Page 1 of 4

email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:30 pm
by parr
Hello everyone the other day send a email to the HM Treasury got a responce back today just thought i share it with you wonderful people.


Dear Whom Ever It My Concern

I want to ask a question while using my right of the Freedom Of Information Act 2000.

First things first I do not want to be dishonable regarding this email.

Just simple answers would suffice please.

How would someone set up and get access to ones Live Birth Trust.

I am going to keep this short and sweet.

Thank you

jon jones


ill edit it with the response once i sanitise my email off it and recompile it .

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:47 pm
by parr
hey here's the response i didn't edit it i had to put it on my m8s site (just to host it)

here is the link

i want to here your responses please

Warning link opens to this address with two pop ups being shown:
Letter removed from this link to prevent it from working.


Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:49 pm
by parr
ok dont click the link copy and paste it into your address bar soz about this

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:02 am
by huntingross
I'm afraid I'm not converted on this idea at the moment, although I'd love it to be true....I don't believe we have a set up like the Canadians. The notion that UK has always been an Incorporation I think is probably unproven, it seems to be a recent history thing, and whilst the government may trade on 'slaves of the state'....i don't see evidence of this as shares.

For example the Incorporation papers for UK plc only has 1000 shares.

So the response is probably genuine, if not actually, at least in belief that it doesn't exist.

Liked the heresay bit at the end....

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:57 am
by Jonah
I take it that if a "live birth trust" does not exist then the process of AFV
cannot work?

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:47 pm
by Veronica
It MUST. There is no other way.

Obviously it isn't called a "Live Birth Trust". It's called something else, and they are playing 'hard to get'. They have to.

Here is the response someone else got, plus my comments:

More consideration on my part:

1) This is what they said:

> I can however, confirm that HM Treasury does not hold any recorded information relevant to a "Live Birth Trust Account". A search of our electronic records does not identify "Live Birth Trust" as a term in general usage and can only guess at what you might mean by it. If your enquiry is with reference to National Insurance, I can say that the system of National Insurance Numbers is primarily used simply to record National Insurance contributions against individuals, which determine their entitlement to certain state benefits - as explained at the Directgov web page below. ... DG_4015904

2) And the quoted link goes to HMRC … who collects the NI Contributions. And the fact that this "determines one's entitlement to certain state benefits" is not exactly telling us something we did not already know.

3) On the other hand, since National Insurance wasn't mentioned in the question, what would lead her to believe there was any connection between NIC & the question? She could reasonably have stopped short after the first two sentences.

Why is HM Treasury involved?

Can't HMRC, who collect the contributions, run the database? Then from this DWP, Local Councils & NHS can feed information to & fro. (Especially now because they have been given the go-ahead to interlink)

I cannot - for the life of me - see why HM Treasury should be involved, unless there is more to it.

OK … so it's not called a "Live Birth Trust" … if they had another name for it, then the answers would still be true, and the question would still be relevant. Are they simply 'in the clear' because the question used the wrong title?

They know it is self-defeating if the Truth gets out & everybody uses it. They know it is 'the end of money as we know it'. Do you think they'll just cough up the information without a fight?

Money is created by your signature on a Promise. They MUST run an Account on that. Who knows what it is called? They do ... we don't.

Look: I wrote this today. it's an extract of something I'm writing to post to David Icke, if I get the chance:

Read it. Tell me it isn't true. Tell me it isn't COMMON SENSE.


Whenever I've tried to identify this deception, I've invariably run into many rabbit trails. This makes it difficult to know where to start.

I've made something of a start to get to this point, because I've explained a bit of background about the 'law'. But thus far I've done nothing more than scratched the surface of that particular trail. There will be oodles of more practical information that I will provide later.

The other major component of The Grand Deception is 'money'. In point of fact it is the driving force behind everything, and very much the driving force behind the creation of 'legalese', and so on.

In fact it could be said that 'money' is where everything starts (and ends).

I've found that generally the best way to convince someone else is to get them to convince themselves. So I'm going to try to do that this way, in the form of a hypothetical Question & Answer Session, where I pose the questions, and you give the answers. Obviously I'm assuming the answers you would give. See what you think.

Here goes ("M:" = Me, "Y:" = You):

M: Do you know what money is?

Y: Yes, of course.

M Can you define it?

Y: Yes, of course I can.

M Well go on then. Just remember a definition cannot use the word being itself defined, and that it must describe the entity accurately, not it's applicability. For example, "a paintbrush" is an implement that has a handle made of solid material, and has a large number of soft bristles affixed. The handle is used for manually grasping, and the bristles are used for holding a quantity of paint.". In other words, the definition if a paintbrush is NOT "Something you paint with" for the simple reason that a Roller is something you paint with, and "painting with" is what YOU DO with it, NOT WHAT IT IS. So, give me a definition of money.

Y: Errrm ...well you buy things with it. It replaces bartering.

M No, that's not a definition .. that's what you DO with it ... what IS it?

Y: Well ... I'm not sure ...

M Shall I offer you a definition? You can then tell me if you agree or not?

Y: OK, then

M "Conveniently, transferable, Tokens of Credit". That's one possibility. Another is "Conveniently, transferable, Tokens of Exchange". How about that?

Y: Well, yes, I suppose so.

M Do you agree, then?

Y: Well, yes.

M Well, "conveniently, transferable ..." they are just adjectives that more accurately define the actual subject, aren't they?

Y: Well, yes

M So, for the purposes of closer analysis - of the subject, which is the important thing - we can ignore them ... can we?

Y: Well, I suppose so.

M Well why not?

Y: Well ... no ... no ... that's OK

M: OK let's look more closely. What is a "Token"?

Y: Errrm well ... you get them from Fruit Machines ...

M: ... and they come as Vouchers?

Y: Oh, yes ...

M May I suggest: "A Token is something *real* that stands in place of, in other words represents, something that cannot actually represent itself"?

Y: Come again?

M You need a Token if the thing being represented is an idea. A concept. A tree can represent itself as it stands in the ground. But, if you are designing a park, on paper, you would use little plastic Tokens to represent the trees in your THOUGHTS. isn't that so?

Y: Well, yes ... I suppose so.

M Well, think about what a Token is, and what it is used for. You need a Token to represent something, in the situation where it can't actually be itself. And that's always true, with just an idea. "Credit" is the idea. "Credit" or ("Exchange") is the CONCEPT.

Y: Well, yes ... I suppose so.

M Money is a CONCEPT. It is simply "I believe ...". It actually has no value, because it is nothing more than an IDEA. You BELIEVE you can offer a tenner and get 'a tenner's worth of goods or services". You believe that, so you carry the Tokens in your wallet. You pass these Tokens to others, who also BELIEVE the same thing as you do. We are all brought up the BELIEVE the same thing.

MONEY HAS NO VALUE. It's only 'value' is based purely on BELIEF, and nothing more. The same with Gold & Silver, and so on. Money is actually nothing more than an 'official IOU' called 'legal tender'. The fact that it has 'no value' has been confirmed, in writing, by the Treasury.

'Money' has as much 'value' as Tokens from a Fruit Machine, or Vouchers from Sainsbury's, or the old Green Shield Stamps.

Just remember: Wars are fought over this thing without value. It is responsible for all kinds of 'cides' … genocides, homicides, suicides, patricides, and so on. All based on an illusion. A Dream World.

Do you believe in Unicorns?

Y: Well, no ... they're mythical creatures aren't they?

M Yes, they certainly are. They are 'real' as Pounds or Dollars or Euros. If a tenner was honest, and said "I promise to pay the Bearer on demand 10 Unicorns", you laugh at it. You'd laugh and call it 'Monopoly Money'. But belief in 'Pounds Sterling' is exactly the same as belief in 'Unicorns'. And the Treasury is prepared to actually admit that, in so many words.

Consider this equation:

Life as we know it = Life we would wish it to be + Money

Arithmetically it is possible to remove a term = Zero, without disturbing the balance of an equation. Since 'money has no value', it contributes no value to that equation. Consequently the above equation can be reduced to:

Life as we know it = Life we would wish it to be

… by eliminating the Money term, while still maintaining a balanced equation.

The argument is that "Money creates the incentive". This is a false statement in order to weave the Grand Deception. The Truth is "Money creates the enslavement, and nothing more"

And this can be shown by closer consideration. So let's do just that.

I think most people will have heard of a Treasury. All nations have one.

Does anyone know what 'a Treasury' actually does?

The general response to that is "Well it makes the money", or "It issues the money".

Well, in a sense those answers are true, but they beg a couple of very important questions.

And, for obvious reasons, there is no real point in asking them these questions - although I did ask the first question, and received a reply that was capable of being interpreted.

The 'obvious reasons' are that those who work in the Treasury don't really know what they are actually doing. That's why the answer I received was slightly oblique.

In order to discover the answers we must use Common Sense, and apply that in conjunction all that has been discovered over the years in relation to the Global Elite, and so on.

We must look at the questions, and work out the answers, and be able to say to ourselves: "They MUST be the correct answers, because there is no other way".

In that way we cut through all the bullshit, and zoom in on the kernel, the crux.

How is money created?

How could it be created? We already know it is an illusion. We have been told that, and we worked it out anyway.

How do you create an illusion?

You convince. You do not mention any other possibility. You repeat the mantra. Endlessly. Via the media, and every other channel you possess.

You rely on your supposed 'authority' for pronouncements.

You remember that you only have to ingrain One Generation, and the conviction will promulgate down through all future generations.

But you have to be careful. You have to be able to control, or regulate this fiction, because the imagination of Humans is limitless.

You mustn't let them ever get the idea that they can imagine as much money as they ever wished to imagine. So, most important of all, your mechanism MUST create enslavement.

You have to make them understand that they must SLAVE under your illusion. Otherwise your illusion is a waste of time, and won't work to benefit you. (Those bloody Human Beings can be tricky bastards, given half a chance!).

So you must get them to commit themselves to something, before you allow them to partake in your illusion. You have to get them to consent to the illusion, by means of 'Carrot & Stick'. (After all, they are nothing more than cattle, of course, so they will fall for that old trick. The old 'uns are always the best 'uns)

Right, well. You get them to sign a piece of paper containing a promise. You get them to make a promise that they will graft if you allow them some of your illusion. You convince them that this is a solemn promise they must keep … or else! That way they do REAL graft, and you walk away with all the benefits, and they never know any different! And, of course, you don't have to keep any promises you may have made, because you are in total control! So you, yourself, can bullshit till the cows come home (to mix a few metaphors)!

Gosh that's clever, innit!

What does this piece of paper look like? Well, anything that has the characteristics of an IOU, for example a cheque. The signature - YOUR signature - being the most important thing, however the date, Payee and amount double-checked between numerals and words are also important.

Another good example is a Loan Application, or Credit Card Application, or the Application for a Mortgage, etc.

So, now we see what a Treasury does? It accepts IOUs, signed by Human Beings, (actually called Promissory Notes), and 'issues the illusion' in accordance.

So, then next question is who is this illusion issued to?

So what can they do, then? Get the Royal Mint to print a ton of banknotes, hire a plane, and from 1,000 feet, let go of all the banknotes. "Here you are England! There's your money for today going into circulation!"

How is money 'introduced into circulation'?

No. Don't think so. This has to be done VERY carefully, so as to ensure that the Human Beings can't wriggle out of the entrapments within which they have been carefully placed.

If the Illusion were just handed over in exchange for the Promissory Notes, what mechanism is there for making sure the Human supplies the Promised Graft in exchange? Such that the free ride can be taken, on that individual's back, by the Global Elite?

No, gosh, just handing it over like that isn't going to work.

We need an intermediary. And that will add to the convolution of the mechanism, and thus create a more solid disguise. And we, the Treasury, can 'remain aloof'. Remain a kind of 'hidden hand'.

As in "Well these massive bailouts are really nothing to do with us. Talk to the Chancellor. Talk to the Banks. Talk to the Building Societies, and so on. Now do you mind if we just quietly get on with our jobs? Thanks ever so much"

("HSBC? Oh yes, the Chancellor has authorised us to hand over £300 million. And that's our job. Ours is not to question the whys and wherefores. Here you are. Good bye. See you next time you go tits-up. Toodle pip!")

So, your Promissory Note (IOU, Loan Application, Promise to Graft in return) is collected by the Bank, Building Society, Loan Company.

It is actually a cheque that they can cash with the Treasury.

And they do just that.

And the Treasury issues authorisation to 'create the corresponding money' or - to put it the correct way - 'to create the corresponding illusion'.

These days just numbers into a computer database, of course. Often by Electronic Transfer.

So, what happened? You promised to graft in return for some illusion you could buy a car with. The Bank took YOUR promise, and cashed it with the Treasury, such as to create that amount of illusion for THEMSELVES.

What could the Bank do?

They could just walk away with the money you have given them. Just by saying "Sorry … but your Loan was not finally approved".

Would you ask them for your Loan Application (your Promissory Note, your cheque) back? Or would you just say: "Oh hell, I'll have to try somewhere else"?

Would they have to give the money back to the Treasury? Why? How would the Treasury know? Would you write to the Treasury saying "My Loan wasn't approved … please make sure you re-claim what was issued on my behalf"?.

And, anyway, if 'the Bank gave the money back to the Treasury', what would the Treasury do with it? Their job is to ISSUE it, not collect it! All they ever did was to create some meaningless numbers into a computer database.

Of course, if the Bank always just walked away like this, people would lose heart, and wouldn't bother to apply for loans. Then the source of signed IOUs would dry up.

So, they have a second option., which is to move the credit YOU made to a Loan Account for YOU to spend against.

But, but, but! You agreed to pay them back PLUS INTEREST.

You agreed to 'pay them back' for something you gave TO them in the first place. And, not only that, to pay COMPOUND INTEREST on top. And you accepted the fact that they will chase you chase you chase you if you don't PAY THEM FOR YOUR OWN PROPERTY.

I think my 'Grand Deception' claim does tend to describe the situation?

Now you say to me: "How do you know all this is true? Can you prove it?"

I say to you: "Can you think of any other way, that fits all the known facts? If it looks like a rat, acts like a rat, smells like a rat, eats like a rat and bites like a rat - I think you'll find it is a rat".

You want to consider Income (or any form of) Tax? Think about what 'a Treasury' could be for. Think about what HMRC does. Why is it necessary to collect Income Tax from YOU, when a Treasury exists which has the ability to authorise as much 'fiat money' as would ever be needed?

The only possible reason for the convoluted mechanism is to weave the illusion, and to make sure of your entrapment.

There is no other possible explanation.

Life as we know it = Life we would wish it to be + Illusion

Subtract the unnecessary zero-worth illusion, designed purely for entrapment, and we have

Life as we know it = Life we would wish it to be


Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 9:58 pm
by Wolf

This is not my bag but I guess one good plan would be to keep asking the same questions and try and get DIFFERENT answers from different people/departments. Its a bit like questioning a criminal and his accomplices in SEPERATE rooms. Look for the contradictions etc.

Also no reason to keep answering their letter until they get pissed off.

Recorded telephone conversations are ideal..they can't handle the pressure. Its what they don't say..the silences..that can be so telling. Hey we need an intelligence branch. lol

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:16 pm
by Veronica
Yes, Wolf. That's what we have to do.

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:56 pm
by huntingross
I'm certain they run many accounts for many reasons, but the one we're focusing on is one supposedly created by birth right in the UK...allegedly ONE share in UK plc which Veronica, you calculated at £34 million or 1000 times less...based on population....

UK plc is a private limited company with a 1000 shares at £1....not 60 million shares....and UK plc and UK Corporation (previously) are relatively recent entities.

If this account is funded by our financial input, it would never attain that value (well mine wouldn't) it could only achieve that by trading our graft or our potential to graft...not the taxation based on the graft.

I think Occam's Razor applies's%20Razor

' God and his cat created a robot called Sparky who built the universe from parts bought from a shop in another dimension '

Re: email sent to hm treasury about life burth bond

PostPosted: Thu Mar 19, 2009 11:07 pm
by Wolf
UK plc is a private limited company with a 1000 shares at £1....not 60 million shares....and UK plc and UK Corporation (previously) are relatively recent entities.

I have not followed threads on this but find it extremely unlikely the uk is any kind of regular PLC or limited company. Even Police stations and councils have a limited company status which appears secret.

Then don't we have the complication that it MAY be traded in administration to the Banksters. The 1000 share company could just be smoke.