The Tender For Law

Volume 4

Oct 16, 2013 1:43 PM

Pete Daoust

OK, while some in here are getting way out of sight, I have a question concerning ESTABLISHING a TRUST. :P

I see that this new trust will need to be domiciled....

I am in a CIVIL CODE Zone, and it fucks me up concerning this TRUST, I would like to establish.

Can this trust's address could be in Ontario, and the person I happen to have in my pocket in Quebec, and the Corporation I registered, in Quebec as wll ?

Would that help, or be completely irrelevant ?

Thanks Pierre

Read Comments

Chris Evan

I think that is the same in the States. For instance, my Trust is being set up as described in this paragraph "WHEREAS, The Trust shall be administered, managed, governed and regulated in all respects according to applicable Common Law Jurisdiction of Massachusetts as well as the Uniform Trustees Powers Act, and the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Uniform Commercial Code (only when and if applicable and/or allowable to remain under the jurisdiction of the Common Law). The domicile of the trust is within the Essex County, Massachusetts Republic."

NOT the STATE of Massachusetts!

Xrisjuice Xris

Tax percue... Is something that would be of interest to everyone.. Try googling it.. Gemstone university also has some great videos discussing operating in the private and the public.. and ties in with standing, capacity etc. ;)

August le Blanc

DA.... DA DA DA DA.... WTF is with Alberta? Its a gong show out here different everything. The Change of Name Act.... etc.. I mean, I get that the Provinces all pass their own legislation, for pith and substance...

Chip Douglas

Interesting that you bring this up Jay Le B. I came across Alberta's Perpetuities Act by mistake looking for Ontario's.

Alberta's has in it this line right at the top:

HER MAJESTY, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, enacts as follows:

Ontario's Perpetuities Act, does not.

Alberta's Perpetuities Act includes these definitions:

(b) �disposition� includes the conferring of a power of appointment and any provision whereby an interest in property or a right, power or authority over property is disposed of, created or conferred and also includes a possibility of reverter or resulting trust, and a right of re-entry on breach of a condition subsequent;

(e) �power of appointment� includes any discretionary power to transfer a beneficial interest in property without the furnishing of valuable consideration.

Ontario's Perpetuities Act, does not.

I get the gist of what Scott is trying to tell us in terms of "It's ALL Clubhouse Rules".....yet it seems very strange and peculiar that there are these omissions in Ontario's Perpetuities Act compared to that of Alberta's...almost as if there is intent involved in Ontario's trying to conceal something from us

August le Blanc

I am still deciphering the pdf the Admiral put up a while back about the" In Personam in Admiralty Jurisdiction"... Its in the files tab above. Topics include Bills of Lading and other related matters. Provincial jurisdiction is covered... First 40 pages english... the next 40 or so same text in french..

August le Blanc

Its a circular argument in a way... The corp is the trustee of the NAME. The Name once liened is Trust property until said lien is satisfied. To interact in their system you need a vessel in commerce, To launch that vessel you need to use the NAME... at least I did. So when the corp was created it was given a registration number which applies to tax stuff. Scott says good corps do not pay taxes so... figuring that as I go.

August le Blanc

Fuck.... the corp has liened the person... Why the fuck would you do that? My account is set up as a non interest bearing checking account. with no affiliation to any govt account of the person. No personal info = limited liability.... Its a Trust account subject to Trust by-laws... Joint account is a good question. I do not know about that.

Chris Evan

"Scott says good corps do not pay taxes so" A corp needs a BoD, Executives, etc...all need to get paid. the PERSON is acting in some of those roles, so the PERSON should get paid! But IDK how...Bitcoins, gold, silver, 12 USC 411....

August le Blanc

That would be up to the director of the Trust and his/her wishes... there is a post somewhere about CEO's getting paid a dollar per annum... and as the corp can act as a currency exchange you can set terms as to which currency you get paid in... for example, The trust only accepts payment in bitcoin and hey I can help with that exchange too... ;-)

Chip Douglas

Since you are in Quebec Pete Daoust, this should help:

the TRUST FUND is understood in the civil law as property owned by NO ONE. There is NO title holder. The trustee and the beneficiary both have PERSONAL RIGHTS as against the UNPERSONIFIED trust fund: the trustee to DISPOSE OF and MANAGE the fund, the beneficiary to OBTAIN ENJOYMENT. The only OTHER solution open to the civilian is to DESIGNATE the trust LEGAL PERSONALITY, so that the trust ITSELF OWNS the TRUST FUND, and the trustee and the beneficiary have RESPECTIVE RIGHTS within the PENUMBRA(?) of that personality and its OWNERSHIP.

Chip Douglas

You might want to make it clear who the 'Dominus' and 'Usufructuarius' is.....Quebec = Absolute Ownership.....Ontario = the Doctrine of Estates

There's a rather simple definition explaining RATIFICATION that Scott mentioned earlier today online, in Black's Law 1st edition

Chip Douglas

"You do not use these terms, why do you suddenly use them regarding law? These are "Clubhouse rules" and you aren't part of the club."......."It's ALL "Clubhouse Rules". Ratifying a TRUST means you get to make YOUR OWN "clubhouse rules".

Would a good "Clubhouse Rule" for myself Scott if/when i ever get around to 'ratifying' my own Trust be- "Only words/phrases from the dictionary my dad bought me for Christmas when i was in high-school are to be used, whenever someone from the B.A.R and/or Government are to deal with me" ?

Pete Daoust

Establish.

To settle, make, or fix firmly; place on a permanent footing; found; create; put beyond doubt or dispute; prove; convince. To enact permanently. To bring about or into existence.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/establish

Chip Douglas

Scott, i came across an interesting Maxim: Use is a fiduciary ownership. Interesting in that i have heard the term 'fiduciary ownership' used in relation to trust law. But i cant find a definition for fiduciary ownership even in a Black's Law 9th-edition. If you havent covered it already, could you give an explanation as to what 'fiduciary ownership' means in relation to trust law? Thanks.

Scott Duncan

Sort of. Avoid the birth certificate as an example. It's not accurate. Think of YOUR CAR.

The method by which you became "lawful holder in due course" of Trust Property would dictate your fiduciary responsibilities.

You REGISTER (transfer title) your VEHICLE, and it becomes Government (Trust) property. You still OWN it, but it is FIDUCIARY OWNERSHIP. You have duties and obligations to fufill in order to "own" the vehicle.

Clear enough?

Chip Douglas

So if my current slavemaster is say CHIP ERNIE DOUGLAS, and i dont like my middle-name ERNIE; im going to change that to BERT...and my new slavemaster will be CHIP BERT DOUGLAS. And its my NEW slavemaster because, im the one who invented CHIP BERT DOUGLAS, instead of The Crown this time around who were the ones who created CHIP ERNIE DOUGLAS?

Chip Douglas

"WHY ROGUESUPPORT INC IS BETTER THAN GOD:

* OWNS the name GIVEN to me by the government"

So did you just happen to TAKE the same name, that was GIVEN to you by the government, and thereby notifying them of your Intent to do so, TAKING that same name, then made it YOURS in the end?

Oh wait...or was it your new slavemaster as you put it which would be ROGUESUPPORT INC.(?), was the one who TOOK the name for you?

Chip Douglas

Because its occurred to me that the Birth Certificate never came with an 'Instruction Manual' along with it- ive noticed Scott where you've said something to the effect of, "Sending an Affidavit of Affirmation (to the Registrar General it was i think), pretty much covers YOUR obligation."

Ok, lets say i do that. What is then the next OBLIGATION on THEIR part?...and thanks for all the info, this is great stuff

Pete Daoust

I am a MAN, and I took Pierre, Peter, Pete, Babe, and Dad to communicate with some folks ....

The government create a PERSON, 5 to 6 weeks after my BIRTH, and they seems to have named that person PIERRE DAOUST, and they've done everything to make me BELIEVE that I am that PERSON.

I can registered a new NAME ( or a corporation if you wish) and use THAT new name to LIEN that person that the government created 5 to 6 weeks after my birth.....

I think that this is what Scott is trying to say :D

Markie Mars

get a Master Business Licence for the name https://www.appmybizaccount.gov.on.ca/sodp/portal/osb/!ut/p/b0/PY4xDsIwDEXPwtA17sxGEQMS0AoV0XZBTmUFi9SJkhSuTyiCwcPzf_o2DNDBIPhkg4mdoM3cezRkWR5rF7XyLiS0ys_a8qjEifrq2pJKzvMIVxhgsCgGepJlMjeX6rDf3rb1qd11LfRFOWkkMZbjvSidUHRzGKkol45YlDFhPqTnyDnLfCbDMVFgMVj9t-3H_kV1OJPQq89NP6OW_DiBn6bmuFmt3jlwhA4!/

employer B.I.N.

Chip Douglas

You've mentioned on the page Scott about- "Send them an Affidavit of Affirmation, and that pretty much covers YOUR obligation"

By doing this, are we merely letting our general intentions be known, and creating a valid executory trust in the process?

Chip Douglas

"...merely letting our general intentions be known, and creating a valid executory trust in the process..."

Say one were to do this.....would they now be on any sort of 'clock'/deadline, to complete this now valid executory trust, into an EXECUTED trust, Scott?

Scott Duncan

I find it very easy to get women to trust me. So much so that they often think sex would be a good idea.

They do/feel this way, because of TRUST.

At no time have I waited for ANYONE'S approval and/or objections before I had sex, even WHEN I gave notice that I was going to do it.

NEVER. Not even once.

Chip Douglas

You've talked about RATIFYING the/a Trust. Lets say, i like all the Terms-and-Conditions ive put into my Trust, and im quite satisfied with the 'Clubhouse Rules' ive set for myself.

Now what? How does a Trust ultimately get RATIFIED and/or, who does it, who is the document sent to?

Robert Cormier

I found this interesting. Food for thought at least. I wonder if Scott Duncan would confirm the info. The link relates to the construction of TRUSTS with specific attention being given here to ANTI DURESS clauses. http://www.assetprotectiontraining.com/antiduress-provision-asset-protection-trust

Sue Rakestraw

Beverly, thanks.....my study is on Express Trusts (common law). I need to read this thread again as Pete mentions "Civil Code Zone". In the states, it would be "without the United States" and NOT within a Federal Zone....

Chris Evan

I went to the Registry of Deeds yesterday looking for a public record. Upon inquiring the woman told me that there are only a few counties left in Mass and that Essex was "voted out years ago. It was on the ballot." Out of curiosity, I asked if I wanted to register a valid UCC claim on property other than a deed or real estate, where would I do that and she said they "still accept those." She went further and said "they report to the Secretary of State now". I interpreted that to mean that they are only a corporate subdivision now.

That looks to me as if the bell curve of our rights slipping away is happening and we can't even see it.

Scott Duncan

Seriously, you people just make shit up as you go.

I'll dumb it down. Stop making shit-stains and pulling crap out of your ass.

JOHN SCOTT DUNCAN was created by 2 "Citizens" and ratified by the government, and GIVEN to ME.

I DO NOT CONSENT, AND WAIVE THE BENEFIT, but it is still "mine" because I am the only VALUE to this constructive trust.

I AM NOT A PERSON, I HAVE A PERSON, but it's NOT MINE. I cannot claim it outside the jurisdiction.

I CREATE A PERSON named ROGUESUPPORT INC, who ACTS AS TRUSTEE and SECURES the name for MY benefit, in a TRUST.

Notice that there's no "trustee in the common law territory" or any such bullshit. It really is that simple.

STOP MAKING SHIT UP!

Pete Daoust

I can't wait to explaine all this to Majo :D, she is only 15 now, so I leave her alone, as pink floyd suggested, but soon this little girl will be tough to fuck, I know, because I KNOW her :D

Muhahahahahahaahaha!!!!!! :D

Pete Daoust

Ho, you should talk with Cara Small Atherton, I was NOT relating to sex.....I was clear as water about it......her sex life is NONE of my business, I was talking about her PUBLIC vs PRIVATE life, and HOW she should handle her ADMINISTRATION shit, when I'll finish my DUTY of EDUCATING her :D

Rick Carne

Think, Pete..what are the requirements for a valid trust...if the "intent" was not expressed by the GRANTORS then, it is what??.. i never said �nyone voided it, i merely stated that if intent is not expressed it is void as that is a requirement for a valid trust and as you understand, as you stated, that yur moms person and dads person..aha!.. and that they had no intent...you are administrating a void trust..no? Want me to type in French Hahaha..

Pete Daoust

No, the persons they happen to have in their pocket are citizens.....unless a Man can be a citizen :D which I doubt .....

As far as their INTENTS, they could NOT have that, I know it :D , they even had NO intentions of ME being born, that was an accident :D, oh fuck I am sure I just released some good informations on why and why... :D

As far as the trust, I can ASSURE you it's NOT voided. Well, if it is, NO ONE told me :D

Pete Daoust

You see Rick Carne, I just realized, not too long ago, that I am a Man, and I HAVE a person.....and I INTENT to have some fun a little bit what that sucker :D

So please, don't SCARE me by saying that thing is voided for christ sakes :D

Derek Moran

Interesting words from Dr. Waters...

IV. LAWFUL AND UNLAWFUL TRUSTS

ANY transaction or act, which CONTRAVENES public policy, the COMMON LAW, or statute of the realm, is UNLAWFUL. The same PRINCIPLE applies to trusts.

Scott Duncan

Why would I give a fuck about "what you would say"?

You make these declarations and when I demand substantiation you think "Ultimately i would say" even QUALIFIES as an answer?

Seriously, you are like this bullshit faucet that never quite shuts off!

Scott Duncan

So you posted bullshit you cannot substantiate and mislead people with irrelevant bullshit... AGAIN.

Here in reality, outside Derek Moran's Wonderful World of Irrelevant Bullshit, the BIBLE is claimed to be true, because it says so in the bible.

SAME THING, YOU FUCKING IDIOT!

STOP FOCUSING ON BULLSHIT

Pete Daoust

When I say, I am the SOLE authorized administrator for PIERRE DAOUST, the person created by the government when I was 1 month old, WHO can OBJECT, ARGUE or even REFUSE that empowerment from me to me Scott Duncan ?

em�pow�er (m-pour) tr.v. em�pow�ered, em�pow�er�ing, em�pow�ers 1. To invest with power, especially legal power or official authority. See Synonyms at authorize. 2. To equip or supply with an ability; enable: "Computers ... empower students to become intellectual explorers" (Edward B. Fiske).

Chip Douglas

What exactly Scott is meant by the 'Three Certainties' of a trust, or in our case, can you fill-in the blanks of what specifically they would mean in our cases?

Certain Intention = ? Certain subject-matter = ? Certain objects = ?

Stuart Stone

Ok, there's a lot of gold in this thread...I'm playing catch up here & had a few thoughts percolating around in the protoplasm re the following:

Chip Douglas: ...I've noticed Scott where you've said something to the effect of, "Sending an Affidavit of Affirmation (to the Registrar General it was i think), pretty much covers YOUR obligation."

Regarding the 'Affidavit of Affirmation': Is it being sent to the public trustee (whether it be the Registrar General, Dept of Births Deaths & Marriages etc, depending on the jurisdiction)?

Regarding the contents of the Affidavit: Is the purpose/intent of the affidavit to revoke the power of attorney granted to the public trustee & inform/notify them that a new POA/trustee has been appointed, namely the Corporation?

Thanks :D

Stuart Stone

Further up this thread Pete Daoust, Chip referred to something along those lines, I don't think the name is accurate...my question is more with regards to the intent, ie:

Is the intent to firstly, revoke the power of attorney granted to the public trustee, and secondly, inform/notify them that the name has been liened into a private trust & the new power of attorney is the corporation?

I'm trying to get my head around the mechanics of the process

Stuart Stone

According to some (Bill turner from NZ in his videos, and possibly Marcus, but don't quote me on that), we attorned when we applied to vote:

ie: When we reached the age where we could legally administer our the PERSON's affairs, by applying to vote, we (as in the man signed for/as/on behalf of the PERSON, effectively asked the government to represent the PERSON instead of self administering...in effect, granting a power of attorney to the public trustee.

This is a reason why, according to my comprehension, that it is futile to protest as we asked to be represented in the first place, so by then opposing/protesting against the person's representatives, a controversy is being created.

If we wish to administer the PERSON's affairs/estate, then this is a mistake or appointment that needs to be revoked/corrected.

If this is a shitstain on my part, I request Scott Duncan to berate and/or correct me accordingly...I'm not ready to kill myself just yet.

Pete Daoust

we attorned when we applied to vote: IT,s funny because, well, that was some times ago, but the last time I APPLIED to vote, they told me I was APPLYING to vote, there were NO mentions of any of this ATTORN thing on the paper, in fact, PIERRE DAOUST received one of these paper recently, concerning some MUNICIPAL voting shit, and again, NO ATTORN stuff on that paper.

So, to make a long story short :D, I DID NOT ATTORN ANYTHING TO ANYONE, unless a PERSON can prove it. :P

Pete Daoust

For me Stuart Stone, if they have PROOF that I have done something and show that proof to me, well, I have done it, but if they CAN'T prove it, they can shovel up their claim right into their stinky asses :D

Stuart Stone

When you apply to vote (or for your PERSON to vote), you are granting power to someone else to represent the PERSON...hence in Australia's parliament, there is the Senate & the House of Representatives...ie the people appointed to represent the citizens/persons...

If you applied to vote (as/for/on behalf of the person), I'm sure there would be a record somewhere.

Otherwise, you would have appointed yourself to administer the person's affairs, no?...

Because we didn't comprehend these things back then, isn't that a big part of the reason we are liening the name now, to claim it from the government, so that it can be governed in accordance with our own wishes, without interference from third parties & interlopers?

Anibal Jose Baez

<<... Scott Duncan ...

I'll dumb it down. Stop making shit-stains and pulling crap out of your ass.

JOHN SCOTT DUNCAN was created by 2 "Citizens" and ratified by the government, and GIVEN to ME.

I DO NOT CONSENT, AND WAIVE THE BENEFIT, but it is still "mine" because I am the only VALUE to this constructive trust.

I AM NOT A PERSON, I HAVE A PERSON, but it's NOT MINE. I cannot claim it outside the jurisdiction.

I CREATE A PERSON named ROGUESUPPORT INC, who ACTS AS TRUSTEE and SECURES the name for MY benefit, in a TRUST.>>

Pete Daoust

When you apply to vote (or for your PERSON to vote), you are granting power to someone else to represent the PERSON.

I thought this granting power thing would have happened when the person ACTUALLY vote, not before..... :/

Pete Daoust

Oh, and let say the person vote, and it votes for a SPECIFIC party because that party have made some specific promises :D

And this party WIN !!!! :D

But this party DOES NOT keep these promises, not ONE of them, in fact, the party decide to do the EXACT opposite....

What would happen then ?? :(

Stuart Stone

I comprehend the WHAT we are doing & WHY we are doing it Mackximus Minimus...I'm sure the (presumed) joinder/obligation is multilayered & not the result of just one event...or maybe I'm reading too much into it.

I think it was discussed in the first or second part of this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5-4BwT5ZpE

Maybe I am just pulling crap out from between my bumcheeks & if I'm creating a shitstain, I apologise.

Chip Douglas

Ok- so just to reiterate based upon what you Pete wrote, and what Scott subsequently 'like' on; in terms of what exactly is meant by the 'Three Certainties' of a trust, or in our case, what specifically they would mean in our cases:

Certain Intention = GRANTOR Certain subject-matter = BENEFICIARY Certain objects = TRUSTEE

k, thanks- i had thought that the Objects were the Beneficiary, and that the Subject-Matter was the Property....just wanted to get that clear

Pete Daoust

I would see it more like this.....but I don't grasp that trust thing completly still :(

Certain Intention = GRANTOR Certain subject-matter = BENEFICIARY Certain DUTIES = TRUSTEE

I see Objects as what's being kept IN TRUST :/

Pete Daoust

The GRANTOR, with certain intentions, creat a TRUST for some certain subject matters (beneficiary), and appoint a TRUSTEE with some certain duties.....all this for some OBJECTS or STUFF to be protected from some certain VAMPIRES :D

Chris Evan

Yes....but maybe I am thinking too much about this. I am not comprehending how it is actually done. So lets say the Grantor expressly states the Trustee has to pay the Beneficiary 8 BitCoins per week. The Trustee (as any good trustee should do), takes the appropriate FRNs and turns them into BitCoins and deposits them into the account of the Beneficiary. Is that considered "Taxable Income" by IRS standards, as the Trustee IS a creature of the State? Or is that Private Trust Business and counted as an expense of the Trustee?

David Johansen

well chriss, i might think (althou we all know about my thinking wrong, and the way that goes), that since the reporting limit (opp here i go thinking, i dont report on myself [fuck them]) is $25K/Yr (under that is not required to file a tax return form). so there is no wrong with just not filing, I'm lucky to maybe clear about 1.2k a year, so fuck them. I am not qualified to be discusssing ANY matters with them. how much I earn is none of MY business! LOL

Chris Evan

Scott: OK, so here in REALITY you need help with the TRUST aspects.

When you create a LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION, you and the Governmaent are acting as GRANTORS - This ends upon creation and the GRANTORS have no further say.

1: A coprpration has SHAREHOLDERS who are the BENEFICIARIES. You determine the number of shares when the corporation is chartered, ans YES you can have ONE SHARE in a corporation. Ammendments to the charter can change this.

2: A corporation has DIRECTORS with titles (TRUSTEES), and you can be one. You have surely seen "Voting Shares" when examining share purchases of a corporation. If not, you need to invest more.

3: Since YOU (Or rather your PERSON) are the only VALUE in this corporation, you should be SECURED.

THIS TRUST TRUMPS ALL GOVERNMENT CLAIMS.

As part of my "God Complex" I shall now grant you permission to ask about what I just wrote.

Stuart Stone

Oh wise one Scott Duncan with the alleged 'God Complex' (I'm not sure if the God part is being alleged here or the Complex :P )...

Re 3: Since YOU (Or rather your PERSON) are the only VALUE in this corporation, you should be SECURED.

To clarify, is the process of liening the PERSON the process that secures the value of the PERSON for the/in favour of/ for the benefit of the corporation, as opposed to leaving the PERSON wide open for 'pirates', including but not limited to governments, policy enforcement agents & others?

Thank you in advance Admiral :D

Chip Douglas

You've probably noticed Scott, that under CONTRACT in Black's Law 9th, there are alot of variations of 'contracts' given. Following up on the conversation we had regarding 'Fiduciary Ownership,' i was looking over the section regarding everything FIDUCIARY in Black's 9th, and just spotted a form-of-contract that seems to have been placed all on its own separated from the rest all under CONTRACT:

fiduciary contract: Hist. An agreement, by which one party delivers something to another, on condition that the second party, will return the thing, to the first.

Is the Birth Certificate a 'fiduciary contract,' Scott?

Chris Evan

oh.....something just clicked!!!! That is why when money is created by a Mortgage or other Promissory Note, the money principal should be returned to the original signer. Because its a fiduciary contract, just like a $10 bill!

Derek Moran

Interesting, i just looked this up in my Stephen Waddams 'Law of Contracts' text ChiefRock talked about being interested in getting too...nowhere though in the table-of-contents or directory at the back, is there any mention of it covering FIDUCIARY CONTRACTS :/

Pete Daoust

Scott, so Rogue Support Inc is TAKING care of the person you happen to have in your pocket, since Rogue Support SECURES that person.

What happen when that person receives a bill ?

I guess Rogue Support has to take care of it ?

Does Rogue Support is then ACTING as a third party to all this, and have to charge fees to someone ?

Anibal Jose Baez

<<PUBLIC NOTICE TAKE NOTICE that the VESSEL known as ***redacted shit here*** is now the LAWFUL PROPERTY of the AQUILAE TRUST per the wishes of ***redacted shit here***'S CREATOR and GRANTOR. Therefore: LET IT BE KNOWN THAT AS OF THIS DATE, BEING FEBRUARY 18, 2013, THE VESSEL KNOWN AS ***redacted shit here*** MUST BE CONSIDERED A PRIVATE VESSEL WITH NO COMMERCE EXPECTED AND/OR IMPLIED. PARTIES ATTEMPTING TO USE ***redacted shit here*** FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES MAY BE FINED AT THE RATE OF FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS PER DAY ($5,000 PER DAY) OR ANY PART THEREOF, FOR UNAUTHORIZED USE. Questions regarding this NOTICE may be addressed to the DULY AUTHORIZED TRUSTEE CORPORATION, [ROGUESUPPORT INC.] at (416) 994-1700. AQUILAE TRUST SEAL (Insert lower right) ***END*** And there's everything you need for A NOTICE. NOTICES NOTIFY! That's what makes it a NOTICE. It's not for ASKING. The purpose is NOT to have a chat, or ask questions. It's a NOTICE. PROPER NOTICE IS disclosure. Before the sign "keep off the grass" was put there, no INTENT was disclosed. The law is about INTENT.>>

Derek Moran

At the library here Pete looking through a textbook called 'Wills and Estates' 3rd-edition by Derek Fazakas put-out by Emond Montgomery, it has a chapter on TRUSTS and gives a great/simple explanation on the THREE CERTAINTIES:

CERTAINTY OF WORDS OR INTENTION: means that it must be certain from the words in the trust document that the testator or settlor clearly intends to transfer the legal ownership in the property to the trustee and the beneficial ownership to the beneficiary. It is not an absolute requirement that the trust document use the words "trust," "trustee," and "beneficiary" as long as the intention of the testator or settlor is CLEAR.

CERTAINTY OF SUBJECT MATTER: means that it must be certain and clear from the words in the trust document exactly what PROPERTY is being transferred to the trustee.

CERTAINTY OF PURPOSE or OBJECTS: means that it must be certain and clear from the words of the trust document who the BENEFICIARY or Beneficiaries of the Trust are. An individual Beneficiary may be an unascertainable beneficiary, but the rule is satisfied as long as the class of beneficiary itself is certain.

Apart from the three certainties, the trust document SHOULD INDICATE THE RULES under which the trust is administered. These rules, of course, should not undermine the three certainties.

Stuart Stone

The best 'kind' of gold digger...in contrast to Kanye & Jamie Foxx's encounters... :P (I'm unqualified as to assess the 'best' gold digger, that's a too general/relative for me to speculate)

Scott is the Creator ie: he already knows where the gold is...he lays that stuff down, but can only respond when 'we' find the nuggets & ask the right questions: :D

So, in my estimation (using this analogy), Scott isn't so much a gold digger as a jeweller & geologist, who either confirms whether we have found a nugget or if it is just a polished turd pulled from the arse...when 'we' uncover a nugget, he explains why it has value, how to maximise its value, and as a geologist, he leads the way in demonstrating where to find more of these nuggets and how to avoid the turds.

Right, that's the end of my messed up analogy, but I hope you get the sentiment...in plain language:

Good find Derek Moran, thanks Scott Duncan for the education :D

Derek Moran

Here's an excerpt from 'The Trust Law Book':

"For example, a corporation may MOVE assets such as ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE off its books into a trust for itself, the trustee's SOLE obligation being to hold those assets SECURE."

In our situations- have our SECURITY-of-the-PERSONS been "MOVED OFF THE BOOKS," as mentioned here Scott?

Derek Moran

Dean Clifford did mention not too long ago here that- "WE, are the RECEIVER in this equation"...but yeah i know what you mean, its also like Blake has also said too- "...depends on which side of the DIAMOND you're playing on"

Derek Moran

Derek Moran: Have you set-up your own EXPRESS TRUST, by chance?

Chris Fleming: It was already established for me when I was born, my parents created it. They didn't know at the time but I figured it out

Derek Moran: As an example of what you just said, here in Canada we have this in one of our Acts:

Not bound to execute TRUSTS

59. Her Majesty and a fiscal agent or registrar acting as such are not bound to see to the EXECUTION of any express or implied TRUST to which any securities are subject.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/F-11/page-29.html#docCont

Derek Moran

Scott Duncan: It shouldn't (Notice I DON'T say "WON'T" because they are just making shit up now, and acting arbitrarily) because TRUSTS are not the same JURISDICTION and involve 3 potential parties, and even a Supernumerary in the "legal" system is subordinate to the TRUSTEE in a TRUST.

...but they just make shit up now, so there's that.

Derek Moran

Pete Daoust mmhhh...just too bad I'm not a HOT horny chick....I would be SITTING on a GOLD MINE in here....I would have Scott's dick liened as we speak.. April 5 at 10:06am � Like Scott Duncan *backs away slowly* April 5 at 2:09pm � Like

Chris Evan

Civil Death The Forfeiture of rights and privileges of an individual who has been convicted of a serious crime.

Civil death is provided for by statute in some states. Most civil death statutes apply only to offenders who have been sentenced to a life term.

Civil death involves the imposition of numerous disabilities, including the denial of the privilege to vote, to hold public office, and to obtain many job and occupational licenses. In addition, an offender cannot enter into judicially enforceable agreements, such as contracts, and may not obtain insurance and Pension benefits. The offender may also be deprived of any right to commence certain lawsuits in court.

Successive marriages can also be affected by civil death laws. The issue is whether or not the spouse of a person declared civilly dead may enter into a subsequent marriage. The state courts are in disagreement on the matter, although, in most instances, where a felony is a ground for Divorce, the spouse of the convicted person may end the marriage.

August le Blanc

One thinks it is a person One trusts. ( rogue support ).

corporation n. an organization formed with state governmental approval to act as an artificial person to carry on business (or other activities), which can sue or be sued, and (unless it is non-profit) can issue shares of stock to raise funds with which to start a business or increase its capital. One benefit is that a corporation's liability for damages or debts is limited to its assets, so the shareholders and officers are protected from personal claims, unless they commit fraud. For private business corporations the Articles of Incorporation filed with the Secretary of State of the incorporating state must include certain information, including the name of the responsible party or parties (incorporators and agent for acceptance of service), the amount of stock it will be authorized to issue, and its purpose. In some states the purpose may be a general statement of any purpose allowed by law, while others require greater specificity. Corporation shareholders elect a board of directors, which in turn adopts bylaws, chooses the officers and hires top management (which in smaller corporations are often the directors and/or shareholders). Annual meetings are required of both the shareholders and the Board, and major policy decisions must be made by resolution of the Board (which often delegates much authority to officers and committees). Issuance of stock of less than $300,000, with no public solicitation and relatively few shareholders, is either automatically approved by the state commissioner of corporations or requires a petition outlining the financing. Some states are considered lax in supervision, have low filing fees and corporate taxes and are popular incorporation states, but corporations must register with Secretary of States of other states where they do substantial business as a "foreign" corporation. Larger stock offerings and/or those offered to the general public require approval by the Securities and Exchange Commission after close scrutiny and approval of a public "prospectus" which details the entire operation of the corporation. There are also non-profit (or not for profit) corporations organized for religious, educational, charitable or public service purposes. Public corporations are those formed by a municipal, state or federal government for public purposes such as operating a dam and utility project. A close corporation is made up of a handful of shareholders with a working or familial connection which is permitted to operate informally without resolutions and regular Board meetings. A de jure corporation is one that is formally operated under the law, while a de facto corporation is one which operates as if it were legal, but without the Articles of Incorporation being valid. Corporations can range from the Corner Mini-Mart to General Electric. (See: articles of incorporation, bylaws, board of directors, close corporation, public corporation, de jure corporation, de facto corporation, shareholder, stock, securities)

Derek Moran

Scott Duncan: I CREATE A PERSON named ROGUESUPPORT INC, who ACTS AS TRUSTEE and SECURES the name for MY benefit, in a TRUST.

..i guess i am then just seeking clarification on the difference between PROXY and TRUSTEE

Pete Daoust

Proxy

A representative; an agent; a document appointing a representative.

A proxy is a person who is designated by another to represent that individual at a meeting or before a public body. It also refers to the written authorization allowing one person to act on behalf of another.

Stuart Stone

He's a cryptic so & so, the Admiral...I think you just facilitated an awakening with those last couple of comments Bobis Youruncle...makes so much sense when he says Marcus almost has it right...at least before he got into the god bothering part of the program...

Civil death...the name liened into the trust, en masse, Aquilae may wish to borrow the surplus value as assets to finance a 'bank' to facilitate the implosion of the monetary system...

Fuck, this is Keyser Sose meets Fight Club!!

August le Blanc

Well, The endorphins are firing, the adrenaline is here at the moment, so I am just going to kick back a little and watch the action on the other thread... The enormity of this one simple thing hit me a while back, Now the understanding has clicked... It is a tremendous relief oddly enough to to my semi evolved belief system that is still being dismantled, on a deeper level... it is a good thing.

August le Blanc

The legal person is dead to them by lien. They are cut off from ANY money related shit... it is a revenue stream that a big fucking beaver put a dam in front of so that they cannot have any more water, currency, debt, money...

August le Blanc

accounting and surety, accounting and surety, accounting and surety... it all stems from accounting and surety... "Liening dicks" thats just weird... Accounting and Surety, focus... accounting and surety... that is all there is to this... (out loud) oops...

August le Blanc

I am happy yes, not gay... in its most recent incarnation, I blow (air) up my semi evolved chimp chick, usually on sale in the back part of the store.. Less hassles and with a good compressor and you got yourself a orgy... If the boat springs a leak, extra floatation device... In the dark one cant' really tell if you add: the sleeping on your arm till it falls asleep trick, when you interfere with yourself it feels like someone else... after smoking a bowl of nice red hair... Just saying hypothetically :-D

Derek Moran

There's a flip-side to this coin...i coulda swore recently seeing someone write that they- "LONGED to be a JUDGE, and that its in my nature to CONTROL people"

I think Dean Clifford would say here- "Start working on your TERMS-and-CONDITIONS" ;)

By: NON ASSUMPSIT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (signature here)

Scott Duncan

OF COURSE that's what "you figured". You never look at the facts and the words, and would rather make shit up.

Here in REALITY, it's a TRUST. TRUST, as in THE HIGHEST LAW.

The question is moot because they are ratifying their TRUST.

Anibal Jose Baez

Derek, why are you so fascinated with WALMART RULES/WORLD?

Do you LOVE Walmart's services so much, that you pick into every decision their BUSINESS does? Do you do this , because you fantasize of being on their private meetings, and want to impress them with how much Walmart bullshit you know? Besides being obsessed with Walmart, do you have time to study for things that will help in REAL LIFE?

How many times Scott has warned us about not being deceived by Walmart/"Clubhouse rules"?

Besides that it has been stressed MANY times by Scott that "WE ARE NOT PART OF THE CLUB" (that by itself should had taken care of the issue) here is one of the most important reasons, if not the most, to stay away from CLUBHOUSE RULES:

<<TRUST LAW IS THE HIGHEST LAW. DON'T SELL ITS VALUE TO LOWER LAW!>> Scott Duncan

Using a very bad analogy: CLUBHOUSE RULES =You get raped, and death by the will of strangers, and nothing you can do about it.

TRUST LAW = You get to slap your cock in the faces of strangers that try to rape you, and get to shoot, and kill them at will. Smokes weed afterwards.

So, if one is going to invest time "studying" "laws", Derek, which one will you fucking pick?

Just hit the reset button! :D

Derek Moran

Scott was in the midst of explaining "Why an Affidavit of AFFIRMATION of all things, as OUR next OBLIGATION, in respect to the Birth Certificate, would be OUR next move, in terms of our OBLIGATION we need to cover next...," before some people dropped into the boat, and just before i had to leave - for those interested in lobbying Scott to finish his explanation

Derek Moran

As to where we left-off, Scott was explaining the significance of LITERALLY swearing-on-the-Bible in court, and how for us to then say in court anything AFTER THAT, that was not CONSISTENT with what was in the Bible, would then be a LIE on our part.....

Chris Evan

Affirmation A solemn and formal declaration of the truth of a statement, such as an Affidavit or the actual or prospective testimony of a witness or a party that takes the place of an oath. An affirmation is also used when a person cannot take an oath because of religious convictions.

Derek Moran

Some thoughts on the ingredients of my eventual Affidavit of Affirmation:

1. Mr. Registrar General, you gave my mommy and daddy a BC to hold for me soon after i was born

2. Im over 18, adult, ascertained, and capacitated

3. Didnt perish in The Great Fire, Absented-from-my-Estate, gone Lost-at-Sea

4. Im the Object-of-the-Trust > 'a people'/the beneficiary

5. NO IMPLIED CONSENT to being an AGENT, just because im holding a valuable security that wasnt created by me, come get it and give me what i was meant to get then if thats a problem for you ;)

6. No 'Instruction Manual' was ever given to my mommy and daddy to pass-onto-me on just what was to be done with the Birth Certificate upon my turning of the Age-of-Majority, to the best of my knowledge (it was a long time ago, and i WAS pretty young- i just dont remember)

7. Section 29. of the Ontario Financial Administration Act says/talks about how the Lieutenant Governor in Council may provide for the manner of executing security certificates

8. How about 30 days to respond?

9. Barring any objections, of course

10. Received your FIDUCIARY CONTRACT

11. Received your Scrip Certificate

12. Send me a copy of any RESTRICTIONS ala section 56. of the Business Corporations Act

Pete Daoust

Mine...

Dear registrar Admiral

1). Just to let you know that I am the Sole Authorized Administrator of that PERSON you've created 16 days after my birth.

2). Thanks for having signed as surety for it.

With all my love

By:_________________ Sole authorized Admin.

:-P

Derek Moran

Mode of executing powers

25. (1) A deed executed in the presence of and attested by two or more witnesses in the manner in which deeds are ordinarily executed and attested is, so far as respects the execution and attestation thereof, a valid execution of a power of appointment by deed or by an instrument in writing, not testamentary, notwithstanding that it is especially required that a deed or instrument in writing, made in exercise of such power, be executed or attested with some additional or other form of execution or attestation or solemnity.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c34_e.htm

Derek Moran

Scott Duncan: NONE OF THIS IS HIDDEN!

Trustee Act - R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER T.23

Vesting orders as to stock and choses in action

13. Ships, shares in

(8) The provisions of this Act as to vesting orders apply to shares in ships registered under the Acts relating to merchant shipping as if they were stock.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-t23/latest/

Lei Gh

I may have opened the wrong business bank account for a holding company that holds stuff. The bank representative mentioned a trust account but I was adamant I wanted a non interest bearing account, a regular business bank account. Did I make a mistake?

http://www.rbcroyalbank.com/business/accounts/bus-trust-account.html

Scott Duncan

Here's the part all of you are missing:

When you LIEN YOUR NAME (Like Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson says :D ), you actually have the power to CREATE FIAT MONEY! Here's the LEGAL catch: YOU CANNOT BENEFIT FROM EVEN ONCE CENT of what you create. An OWNER cannot be a beneficiary, EVER, and the bookkeeping requirements are INSANE. It's why I sit on half a billion. When I unleash it, I will NOT be able to use ANY of it. It will help start the war that's coming.

...but that's ME. One of the things you people keep missing, is that YOU ARE NOT ME. You do not KNOW hat I do. You do not have the EXPERIENCE I do, and above all YOU THINK WRONG, AND VALUE THE WRONG THINGS. This is why you have all of these irrelevant questions.

YOU HAVE NEW MONEY! WITH NO GOVERNMENT CONTROL! DO COMMERCE IN THAT! Seriously, NOBODY IN HISTORY EVER HAD THIS.

All of you wring your hands and say "what are we going to do!" when you have something nobody in history has had. TRUE POWER, and you are too blind to see.

Pete Daoust

I feel that I am courteous enough to offer MY signature so these debts can be discharged. But these ACCOUNTS are not mine, I am not going to start balancing what's not mine. I can't be that courteous. In fact, that would be stupid from my part doing such a thing :/

David-Paul Sip

Demand

PEREMPTORY (here's that word again :D ) allegation or assertion of a legal right.

A demand is an emphatic claim, which presumes that no doubt exists regarding its legal force and effect. It is a request made with authority.

A money demand is a demand for a fixed sum of money that arises out of an agreement or contract. Commercial Paper is frequently payable on demand or immediately upon request.

A legal demand is one that is made by a lawfully authorized individual and is proper as to form, time, and place. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/demand

Chris Evan

You remember what happened to me, right? You remember that not a single fuck was given in regards to surety, right? You remember that not a single fuck was given in regards to a mistake, right? You remember that not a single fuck was given in regards to fraud, right? You remember that simply bringing up these issues resulted in handcuffs within 20 seconds, right?

Pete Daoust

I don't think a single fuck was given by them, in most of my shit either, maybe I just push it farther than you do.....

And I keep it so simple that they don't seems to know what to do, it's like they seems to be in check mate, as we speak, but we'll see.....we'll see :)

Chris Evan

I honestly would rather be dead at this point. Scott said at the beginning that he would teach us how to be in commerce with out the liabilities. All I've got to show is a bunch of negative accounting. I am now broke, being driven away from where I have always lived, about to be stolen from and liquidated. All for what?

Chris Evan

Redemption / Strawman / Bond Fraud

Proponents of this scheme claim that the U.S. government or the Treasury Department control bank accounts�often referred to as �U.S. Treasury Direct Accounts��for all U.S. citizens that can be accessed by submitting paperwork with state and federal authorities. Individuals promoting this scam frequently cite various discredited legal theories and may refer to the scheme as �Redemption,� �Strawman,� or �Acceptance for Value.� Trainers and websites will often charge large fees for �kits� that teach individuals how to perpetrate this scheme. They will often imply that others have had great success in discharging debt and purchasing merchandise such as cars and homes. Failures to implement the scheme successfully are attributed to individuals not following instructions in a specific order or not filing paperwork at correct times.

This scheme predominately uses fraudulent financial documents that appear to be legitimate. These documents are frequently referred to as �bills of exchange,� �promissory bonds,� �indemnity bonds,� �offset bonds,� �sight drafts,� or �comptrollers warrants.� In addition, other official documents are used outside of their intended purpose, like IRS forms 1099, 1099-OID, and 8300. This scheme frequently intermingles legal and pseudo legal terminology in order to appear lawful. Notaries may be used in an attempt to make the fraud appear legitimate. Often, victims of the scheme are instructed to address their paperwork to the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.

Tips for Avoiding Redemption/Strawman/Bond Fraud:

Be wary of individuals or groups selling kits that they claim will inform you on to access secret bank accounts. Be wary of individuals or groups proclaiming that paying federal and/or state income tax is not necessary. Do not believe that the U.S. Treasury controls bank accounts for all citizens. Be skeptical of individuals advocating that speeding tickets, summons, bills, tax notifications, or similar documents can be resolved by writing �acceptance for value� on them. If you know of anyone advocating the use of property liens to coerce acceptance of this scheme, contact your local FBI office.

Pete Daoust

"fraudulent financial documents that appear to be legitimate"

I have asked numerous time that IF these bills of exchange are not good, or they are refused, or I am completely wrong, just tell me and I WILL FUCKING PAY.....but give me back these no good BoE's :D

And nope, they ALL want to keep them..... :D

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! :D

Pete Daoust

Be skeptical of individuals advocating that speeding tickets, summons, bills, tax notifications, or similar documents can be resolved by writing �acceptance for value� on them.

I AM VERY SKEPTICAL :D .....and I have no clue on why anyone would write ACCEPTANCE FOR VALUE on anything :D

Pete Daoust

If you know of anyone advocating the use of property liens to coerce acceptance of this scheme, contact your local FBI office.

There's no one I know doing this shit, and there's no local FBI office in Quebec.

The only FBI thing I know is a Orange Juice corp. that produce juice :/

Pete Daoust

I read The Tender for Law, and maybe 50% of what you post on facebook (I just can't keep up with your pace)

I also read Article 1 of the Quebec Charter.

That's about it :D

Oh, I have read some shit about accounting recently......because after QRA have conducted a criminal investigation on my name, with the accountant, well I have lost the accountant, he got scared.......so I have no choice but to learn this shit :/

I almost finished SFC Inc its books for the 2014 year.

It took 56 hours so far :-o

Michael Atkins

You are already rich. You are alive and have time and labour at your disposal. You just gotta stop it from being stolen. And i agree the situation you faced was scary but something is not correct. How does it get corrected?

Chris Evan

You've had a motor vehicle ticket that you've been fighting for months under various offers. How much of your time is acceptable to trade for this bullshit? How in the fuck can you say "not hopeless here" AFTER you have spent dozens of hours fighting a couple hundred bucks? How much money in registered mail have you spent?

Pete Daoust

Today...

Whoever:Humm...what's this private trust's address ?...

Me: Well, this question needs to be addressed in writing to the Trustee, which is 9111-1111 Quebec Inc. But take notice that these guys are not interested in wasting even one minute of their time, so get your check book ready.... :D

HAHAHAHAHA!!!! :D

Pete Daoust

2015 price list.

Ouverture de dossier: $2500.00 ea. Tarif a l'heure: $1000.00 Production de document: $250.00 ea.

Piece d'identit� (Permis de Conduire et carte d'assurance maladie) OBLIGATOIRE pour toutes ouvertures de nouveau dossier.

Termes de paiements sont: PAYABLE D'AVANCE.

Ces termes et conditions son non-n�gociables.

Merci La Direction.

(for English version, see Google Translate, and make sure he don't fuck it up) :D

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Pete Daoust

Agents of 9111-1111 Quebec Inc all have an oath of office.

And ANYONE who will decide to FORCE anything, prior to meet with these terms and conditions, will have a lien registered on them for $2 millions, for "security for cost"

These poor Agents have no other choices, not their fault..... :(

Best is to not call 9111-1111 Quebec Inc, seriously :P

David-Paul Sip

:D Zombie thread. This must be the TRUSTEE's OLD fee schedule. There is no line item for violating the integrity and/or security of the PERSON. This is where it is getting VERY costly for the City of Terrebonne :P

Pete Daoust

This just in.

Yesterday there was a protest in Montreal. Some of these protestors sent a fax to cops before taking the street. Funny coincidence, yesterday was the FIRST time in these past four years that protestors were ALLOWED to take the street in Montreal by cops. :P

Scott Duncan

If they want to PROTEST, which by it's very nature is to speak out without inflicting harm, then LET THEM.

I remember being that age. I KNOW how important it is to them.

Yes, protest is pointless in the larger scheme of things, but that does not change who THEY are, and what THEY feel.

Know that I would do the same for a bunch of muslims protesting the fact that Canada allows atheist to live.

WHATEVER the idea, GOOD, OR BAD, when government silences it, it not only deprives someone of their right to express the idea, it also denies YOU the right to hear it.

Protests are EXPRESSION. POLICE are just a goon squad. One is your right, the other isn't. Personally I'd rather everyone KNOW Muslims (Yes even the "moderates") want atheists killed, rather than having it come as a surprise to people, because the government repressed speech a few short years earlier.

PROTEST is what stops the young from spiraling into depression and despair! I Know! I used to do it!

Mine weren't a waste. Protesting Scientology was NOT protesting any "authority", it was warning of a money-driven fraud. Those protests lead to the formation of Anonymous.

So i know what Natasha feels, and it really makes enduring the Derek Moran ilk a little less painful to endure.

Natasha Tutino

I have broken down my 'empathy' (empathy -em- PATHETIC) into 3 stages.

The person committing the crime

Those benefiting from said crimes

The children who are raised in lies and will more than likely chose to remain ignorant as they get older, and will BELIEVE they DESERVE the cushy life and that they EARNED it.

Natasha Tutino

I owe you a lunch for that :) Mind you; I have recently found out that many who have the same mentality as 'the pack' were actually kicked out of 'the pack'

--> those removed are intelligent, not-so-ignorant men like you, who have alledged much fucktardiness within 'the pack'. It is also made up of of ex-military, police --- Need I say more?

So, I retract my 'but the kids are our future we can reprogram them' crap, but I'm sticking to:

these people are fucktards who, after crossing my empathy levels, deserve to be torched with as much *love* as possible.

I'll use love. I don't want some cop lover to call the SQ or Army saying they are in danger because of what I wrote on FB....or DO I?? Much fun can be had. I think I'll need a bit more VALUE first.

I would be lying if I said I am not scared that as a woman, the intimidation tactics they would try on me would mooooore than likely be just a tad more aggressive compared to those they tried on your landlord, franki.

I know this because, well, you know my story with the G.I. robocops:/