"The Certificate Of Registration of Live Birth is By Banking Definition Termed “A Certificated Security” The application they made was known as “an application for a live birth certificate” and what issued from this application was known as a “birth certificate.”"
""the ‘company’, the “United States”[i] [or in our case the UK] kept the original application and gave your parents a copy of a birth certificate[/i]."
"The application they made was known as “an application for a live birth certificate” and what issued from this application was known as a “birth certificate” This created what is known as a “foreign situs trust account”."
Situs: Latin The location or position (of something) for legal purposes. As in lex situs, the law of the place where the thing in issue is situated.
"Also when we filled out the Form SS-5 [i][here it would be the dole i imagine] we ‘allowed’ the ‘company’[UK] access to our account, our check book as it were, the pre-paid account that was set-up when our birth certificate issued. We gave them permission as signers to write checks on our account, and they do all the time. Keep in mind, this is the same account the bankers fractionalized and created huge, almost unlimited sums of “money”, and we became ‘co-business partners’, with the ‘company’. They are able to access and use our pre-paid account, for whatever they deem necessary.
…the ‘company’ then took the application and pledged your future labor as a guarantee for payment to the bankers, also known as the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The bankers gave the company a credit for your application against the amount that the company owed the bankers, which at the time of your birth, was worth close to 1 million dollars. This transaction is what is referred to as a “money of account” transaction, as no real money changed hands. It was simply an accounting entry against the debt owed to the bankers, by the company.[/i] "
"The bankers then took the [your] application, and used fractional banking lending. It is the birth certificate that is proof that an application was submitted. It is the application that is the real negotiable instrument and the birth certificate proves there is a negotiable instrument being used in commerce -- to borrow money.""Right now, even though they have no legal right or claim or lien, the bankers control your “title” / birth certificate.
…you are the only one who can go to the ‘bank’ and redeem and regain control of the [your] birth certificate. Just like the car. The car gives value to the title to the car. You give value to the title, the [your] birth certificate.
Without you, the birth certificate is worthless."
[from "A New Abridgement of the Law with large additions and corrections Vol 10. pg-259"]"Slaves conveyed in trust are subject to execution for the debts of cestui que trust"
"Courts of Law will protect the rights of a cestui que trust, against any person having notice of the trust"
How to authenticate my Birth Certificate for marriage in Mexico?
"Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33.
...the primary issue of the above doctrine is in reference to the symbiotic nexus of the debt “Created Under HJR-192″ and the necessity of two parties (The American/British people sponsoring the credit and being in joint venture with government the debtor) as lying within the same operative facts [that were operating within a bankruptcy] (which is what requires that the public debt be discharged dollar for dollar.) This sets up a self executing dynamic that must and does arise out of necessity in our quasi relationship with the fed [BOE] as the fed has an obligation to each of us individually,(Emphasis on the Individual Account/ NI number) and that obligation is that each of us are a pre-paid principal to offer credit to the treasury and thereby, collateralize the fed [BOE] to do business as the debtor entity it is designed to be.
thereby... we come within the same set of operative facts under HJR-192 as the (or any) initial claim i.e. offer or claim initiated and thereby... that claim or offer instantly activates additional (Pre-Paid) legal rights otherwise dormant in the (alleged) debtor (taxpayer/transmitting utility) or defendant in possession [Of th birth certificate] through “its” attorney-in-fact or authorized representative, being the natural person. (Who by his or her nature is always within their own court of paramount or natural right......[this is the equivilent of "occupying the executor office" as far as i can tell])
The term “same set of operative facts” identifies the necessity of both sides of the account equaling ZERO. (Keep in mind, that this is all about the necessity regarding the remedy and/or relief through the bankruptcy and thereby re-organization process to avoid the imposition of a condition of involuntary bankruptcy/servitude or peonage upon each and every natural person.)
The justification for the defensive use of recoupment in bankruptcy is that there is no independent basis for a “debt,” and therefore there is no “claim” against estate property. Harmon, 188 B.R. at 425; § 101(5) (claim is a “right to payment” or “right to an equitable remedy”); § 101(12) (“debt’ means liability on a claim”)."
The reason you succeeded in your case has nothing to do with you "occupying the office of Executor/Administrator" as it is impossible for you to do that for the Legal Fiction bearing your name. You can only act as the trustee for that name.
Canonum De Ius Positivum
Canons of Positive Law
7.1 Article 299 - Roman Court
A Roman Court is a Forum for the exclusive private business of a Law (Bar) Guild sanctioned by the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican, in which members of the guild presume certain roles on behalf of the "government" in order to make profit for the guild and its members through direct asset seizure and the commercialization of various securities, bonds and bailments.
The meaning and source of the word "court" in respect of Roman Court is derived from the Latin word cautio meaning "securities, bond and bailment" as the primary commercial business of ancient Roman Cult sanctioned law guilds since the 13th Century.
Prior to the creation of the Bar Associations in the 19th Century, the private Bar Guilds were known as "guilds" as well as "livery" companies and often by the name as Judges and Notaries since the 13th Century coinciding with the invention of Indulgences of the Roman Cult.
In order to make “guild” money, called “Guilt” or “Guilty”, the Private Bar Guilds normally oversee a unique hidden trust for each controversy or “suit” that comes into the private Roman Court. Any bonds that are generated, called “Guilt bonds” are connected to the hidden trust, which the private Bar Guild members are sworn to deny exists.
The Presumption of the Court.
Canon 3228 : A Roman Court does not operate according to any true rule of law, but by presumptions of the law. Therefore, if presumptions presented... by the private Bar Guild are not rebutted they become fact and are therefore said to stand true. There are twelve (12) key presumptions asserted by the private Bar Guilds which if unchallenged stand true being Public Record, Public Service, Public Oath, Immunity, Summons, Custody, Court of Guardians, Court of Trustees, Government as Executor/Beneficiary, Executor De Son Tort, Incompetence, and Guilt:
(i) The Presumption of Public Record is that any matter brought before a lower Roman Court is a matter for the public record when in fact it is presumed by the members of the private Bar Guild that the matter is a private Bar Guild business matter. Unless openly rebuked and rejected by stating clearly the matter is to be on the Public Record, the matter remains a private Bar Guild matter completely under private Bar Guild rules; and
(ii) The Presumption of Public Service is that all the members of the Private Bar Guild who have all sworn a solemn secret absolute oath to their Guild then act as public agents of the Government, or “public officials” by making additional oaths of public office that openly and deliberately contradict their private "superior" oaths to their own Guild. Unless openly rebuked and rejected, the claim stands that these private Bar Guild members are legitimate public servants and therefore trustees under public oath; and
(iii) The Presumption of Public Oath is that all members of the Private Bar Guild acting in the capacity of "public officials" who have sworn a solemn public oath remain bound by that oath and therefore bound to serve honestly, impartialty and fairly as dictated by their oath. Unless openly challenged and demanded, the presumption stands that the Private Bar Guild members have functioned under their public oath in contradiction to their Guild oath. If challenged, such individuals must recuse themselves as having a conflict of interest and cannot possibly stand under a public oath; and
(iv) The Presumption of Immunity is that key members of the Private Bar Guild in the capacity of "public officials" acting as judges, prosecutors and magistrates who have sworn a solemn public oath in good faith are immune from personal claims of injury and liability. Unless openly challenged and their oath demanded, the presumption stands that the members of the Private Bar Guild as public trustees acting as judges, prosecutors and magistrates are immune from any personal accountability for their actions; and
(v) The Presumption of Summons is that by custom a summons unrebutted stands and therefore one who attends Court is presumed to accept a position (defendant, juror, witness) and jurisdiction of the court. Attendance to court is usually invitation by summons. Unless the summons is rejected and returned, with a copy of the rejection filed prior to choosing to visit or attend, jurisdiction and position as the accused and the existence of "guilt" stands; and
(vi) The Presumption of Custody is that by custom a summons or warrant for arrest unrebutted stands and therefore one who attends Court is presumed to be a thing and therefore liable to be detained in custody by "Custodians". Custodians may only lawfully hold custody of property and "things" not flesh and blood soul possessing beings. Unless this presumption is openly challenged by rejection of summons and/or at court, the presumption stands you are a thing and property and therefore lawfully able to be kept in custody by custodians; and
(vii) The Presumption of Court of Guardians is the presumption that as you may be listed as a "resident" or a ward of a local government area and have listed on your "passport" the letter P, you are a pauper and therefore under the "Guardian" powers of the government and its agents as a "Court of Guardians". Unless this presumption is openly challenged to demonstrate you are both a general guardian and general executor of the matter (trust) before the court, the presumption stands and you are by default a pauper, and lunatic and therefore must obey the rules of the clerk of guardians (clerk of magistrates court);
(viii) The Presumption of Court of Trustees is that members of the Private Bar Guild presume you accept the office of trustee as a "public servant" and "government employee" just by attending a Roman Court, as such Courts are always for public trustees by the rules of the Guild and the Roman System. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to state you are merely visiting by "invitation" to clear up the matter and you are not a government employee or public trustee in this instance, the presumption stands and is assumed as one of the most significant reasons to claim jurisdiction - simply because you "appeared"; and
(ix) The Presumption of Government acting in two roles as Executor and Beneficiary is that for the matter at hand, the Private Bar Guild appoint the judge/magistrate in the capacity of Executor while the Prosecutor acts in the capacity of Beneficiary of the trust for the current matter. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to demonstrate you are both a general guardian and general executor of the matter (trust) before the court, the presumption stands and you are by default the trustee, therefore must obey the rules of the executor (judge/magistrate); and
(x) The Presumption of Executor De Son Tort is the presumption that if the accused does seek to assert their right as Executor and Beneficiary over their body, mind and soul they are acting as an Executor De Son Tort or a "false executor" challenging the "rightful" judge as Executor. Therefore, the judge/magistrate assumes the role of "true" executor and has the right to have you arrested, detained, fined or forced into a psychiatric evaluation. Unless this presumption is openly challenged by not only asserting one's position as Executor as well as questioning if the judge or magistrate is seeking to act as Executor De Son Tort, the presumption stands and a judge or magistrate of the private Bar guild may seek to assistance of bailiffs or sheriffs to assert their false claim; and
(xi) The Presumption of Incompetence is the presumption that you are at least ignorant of the law, therefore incompetent to present yourself and argue properly. Therefore, the judge/magistrate as executor has the right to have you arrested, detained, fined or forced into a psychiatric evaluation. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to the fact that you know your position as executor and beneficiary and actively rebuke and object to any contrary presumptions, then it stands by the time of pleading that you are incompetent then the judge or magistrate can do what they need to keep you obedient; and
(xii) The Presumption of Guilt is the presumption that as it is presumed to be a private business meeting of the Bar Guild, you are guilty whether you plead "guilty", do not plead or plead "not guilty". Therefore unless you either have previously prepared an affadavit of truth and motion to dismiss with extreme prejudice onto the public record or call a demurrer, then the presumption is you are guilty and the private Bar Guild can hold you until a bond is prepared to guarantee the amount the guild wants to profit from you.
Based on notes from Dave Clarence training calls through October 23, 2010
Referencehttp://www.talkshoe.com/tc/39904 David Clarence with Angela
13 A Billing authority’s power to reduce amount of tax payable
(1) Where a person is liable to pay council tax in respect of any chargeable dwelling and any day, the billing authority for the area in which the dwelling is situated may reduce the amount which he is liable to pay as respects the dwelling and the day to such extent as it thinks fit.
(2)The power under subsection (1) above includes power to reduce an amount to nil.
(3)The power under subsection (1) may be exercised in relation to particular cases or by determining a class of case in which liability is to be reduced to an extent provided by the determination
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest