. A law dictionary proves that easily. Title is a MEANS showing just possession. Ownership is in dominion which is who has the Right to Property.

    I don't know your claim - what is it? Please elucidate it upon a candid world. Man cannot read minds.

    THEREFORE,

    DECLARATION OF TRUST [INDEPENDENCE] AND TRUST AGREEMENT [CONSTITUTION].

    DECLARE THYSELF.


    Shalom,
    MJ

    P.S. I have never head a dead man talk so I am unsure what you mean about a living voice. I jest of course but it is nevertheless humorous to me.
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 01-30-14 at 12:03 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!

  7. #67
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    what i claim is my property (that which is proper to i; a man, and exclusive of all others) is true, simply because i speak it

    if someone wishes to disparage or deny what i; a man, claim... come forward now and be heard

    "living voice", i agree, is a redundant phrase; except that, in the 2nd dimension realm, fictions have a "voice" on paper

    in common law, "voice" means only one thing; a man who speaks [cf. viva voce]

  8. #68
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    what i claim is my property (that which is proper to i; a man, and exclusive of all others) is true, simply because i speak it

    if someone wishes to disparage or deny what i; a man, claim... come forward now and be heard

    "living voice", i agree, is a redundant phrase; except that, in the 2nd dimension realm, fictions have a "voice" on paper

    in common law, "voice" means only one thing; a man who speaks [cf. viva voce]
    okay I see your point - a court "speaks" thru its records....as it were. However in the end, men/women produce the record. Words do not magically appear absent an intelligent mind.

    This is why I vehemently oppose evolution. However, consider INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and COPYRIGHT. Are these not written expressions with certain property rights associated therein and thereof? Is not the creator allowed to profit from those rights? For a workman is worthy of his hire.

    Common Law comes from Scripture. All trusts must first be spoken into existence. And God said....and God spake....etc. However a kingdom of priests all agree that there exists a King. And it ain't them! They all abide in one law under the law giver. And the law giver is sovereign!

    Shalom,
    MJ
    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!

  9. #69
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    great

    where have i infringed upon "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and COPYRIGHT" through my offerings?

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    when did i ever claim ownership?

    what evidence would you bring in open court to verify that what i claim is in error - can a piece of paper verify itself?

    when did i say i would go in the "state's" court and be ruled over by a "judge"?

    when i bring my court to a public courthouse, it will be the rules of my court (which i create) that the magistrate will follow and hold the parties to as a witness independent of the tribunal

    the unwritten common law is the highest law on this land - contract wisely

    you do know that you are participating on a site which is named 'saving to suitors' club, right?

    not only do i believe i have an inherent right to a common law remedy, so do the people who wrote the 'saving to suitors' clause of 1789 which still stands today...

    [cf. "...the United States, ... within their respective districts, as well as upon the high seas; (a) saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land,..." The First Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789; Chapter 20, page 77. The Constitution of the United States of America, Revised and Annotated - Analysis and Interpretation - 1982; Article III, ยง2, Cl. 1 Diversity of Citizenship, U.S. Government Printing Office document 99-16, p. 741.]

    exercise your inherent right; and, be competent
    Honestly, I wanted to learn more about the FRB then anything else - this is why I joined. I appreciate David and his very hard work. I am at a cross roads man v person. the 12 USC 411 has to do with a person, not man. But I am not at that point of being ONLY man. The person must give up everything - a release of claim and interest in the person. I am not there today.

    You think I want to argue, I really do not want to. I have asked questions and have yet to receive answers. How do you go into your court? Have you been successful in going to your court in the public courthouse? You create the court and the magistrate will follow and hold the parties to as witness per your say so? The highest law on the land is GOD"S LAW. This is the only law that matters and this Law pertains to man.

    What makes you think you have any rights to begin with in regard to Man's laws. We live in a demoCRAZY - where majority rules. Go figure a majority of idiots have a say about others.

    So let me ask a point blank question: Have you actually gone into court and made it yours? Have you had the magistrate actually do what you told him to do? Please tell us what exact type of case you have dealt with regarding Common Law and have won?

    I see I missed a question you had: IF I WERE IN COURT, ANY COURT, YOURS OR THEIRS, and I was asked to question you about your proof of claim - anything you may claim for that matter, this is what I would do: When you are asked to swear to tell the truth and then asked your name, I would interrupt and state: Magistrate I have evidence to prove that Anthony made a false claim to property that he does not own. THe evidence I have is the BC. It is a certified copy with state seal and state authorized signer signed this document - Your honor what are you going to do to this belligerent, an enemy of the state who dares make false claims to property he does not own? Your honor, you realize the country is bankrupt and has no backing of the INTERNAL currency, therefore in the 1930s all titles were seized and thus all property is vested in the state where citizens, residents, men are mere users per the senate record.

    Again for the final time - I would never say never that common law will not work - the odds are simply against it. I stated previously that Glenn Fearn uses the common law case law everywhere in his documents. The man is very smart, I do have respect for him. But he fully admits he IS a belligerent. I see his work as I DARE YOU TO CHALLENGE ME, YOU WILL OWE ME $1,000,000 IN SILVER. To me this is nothing more than UCC.

    I challenge anyone here to take a listen to Marcus. These videos are long and I have to say at times boring but boring because he is trying to drill it in our heads. We are Servant Kings and if you are Christian - he quotes the Bible through out constantly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ysESwj1w10

Posting Permissions

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