RE: Public


From Lee

By the term the public, is meant the whole body politic, or all the citizens of the state; sometimes it signifies the inhabitants of a particular place; as, the New York public. A distinction has been made between the terms public and general, they are sometimes used as synonymous. The former term is applied strictly to that which concerns all the citizens and every member of the state; while the latter includes a lesser, though still a large portion of the community.

When the public interests and its rights conflict with those of an individual, the latter must yield. If, for example, a road is required for public convenience, and in its course it passes on the ground occupied by a house, the latter must be torn down, however valuable it may be to the owner. In such a case both law and justice require that the owner shall be fully indemnified.

A fictitious legal entity/person which has rights and duties independent of the rights and duties of real persons and which is legally authorized to act in its own name through duly appointed agents. It is owned by shareholders. Usually created under the authority of state law.

An aggregate corporation is an ideal body, created by law, composed of individuals united under a common name, the members of which succeed each other, so that the body continues the same notwithstanding the changes of the individuals who compose it, and which for certain purposes is considered as a natural person.

A corporation, or body politic, or body incorporate, is a collection of many; individuals united in one body, under a special denomination, having perpetual succession under an artificial form, and vested by the policy of the law with a capacity of acting in several respects as an individual, particularly of taking and granting property, contracting obligations and of suing and being sued; of enjoying privileges and immunities in common and of exercising a variety of political rights, more or less extensive, according to the design of its institution or the powers conferred upon it, either at the time of its creation or at any subsequent period of its existence.

Now, go back to what Judi, deputy registrar general, said.  We do not register people, we register events (and information associated with said events).  Anything registered is said to be "registered in the public", which by extension from the above definitions can be said to be registered in the body politic.  People are not registered in the public, the name is registered in the public.  Therefore it is the name that is an individual memeber of Read the rest of this entry

RE: Cestui Qui Vie Trust Act 1666


I read about this 1666 Act stuff before and will say it is in interesting viewpoint but my take is it is hogwash.

It is not until you id yourself by a registered name (no life entity) that you are treated as a child of the state or dead. Dead to the soul of life. Hence the permit to use the car. Do parents not grant permission? Do children not ask?

If you id yourself by a registered name you are dead because the name is dead.

I remind folks of the pig farmer in BC who was charged for murdering 27 woman or so. A lawyer for the defense raised the fact that one woman they could not identify by name. No name, no jurisdiction and the charge of murdering that woman was dropped. She was dead, was on his property, but he was not charged or convicted of murdering that one woman and the only difference was, they could not id the body by a name.

I remind also of the two landlord tenant cases. The guy in the second case has not paid rent for 3 years. I drafted the affidavit so I know the content and it came down to, man is not the tenant, the name is. Man is not liable obviously.

Man does not own the earth the earth owns man.....Sitting Bull.

Time wounds all heels..(hahahaha/call it karma).....John Lennon

All are One so whatever you think 'they' are doing to you, it is you doing it to you.


With lottsa love

Original Message:
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 06:21:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Cestui Qui Vie Trust Act 1666

Cestui Qui Vie Trust Act 1666

All comments from: seventiki

What is a "Ces tui Qui Trust" (pronounce set-a-kay) and why should you care?

In 1666, in London, during the black plague, and great fires of London  Parliament enacted an act, behind closed doors, called Cestui Que Vie Act 1666.

The act being debated the Cestui Qui act was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and women were declared Read the rest of this entry

Pay it Forward up-date clarification


It seems some folks are confused. In the email titled 'Pay it Forward up-date' is this;

So with our desire and intent on the table, all that remains now is that you are not so and so (the name), the name is so and so. I am asking the recipients of this round two letter for their authority to say you are so and so to validate the attachment of legal liabilities, duties, responsibilities, benefits, ownership, etc., to you men and women, that are or may be recorded under the legal name.

The recipients are those who receive the letter from the trustee e.g. CRA. At no time does the trustee send letters to you people in the program. And I wrote, I am not asking for your consent to the content
of that letter, yet some have given their consent.

Are we good now?

I love you

Supreme Court ruling


I received an email from one who received an email from another containing information about one of us being raided by CRA. The raid had nothing to do with paying it forward and I will not say any more than that.

On another note I read in the Ottawa Sun yesterday, the writer works for the Toronto Sun, of a Supreme Court ruling.

Page 27 of the Comment section, author is, Alan Shanoff. Article is titled; "Cops do not need warrant to look at your hydro bills".

The matter was concerning a charge of growing pot. The police suspected a grow op but had not enough grounds to request a warrant so they contacted the hydro company to get the account records. Upon receipt of that the police got a warrant. The question before the Supreme Court was in essence, did the police have the right to Read the rest of this entry

Every now and again I receive methodologies how to break free of the system. How to break free of contract, commercial redemption, Office of Executor, and all that BS.

Every one of them is a deception, delaying the inevitable and a waste of time and energy.

In law consideration is what binds, therefore, where consideration is not, neither is contract neither is law.

Where there is love there is no contract there is no law because of a lack of consideration.

Consideration = contract and contract is the law.

The only way to be free of the concept of consideration and contract and law is to Read the rest of this entry

Era of Love and Peace

Hi all

It seems that creators intention is moving right along and love, divine peace and love is in the air/heir.

For those partaking in the pay it forward process or considering doing so this is a reminder that the basis of the motivation of the pay it forward process is not to get out of a situation but into giving of oneself freely and unconditionally. That is not to say that whatever situation you may be in is not rectified but that love, giving freely and unconditionally of oneself, is the motivating factor, the reason, the consideration.

This consciousness is not something new it has always been here for us. It is not something I invented or came up with it has always been here for us to be.

Fear is what holds us back. To help you let go of fear you may wish to Read the rest of this entry

Executor II


If you read over the email Executor, it brings us back to why we did what we did last year. Grocery Store Bandits.

We are sons and heirs of God so there must be an estate and sons and heirs of such an estate, in my view, to not be confused with all others, must do true love.

Doing so keeps the assets of the God estate, the world, in the estate administered by the executor, government, for the benefit of the heir rather than as most do now, claim a portion as their own.

By claiming a portion of the God estate as ones own, creating a new mini estate but still of the one estate; one assumes full responsibility. He has assumed the role of the executor/trustee.

You cannot separate from the family or not give freely to the family and expect a free ride at the expense of the family. If you give freely to the family then it is very likely the family will give freely to you and God has promised you that.

There is but one way in my estimation to Read the rest of this entry


Hi all

It is not you but the estate that is bankrupt.

If that be true then the one entering the estate into bankruptcy is doing so because of mismanagement but more significantly, he must have control.

Question to ask. When an assignment of an estate is made to a trustee in bankruptcy, is it the estate or man who is bankrupt?

If the estate then man cannot be the name.

When a man dies the estate lives on. They say that Micheal Jackson made money even though he is dead. So clearly the name cannot be referring to the man but the estate. Man can have an interest in property that makes up an estate, thus, the man is not part of the estate. He must have an interest/control in order that he may assign the estate over to a trustee in bankruptcy. He is not assigning himself but the estate. In the matter of the Bankruptcy of DOE, JOHN.

Thus, man and the estate (assets, rights, interests and entitlements) are not one and the same and man and name are not one and the same. If the name does not identify an estate, the property that makes up an estate, but man, by what means can the property be identified?

I suppose the answer is, Read the rest of this entry

Free from regulation

Hi all

Where there is love there is no contract there is no law.

Why so?

Love is not and cannot be regulated. No law or legislation can regulate love.

Obviously then, love is the way out from under laws rules and regulations.

Of course the human mind is saying, oh no, you have to Read the rest of this entry

Col. Edward Mandell House

Col. Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President) [1913-1921]…

"[Very] soon every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology we can compel people to submit to our agenda which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions.

Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us, will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be non the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all this is the only logical way to fund government by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call "Social Insurance." Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

Is income tax voluntary

Hi all

It is said that income tax is voluntary.

Could it be so?
Read the rest of this entry

SEO Powered by Platinum SEO from Techblissonline