I am some dude latest recording Boris and usufruct

[xparte]

Herods 2nd temple Christ was never fond of it, den of vipers a satanic cult is precisely why its destruction physically it was necessary not to crush a talmudic judaism rather steal it for Rome and canonize it.It is the house of God destroy this temple or my truth
and in three days I will make it rise again but the temple Jesus was speaking
about was his body our temple within Christ. No, the truth is written over and over in the NT... with Jesus calling them vipers, challenging them when they persecuted, answering their claims with Scripture and chastising them in general! ! He came to set the captives FREE from the bondage of sin AND the bondage of laws misinterpreted and given in a spirit of hypocrisy, etc ....Of course the enemy does not want people to realize this!! and has used the Jews and people's ignorance about them and their "ways" as a means to accomplish his deceit!! Christians have this attitude of "well I don't know anything about Judaism and wouldn't be able to understand it anyway..." and are convinced that Jews are God's chosen -- Not realizing that it is the ISRAELITES that are His Chosen Ones (into which we are grafted)!!! The four Christian gospels say very little about the Temple in the days of Jesus. Except for a few brief words from Jesus there was no extensive public warning that the Second Temple was to be destroyed. The analysis of why this happened would be explained afterward, after resurrection of Jesus. It was then that the Apostles (all Jews) confronted the nation with her grievous sins. weeping for tammuz Vision of Idolatry in the Temple What has no greater truth the loss of AUTHORITY Christs u see me u seen the father we have to clean up the bullshit The intense spiritually of the First Temple cannot be compared to the Second. The constant open miracles are gone. Prophecy will also disappear during the early years of the second Temple. The Ark of the Covenant is gone ? and although there is a Holy of Holies, it stands empty. old Covenant new Covenant deception hardly if your the deceiver i detect no lack of encouragement for finding ones temple just like the ark it will There's a well-known story told in the Talmud a priest, who finds a loose stone on the Temple Mount and realizes that's where the Ark is hidden. On the way to tell others about it, he dies. The point of the story is that the Ark is not meant to be found. Not yet. So any discourse is our truth shared. Meaning and truth are just second cousins .

[allodial]

Once upon a time I had a very lucid dream that I was taken back in time to tour "Solomon's Temple" as in the one that stood during the reign of the ancient Israelite king named Solomon. In sum, it was laid plainly that the temple building had anthropomorphic design (laid out like the body of a man). From two sources I would find further validation.

Also, back in mid 90s, I had another dream I was taken on a flying tour by Moses and he showed me a military/naval fleet crossing the Atlantic, mainly the boats and craft such were painted Olive Drab / Green and there was a dragon (Leviathan/Sea Serpent) hidden among the fleet--all heading toward the USA. Strangely enough, years later military patches bearing serpent figures started popping up. Where the fleet came from: I got the impression it was derived of passengers from Europe and the Middle East.

***
Re: Destruction of the Herod Temple.
It is suggested that Revelations was penned before 66AD. There were various people who gave witness of the pending destruction back then--from the public record it was very public. If I recall correctly, the Herod Temple was missing 'hands'.

Also, remember there was also the Tabernacle of David.

[xparte]

[allodial]

Perhaps this might give a better idea of my dream/vision: http://www.templesecrets.info/. Who knows the meaning of a text but the author. The temple vision/dream wasn't necessarily confirming the rightness or wrongness of the construction of the temple. The point being that the true god can reveal anything he wants to anyone he want to. Contrary to Freud or Nietzsche, God is not dead.





Furthermore:

Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? 1 Cor. 3:16

But when Jesus said "this temple," he meant his own body. John 2:21

And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. Rev. 21:22

It was round about eighteen thousand measures: and the name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there. Ezekiel 48:35

Re: Dreams
Freud IMHO seems to be more of a hack, obsessed with the penor. IMHO (Carl) Jung had more sense especially when it came to dreams. Freud basically validated perverts. However, Newton Riddle beats them both, was ahead of their time [1909] and over their heads. Neither of them probably ever truly grasped the significance of prenatal culture especially as pertains to the subconscious mind. In view of Newton Riddle and the Bible, Freud is LOLZ.

For God speaketh once, yea twice, yet man perceiveth it not. In a dream, in a vision of the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in slumberings upon the bed; Then he openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their instruction that he may withdraw man from his purpose, and hide pride from man. He keepeth back his soul from the pit, and his life from perishing by the sword. Job 33:15-18

If I boast, I boast of the God and of the treasury of his wisdom and mercy.


{s.b. 'In'} Man superimposed over the Capitol "casket."

When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;
What is man {the term 'adam' not used here}, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man {'adam' used here}, that thou visitest him?
For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, {<-the word is 'elohim'} and hast crowned him with glory and honour.
Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet.... Psalms 8:3-6

[xparte]

The temple vision/dream wasn't necessarily confirming the rightness or wrongness of the construction of the temple. The point being that the true god can reveal anything he wants to anyone he want to. Contrary to Freud, God is not dead.. Well the history of dreams are freudian in doctrine only. is the perversion of the author i put perversion in the temple if your done shuffling cards please deal me my hand insulting dreams are a poor choice lucid or otherwise i choose the controversial Freud as a lucid outcast not as weight for the once upon a time is condescending and i am not comparing Jung/Freud People experiencing psychosis may have changes in their thinking patterns. when its your dream my analysis is your own . if u wish to subtract from my understanding with the temple crowd then i have nothing more to add.the Herods 2nd temple Christ was never fond of it, den of vipers a satanic cult is precisely why its destruction physically it was necessary not to crush a talmudic judaism rather steal it for Rome and canonize it.It is the house of God destroy this temple or my truth
and in three days I will make it rise again but the temple i believe Jesus was speaking
about was his body or our temple within Christ. No, the truth is written over and over in the NT. Once upon a time I had a very lucid dream that I was taken back in time to tour "Solomon's Temple" as in the one that stood during the reign of the ancient Israelite king named Solomon. In sum, it was laid plainly that the temple building had anthropomorphic design (laid out like the body of a man). From two sources I would find further validation.you are lucid in accepting what i impart or your implying yove known this and more all along at the very least you can thank me or the dream or Christ for reminding us all what peversions come with foundations and text. why i cant speak for no Newton Riddles or interpreting dreams as ones prosthesis dreaming into that artificial device that replaces or complements scripture is a big mistake when understanding or fetchin it on your own i speak from the temple not for it if we share speaks in ones own words is plenty enough to discern if i was hollerin u can always dream up i wasn,t

[george]

I noticed that Boris has added lots of new info on his site.

http://iamsomedude.com/writings.html

also the audios are well worth listening to IMO

there is also a new forum he has added but it requires a 3rd party log in via google, yahoo or some other existing service and it can not be accessed with out enabling java scripting (ip fishing?) . both seem suspect to me (doesnt everything LOL) and as far as I can tell you can not join directly either.

[allodial]

I noticed that Boris has added lots of new info on his site.

http://iamsomedude.com/writings.html

also the audios are well worth listening to IMO

there is also a new forum he has added but it requires a 3rd party log in via google, yahoo or some other existing service and it can not be accessed with out enabling java scripting (ip fishing?) . both seem suspect to me (doesnt everything LOL) and as far as I can tell you can not join directly either.

Boris isn't necessarily saying or teaching anything remarkably new. Vic Beck for a short moment got to the truth about "birth certificates" but quickly he shut up--the truth didn't come from him but from the callers of his conference call who he would hurriedly shut up once it started to dawn on him the breadth of the truth being shared. Since 2008 or so he has apparently sanitized the Interweb of those conference calls.

For those 'in the box' I would say that it is important to get the gist of this: that you are holding office but they aren't telling you quite outright. Because if you knew you would be bonded--and you might be bonded or own a bond or have a bonding mechanism (or whatever it is) via BC, DL or SS card. A DL (or State ID) is said to be a paltry $200 bond.

Anyone that takes the time to see how things work, the Attorney General enforces behavior of the state officers but those officers might register through: [1] Secretary of State; [2] Registrar of Births & Deaths or Bureau of Vital Statistics; [3] the DMV or the like. Once the registration is done, the person is on the scope for potential 'violations'. I would go as far as to suggest that even being director of an LLC or a state registered corporation is to hold office (why do you think the registration is public?). So as to CYA, its a matter of risk management or risk mitigation and bonds or deposits of cash (or cash equivalents) are two key ways that is accomplished.

However, when it comes to municipal corporations, state officers might treat them as 'their own little reality' with the mayor or chief of police being the 'AG' or 'go to' for enforcement or remedy. Of course, the DA or City Attorney tends to be the primary mover on municipal-level 'offenses'.

So most of what many people have been having problems with is 'debt'. If you fail to see that the bankers, the utility company officers, etc. are all holding office and they are holding office by license of the Fed or the State then you should understand that they would be under no less restraint than you. Having a problem with debt is typically remedied by having that debt liability discharged (i.e. the liability fulfilled).

As for the office, not taking up an office in the first place is a way to avoid exposure to the liability of that office. If you are coerced into something and fail to make that coercion known: they will presume coercion to be lacking. How you handle your affairs might be the utmost art form.

While I don't necessarily endorse the document or suggest doing anything in the document, this document has some things worth reading when it comes to BONDS: Using Your Exemption. I do not suggest sending any such bonds to creditors such as banks. It is the general concept of bonding that is worth getting the gist of IMHO.

Also: Legal Personality.

[george]

Boris isn't necessarily saying or teaching anything remarkably new. Vic Beck for a short moment got to the truth about "birth certificates" but quickly he shut up--the truth didn't come from him but from the callers on his show. He has apparently sanitized the Interweb of those conference calls.

For those 'in the box' I would say that it is important to get the gist of this: that you are holding office but they aren't telling you quite outright. Because if you knew you would be bonded--and you might be bonded via a BC, DL or SS card. However, a DL is said to be a paltry $200 bond.

Anyone that takes the time to see how things work, the Attorney General enforces behavior of the state officers but those officers might register through: [1] Secretary of State; [2] Registrar of Births & Deaths or Bureau of Vital Statistics; [3] the DMV or the like. Once the registration is done, the person is on the scope for potential 'violations'. I would go as far as to suggest that even being director of an LLC or a state registered corporation is to hold office (why do you think the registration is public?). So as to CYA, its a matter of risk management or risk mitigation and bonds or deposits of cash (or cash equivalents) are two key ways that is accomplished.

Ive noticed that some of the previous calls with Boris where other callers who were at few steps ahead and discussing some seemingly very sensitive info, those audios were also scrubbed from the web and some of the videos were later re-edited with some of the informative side talk removed.

since SJC forum went down I download everything asap. I cant imagine the latest vids on Boris's site will last too long either. one of them in particular really gets into some nuts and bolts but it does end abruptly right as the callers is getting into some real eye opening stuff IMO.

Im certainly taking notes.

[allodial]

Ive noticed that some of the previous calls with Boris where other callers who were at few steps ahead and discussing some seemingly very sensitive info, those audios were also scrubbed from the web and some of the videos were later re-edited with some of the informative side talk removed.

since SJC forum went down I download everything asap. I cant imagine the latest vids on Boris's site will last too long either. one of them in particular really gets into some nuts and bolts but it does end abruptly right as the callers is getting into some real eye opening stuff IMO.

Im certainly taking notes.

Yep. That tells you something! We had lots of info on SJC and other sites--and it was wiped! And if he is doing selective sanitizing of what OTHER PEOPLE SHARE what does that say of him? I get if he is careful about what HE says for his own safety--but if someone else is saying it---what gives? There were old credit card commercials that said "Don't leave home without it." I could imagine a remix that said "Adequate bonding. Don't leave home without it." Being adequately bonded is akin to having a good general liability insurance policy. They might be aware that you CAN be bonded, but if you don't they might presume that you just don't care that much.

Hint: What are they always asking you for? (banks, cops, DMV, colleges, passport office). The next question: What is so important or useful about those documents? The Great Deception should start to unravel PDQ once you get the gist of it. Imagine someone (anyone but you) profiting from things you have in your pocket everyday.

In my analysis of Boris' documents he is simply rehashing, A4V, Elvick (who got to the heart of a lot of things but didn't quite fully get it), Tim Turner, Winston Shrout (which I would suggest WS to be providing sound information for the most part but in his own style) etc.

The disinfo agents are mainly out to get people to self-destruct their own systems rather than realize how they can use their systems to their own advantage.

[george]

I think in this case that it was not an attempt to withhold any info as much as it was to keep the stupidest ones from painting targets on their backs. Boris has said this often as to why he doesnt provide any prescribed forms or documents that one could use on his site.

I completely get it too now that Ive listened in on these calls. try it and see is not the way to do this stuff, you gotta know why you are doing it first.

Im paying attention to him, and he has actually done a better job of teaching and getting better at it than anyone else so far IMO.

Im still suspicious but thats just how I am however, if I can get this, and i think I can, (Boris is a straight talker and that I can relate too) then that itself will eliminate any suspicions.

Im on it now more than ever so, we shall see.

[allodial]

I am not trying to cast a bad light on him. And it may be that his 'rehash' is really that he gets what a lot of sources have taught but and is translating and sharing it in his own language or style. However, Winston Shrout is one of the few big names with solid information.

As for not providing forms, fair enough. However, there is a difference between sanitizing as part of disinfo and sanitizing for safety and protection.

For sources of information, there is also:

Antishyster Magazine

Antishyster, Suspicions Magazine and more

There is also a newer "alternative news" mag called "Uncensored Magazine".

[BLBereans]

"OMITTED".

Hmmmmm...

[allodial]

Its a lot simpler than that. "Ownership" is suretyship (potentially accommodation party). Some might disagree and say "no suretyship is only for another person". If you realize that personification of vessels and inanimate objects is still alive and well today, then you realize that owning a personified motor vehicle is suretyship (nombre=name in Spanish and it has a VI-nombre, right and ships have Vessel Hull Nombres, right). If you say you own what is theirs then you are basically volunteering to stand with them as far taking liability goes--your choice. If you recognize what they already will admit that IT is theirs and they are liable they will acknowledge the liability--that is how the system was designed at least since the 1930s. Its something made plain and simple by me for decades but its too simple--hardly anyone wants to hear it. The impression I get is that the State/Crown/King/Queen is taking liability intentionally, as part of a greater design.

IMHO, its not so much about 'profit' and 'commerce'--profit is not necessarily inequitable. A key problem for many ...is really more about vanity.

A lot of people seem to be looking for 'black arts' or dark ways to deal with things. This is not about getting over on the system or pulling a fast one, it is about equity. That said, many people's own personality flaws or tendency toward being shady is the obstacle to the truth for them--they lie and are shady and so dress everything up in the form of a con or gimmick so good, clean simple honesty scares them. They are looking for the hook, but there ain't one. Not finding one, they go look for a charlatan with lots of fancy talk. Some people just gotta have a conflict--but when I've cleared the room, everyone is happy--some people cannot handle that they need a fight/struggle..some blood on the floor.

There are those that I know that work with revenue agencies and governments around the planet and they have helped folks resolve major debts. The thing is, they aren't aren't biased towards you and against the state and they aren't biased towards the state and against you. They see the revenue agent's duty to collect and your duty to pay as a matter which provides satisfaction and relief to both sides.

12 U.S.C. 95a (?) cached.

Furthermore, consider that heretical Gnostics are aiming to hijack a system founded on Biblical principles and so spent much time hiding and concealing and are now trying to 'reintroduce' the same principles dressed up as their invention. As in, the brilliant insight given by God to Christians, after a hundred years of casting shadows and creating confusion they are now trying to reintroduce the truth as their own and to use it to teach their doctrines. They give them a false impression of "Christianity" which is just propaganda for their measures. Let me show you how old the truth is and how plain and clearly it is written (TOO SIMPLE FOR SOME PEOPLE):

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. Matt. 17:24-26

Read that and consider the doctrine of parens patrie, why the state created a person as their 'child' in order to promote equity. You see, Peter posed himself as a stranger and it may very well be that the Pharisees may have made the true Israelites think they were Gentiles. However, Jesus encouraged him to settle the matter (i.e. equity and keeping the peace--kings are conservators of the peace--rather than being rebels they are peace officers). That is one reason the Pharisees were errant is that they were looking for a rebellion rather than a conservator of the peace.

Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee. Matt. 17:27

But the point is: this is 'ancient technology'. They hate the Bible because among other things it evidences their plagiarism--and they dont want to give credit to the god of Christ (i.e. the Anointed). They love to dress the truth up in some "fancy doctrine" as if they invented it, using it as a way to evangelize while hoping the victim will never see it was public domain all along.

P.S. One of the biggest deceptions pulled throughout America is the notion of there not being a Crown or its equivalent.

[Gavilan]

Interestingly enough, Cornell Law has recently removed Title 12 U.S.C. 95 a from its site - "OMITTED".

Hmmmmm...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/4305

[David Merrill]

The Run is immanent.

Quality Rubber Stamps - Tim.