the link.

Need help and support? Post here and we will do our best.

Re: the link.

Postby kevin » Sun Jun 26, 2011 8:48 pm

awt wrote:just tell me what i don`t know and then i will pass it onto all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Sorry, you asked! in my opinion you obviously don't know how to ask someone a polite question.
kevin
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: the link.

Postby ineverknewthat » Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:19 pm

IThis is the topic that actually caused me to join this forum. Although the OP doesn’t quite make it clear what he/she wants answering, I do have a question concerning what Roger Hayes had to say in his interview to Edge Media, but first let me just quote from that interview..
This is what Roger says;

“going back to the 16 hundreds, we had an interesting scenario. We had the Black Death in 1665, People leaving London. The next year we had the fire of London. People were abandoning their property and people were dying and they set up the Cestui Que Vie trust to cover the ownership on behalf of the people who were missing. So that was the act that was set up. Then that act lost it’s; well if I can just explain, in 1948 the description of what the purpose of the act was for, went missing. Right or at least it was removed, well not went missing, it was removed.
So we did a bit of research and it seems the act itself was being used for something else, and what we discovered is that the government in fact had set up a legal fiction and in my case they have set up a legal fiction for Roger Hayes. That legal fiction is not me and it is exactly the same format as a limited liability company and what they are doing is, they are applying rules and regulations and their authority to us, via the legal fiction.
So for example, they could apply regulations to roger Hayes limited company as director of the company, I am obliged to obey the rules, I take responsibility on behalf of the company. That is what they did with the legal fiction using The Cestui Que Vie Act.
So what we discovered was that the way the council could actually charge me council tax, is that they were, quite correctly, applying the tax to the legal fiction, which government set up and there for the government owned. And unwittingly I was actually taking up the responsibility without realizing. So I was consenting”.
So there we have it. Roger`s definition of The Cestui Que Vie Act 1666. And his reason he is with - holding his council tax.

So as the OP put it, what is it that roger found that linked Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 to the legal Fiction? What was it that bought him and his research to the conclusion that Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 was in fact NOW being used for something other than its original purpose?
I have tried many times to ask roger but have never had a reply so maybe some of the more experienced members here could fill in the gaps for me. I hope this qualifies as a reasonable question.
Thanks. tony
ineverknewthat
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: the link.

Postby Freeman Stephen » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:13 pm

news to me. ill have to get one of those televicious boxes to keep up to date. always wondered how they claimed the right to tax labour after they declared slavery abolished
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: the link.

Postby rebelwithoutaclue » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:13 pm

Is it not something to do with us being declared dead unless we reclaim ownership of our estates within 7 years of being born? As I believe if we don't reclaim within 7 years the government take our estates into trust. I've probably not explained it very well or I'm completly wrong.

Hope I'm not and it helps you find what your looking for.
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”
rebelwithoutaclue
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 6:36 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: the link.

Postby ineverknewthat » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:20 pm

rebelwithoutaclue wrote:Is it not something to do with us being declared dead unless we reclaim ownership of our estates within 7 years of being born? As I believe if we don't reclaim within 7 years the government take our estates into trust. I've probably not explained it very well or I'm completly wrong.

Hope I'm not and it helps you find what your looking for.


It is in fact a missing persons act, I have researched it. You could call it a Just In Case the missing person turns up ACT .
It still applies today and has never been ammended or (except for the preamble roger mentions) repealed. In fact nowdays people are able to claim their right to a missing relations estate before the 7 years are up in some cases. This is why I am struck by what roger says as to this act "being used for something else".
Last edited by ineverknewthat on Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
ineverknewthat
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: the link.

Postby Freeman Stephen » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:35 pm

youll have to ask roger that or do the research. do you think its not plausible that labour tax could be getting pulled through that avenue? where do you think the governments claimed right to tax peoples work comes from?
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: the link.

Postby ineverknewthat » Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:46 pm

Freeman Stephen wrote:youll have to ask roger that or do the research. do you think its not plausible that labour tax could be getting pulled through that avenue? where do you think the governments claimed right to tax peoples work comes from?

Hi stephen,
like I have said I have tried many times to ask roger this very question , I couldn't get near him at the Stoke conference,is all anyone wanted to know at that event was everything concerning the new bank and it's details. I have mailed him on many occasions and I will try again this week when I know he will be at the Plymouth office. I have also researched it, it still stands as it did back in 1666 nothing has changed,(except the preamble roger mentions) it IS STILL a missing persons act .And like I have said above, they are more lenient with it these days a family member can claim right to the "missings" estate before the due 7 years are up.

taxes? well I have yet to find any single bit of law that states a man can be taxed on his personal labour. But if as you put it that taxes maybe "getting pulled through" this avenue then roger must know that too don't you think?
This is why I am amazed roger seems reluctant to share what he found during his research . Especially after the support shown and given to him at the Wirral hearing. I couldn't find the link that he says they have found.i.e. " what we discovered "
Last edited by ineverknewthat on Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
ineverknewthat
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: the link.

Postby ineverknewthat » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:26 pm

[quote="rebelwithoutaclue"]Is it not something to do with us being declared dead unless we reclaim ownership of our estates within 7 years of being born?

It has absolutely nothing to do with "7 years of being born"

As I believe if we don't reclaim within 7 years the government take our estates into trust.

It has everything to do with a missing person who`s estate can be claimed BEFORE and not after the 7 year period is up.Either by Government OR a relative who can prove right of cliam.

quote]
Last edited by ineverknewthat on Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ineverknewthat
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:42 pm

Re: the link.

Postby rebelwithoutaclue » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:41 pm

As far as I am aware the act covers everyone in the UK. What I have heard is that during the great fire of London everyone in the UK was declared dead and they have 7 years to reclaim. Now if a child was born today, he would have 7 years to reclaim his title.

I seen this in a video and it went in quite a bit of detail. Whether its true or not I don't know.

I'll try find the bid when I get home and post on here
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”
rebelwithoutaclue
 
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 6:36 am
Location: Glasgow

Re: the link.

Postby ineverknewthat » Mon Jun 27, 2011 3:54 pm

I too have seen a couple of vids on the subject, but I have to admit, they are a bit tongue in cheek. One of those guys can't keep a straight face from my stand point.

roger explains very well the reason for this act, missing persons and lost property destoyed in the Great Fire. Property(estate) did indeed go into government trust and one most certainly had to prove they were the rightful owner of the destroyed estate OR the rightful heir.

and that is all there is to it.
ineverknewthat
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 12:42 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Help Wanted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron