"In as much as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of
the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary,
having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity
with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any
law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate,
artificial persons and the contracts between them."
S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54),
Reality has been counterfeit! The real man (lawful) is presumed to be the created fictitious business record name. a doppelganger ( juridical /legal ) of the living being because one there has not expressed his/her living will to take control and correct the domicile record.
These records are stored and administered by a public corporation as the "hired" keeper of the public ( for the many) records for the elect and the elects elected officials who farmed out the job to a private company forming a re-public.
A republic is a remade public or the care of public records in private hands under private rules , as the records are held in the trust of a private company for profit .
Instead of the way it was designed to be, as a non profit public service for maintaining of the public records by the local people desiring to serve their community for a time. By serving a couple year stint as a public servant of the people protecting the general public records for future generations. This volunteer system in turn protected the future from the private pirates who saw easy money by controlling that public information and selling it for a profit as it turned out today.
The real man has not yet come to the comprehension of the cedent . The cedent is the opposite of the decedent , decedent does not mean dead like we have been taught to believe . Cedent means to assign or transfer, so decedent means to not assign or not transferred. So transfer from what ?
When we were infants our certificate of live birth with our calling ( given name) was registered by the local health agency and we were given in exchange an estate (as interest in our birthright given us by our true father in heaven)
This happened because our biological father did not claim the certificate of live birth when the notice came out in the newspaper of our birth, so our estate was considered abandoned . So since we were infant de-cedents, a record was set up in name similar to our calling , and held in trust under the trustee's name .
The record wasn't set up in our given name as that was us the baby , no, it was set up for us as a sole proprietor business name or fictitious legal name in this format FIRST MIDDLE LAST.
Our baby name was written first -middle so they could be distinguished from one another. But as time went on , we grew up and had to enter school and since school was public (for the many ) they used the public registered business name to enroll us in school instead of our proper given name. This is where the confusion started as now we had two names a given name and a sole proprietor business name that had a last name ( fiction) attached to our given name. The calling we were called at home by our mother was our first-middle , and at public school identified by an all caps LASTNAME.
When we turned 21 years old, called age of majority, we were to return the trust abstract birth certificate / business name to the issuer and claim back our birthright being held for us until we came of age. At this point we could chose to return to our true heavenly father and leave our adopted city or municipal father where we had been adopted by legal registration , we were now to be responsible for ourselves and set up our own goverment/society ONE PROBLEM. No one told us !
“We must therefore revert to Roman law, which established domicile as the extension or communication of a pre-existent legal status of individuals-origin (origo o, jus originis ). In the theory of the Roman lawyers each man belongs to his municipality, to his city, where, as he contributes his share to the expenses and taxes, so he has a right to the common advantages. Children naturally follow their father's condition and belong likewise to the city, even though born at a distance. Such is the Roman origo, quite akin to what we call nationality, except that the origo relates to the restricted locality of one's birth, and nationality to one's native land. Hence it is birth, the legal birthplace, that determines one's origo,i.e not the actual site of birth but the place where each one should have been born, the municipality to which the father belonged (L. 1. ff. Ad municip.). Let us now suppose a man settled for a long time in a city of which he is not a native. Partly in return for the taxes he pays, and partly to permit him to exercise local civic duties, he is granted the status of a real citizen, without loss, however, of his own origo or municipal right"
So in ignorance we kept using our business identity lastname (the id or infant decedent record ) also known as a the sole proprietor and used that name to get a drivers license and social security etc . all the things we were told (mistakenly) we needed to be legal adults, thinking all along that that business name was us! and not the separate legal entity it is.
Our family never used that last name when they called us at home, but outside the home every business wanted to know our last name when really a surname . We never knew we were using a fictitious business record as our name or that were supposed to transfer back to our true fathers house (yahawah) and use our true given calling, our given name in order to not be presumed, by use of that registered record, to be acting in the capacity of a fictitious business name! We were unknowingly presenting ourselves as the trustee representing the sole proprietor record lastname!
This transfer or ceding (cedent) of the sole proprietor name back to the issuer is how we release the claim of right to the trust estate ( an interest only) and regain the full birthright power (called inherent power) we had when we were born and set up our goverment/society
That birthright power had been split into two rights by the certificate issue, so the trustee or city father had the right of property or legal title and we had the right of possession or use of the now titled body. This was done so they ( the city father ) could access our interest in the birthright estate given us by our heavenly father (everything he has, was given for us to use, for our faith in him as our true father) to pay for their management fees for our public schooling and all the expenses we needed as, after all they were acting as our adopted father and controlling our birthright until we reached the age of majority or woke up to being adopted by the state municipalities.
But when we turned 21 , they as trustee de son torts must have gotten greedy, taking all those fees for managing our estate because they never told us when we reached the age of majority that we could do it ourselves as the executer of our own heavenly father given interest ( first estate) instead presuming us lost , absentee or dead when we did not return to claim our interest. (second estate)
So now that we have found out, we have to separate the name and correct the records back to their proper place and return to our true maker our heavenly father and straighten out the confusing mess after doing it wrong all these years.
Our true heavenly father who made us ( not our bio dad ) our maker, is waiting for us to return to him but we need to know first he didn't give us the adopted business legal name tied to our adopted city father.
We need to come back to him in our Christian or given name and learn who or who's we really are., so he can accept us as his children and settle all our debts created and charged by our adopted city father looking after us , and give back all that's his so we can have clean hands when we come back to our heavenly father and he can give us what he has to replace the trust property we don't have right to anymore as no longer a member of their society.
See our adopted father owned everything we had, as a trustee for the man king, and he could only grant a use to that trust property out to his domiciled sons and daughters loyal to him, not those who wanted to leave him and to return to their real heavenly father.
So we return with nothing to heavenly father, but lucky for us our heavenly father made the entire earth and owns everything in it! All we have to do is believe him, return from our lost state and separate from our old ways and name and take on our new calling as a son or daughter of Yahawah.
Until one establishes ones own government One can separate the two undisguisable names by filing out a fictious business name filing with the domicile, the business name FIRST MIDDLE LAST being the fictitious sole proprietor name and the Christian name First-Middle being the user of the fictious business name. However it does not separate you from that system just righty divides the account name from the living being , but since the fiction cannot see living beings it separates you as the trustee of the record in thier view.
Each business record is an interest or "estate" and considered a vessel ( a container Ship ). Ships need captains! The ship cannot pilot itself. So even though one there has never set up a business, you are presumed to be one just by using the legal name (FIRST MIDDLE LAST) of the registered berth (birth) name record and operating ( taking control ) the presumed sole proprietor-ship in that name. So that presumption must be counter deeded back.
The double personality that has been formed to run things is called an indivi-dual ( dual personality) the living being ( in a private capacity) and the sole proprietorship "record/office " in the public group trust capacity as the captain over that sole proprietor SHIP
The NAME record being the connection betwee the two or individual, as your name/calling in your private capacity is indistinguishable from your OFFICE NAME record as the presumed public sole proprietor which you are always presumed to be after registration with whatever state or city group when out in the public.
So one man with two persons! The private living being using the record name of the public legal person . This continues until the real living being wakes up and reconnects with his maker in heaven and realizes he has both a soul and a body and has mistakenly given away his inherit power for a set of registered rights (privilege's) or USE of his birthright in exchange for benefits .
This realization of the mistake when expressed through outward expression (speaking the truth by and on the record by counterdeed to counter the presumption) unifies the two rights into ONE again by clarification and correction of the ship's (trust) records.
The awake soul is much like the moment you realize you are an adult and no longer a child. You realize you now have duties and responsibilities, and a purpose for your life given to you by your maker to fulfill before you die and ascend to the next stage. Some people never wake up to this fact of life and remain in the matrix illusion lie that you are forever to be ruled by men due to the mistake of making a record in their system and accepting the office benefits in trade for your birthrights. When the truth is, that you are a powerful living spirit being, loved by your maker Yahawah , who is waiting for you to accept his love and forgiveness and removing your false re-cords, cut all ties to the legal name and come home from your wayward residency within the Man king world ( 1 st Samuel chapter 8) and dominion your soul with him in the heavenly Kingdom realm.
This legal person (record) the sole proprietor business entity is just a record or image of a man created by men , not by Yahawah , by the application for a certificate of live birth a office record is created , which most people are blinded to believe is the birth of themselves , however in reality it is just the creation of the legal name office account "record" that our mother's asked to be set up by making the application for a certificate of birth in a false belief it was beneficial for her child. Her baby was to be recorded in the family bible
A living being does not need a piece of paper to prove they are living but a legal name record does need to prove exsistence. So the birth certificate is proof a "organization was organized" and a business name record was created in the system for you to USE. "Keyword USE." Much like a bank account , of course the bank account itself isn't you, but account number ties to a name as the account record name. So it is with the name you USE to find the account by matching the account record name with the actual account number.
Real people as living beings are not Individuals, they are not account records, they BACK the account records! Real people are not plural "You's" or duals. These created legal record Individuals are the divided ( two lives) persons , business accounts which have personal and business sides for private and public business dealings.
In fact free living men have only one name In law! No man can have more than one Christian name in law ; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; ie John-henry: First-middle
The living being lives in the public under the laws of his maker Yahawah in Heaven, the maker of heaven and earth. If your spirit (ghost) has not reconnected with your maker you are only a shell or sole body , a ghost ship dead in the water without a captain or purpose . Free to be occupied by anyone and commandeered by the first claimant, as an abandoned record .
Fictions or records have a last name (truly an occupation name ) attached to the given first middle name to create the private group sole proprietor name as a FIRST MIDDLE LAST like JOHN HENRY CARPENTER
The Carpenter or trade name ( his trade or work) shows the man has been captured and his given name has been attached to a TRADENAME operating in commerce so he is " presumed " ( on the record) to be acting as the fiction entity record in the role of sole proprietor as a carpenter.
When a given name (Christian calling ) has a last or dead trade name attached to it by a private deed, the name ceases to be a public name as it now has a private occupation (Last name ) attached to it changing the name so as to be in a re-public registered entity controlled by a private contract or member of a group they joined (joinder) .
Quoting and relying on
JURISPRUDENCE OR THE THEORY OF LAW
by John Salmond Third Edition.
§ 114. DOUBLE PERSONALITY.
It often happens that a single human being possesses a double personality. He is one man, but two persons. Unus homo, it is said, plures personas sustinct. In one capacity, or in one right as English lawyers say, he may have legal relationship with himself, or owe money to himself, or transfer property to himself. Every contract, debt, obligation, or assignment requires two persons; but these persons may be the same human being. The double personality exists chiefly in the case of trusteeship. A trustee is, as we have seen, a person in whom the property of another is nominally vested, to the extent that he may represent that other in the management and protection of it. A trustee, therefore, is for many purposes two persons in the eyes of the law. In right of his beneficiary he is one person, and in his own right he is another. In the one capacity he may owe money to himself in the other. In one capacity he may own an encumbrance over property which belongs to himself in the other. He may be his own creditor, or his creditors as his executor, or a testator appoints one of his creditors as his executor, or makes one of his tenants the trustee of his land. In all such cases, were it not for the recognition of double personality, the obligation or encumbrance would be destroyed by merger, or confusio as the Romans call it, for two persons at least are requisite for the existence of a legal relation. No man can in his own right be under any obligation to himself, or own any encumbrance over his own property. Nulli res sua servit.
All laws are either of God's making or Man's
Who “you” are, is no longer the question. The question is, who “IS” you. The word “you”
gets more people into trouble than any other word currently utilized within our legal and
It is virtually impossible to fully explain the proper grammatical usage of the word “you”,
insofar as proper English is concerned.
Wikipedia: You (stressed /ˈjuː/; unstressed /jə/) is the second-person personal pronoun in
Modern English. Ye was the original nominative form; the oblique/objective form is you
(functioning originally as both accusative and dative), and the possessive is your or
YourDictionary.com: you (yo̅ ̵o̅) pronoun pl. you
1. the person to whom one is speaking or writing: personal pronoun in the second
person (sing. & pl.): you is the nominative and objective form (sing. & pl.), yours the
possessive (sing. & pl.), and yourself (sing.) and yourselves (pl.) the reflexive and
intensive; your is the possessive pronominal adjective
2. any person: equivalent in sense to indefinite one: you can never be sure!
Note: Though you is properly a plural, it is in all ordinary discourse used also in
addressing a single person, yet properly always with a plural verb. (No confusion here!)
Loosely, the word “you” is a pronoun, that cannot be properly grammatically used
according to English language rules. When spoken, “you” is commonly heard by
everyone present, as if it were being addressed to each of them, individually, in a singular
sense. We erroneously hear a singular inclination of the properly plural expression, as in
one speaking to a group and saying; “I’m happy to share this with you.”
Properly, “you” is indeed “plural”, yet the word “you” is often spoken as if it were in
reference to a singular man or woman. In such instances, the word “you” induces a
natural inclination for everyone in an audience to hear it as being addressed singularly to
a specific individual within that audience, particularly if the word “you” follows an
antecedent noun; as in one speaking to that same group, and saying; “Yes George, I’m
happy to share this with you.”
In “law”, this word “you”, is properly utilized in all ordinary legal discourse when
addressing the singular mind (or the single party with volition) within the plural-natureconstruct
of a PERSON. The PERSON being comprised of a man that answers for, or is
liable for that PERSON, and the corporate entity that IS that PERSON. In this sense,
addressing a PERSON, as “you”, is actually as close to a proper use of the word “you”,
as anyone could imagine.
Thus the personal pronoun “you”, being both singular and plural, properly addresses the
essential plural nature of the single PERSON entity. The key to benefiting from this, is to
grasp who the correct (plural) components are within that single PERSON entity.
So here are some thought provoking examples:
A judge might say; “Mr. John Smith, I find “you” guilty.” The question arises, then; “who”
is this particular “you”, considering “you” is plural?
The answer may well be in the judge’s next question; “Mr. Smith, do “you” have anything
to say?” Notice, the judge is not properly asking if Mr. John Smith has anything to say, he
is rather improperly asking John Smith, if “you” has anything to say. Thus, whoever
answers, voluntarily defines himself as being in joinder with “you”, and concurrently
accepts the guilty verdict, for the PERSON, Mr. Smith.
Check out any court transcripts you can find, and in not one instance, will you ever find
an example of a judge saying; “I find you, Mr. John Smith, guilty.”
Likewise, find someone high up in the banking system that alleges that “you” owe their
bank money. You will NEVER get them to say “John Smith owes $XXXX to this bank and
therefore John Smith must pay $XXXX to this bank.” Rather they will only always ever
say something like; “You owe $XXXX to this bank, therefore you must pay $XXXX to this
bank.” Even a judge’s order will say something like; “John Smith, I order “you” to pay”.
Even when asked directly to just repeat, “John Smith owes $XXXX to their bank”, they
will either terminate the conversation, or continue to ask; “are you John Smith?”, and
when you respond with “yes”, they repeat that “then you owe $XXX to their bank.” When
asked directly while on a telephone conversation, if they intend to continue to refuse to
say, “John Smith owes $XXXX to their bank”, they generally just get angry and hang up.
I guess we all should be looking for “you”, since “you” is the one, and apparently the only
one, that can be found guilty, or that must pay whatever is owed. Check out collection
notices. Again, it is always “you” that must pay, or action will be taken against “you”.
This is not just silly grammar, and there is good reason to explain it this way. Okay, here
is why. “You”, in legal and financial discourse (which differs from otherwise “normal” language) ,
refers to the duality inherent within, and of, the party that is liable for the essential plural
nature of the single PERSON-corporate-entity, or who at least is prepared to volunteer to
accept responsibility and or liability thereto. The PERSON, a.k.a., the Estate, is at a
minimum, comprised of a decedent, and an Executor, hence the duality/plurality of its
nature, which justifies correctly addressing it with the inherent plurality of the word, “you”.
You see, a PERSON, without its Executor, has no volition, and thus cannot answer to
anyone, judge or banker included. Only a man can answer. The problem arises in that
men are outside, or above the jurisdiction of judges and bankers; i.e., “only a PERSON
may commit an offence”. Hence a judge will not ask a man per se, nor will he ask the
PERSON to answer, he will only ask “you” to answer, in hopes that a man will volunteer
to respond as and for the plural “you” - the PERSON. He also knows very well that he
cannot directly ask the PERSON to answer, because a PERSON is a fiction entity, a.k.a.
corporate being without volition, and cannot answer.
Judges and bankers also know that all PERSONS are domiciled offshore (corporate bodies
registered in foreign jurisdictions), hence they have no domestic jurisdiction over those
PERSONS. Therefore it would be futile to find a PERSON guilty, or to attempt to force a
PERSON to pay a debt, or to pay taxes. Who paid the tax in the Messiah’s day? Well, not
the sons, or the domestic ones, but rather the Strangers and the foreigners. Thus, the
CRA collects the tax, a.k.a., they re-venue it, from a PERSON domiciled in a foreign
jurisdiction so they can comply with scripture.
Hence it is not futile to find a man to volunteer to be “you”, because “you” can indeed, be
found guilty, and “you” can be ordered to pay debts and taxes, and in most cases,
historically at least, “you” has very obediently served the sentences and paid the debts
and the taxes for, and as, the foreign PERSONS. And besides, only a “you”, a.k.a., a
man acting concurrently as a man and as a decedent, within the construct of a PERSON,
can answer a question, or pay a debt or taxes, or cause them to be paid, for, as, or on
behalf of that foreign PERSON.
Many have heard that “sometimes” when a man informs the judge, that the judge has
been appointed as “Trustee”, the judge will dismiss the case, but not always. “You” is
also directly related to the reason for this seemingly inconsistent behavior.
In truth, the PERSON is legally considered an Estate for a “decedent”. This decedent, or
dead man, constitutes the basis, or claim of right to the property of the Estate, a.k.a.,
PERSON. Only an Executor of an Estate can make appointments, such as those of
Trustee or Beneficiary. If a man appoints a judge as the Trustee, then initially, the judge
will correctly presume that you, the man (not “you” the PERSON), has assumed your rightful
role as Executor of the subject Estate. And unless the judge can trick you, the man into
admitting that you, the man is not the Executor, without asking you, the man directly, the
judge will continue on this presumption, and dismiss the case against the plural “you”, the
The judge knows that if you, the man, is the Executor, that you, the man can indeed
appoint him as Trustee, and concurrently hold him liable, as a Trustee. However, if “you”,
the mistaken man, claims to be, or lets himself be tricked by the judge, into being
something like a Grantor, or a Beneficiary, of an undefined, or allegedly undisclosed, or
implied Trust (as opposed to Executor of the subject Estate), then the judge will rapidly find
“you” the PERSON, guilty, because he will then re-place himself as de facto Executor.
Oh, and get over the false and silly idea that it matters, or that the court even cares
whether or not you, the man write the name of the PERSON’s Estate in all capital letters,
a combination of upper and lower case letters, or Chinese symbols.
It DOES NOT MATTER. The PERSON is still defined as an Estate of a decedent,
registered in a foreign jurisdiction, regardless of how you write it’s name. “You” can, and
more importantly you do make joinder with the PERSON’s Estate, regardless of how its
name is written, simply when, and by answering to, “you”.
Inasmuch as I am me, who is “you”?
Every Indiana citizen is a stockholder in the assets
Code is not law
Debt issuance !