Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce May 9, 1939 p.394

"Will you tell me why the government with power to create money should give that power away to a private monopoly and then borrow that which parliament can create itself back at interest to the point of national bankruptcy"... "Why should a government borrow that money at interest?" Mr Towers, "Now, if parliament wants to change the form of operating the banking system, then certainly that is within the power of parliament."..."why cannot the people get the benefit of their own gilt-edged credit"?

– MINUTES – CANADA – Bank of Canada

Read it for yourself HERE

An International Solution - Must See! Click Image Below
Time For The TruthFind Out Here

Please Help Keep This Blog Alive!

Please Give Anything For Ongoing Blog Expenses...

Sponsors Supporting This Blog

Ad Square Ad Square

grant of scrip and land

Hi Lovers

The attachment contains the stuff I mentioned about Sir John A. MacDonald. I think you will find it very enlightening. Keep in mind that things are not as they were back in 1878ish........Much is revealed in my view.

From the attachment

"Without offering, therefore, a recommendation in the matter, permit to remark that it seems to me to be no part of the duties of the Government to compel, so to speak, the half-breeds to prove their claims.

It is not necessary to look up parties who have claims. If they care for their interests, they themselves will come forward and establish their claims".

They are saying the government is not under a duty or obligation to locate and confirm claims.

I am not saying but it may be the BC establishes an interest thus a claim. I did inform the Bank of Canada I have a BC issued in Ontario and believe it to be proof of claim to assets in Canada. I got a call back from that bank in about 2 hours. Contact the Gov't of in my case, Ontario.







Ask and it is Given (granted)

Hi lovers

I was going to send this to a friend but as it progressed I thought it good to share here.
I have been reviewing your certificates of acceptance.

These are my thoughts;

The gov did not grant you a name or dictatorship but a BC, short of the long form.

All I have read about executor is that party is with the liability and or obligation, duty to perform. They will, in my view, act on what is said in their rules etc and not by what we say. God did not make us executors and so what I see them seeing you say is, send the bills/charges to here.

They still say many who followed the D.C. executor method are in jail.

Regarding the deed thing, at no time has anyone said anything about executor or administrator in that it seems not to be necessary.

Think about this; in the stead of passing off or appearing to pass off or not accept obligations, ask and it is given. Ask for forgiveness.

How responsible or honourable it is to say or insinuate  "you have the obligation"? To me that is a legal land mindset. Obligations, there are no obligations with God.

I am not saying but it sure seems one of the lessons of life on this planet is to learn to and be responsible and ok with being humble. No orders, no demands, ask.

When the government was giving out land by grants, all one had to do was ask and it was given; he did not demand land. The ego will say, God gave it to me so I am not asking they owe me. And that may be so but if asking does the trick, demanding seems to not work, then ask.

Maybe we doubt who is in charge is why we do not think to ask. Maybe that mindset is what empowers them (other self) to use that power over the thinker (self), like for like. or reaping what one sews.

Maybe we have not been children yet but irresponsible and by asking we are as children. When the request is granted, you can be the babysitter, we then at that moment are grown up, responsible. The government did not grant land to children so I am speaking metaphorically, the point being, has anyone asked?

When someone owes you do you not ask for what is owed. If the ower (issuer of BC in this case) is not sure who he owes, would it not be good for the owee (recipient) to identify himself and ask?

We have land and legal land. One is real property the other is where everyone's mind is. Land of obligations but if ones asks, there are no obligations, it is either yes or no and done, finished, right then and there.

I shared what someone shared with me recently, and that is his wife asked that a debt be forgiven and I was told it was. A lady out west sent in a copy of the SOB with a short note asking that a debt be settled, it was.

Perhaps taking any other action is what has us bound up in legal title land. See, when you ask you are dealing with things GIVEN, not like when you offer you are buying or contracting. And ordering those not under your employ to perform in my view is akin to egotistical warfare that will be matched in kind.

If you ponder over whats going on with the deed thing shared lately on the net, ask and ye shall receive seems may be the smooth road.

I mean, if one can have the record changed after the fact to show one is the sole owner of the land in fee simple, no claims are on the land itself, then one can obtain land from the get go by making it clear before hand the warranty deed (indenture) is used to transfer good clear title. No surprises.
That be the case, one can simply request land. If that can be done then surely at that moment it is accepted you are not part of legal land.

Perhaps that is what children of God do, they ask. Perhaps the earthly authorities are his authorities waiting for you to ask. We have taken many roads that are dead ends and yet when people have asked they have received.

I think the government at upper levels knows what a BC is and who you are and that the body is of the ground and that God did breathe life into it and you are a child/heir of God but..........................HAVE YOU ASKED? Ask and it is GRANTED.

Maybe that is what a BC is for, to recognize you as a son/heir of God.

Like i said, these are my thoughts.

With love.

p.s. I was just informed that the lady who asked that a debt be forgiven did not include the SOB or BC. This suggests to me that they know the difference of man and corporation and same regarding the names. In other words, when they see VRB they know they are dealing with a person or a man or a woman. Persons contract, children of God ask. The asking is what makes one a child of God.

The BC is a 'valuable token', and since it was not required that the debt was forgiven, it did not prove identity on that account, the name did, so the BC must be representative of something else. Perhaps a form of or a crown grant or proof of right to request land (maybe more) by grant which is all they had to do way back when according to Sir John A MacDonald. I shared he was pissed when he became aware the land was being taken by speculators. The same happened in California and probably everywhere and evolved into what we have today, speculators. We are all speculators.

Now isn't that spectacular?

I would say that anyone purchasing land is seen as purchasing it for investment and do not people say my house is worth more now or less now and is that not what speculation is? Based on an inituial investment in terms of money. So money not the land is the interest. Do you see it?

The reason for capital gain tax is the investment was based on speculation.

My point is, purchasing land like we have may deem one a speculator. If you ask and it is given dare you sell it and take the money (total disgrace) therefore, the market or commercial value is of no interest to you, the substance is, thus no speculation nor speculator. Just accept what is already given by the creator of the heaven and earth.


Law Relating to Registration

Hi Lovers

I came across the document upload here. Take note of the purpose of extracts.

"An Act for enabling Courts of Justice to admit Non- parochial (parish) Registers as Evidence of Births or Baptisms, Deaths or Burials, and Marriages".

As far as I can tell, they are upholding that act. An example is section 46 of the Vital Statistics Act Ontario. I would say a certified copy of registration or certified extract, a BC,  are certificated authentication documents. Admissible as proof means no doubt, highest level of evidence. The proof is the proof. So, although a BC is no the original, for purposes of law it is original. But it must be a Certified Extract.

Further, when I had the certified copy of registration of birth (SOB) authenticated on it includes this; "I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT the facsimile signature is that of JUDITH M. HARTMAN, and the Seal, an impression of which appears on the annexed certificate (SOB), is the Seal of the Registrar General of the Province of Ontario and that faith and credence are due and ought to be given to such signature and Seal in all places.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF I have hereunto set my Hand and affixed the Seal of the Management Board of Cabinet of the Province of Ontario at the City of Toronto in the said Province this twenty-seventh day of April A.D. 2004   [signature] for SECRETARY OF THE MANAGEMENT BOARD OF CABINET".

So, the only question now is, what does the record verify or mean and how can it benefit us? I think we can use it to verify, we, the soul of God, occupy the body of the dust of the ground known as man and are the donne of the given names. We being the spirits in the bodies of the dust of the ground, earth/land. That gets us to land and man has dominion over the land.

Are we immovables?

If a deed to land proves lawful occupation of it, then I think the SOB proves lawful occupation of the body and given names as donee. As a divine being occupying a body of the dust of the ground, what are you occupying and the names given you by your folks were not given to the body but received, recorded in your memory?It is all how you look at it. You are not the body you occupy one. So if the SOB means that then the BC must by extension as another extract, short form, have the same meaning. I dunno.............

But there is this: A birth certificate according to the Deputy Registrar General is a 'abstract' and Websters says this about that; a shortened form of a work RETAINING the general sense and UNITY of the original. The original of course is the SOB and so it would seem that the BC is nothing more than proof of the original which may include your body in the originating process. So it sure seems that the BC is a form of a crown grant/deed.

In other words, we have a name in mind, they are the given names, and we have names in the system as a judge put it but that name includes the surname and is not the one in mind. But the surname does connect lineage for inheritance. What did we inherit? Land, a name, what was given before me time here, a freehold or landed estate as distinguished from an estate at will only. See Statute of Frauds.

Now with regard to the name on the BC, one it seems would be in a better position to take lawful ownership of the landed estate VRB, which may be or include your body since it is of the dust of the ground and you are the life breathed into man. Your body is recognized by or as the name in my case VRB and if the body also be of the land, then the name is recognizing that what is of the land, not you personally because you occupy the body, you are not the body.  The land is your in inheritance along with dominion over it.

A death certificate certifies the death of a testator. If you read Genesis 2:7 and the Ontario Vital Stats Act of the meaning of birth you see a relationship which suggests a knowingness to me that they know we occupy a body of the land. We just have to get it right within ourselves.

Genesis 2:7, and the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

birth” means the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a fetus that did at any time after being completely expelled or extracted from the mother breathe or show any other sign of life..........

The phrase "other signs of life" is interesting. They are aware of life and signs of it. But what the signs of life are, signature, thumb print, blood? I am not saying but I think given the order of events in the bible, God gave man dominion over the earth and then later breathed life into him. Is that symbolic of the awakening of the spirit of God or that it exists in us but until awake, we are mere men led by human rather than divine consciousness? Regardless, I know I am not the body therefore I occupy it and I (soul of God) am the donee of the name and man is of the land and the land, earth, man is given dominion over and that could mean or include the body once you acknowledge possession/occupation of it. Acceptance of the SOB may be the 1/10th giving one absolute indefeasible title, power and authority as all power is ordained of God.

Terminology aside, see it this way, there is I am, the spirit of God and donee of the given names occupying (not own) the body of the dust of the ground known as man that is the recipient of a BC and lawful owner of the landed estate known as VRB. If the body be recognized by the name in my case VRB, then I as acceptor would be the lawful owner of it as well as appurtenances and hereditaments and tenements and you get the drift if this makes sense.

Seal (noun); something that confirms, ratifies, or makes secure: GUARANTEE, ASSURANCE. That is what we have on a BC and a authenticated cert copy of SOB. Faith and credence.........

Law Relating to Registration 3

Statute of Frauds (mentions legalization)

Still working things out


With Love






Hi Lovers

Seal (contract law)

Until modern statutory reforms in contract law, a seal was widely recognised by courts in common law jurisdictions as removing the need for consideration (value) in a contract. This reflects classical contract theory, in which consideration was viewed as a formal aspect of a contract, so that a seal could be considered an alternative form. A seal was not per se a type of consideration, but rather raised a presumption of consideration (courts have varied in their opinions of whether this presumption was rebuttable). See, e.g., Marine Contractors Co. Inc. v. Hurley, 365 Mass. 280, 285-86 (1974).

The rationale for this special treatment of sealed contracts can be understood in terms of the legal formalities that are associated with sealing a document with a wax seal. Firstly, the following of the legal formality of affixing a seal to a document was evidence of the existence of a contract. Secondly, the need to use a seal – widely known to have legal significance – served to impress upon the parties the significance of the agreement being made. This element of deliberation is important in the context of many legal theories for why donative promises are not generally enforceable in the same way as contracts: there is a concern that donative promises are sometimes made under pressure (for example, from family members) without adequate deliberation, which explains why a requirement for the legal formality of the seal might substitute for consideration to give enforceability to donative promises. Thirdly, the following of the legal formalities through the use of a seal demonstrated beyond doubt that a legal transaction was intended by the parties.[1]

Like we wrote the other day, with regard to the name the folks gave us we are the donee, but as for the BC the gov gave (granted) us, it has a seal onto it for it seems, enforceability.

The common law rule which required that a deed made by a private individual had to be sealed to be validly executed was finally abolished in 1989 by the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. The Act implemented recommendations made by the Law Commission of England and Wales in their 1987 report Deeds and Escrows[7] and replaced seals with the requirements that the document had to explicitly state that it was being executed as a deed, and had to be witnessed.[8]

Keep in mind that the grantor is with the liability. Notice to "the common law rule" regarding a private individual. When have you ever acknowledged a deed as a private individual (man)?

There are title deeds and land deeds.

Seal of office

7.  (1)  The Registrar General shall have a seal of office. If you look at the Coat of Arms for Ontario it is very similar to the emblem on the BC but, it is not the same. The parts in colour are not on the one on the BC. I would say that is the Seal of Office of the BC and cert true copies of SOB.

Seal of office--effect.

374.050. 1. The seal now used by said department shall be the seal of the office of the director of the department of insurance, financial institutions and professional registration, and the same may be renewed whenever necessary.

2. Every certificate or other paper executed by said director in pursuance of any authority conferred on him by law, and sealed with his seal of office, and all copies of papers in the office of said director, certified by him and authenticated by said seal, shall, in all cases, be evidence equally and in like manner as the originals, and shall have the same force and effect as the originals thereof would, in any suit or proceeding in any court of this state.

Divided titles

Hi Lovers

What is fee simple?

At common law, an estate in fee simple in a parcel of land is one transferred absolutely to a person and his or her heirs, forever, without any conditions. This is the highest estate in land that can be held by a person in a common law province.  The civil law equivalent of a fee simple estate is the concept of "ownership," which is the right of enjoying and disposing of an immovable in the most absolute manner. The only restriction is that no use be made of the immovable that is prohibited by law or regulation.  An estate in fee simple is freely transferable by deed, will or otherwise.”

So we see two types of titles, one in common law the other under civil law.

For a $50 fee landowners can obtain a certified copy of the Crown Land Patent Grant relating to their property by contacting the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources with the lot, concession and original township information.

I was typing and this came out;

"When one wakes up to who he is he can move back to the common law side of the fence where the land is leaving the legal title and the encumbrances and debts on the other side because that is where they are".

We land when we get back to common law and stop playing in legal land or dealing in legal titles except as grantee. Delivery of the baby was made to the dock/tor and then delivery was made back to mom. The baby is still at sea, in transit, negotiation, receivership pendente lite, still working things out.

Another thing hit me when typing.

On land documents the property is registered like this SMITH, Mary.

They like on the BC put the surname first in line and on the land thing it is always that I have seen in BLOCK letters.

SMITH is a legal title and so I wonder if by putting it first like that on the legal title it means, first in line first in time. In other words, the legal title is priority title.

Now, when the land deed stemming from the crown grant is acknowledged and accepted, if we do that acknowledgement like this Mary Smith and Mary has also already accepted the given names, now Mary is first in line and in time under common law of God because the land was created and given long before civil law or legal titles came to be.

So perhaps for want of the acknowledgement being done legal title trumps.

It is probably better to be a friendly occupant of land than a owner of legal title.

Certificate of Occupancy

Hi Lovers

Strange title for a post but hopefully we make sense of it.

- Order and Truth -

All order is based up-on real-truth, so the-only way to get back, to true-law, and real-order, is to return to the-real truth. Chinese Proverb.

Ok then, let us begin by taking that advice and heed to this;

Genesis 2:7, and the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

and this;

Vital Statistics Act, "birth" means the complete expulsion or extraction from its mother of a foetus that did at any time after being completely expelled or extracted from the mother breathe or show any other sign of life…………

So, man is of the dust of the ground, earth, thus the body (dead meat) is of the land. Then God breathed life into man and that life occupies the body known as man.

That is a truth we can then move forward from.

The life is not the body but the lyghte occupying the body thus we can say that a birth certificate, given the events surrounding its issue and the facts of life, is a certificate of occupancy, you, the divine, in the body.

So the registration of birth process ACKNOWLEDGES and ACCEPTS, proven by act of registration, the facts of life. Firth there was life/lyghte so we are at the beginning and the foundation of truth.

Now onto some more truth.

Statement of Birth, form folks sign, proves (records) you are the donee of the given names or names given. Those givens name(s) exist in your head. They are not part of any public record as far as originals go. You do not answer to paper you answer to a name you hear and when you hear e.g. mary you, the life, not body, is the one called.

Who those name(s) are TO be received by however is a different story. In your mind you have received and accepted the name(s) but that is not public NOTICE.

Not known, still in transit, on the seas, until the deed, SOB) is properly acknowledged and accepted as donee of the givens name e.g. Mary. Once that is done there is no doubt now that when you say "I am Mary", you are not MARY SMITH.

Negotiation (transit) is completed by delivery and delivery is past tense for, accepted. You see, until the goods are offloaded it cannot be said delivery has been made let alone the cargo accepted.

So upon notice of acceptance (these terms are found in the bills of exhange act) then delivery has been made, means, landed. No longer in transit or negotiation or at sea. It, the voyage, is finished, and a re-birth/berth.

At this point now we have you who answers to the name mary occupying the body. That concludes part one; opening of first chakra.

Part two is a completely separate but connected situation that until part one is done blocks the second chakra from opening.

Part two is dealing with the birth certificate (BC) and the issue of it and first off, when part one is done there is no way the BC evidences the name on it was given to you by your folks, because on the BC it would show, SMITH, MARY or Smith, Mary.

Further, the law did not compel your folks to give you a name they were going to do that law or no law. Another reason the name you, the life, answers to is not on the BC and the birth record proves it, is acknowledgement.

What I am getting at is, and is the reason i chose the word donee above, the names given me we given freely by my folks whereas the one on the BC had to be applied for and we do not apply for a name but a BC.  In other words, a child does not apply to his parents for a name, it is forgiven, but if you want a BC you must apply for it.

Further, for title in the BC to pass to the recipient would have to receive some kind of release or receipt/acknowledgement. The fee paid for a BC is an admin fee, not a contract, no consideration in money or that can be sued on, and full legal title does not pass to the recipient.

So, what the heck is a BC.

I say it is a form of a Crown Grant and i say that because of the information already put above and also because although one may apply for a BC he may not obtain one which means it can be withheld which means if you did obtain one it was granted as is simultaneously the entitlement of the recipient, the body, to be recognized by the name appearing on the BC.

At this point now we have you in the body who answers to the name mary occupying the body recognized by the name MARY SMITH (a legal title).

Remember we are talking of a grant here and that you are not MARY SMITH and the grantor holds the title and the liability. Warranty Deeds are made out by the grantor and the grantor by his hand and seal (see birth certificate/deed) is with liability. All we got is a BC, grant. I think this more of a province type grant than a government grant. Further, if the grantee not be known, e.g. did not accept as grantee, marketable title stands as king.

Since the BC was granted and because the name on it is not the one given us by our folks (see part one) it is granted us by the province. By accepting the deed as grantee we bind the grantor. to his promise. God is the likely real grantor and so even better we accept as grantee. Accept the Father into our heart.

Blacks 4th DEED, at common law, a sealed instrument, containing a contract or covenant, delivered by the party to be bound thereby, AND ACCEPTED BY THE PARTY TO WHOM THE CONTRACT OR COVENANT RUNS. Now it cannot run to you until you accept and it does not run to you but MARY SMITH when dealing with MARY SMITH, hence, it is okay for the body to be recognized by the name MARY SMITH; you are a user, for we are talking the legal title side. I believe the contract is the entitlement to be recognized by the name (offer and acceptance). I am not certain that the acceptance of the BC only is sufficient to bind the grantor.

I see we are on the fee simple side of the fence (common law, grants, gifting, life) and the BC name on the legal title side of the fence (marketable titles. paper,debt, death).

It may be said like this with respect to the BC or part two here.

I, mary, a woman, in the capacity of MARY SMITH am recorded as the grantee on the deed (grant/BC). That is the opening sentence and does not include the acknowledgement and acceptance. This allows me to interface with commerce but without the obligation of being MARY SMITH (i am doing but not in my name but I am grantee after acceptance) or beneficiary or under civil law and if the BC is a grant by grantor, which in my estimation it is considering there is no consideration involved and there is a or signatures and a seal on BC's and it is not the name given me on the BC, it appears to be a deed at common law, where life is, and I think the party bound thereby will step forth voluntarily once it receives acknowledgement and acceptance. So long as you are in the loop of MARY SMITH as grantee, you mary receives no benefit or recognition. Which is exactly how Father would have it.

They have to because once you acknowledge and accept the SOB deed, for all intents and purposes you are mary and so someone has to take the legal liability for MARY. Part two formalizes or as my good cook friend Chris says, caramelize. Taste better........haha!

Acceptance is delivery meaning you have landed. The process for acceptance I would say cannot be done and witnessed only by you. I think your witnesses have to know you as mary at which point mary is the one who can accept. That is minor technical stuff.

I am still pondering this through but it was after reading revised statues of Ontario 1950 that I came across Certificate of Occupancy and I saw me in the body occupying it as one with dominion over the earth and a BC as an acknowledgment of that.

In this country when first settled, to get land you had to apply and if you got the grant then your application, offer, was accepted. The point is, if you do not ask how it is you can receive?

Well, we are the children of the promise (deed, contract under seal, lyghte) and as far as I can tell, the government has done it by the book on the basis we are with dominion over the earth and have rights to share of it as seeds-of-lyghte.

Only you can acknowledge and accept what was given you and only you can acknowledge and accept the corresponding BC etc as grantee.

At this point now we have you in the body who answers to the name mary occupying the body recognized by the name MARY SMITH (a legal title) recognized as grantee.

Legal liabilities (title) are in MARY SMITH who is a legal title on the legal title side of the fence and we by virtue of acceptance of the grant/deed as grantee, should as far as I can tell, if any of this is correct, enjoy the ride, inheritance.

It is suggested in the bible to come out of her, to be in the world not of it. I am thinking that means, come out of MARY SMITH as MARY SMITH and be in MARY SMITH as grantee. Your friends call you (the occupant) mary, the public sees your body as MARY SMITH and the information system knows MARY SMITH as a friendly, SON (in law) to be served.

Gives a new meaning to 'go within or go without'........hahahahaha!

With love



Hi Lovers

Found this in the 1960 Revised Statutes of Ontario link here....

You have to scroll down alphabetically. Notice to the words have changed. I think they scanned the documents using some kind of word reader and so you will notice incomplete sentences and other errors but the meat is there.

Personal 42. — (1) No tax is payable under section 4 or 5 by a .......corporations exempt corporation for a fiscal year during which it was a
personal corporation.

(2) In this Act, "personal corporation" means a corporation that, during the whole of the fiscal year in respect of which the expression is being applied,

(a) was controlled, whether through holding of the majority of the shares of the corporation or in any other manner whatsoever, by an individual resident in Ontario, by such individual and one or more members of his family [qualified below] who were resident in Ontario or by any other person on his or their behalf; [Hallow: a holder of BC you can be sole shareholder]

(b) derived at least one-quarter of its income from,

(i) ownership of or trading or dealing in bonds, shares, debentures, mortgages, hypothecs, bills, notes or other similar property or interest therein,

(ii) lending money with or without securities,

(iii) rents, hire of chattels, charterparty fees or remunerations, annuities, royalties, interest or dividends, or

(iv) estates or trusts; and [Hallow: this one here although I am withholding until further investigation, seems is very much applicable, in fact, provable].

(c) did not carry on an active financial, commercial or industrial business. [Hallow: Charities, estates, do not, I believe, fall into that category unless of course, we do or do not do something that the information in the system, otherwise known as NOTICE, indicates either we are partaking in such, or, have not given NOTICE of something. I will get into that aspect here in the coming days. I have some verifying to do yet]

Idem (3) For the purpose of clause a of subsection 2, the members of the family of an individual are his spouse, sons and daughters, whether or not they live together.

Distribution (4) The income of a personal corporation whether actually distributed or not shall be deemed to have been distributed to and received by the shareholders as a dividend on the last day of each fiscal year of the corporation.

Sec. 42 (9) HI CORPORATIONS TAX Chap. 73 931

(5) The part of the Income of a personal corporation that Division [<<< I think that is the wrong word, maybe it should be distribution] of shall be deemed under this section to have been distributed to and received by a shareholder of the corporation shall be the proportion thereof that the value of all property [Hallow: private-productiivitylabour] transferred or loaned to the corporation by the shareholder or any person by whom his share was previously owned is of the value of the property so acquired by the corporation from all its shareholders.

(6) The value of property transferred or loaned to a Valuation personal corporation shall be deemed for the purpose of this section to be its value at the time the property was transferred or loaned to the corporation.

87. — (1) Every corporation that is required by this Act to pay taxes shall keep records and books of account, including an annual inventory kept in the prescribed manner, at its permanent establishment in Ontario or at such other place as is designated by the Treasurer, in such form and containing such information as will enable the taxes payable under this Act to be determined. Hallow: since there appears to be no tax liability, this section is not applicable but I wanted you to see it.

Now the above is from 1960 and so we need to find it in more current legislation. This is a request to all of you researches to seek and find it and let me know. Thank you!

Now onto what they call the Registry Act in Ontario. Here is section 105 of that Act;



105.  In this Part,

“document” includes,

(a) a plan of survey,

(b) any certificate, affidavit, statutory declaration or other proof as to the birth, baptism, marriage, divorce, death, burial, descendants or pedigree of any person, or as to the existence or non-existence, happening or non-happening of any fact, event or occurrence upon which the title to land may depend,

(e) a notarial copy of a certificate, affidavit, statutory declaration, proof, notice or receipt described in this section that the Director specifies. 1998, c. 18, Sched. E, s. 260.

Deposit of document

106.  (1)  A document may be deposited in the office of the land registrar of any registry division in which any land to which it relates is situate. R.S.O. 1990, c. R.20, s. 106 (1).

Question, for what reason or purpose may one wish to make such a deposit? With what I have in mind and when verified, and I share more information, the dots may start connecting for you. Hint, if it is not in writing it did not happen = no NOTICE. When you see what they do with land, the paperwork, deeds, certificates etc, they are or I should say we believe they are following the same process and procedures when they register births. SOB is the deed and the BC the certificate but there is more to it not mentioned.

Hint, a thing is not given unless the recipient has acknowledged his ACCEPTANCE of the gift. Til then, title has not passed or is an uncertainty. A uncertainty for example can be this under Gratuitous Promises and Gifts; a gift is given but the giver, grantor, changes his mind later and says he did not give the gift and sues for the value of the gift. What action may you take as the recipient of the gift, grantee, that may prevent that? Not only that, if you do not take such action, what proof have you it was you that received or was meant to receive the gift?

Hint: do not rely on the other guy to do what need be done that your ass, rights in property are secure and witnesses must be involved as must some form of NOTICE = public record.A public record is un-defeatable barring fraud or mistake which is no concern for us here given the government in the case of registration of birth did it.

Years ago I used to say at seminars, sometimes we see folks have things on their front lawn saying FREE and you stop and pick up the free thing. Here is the kicker, what proof have you the property is yours, that you did not steal it?

Now another kicker, absent proof of gift, I mean proof, the law presumes he purchased the property (rights) but since we are talking of a gift here there is no proof of purchase, receipt, which is the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, hence; what action can you take to secure yourself from the happening of that event? I tell you this, it is really simple....................hahahaha!

With love

p.s. It is possible that when we buy land we are not paying for land. It is a scam.



Hi Lovers

This is the result of redeeming the token/BC.

You will come out with your freedom like you do when you redeem a token when playing, or want out of,  monopoly. As long as you play that game you are not free. How can you be when your sitting in a chair at a table?. So when one quits the game, e.g. by way of redeeming the token the only thing the player walks away with is his freedom. He has no debts to settle because that is part of the game as are the houses and cars and all that stuff.

What greater thing do you value than your freedom?

Now if you think you are entitled to more than your freedom, I believe that mindset will or is what is blocking us from being free of the game.

If your freedom is not good enough then you will be in the game. How do you know what comes with freedom from the game? You don't but you know the burdens of playing the game, monopoly.

I think at the end of the day what binds us most is we want more than life and freedom. I am confident that with freedom comes the gifts and love of God that Father. That they will flow to us or fall in our lap. Oh ye of little faith.

When Neo was asked what he wanted he said Peace.



Are we considered Hostages

Hi Lovers

Are we in the host age?

Indeed, the “pawn” in pawnshop comes from the word for “pledge”, as in the collateral left, with a token IOU provided by the shop that is later “redeemed” for the item left. St. Nick is the patron saint of pawnshops (and, appropriately, for thieves), while “Old Nick” refers to the devil (hence, the red suit and chimney soot) to whom we pawn our souls. The Tenth Commandment’s prohibition on coveting thy neighbor’s wife (which goes on to include male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor) has nothing to do with sex and adultery but rather with receiving them as pawns for debt. By contrast, Christ is known as “the Redeemer”—the “Sin Eater” who steps forward to pay the debts we cannot redeem, a much older tradition that lay behind the practice of human sacrifice to repay the gods.*

I have not yet confirmed the accuracy of this;

In the Hand- Book on Roman Civil-Law c 1933 under Security it says the First-Thing that You NEED is A HOSTAGE

I have drafted a document but before I share its content you may wish to consider that a BC is a pawnticket, token IOU.

You may wish to research further into the meaning of words that are related; pledge, pawn, hostage, conflict and other words you will see in your seeking. Keep in mind that the Deputy Registrar told us that a BC is not personal id but a valuable token.

Now what if that token is like a pawnshop ticket? What if we use a pawnshop ticket as personal id. Did you know that the pledgor is responsible to report income to the pledgee and it is all binding until the ticket is redeemed. Are we using or benefiting from trust or estate property?

Under pledge; The pledgee has the right to the possession and control of any income accruing during the period of the pledge, unless an agreement to the contrary exists. [Perhaps the use of a SIN number by employee is that agreement? Using the estate name, property, to profit. Who knows, we may be the estate] This income reduces the amount of the debt, and the pledgor must account for it to the pledgee. Perhaps the estate (you) is backing the money paying you, hence, the debt.

Now does that not fit what is going on with all of us. No matter what we do or where we go it seems we are constantly called upon to pay and or perform. No escape from 'pay or else'. Bound to the money game because the gov't accepts its money only in payment of taxes and fees. Under pledges, until the pledge is redeemed, the pledgee is in control and is with all the rights.

The gov does have possession or control of the SOB's and we do have an extract/extension (BC). A pawn ticket is to bear the same number as affixed to the pledge and we see the number on a SOB does also appear on a BC.

Identification of pledge

14.Each pledge shall be identified by a number that corresponds with the number of the pawnticket and the entry of the transaction in the pawnbroker’s book, and, when the pledge is redeemed, the pawnbroker shall record the amount of interest taken and of all other charges and shall keep the record for not less than one year after redemption. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.6, s. 14.

Anyhow, you have to read between the lines a bit (one thing being we have no debts) and do look up the word hostage and here is a definition but seek more; a person held by one party in a conflict (brings to mind the Leiber code) as a pledge that promises will be kept or terms met by the other party.

The other party may be the name on the SOB/BC which we know is not us. In other words, we are the pawns for the debts of the name because the name itself cannot perform. In that sense the name may be a estate and I am of the thinking that until the BC/token is redeemed, the estate remains under the control (protection/guardianship) of the pledgee.

Pawn Brokers Act Ontario;

Production of ticket

16.Except as hereinafter provided, a pawnbroker is not bound to deliver a pledge until the pawnticket for it is produced and delivered to the pawnbroker. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.6, s. 16.

Since the government does not know us, it like a pawnbroker would need to see the token, pawnticket, that it may know who is entitled to the particular estate/property In any case, not until the ticket is delivered is the pawnbroker bound to make delivery or can the account be settled.

It seems to that anyone who has got only the SOB in evidence has had success. Presentment of the BC then may be evidence of the pledge, that it is still in effect, hence; the holder upon presenting it is unknowingly indicating himself as a hostage, pawn for debt.

So our folks left us a name to be picked up that constitutes the basis or foundation of a or continuance or member of a family estate, lineage, family name >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

All things we do in that name, extended to our use via the BC, is added unto the estate, property of the estate, but again, until the token is redeemed and the estate freed, the heir is a security/hostage and the property under bond/seal/pledge and the pledgee has the burden because we are using estate property that does not, if this comes down to redeeming the token IOU, belong to us as heirs. We would be mere vassals.

There are expenses (burdens) passed forward by the pledgee and the pledgee is not bound to perform until delivery of the pawnticket is made to the pawnbroker.

It may be that CANADA is the pawnshop or warehouse, each province a compartment with its own interests apart from the other compartments. All are one.

All the fancy diction aside, and if any of this is accurate, all one need do it seems is redeem the BC, token we owe you. We have something here that belongs to you. Control is what we are talking about when we say 'belongs' and with control comes freedom.

As divine beings, do we really need a BC?

We could also see it this way perhaps. SOB represents a life, source of energy, we are the gold in that sense. I did read that the doctors notification of birth is known as the 'gold standard form'. Pledgee, moneychanger, by holding the SOB holds the gold, albeit constructively but with full rights which includes taking actual possession. Seizure of property comes to mind. But the gold is not his gold, it belongs to the one holding the receipt/token IOU.  So like the days of old, one would deliver his token IOU issued by the money changer to the money changer/Caesar (who must accept his own IOU as you will read in the document I have prepared) and give it for his gold in this case for us, that may simply mean freedom and all the attachments that go with it now that we would be free of the pledge and perhaps led by the spirit of our Father, our vessel under his tow.

If a pawnbroker were to refuse acceptance of his own issued token IOU on presentment, he to is subject to the requisite rules of dishonour.

What is written here are my thoughts and no claim is made regarding the accuracy. As always, before you jump on a bandwagon make sure you know the tune being played that you can play along or you may get boo-ded off the staged.

With love



Marc Stevens

Hi Lovers

This guy is quite good.

He is quite correct that the state is not the land and so no offense occurs in the state or under its jurisdiction.

How can anything occur in the state when the state exists in information? Is information on paper/microfiche. The legal name (VRB) is in the state, information, a member, part, information technology system.

He helps one see through the corporate-veil.

Gets interesting near the twenty - twenty two minute mark......

Point for you and I is, there is no state, no Canada/CANADA, ONTARIO/Ontario, PROVINCE/province. So how can claims in said names be made?

With Love


You choose

Hi Lovers

This message is not suitable for children, being those who wish to perpetuate through participation the very things they are hoping to break free from.

A quote from Christ; "I must withdraw from everything which I do not want to SEE perpetuated".

As you know I would normally comment but this is for you to figure out?

With love


Hi Lovers

There is only one or all is one.

I has a question. In that oneness, how can there be a trust or trust? How can there be executors, trustees, grantors, beneficiaries, estates? Notice the plurality.

Do such things not signify and or promote and or perpetuate a beleif in separation or that, there is more than one?

Perhaps it is time to ask once again, where does God begin and end, where is God, the one, not?

I have asked this question many times over the years and no one has answered, yet most by their actions and words must beleive there is more than the one otherwise, why do they do what they does?  Why?

With love





Hi Lovers

We all may have played a part in this via the letters we sent to the various government ministers et al last year and of course the Minister of Finance who invited input regarding changes to the financial system. We provided them with information found in the parliamentary library they may very well have had no idea of.

A quote; The meeting between the 57 Finance Ministers from around the world that took place on board a ship off the coast of Monaco is beginning to quietly emerge as a powerful and dynamic shift in Global Economics and potentially in Global Politics as former Presidents and Prime Ministers of countries who have sided with the Banking Cabal, are now already jumping ship and supporting the growing movement toward proper financial management of the Global Accounts around the World.

This is brilliant

Love, all ways!




Hi Lovers

Peace & Love

Hidden Hand

Hi Lovers

We shared this discourse with Hidden Hand almost a year ago but it seems maybe is it time for a review. Since sharing the Hidden Hand dialogue I have read the 5 books titled The Law of One which speaks of or is about the Great Harvest.

Be your own judge.

A quote that fits exactly where we here seem to be going with respect to I AM;

ATS: Is the Messiah alive today?

HH: There is no "Messiah". Stop looking outside of yourself for 'salvation'.

Shame on ye who see evil in it;

You have been taught this in those Degrees, conferred in the Lodge of Perfection, which inculcate particularly the practical morality of Freemasonry. To be true, under whatever temptation to be false; to be honest in all your dealings, even if great losses should be the consequence; to be charitable, when selfishness would prompt you to close your hand, and deprivation of luxury or comfort must follow the charitable act; to judge justly and impartially, even in your own case, when baser impulses prompt you to do an injustice in order that you may be benefited or justified; to be tolerant, when passion prompts to intolerance and persecution; to do that which is right, when the wrong seems to promise larger profit; and to wrong no man of anything that is his, however easy it may seem so to enrich yourself;--in all these things and others which you promised in those Degrees, your spiritual nature is taught and encouraged to assert its rightful dominion over your appetites and passions.

The philosophical Degrees have taught you the value of knowledge, the excellence of truth, the superiority of intellectual labor, the dignity and value of your soul, the worth of great and noble thoughts; and thus endeavored to assist you to rise above the level of the animal appetites and passions, the pursuits of greed and the miserable struggles of ambition, and to find purer pleasure and nobler prizes and rewards in the acquisition of knowledge, the enlargement of the intellect, the interpretation of the sacred writing of God upon the great pages of the Book of Nature.

And the Chivalric Degrees have led you on the same path, by showing you the excellence of generosity, clemency, forgiveness of injuries, magnanimity, contempt of danger, and the paramount obligations of Duty and Honor. They have taught you to over-come the fear of death, to devote yourself to the great cause of civil and religious Liberty, to be the Soldier of all that is just, right, and true; in the midst of pestilence to deserve your title of Knight Commander of the Temple, and neither there nor Elsewhere to desert your post and flee dastard-like from the foe. In all this, you assert the superiority and right to dominion of that in you which is spiritual and divine. No base fear of danger or death, no sordid ambitions or pitiful greeds or base considerations can tempt a true Scottish Knight to dishonor, and so make his intellect, his reason, his soul, the bond-slave of his appetites, of his passions, of that which is material and animal, selfish and brutish in his nature.

It is not possible to create a true and genuine Brotherhood upon any theory of the baseness of human nature: nor by a community of belief in abstract propositions as to the nature of the Deity, the number of His persons, or other theorems of religious faith: nor by the establishment of a system of association simply for mutual relief, and by which, in consideration of certain payments regularly made, each becomes entitled to a certain stipend in case of sickness, to attention then, and to the ceremonies of burial after death.

There can be no genuine Brotherhood without mutual regard, good opinion and esteem, mutual charity, and mutual allowance for faults and failings. It is those only who learn habitually to think better of each other, to look habitually for the good that is in each other, and expect, allow for, and overlook, the evil, who can be Brethren one of the other, in any true sense of the word. Those who gloat over the failings of one another, who think each other to be naturally base and low, of a nature in which the Evil predominates and excellence is not to be looked for, cannot be even friends, and much less Brethren.

No one can have a right to think meanly of his race, unless he also thinks meanly of himself. If, from a single fault or error, he judges of the character of another, and takes the single act as evidence of the whole nature of the man and of the whole course of his life, he ought to consent to be judged by the same rule, and to admit it to be right that others should thus uncharitably condemn himself. But such judgments will become impossible when he incessantly reminds himself that in every man who lives there is an immortal Soul endeavoring to do that which is right and just; a Ray, however small, and almost inappreciable, from the Great Source of Light and Intelligence, which ever struggles upward amid all the impediments of sense and the obstructions of the passions; and that in every man this ray continually wages war against his evil passions and his unruly appetites, or, if it has succumbed, is never wholly extinguished and annihilated. For he will then see that it is not victory, but the struggle that de-serves honor; since in this as in all else no man can always command success. Amid a cloud of errors, of failure, and short-comings, he will look for the struggling Soul, for that which is good in every one amid the evil, and, believing that each is better than from his acts and omissions he seems to be, and that God cares for him still, and pities him and loves him, he will feel that even the erring sinner is still his brother, still entitled to his sympathy, and bound to him by the indissoluble ties of fellowship.

If there be nothing of the divine in man, what is he, after all, but a more intelligent animal? He hath no fault nor vice which some beast hath not; and therefore in his vices he is but a beast of a higher order; and he hath hardly any moral excellence, perhaps none, which some animal hath not in as great a degree,--even the more excellent of these, such as generosity, fidelity, and magnanimity.

Bardesan, the Syrian Christian, in his Book of the Laws of Countries, says, of men, that "in the things belonging to their bodies, they maintain their nature like animals, and in the things which belong to their minds, they do that which they wish, as being free and with power, and as the likeness of God"; and Meliton, Bishop of Sardis, in his Oration to Antoninus Cæsar,says, "Let Him, the ever-living God, be always present in thy mind; for thy mind itself is His likeness, for it, too, is invisible and impalpable, and without form. . . As He exists forever, so thou also, when thou shalt have put off this which is visible and corruptible, shalt stand before Him forever, living and endowed with knowledge."

The above is from

So it may be the Masons sit on the bench and it may be you are treated as you are for some of the reason(s) indicated herein.

Oh yes, as is said here, you may be quick to judge, but so to will ye be judged. In fact, if you are before a judge, you have already judged.

Now before anyone goes off half cocked here, this is not about promoting free masonry but the message.

And as in each Triangle of Perfection, one is three and three are one, so man is one, though of a double nature; and he attains the purposes of his being only when the two natures that are in him are in just equilibrium; and his life is a success only when it too is a harmony, and beautiful, like the great Harmonies of God and the Universe.

Occupy Wall Street

Hi Lovers

Seems our friends to the south are doing something and have support of others from other countries.

They have been at this for 12 days it seems

Here is a video of day one

This is an interview with a Trader

All the more reason maybe to let the old paradigm go

With love



Hi Lovers

So you think you can figure out what the bleep is going on.........


Hi Lovers

Here's one for ya.

The telephone found Alexander Bell.

And what it is that you seek? for so long as ye seek, ye cannot receive what it is you seek that will find you if you but allow it. Or, perhaps there is no thing to seek but patience.

With more really good vibes........I LOVE


Taking a spiritual stand

Hi loving souls of the one great one

The force is with you for it is in you, it is, who you are. But this force is not about forcefulness. Quite the contrary. It is of such force that no force is required because no force can force it.

Weakness is, or stems from, as does fear and the actions it generates, ignorance of that force of nature for which there is, no excuse.

Hallow, 2011

With good vibes

We are One

Hi Lovers

I received this link from Dena. Thank you Dena, truly inspirational.

I watched the movie Soul Surfer last night. Wow.

True story about the surfer girl who lost an arm to a shark. It is how she handles the situation and the lives she affects that renders the big things in our lives so small and meaningless.....Another inspirer.

I love you one and all

 Page 7 of 22  « First  ... « 5  6  7  8  9 » ...  Last » 
SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline