Me, my brain transform into a JAM pot when it comes to "establishing a trust", so I may not be very helpful in this thread, so I am COUNTING on you !!! :D

Now, I need someone to identify ALL the steps, starting by the no. 1 to whatever... :)

Chris Evan, Blake Gardner, Mackximus Minimus, Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma, Derek Moran, Maximus Legis, Bobis Youruncle, Ceit Butler, Gail Marie, Mike Carparelli, Norah Holloway, Dean Otf Kory, Andrew Lawrence, ChiefRock Sino General, Kent Barrett, Stuart Stone, David Johansen, Daniel J Wentz, Janick Paquette, Lou Manotti, and others......please share your WISDOM :D

I would say that this is what needs to be kept in mind FIRST: The Registrar General has done his part. He gave the Birth Certificate to our mommy and daddy soon after we were born to INDEMNIFY us, in exchange for the SOLBR. Now he is just sitting around with nothing to do now that he has done HIS OBLIGATION. As of now, he is just a BARE/NAKED/SIMPLE TRUSTEE.

Next, is to remember that Scott said sending the Registrar General an AFFIDAVIT OF AFFIRMATION, would be the next thing to do as part of OUR OBLIGATION. ..you should put the call-out to Rick Carne, and Chip Douglas too, Pierre

OK, now we need.... Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 .... That's where we're at......

I would say is to affirm you are still out there kicking around and acknowledging beneficial interest in the PERSON security...

Sorry, but I will keep this thread as pure as possible :D .....we are at: IDENTIFYING THE STEPS ON HOW TO ESTABLISH A TRUST STEP 1. STEP 2 STEP 3. And so on........ :D (no offense please )

Fuck :(

Trust Law is the highest form of Law. It trumps Admiralty Law, it trumps Cannon Law, is the highest Law. So that means this is SERIOUS BUSINESS... the real deal. Anyone with beliefs, it's incapable of acting in Trust Law. Ok, in general, a TRUST AGREEMENT is created by a PERSON, also called a SETTLOR/GRANTOR/TRUSTOR/CREATOR, setting up the TRUST with an specific OBJECTIVE/OBJECT, or OBJECTIVE OF THE TRUST. Usually HOLDING PROPERTY (called TRUST PROPERTY) in TRUST for a BENEFICIARY. The tasks needed to HOLD that PROPERTY are carried out by a TRUSTEE, under some BY-LAWS, or rules. So, in a trust we have: 1) A PERSON, a GRANTOR/CREATOR, setting up a TRUST. 2) OBJECTIVE or OBJECT of the TRUST. 3) A specific kind/variety of TRUST. 4) PROPERTY (Trust property) 5) BENEFICIARY 6) TRUSTEE; and 7) BY-LAWS or RULES. Let's start with that.

Ok, guys, we can make this an AWESOME thread, or we can cause a disaster here. TRUST is serious business. If we really want to find some answers together, let's keep this simple. Pete Daoust is correct when he advises we go step-by-step. Can we AGREE on this? If not, I will not participate in this thread. I have A LOT of reading to do to figure this shit out by myself, and so everyone that wants to get it together.

OK....so.... 1) I guess the NAME for the trust ? 1) A PERSON, a GRANTOR/CREATOR, setting up a TRUST. 2) OBJECTIVE or OBJECT of the TRUST. 3) A specific kind/variety of TRUST. 4) PROPERTY (Trust property) 5) BENEFICIARY 6) TRUSTEE; and 7) BY-LAWS or RULES.

Is there ANY legal information we should know about the name we get to choose for the trust ?? Could I name the trust AQUILAE for exemple ???

Scott Duncan: AQUILAE is just the NAME of the trust. "CHAD'S TRUST" would be no different. AQUILAE means "Of the eagle". Only REALLY SMART people get the true meaning. Give up

Let step 1 be the name of the trust we wish to create Step 2: The purpose of the trust...why create a trust Step 3: The roles: eg: Grantor, Beneficiary, Trustee Step 4: The trust property Step 5: How to structure it...type, held in a corp etc Step 6: The paperwork, charter etc Step 7: Ratifying the trust, proper notice etc...

That is step no. 3 Kent Barrett...

Step One: Daoust Trust.

Great ^^^^

Pete Daoust: "Is there ANY legal information we should know about the name we get to choose for the trust ?? Could I name the trust AQUILAE for exemple ???" Scott answerd this to YOU a while ago, Pete. <<Stop letting OTHERS define YOUR trust/claim. Call it Le Trust DuPierre, for all I care. IT'S YOURS and your CORPORATION'S.>> Scott Duncan

Thanks Mackximus Minimus.....I remember that, I just wanted to CLARIFY the issue, so STEP no. 1 is OVER with......lets jump on step no. 2 :D

Step 2: The purpose of the trust...why create a trust

Name: TRUST THE PUPPY :D Purpose: To remove the person from commerce & protect it from pirates/privateers, while using its value as a corporate asset

Is that How you will write it on the LEGAL document ? :D

Can I have an example please on Step 2.

It's a private trust...YOU are the Creator....it can be THE PUPPY MESSIAH!! :D

Can "WE" have an example please on Step 2. ? :D

Step 2 was kinda described in 'purpose' Mike Carparelli

The Objective of the Trust is to HOLD PROPERTY for a BENIFICIARY. That's it. Simple.

WE

Let's use WORDS correctly, the is no PURPOSE on a TRUST, there is OBJECTIVES/OBJECT.

thank you Stuart Stone. For example: We want our HOME to be protected from Pirates. The OBJECTIVE then is to HOLD the HOME for a Beneficiary. correct?

Before the name, we need the CREATOR. Who will be the CREATOR of the TRUST? Which PERSON will be?

The Creator will be a NEW PERSON that we create, in form of a corporation. Are we together on this?

my bad, OBJECTIVE(S): To remove the person from commerce & protect it from pirates/privateers, while using its value as a corporate asset The trust may acquire property via grant, gift, transfer, lien or other methods as the board of trustees deem appropriate. The trust may protect the interest(s) of the beneficiary(ies) and trust property by liening and/or otherwise securing the property of others that may create controversy and/or damages against it (wording a bit hazy, but that's the gist)

The Creator may be a newly created person or an existing person (corporation)...agreed Mackximus Minimus

Step ONe: I go online, I Create a Corporation, pay my 200.00. The name of the corp for example can by Jebus Inc. This is now the PERSON.

So, 123456 Quebec Inc, is the creator let say :)

You're sure Kent ? ^^

Let's go step-by-step, people. Ok, so we have a CREATOR, we have an OBJECTIVE, we have a name for the TRUST, now we need to identify WHICH KIND of TRUST we will be using. Do we know?

Private one :P

Yes, but which kind of private trust? There is a few, so which one?

Private ?? :D

Scott said that this was bullshit ^^^^^^^^ :P

ok, I'm out for a bit, will rejoin later...GTEN recommend Private Express trust for the extent of protection...but I have not studied their reasoning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeWH2ACm65Y This may be worth a look...

He said WHY would you choose from THEIR stuff ??....it's a PRIVATE trust :P

So what TYPE of trust would we choose ? :/

I have come to the conclusion that a Private Express Trust is something I can start with. Please share other experiences if you have other knowledge.

I have NONE :(

see above guys...I'm agreed with Private Express Trust but have not yet studied why...back in a while�

What does EXPRESS mean in this ? :/

Carl Weiss advises a Private Express Trust, or Common Law Private Express Trust.

<<What is EXPRESS? Made known distinctly and explicitly, and not left to inference or implication.Declared in terms; set forth in words. Manifested by direct and appropriatelanguage, as distinguished from that which is inferred from conduct. The word isusually contrasted with �implied.� State v. Denny, 118 Ind. 449, 21 N. E. 274, 4 L R. A.65. Law Dictionary: http://thelawdictionary.org/express/#ixzz2mdXOdOD>>

<<What is TRUST? 1. An equitable or beneficial right or title to land or other property, held for the beneficiary by another person, in whom resides the legal title or ownership, recognized and enforced by courts of chancery. See Goodwin v. McMinn, 193 Pa. 046, 44 Atl. 1094, 74 Am. St. Rep. 703; Beers v. Lyon, 21 Conn. 613; Seymour v. Freer, 8 Wall. 202, 19 L. Ed. 300. An obligation arising out of a confidence reposed in the trustee or representative, who has the legal title to property conveyed to him, that he will faithfully apply the property according to the confidence reposed, or, in other words, according to the wishes of the grantor of the trust. 4 Kent Comm. 304; Willis, Trustees, 2; Beers v. Lyon, 21 Conn. 613; Thornburg v. Buck, 13 Ind. App. 446, 41 N. E. 85. An equitable obligation, either express or Implied, resting upon a person by reason of a confidence reposed in him, to apply or deal with the property for the benefit of some other person, or for the benefit of himself and another or others, according to such confidence. McCreary v. Gewinner, 103 Ga. 528, 29 S. E. 9G0. A holding of property subject to a duty of employing it or applying its proceeds ac- cording to directions given by the person from whom it was derived. Munroe v. Crouse. 59 Hun. 248, 12 N. Y. Supp. 815. Law Dictionary: http://thelawdictionary.org/trust/#ixzz2mdXdWjnf>>

<<Private That which affects, characterizes, or belongs to an individual person, as opposed to the general public.>> <<What is PRIVATE LAW? As used in contradistinction to public law. the term means all that part of the law which is administered between citizen and citizeu, or which is concerned with the definition, regulation, and enforcement of rights in cases where both the person in whom the right inheres and the person upon whom the obligation is incident are private Individuals. See PUBLIC LAW. Law Dictionary: http://thelawdictionary.org/private-law/#ixzz2mdXooUHK>>

Express express adj. direct, unambiguous, distinct language, particularly in a contract, which does not require thought, guessing, inference or implication to determine the meaning.

Are we still together on this?

OK....I am with you: A Private Express Trust.

4) PROPERTY (Trust property)

So, let's worry about having all the ingredients for the recipe FIRST, and THEN we can figure out how we bake the cake. Yes 4) PROPERTY. Which PROPERTY/PROPERTIES? Have we identified the PROPERTY?

I guess this CREATOR named 123456 Quebec Inc, needs to have SOMETHING to pout in that trust ? :/

Or, maybe a PERSON wants to give SOMETHING to 123456 Quebec Inc ? :/

I have come to the conclusion that THE NAME/PERSON, and ANYTHING bearing that name, once we LIEN the NAME, it's IN FACT TRUST PROPERTY, and needs to be claimed as such. So ANYTHING baring the NAME, it's considered PRIVATE TRUST PROPERTY once properly CLAIMED. So, let's identify ALL PROPERTY that would fit the description.

Everything PIERRE DAOUST own's ?? :/

Ha, and what if, there is a marriage license in the picture ??

NO PIERRE! that is NOT what I said. I said anything bearing the NAME (and that you can account for), not anything you OWE (good luck with that! What do YOU OWN, Pete?) So, I guess the BC is something that bears the NAME, so that is PROPERTY. Correct?

What do YOU OWN, Pete?) NOTHING :D

But I said Everything PIERRE DAOUST own's ??, not me :/

But PIERRE DAOUST own's fuckall anyway, so :D

But what if, a person have something under its name, and that something has no lien on it.....like a house per instance, can that person make a GIFT to the trust ?

rule #1 read everything to learn, know what you need to determine whether that information is proper or dis. 99% of the info you learn will be disinformation. if you are the king you get to make the rules, not follow somonelses.

Can this TRUST receives GIFT from other persons, that is the question :)

I said YOU, Pierre. What if, there is a marriage license in the picture ?? The State can only intervene in a "marriage" if there is a controversy that the two parties cannot settle privately. I hope you married a good woman. That's all I have to say. Hahaha! But I digress... Let's get back to identifying the PROPETY. Yes, a TRUST may accept gifts. In a TRUST you can do WHATEVER you want, Pete. YOU ARE THE MOTERFUKING CREATOR, Pete! You call the shots. If you don't get that by know, you are better off keeping on acting as TRUSTEE for the government being the sole administrator for THEIR name. :P

I have married THE BEST ONE... ;)

So, PROPERTY. We know of the BC , but what other PROPERTY? Maybe cars, real estate, boats, etc? OWE nothing. Control everything. A LIEN is first in line in commerce. If you have a house under the NAME, then that becomes matter of PRIVATE TRUST, don't it? So, who do you want first in line for that PROPERTY? Didn't YOU create the VALUE? I'm just asking questions. If I say something that is bullshit, please someone call bullshit. I am just talking about what I have learned, and understood so far.

But if the HOUSE is under the NAME/PERSON that will be liened, what's the big deal ???....the house gets liened automatically ?? n ?? :/

But if the house is under the wife's name/person, she can GIVE that house to the trust ?? :/

Let's say I have a friend who has a Harley Davidson, and wants to make a gift to the trust, is this ok ?? :/

Or does the house needs to be sold for $1 to the corp. and then the corp. places it IN TRUST ???.....how the fuck does these things works ??? :D

I have not established a trust... as yet. But I will be going to. Hopefully soon. I don't have "answers", Pete. :( I share what I know. I still have questions on HOW and WHY you transfer PROPERTY to a TRUST. So, maybe someone else can talk about that. So far, I'm concerned about identifying which PROPERTY is going to be held in trust.

But I know a TRUST may receive gifts. That is a fact.

So far, I'm concerned about identifying which PROPERTY is going to be held in trust.: ME TOO, AS YOU CAN SEE !! :D

I think I'll pray on it, a nice prayer to Lou Manotti could fix all these questions :D Apparently, he is better than JESUS !!!! :D HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Well, at LEAST I know the SECURITY INSTRUMENT/BC is something for SURE that I can identify as PROPERTY. Can we agree, at least on this? Shit, I'm happy just with that, but let's see who else can tell us what else could become PRIVATE TRUST PROPERTY.

Let's go gang, we hold our hands all together and PRAY to Lou :D and sing a song, Ho, and kill a goat and offer it to him :D

you only want to have those things that you owe nothing on inside the trust or you may be opening up the private trust to the public

Where did everybody go? :( This was filled with comments, and when some ORDER started sifting things, silence took over.

I am waiting in front of my screen :/

Ok, Pete, the BC will do for now as PROPERTY. Let's keep this exercise going. Next is the 5) BENEFICIARY. Who is the BENEFICIARY of the TRUST?

Fuck, I feel it incomplete :( we will get back on this......we have to, ok let's move on :(

I wish it could be Men and Women :(

Pete, we don't have to know all details on HOW to cook the cake. Let's get the basic ingredients going, and we keep working from there. 5) BENEFICIARY... There is NO DOUBT is Motherfucking ME. So that's that.

Pete, we don't have to know all details on HOW to cook the cake: I do :P

Or you will have a very funny cake , :D

Motherfucking ME: who is that "ME" ?

Well, we'll BAKE the cake, we wont cook it. :P If you don't know who ME is, how can I tell YOU? What we are doing is changing Master. We are still going to be servants, but WE are the Master behind the curtains, not the government. So, ME, I guess, is both the servant and the Master.

I get it :D

Is that how to become the servant king? (minus all the God crap?) :P

But how will you IDENTIFY the beneficiary on the LEGAL paper ?? I am confused where the corp. lien the PERSON, put that thing IN TRUST, and the beneficiary of that trust is that same PERSON :/

I have not watched the servant king? UNRAVELED

Trust Property.... The BC, driving licence, passport & other entities created from the BC. Any charges, warrants or other instruments that use the name, thus securing the value from those interests.

Any charges, warrants or other instruments that use the name, thus securing the value from those interests. I don't get this ! :/

The beneficiary becomes the shareholder(s) of the corporation, no?

So the beneficiary of the trust, is the corp. ?? :/

Pete, remember how Scott said lien the case number (for court cases etc)? This is a privateer/pirate attempting to take value out of the trust by attempting to secure trust property for their own profit...so lien the thing...you have first claim (and highest claim) on trust property (the person), not anyone else, so you lien the case & claim the value to offset against your lien on the person.

Me too... I think the Corporation becomes the holder of the trust (this is who Scott referred to as the person you can trust...you created them & made yourself sole shareholder and/or director)...the shareholders are the ones who extract value from the trust (beneficiaries) The Board of Trustees are the same roles as the Board of Directors of a corporation (I think). The shareholder(s) vote on and instruct the board of Directors/trustees as to the policy of the trust/corporation....but the shareholders carry no liability for the actions of the corporation & the director(s) carry limited liability. You can wear more than one hat for this process

Stuart is correct. The beneficiaries could be ANYBODY YOU FUCKING WANT (Including, but not limited to, yourself and/or someone you TRUST, like a CORP) (hereinafter, �Beneficiaries�) for the purposes to: identify, accumulate, purchase, and/or hold all Equity and Value that become available; improve the Trust Estate so the Beneficiaries may possess the things of life sufficient to provide for health, growth, protection, education, expansion, welfare, preservation and/or a continuation thereof through a fund to extend credit and funds to the Beneficiaries; and provide for prudent administration and distribution systems for the management thereof." You don't have to tell the government, or anyone outside the trust, who are the beneficiaries. Is a private matter. Ok, let's move to 6) TRUSTEE. Who will be executing the tasks to HOLD that PROPERTY? Who will be TRUSTEE to the TRUST?

the corporation

I will be going out for dinner now. Will be back later. Please feel free to complete steps 6 and 7. THEN we will worry about baking the cake. Later!

I have often closed letters with the following: 'For and on behalf of the board of trustees'...faceless and nameless....just like 'For and on behalf of the Manager' that is often at the end of letters from the bank...or 'For and on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner' from the tax dept.

Ok, bedtime where I am...thanks all, very useful... :D

Ok, we have identified step 6, we have a TRUSTEE. The TRUSTEE happens to be the PERSON we created, a corporation. Let's go to 7) BY-LAWS or RULES. What is a BY-LAW? <<Scott Duncan: If it is a TRUST and not a PERSON WHO posts the NOTICE, it is what is known as a BY-LAW. This means that should you choose (of your own free will) to interact with the TRUST, you are subject to the BY-LAWS.>> <<2: Establish a corporation - In the Charter, assign the role of the corporation to HOLD the trust, and establish the "Law" guidelines (You get to make your own up) as regards keeping the trust.>> So just as the government has Laws (by-laws), hell we get to make our own! For both the TRUST and the CORPORATION. That's were the part of beliefs make this impossible. We must get rid of any/all beliefs, because it's the end of knowledge, there can't be any TRUST if belief is involved, and because beliefs help maintaining the programming that we are not the absolute AUTHORITY, among many other sick shit. With beliefs, our brain would not be able to move forward, without requiring some kind of OTHER authority approving what we are doing.

Something else that I want to mentioned is the word COVENANT. <<Covenant An agreement, contract, or written promise between two individuals that frequently constitutes a pledge to do or refrain from doing something. The individual making the promise or agreement is known as the covenantor, and the individual to whom such promise is made is called the covenantee. Covenants are really a type of contractual arrangement that, if validly reached, is enforceable by a court. They can be phrased so as to prohibit certain actions and in such cases are sometimes called negative covenants.>> Could the TRUST AGREEMENT be a COVENANT? Let me know what you all think.

Shit, I can go wild with these by-laws !! o_O

Tell me about it! :D

But since we don't want to start crazy, we just want some basic by-laws, that we can change/modify as we please. Just like the government does! :D It's our creation, we are the AUTHORS that have the AUTHORITY, and we can change this AT WILL. So, I say we have identified the 7 ingredients for the cake. The government just needs a COURTESY NOTICE of the existence of the TRUST, That's it. The rest is up to us. Matters of private trust. They don't get all the details of our business, just like we don't get all the details of their business. I think thanks fair! :D Meaning, we can get the ball rolling, without having fined tuned all the details of by-laws, and other things, and we can change those as we go along. I really wish if their is something that is incorrect in all this, that someone would come in and correct it. That's what I've got so far.

Once we have our trust created, the paper work needs to be notarized I think too? or is the corporate seal all we need?

Notarized, and/or 3 witnesses. We need the seal, as well.

The 3 witnesses, and our signature with a Thumb Print?

I have no notes on thumb prints, Norah. Where do you get that? I guess technically, anything could be our seal. Seal should do the trick. Plus, we keep all originals. I have never received any documents from the government with thumb prints, and blood. Thumb prints sounds something a free-dumb would use. But, please someone correct me if now we need to share thumb prints, and dna for free.

I saw a document, where I was a witness to an affidavit, and the affidavit needed their signature. Over top of their signature they red inked thumb printed... Like a "blood seal" I guess, and it was the unique seal to their being. Does that make sense. I had never heard of it before either, but it was submitted into the court file.

As long as the corporation does business over provincial/state lines, all signing officers can notarize. :D

Technically, I assume since our seal is what we say it is, a thumb print can be a seal. I just don't have anything about thumb prints in my TT4L notes.

The theory basically goes- Do corporations have fingerprints? ;)

A corporation doesn't have fingers, much less thumb prints. But it sure has a SEAL. You are correct, Derek. So Norah, in Trust Law, stay away from thumb prints. Use a seal.

Finger-prints, blood, your image and voice are signatures not seals. Post Script: I don't sign documents with any of these. :P

Its not 1776, all though the blood thing may be valid, it will get your documents noticed, all right, under a freeman thing. Those methods are on the watch list and all through the courts. It is 2013; New tech, use the new tech, it is recognized, Signatures and corporate seal. Here is my take on things. My creation, My Law acting under Title. at the wishes of the beneficiary. Also to the benefit of the sole shareholder of the corporation thru a dividend and the corporation only answers to its share holders = one sole shareholder. Trustee Corporate Seal = Trust Seal Trust seal = Law Law = Judge Roy Bean. 2 witness's and Trust seal = Private Law Private currency in Private law = benefits

Since 1933, when a child is borne, the Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate knowingly and willingly claim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink impression of the feet of the baby onto the live birth record, or a drop of its blood as well as tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the deceitful legal meanings on the live birth record. This live birth record as a promissory note is converted into a slave bond sold to the private reserve bank of the estate and then conveyed into a 2nd and separate Cestui Que (Vie) Trust per child owned by the bank. Upon the promissory note reaching maturity and the bank being unable to �seize� the slave child, a maritime lien is lawfully issued to �salvage� the lost property and itself monetized as currency issued in series against the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust.

What is SALVAGE?....blacks law dictionary 2.A product that has more value as scrap than its value as the original product.

is your person scrap of the original? hahahahaa

yes rick, that is correct BUT it also falls under the category of (pierre); FFRREEE DDUUMMMBZEEE with one exception, that it exists and we can LEIN IT so they cant benefit from it anylonger.

a LIEN IS A CLAIM that MUST be paid FIRST. anything they get has to go to the leinholder first. you can enforce a lien.

And you have the highest claim :D

yes joey, thats when you reach for your revolver... um use that claim to declare ownership of the goods when any warrant is issued (warrant is a declaration of a claim, you need superior claim to posession of the goods and you can take it away from them.

habeus corpus and notice of lien.

the lien becomes a useful tool if you are a proper mechanic.

A Courtesy Notice of ones own creation as per: The Director, for educational purposes You may use the name and pick apart at will. It is for the purpose of paying it forward. This Thread Only. :-) Public Notice: It is not our wish to create controversy, Having given previous Public Notice: To eliminate the need, We have decided the following is the most prudent course, We herby declare on this day November 30.2012: The name Jason Fredrick Le Blanc, is Private property Along with ALL Titles, Patents, Letters Patent, Property and Assets including but not limited to; all accounts/contracts derived from said name on any document. Questions regarding this NOTICE may be addressed to the DULY AUTHORIZED TRUSTEE CORPORATION, [ 1732964 ALBERTA LTD.] By registered mail addressed: To: Original Trust Attention: Accounting Dept. PMB 206 204-1440-52 ST, NE Calgary, Alberta T2A-4T8 Authorized By: The Board Of Trustees, PRIVATE CORPORATE SEAL 1732964 ALBERTA LTD. All RIGHTS RESERVED

That is the way the Name appears on the BC.

The Lien The Duly Authorized Trustee corp administrates is for JASON FREDRICK LEBLANC which is the way it appears on govt ID, bank cards etc.

Actually One is involved in a thing where one thought specificity was prudent. So ONE created; acting under title.

And they are both in effect.

And now ONE communicates as WE to other entities when contracting.

They are both the same... tenders for law

Yep, it is a nice way of saying fee for service.

"I have come to pay you a courtesy"

I cannot appeal to my rapist so I must create my own court.

So I did. Thanks to Mackximus Minimus and ALL here.

I pulled the trigger on a thing: an action. When upon investigation some new facts came to light. I then became Wrath.

I mean me as beneficiary wishing it so.

Which is a trustee.

All positions in a trust are trustees.

Correct though: specificity and accuracy with the terms is crucial. I need to keep on that, it is a mind set that requires diligence. Programming and such interfere, along with ignorance

when you know who your rapist is and his modus operandi, you can stay back far enough and take him out before he knows your even around.

Proper administrative process has been followed. Ninjas hide the good guys do not. No need they stand in their own law.

Fearless

That is the biggest gift of it all.

Bobis Youruncle, I just want to clear something. A Trust can be formed, without the BENEFICIARY even knowing he/she/they are the BENEFICIARIES. In a trust, the BENEFICIARY has NO POWER, nor can make any decisions. In a TRUST everything is done per the WISHES of the GRANTOR/CREATOR, which is us. Do we, as BENEFICIARIES, have any wishes carried-out by the state, of the TRUST our parents help to form? NO! We did not create it, we do not control it, as BENEFICIARIES we have no power within the TRUST. We just take the benefit, nothing else. So in our position, we technically know we are the beneficiaries, but in a TRUST, things are not done per the wishes of the beneficiary, but rather the wishes of the CREATOR/GRANTOR. I know what you meant to say, but like you said, we have to be careful about the words we use, and how we use them. I just wanted to mention it. It will look pretty bad if in a communication you, or anyone, expresses "the wishes of the beneficiary" for a trust. Cheers, mate! You are breaking the ice for many of us!

A security agreement is how you dump titles that are perfected into a trust.

I just finished reading this compilation by Derek Moran, on Scott on Trusts. A must read! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1421310844751664/permalink/1433061843576564/

Got it. I have always been an explorer. I break trail and sometimes get stuck and need assistance to get out. I take risks based on, well I really do not like it here, So I go over there. I do not want to live like a slave anymore. We cannot go down into common law, that has been changed into what we have today, Legal. So it makes sense to create a jurisdiction (trust) in which we can operate legally and be immune to trespassers by operating under title. As per wishes of the Creator and Grantor expressed in a covenant. Which Assigns the roles to play, as expressed in the Corporate charter as per wishes of the shareholders in concordance with the Covenant established at the Birth of the Trust by a simple trust agreement ( covenant). Not only that but if a historical record is established we have grounds to pursue said adversary. To hold them ACCOUNTABLE for their actions. We cannot appeal to rapists, so we need a court of competent jurisdiction which we are the creator of. To hit a home run. Value would be a good thing to establish as well... Hmmm.

Nice thread so far !!! :D

So, we have the 7 basic ingredients for the cake. I still have questions concerning BY-LAWS. But I know we can come back to that ingredient. If there are no shit stains in this thread, we are making good progress. I REALLY WISH that, if there is some bullshit here, for someone to come clean, and correct it. :( So, maybe next we can talk about 1) what is a LIEN, 2) HOW to place the LIEN, 3) how to perfect the LIEN, 4) how to RATIFY the TRUST, 5) how to perfect the TRUST, and 6) how to SECURE the TRUST? Just some suggestions.

A side bar on words and their power from first hand experience as to the power of deception: One came here to learn empower oneself, during my preliminary investigation, I met with the head of the order. To disclose what had happened and find info I was given a name as to whom damaged the vessel as a young fella. The name was spelt different but sounded the same. As a result I came across the offending parties legal name in my investigation, Because I had been given a different Name that sounded the same, I literately did not see the Legal Name, I physically could not see it My mind would get cloudy and I would sink into depression. Long story short, I saw the name when I revisited the investigation. My mind had cleared enough after I had de-programmed myself, with help. I was deliberately misguided, they were counting on the trauma to keep their secret hidden. It is insidious. And brutally effective. So the layers of programming are not an easy thing to break out of, it is all around us The POWER of words ( technology) hides the truth.

A lien is established by creating cause. Cause is created by proper administrative process: By ACCOUNTING; WE CREATE A BILL. To begin a fee schedule included in a A bill for services or offences committed against trust property. It includes terms and conditions ( statutes) Under a charter ( ACT) The Bill clearly states these terms and adds a value to each of the terms and conditions = fees, First notice is sent via registered mail, important for historical record and proof of receipt. We are in honour, We give ample time to respond, Time expires, then second notice is given, time to respond, time expires, then 3rd notice all of which give the opportunity to cure the matter. Notice of default is sent the historical record is established you now have grounds and cause for the lien. Everything is stamped with corporate seal and witnessed by 2 signatures. Creating Law.

I just noticed that re-reaing my notes, Joey Spirit! You are correct!

Security agreement is an interesting deal. When one filed the lien, operating under title. The monkeys could not find the NAME, so they handed me a 50 page print out of all names with same given last name. Each one already has a security agreement in place, the security created at our birth by the creators and grantors of the trust established between signing parent and govt at birth, when our title is transferred to the trust as property. TITLE TITLE TITLE TITLE TITLE The creator and grantor cannot be beneficiary to the corporation but operating under different title Ie: Sole Shareholder as prescribed in the document of ones own creation. The corporate charter in accord with covenant established at formation, creation of trust.

So, the GRANTOR is ME, under a TAKEN NAME. And the TRUSTEE corporation, per the wishes of the CREATOR/GRANTOR, LIENS the name for ME. Does anyone have a different answer? <<Scott Duncan: True that. But It's really Admiral Scott (Taken Name) not any family and/or GIVEN name. I hold the AQUILAE trust, and GIVEN names are for COMMERCE.>> <<Mackximus Minimus: I have a question for Scott Duncan: 1) You had mentioned in a previous post that sending an "Affidavit of Affirmation" to the Register of Demographics Office (that's the name of the agency that issues surety bonds here) claiming the PERSON, would be sufficient to cover "MY" obligation. Would this process be sufficient to place a LIEN on the PERSON? And if so, who makes the CLAIM, "ME" with my TAKEN NAME as a MAN, and/or a proxy? Thanks for any time to respond, Admiral. Scott Duncan: Rogue Support Inc. did it for me.>> <<Scott Duncan: You need to CLAIM the VALUE you have contributed to the name. Lien the shit out of it, and call yourself something else. No "given" name. Only TAKEN names have power.>>

The name is only taken after proper process, once lien is filed you then have a taken name.

The legal person ( corporation ) the trust administrates thru does everything thru its directors operating under title. You become a role player.

Multiple hats under title.

The grantor is you under given name.

And the government in which the corporation is registered

In order to have a taken name you have to take it first.

Its a mind fuck reach around.

Spinning head syndrome abounds, cause you are just used to playing one role.

My understanding is that GIVEN NAMES are for COMMERCE. You cannot HOLD a TRUST with a GIVEN NAME. So, I can deduce, from my notes, that it's ME, under a TAKEN NAME, that signs as SETTLOR/GRANTOR/CREATOR. <<Scott Duncan: True that. But It's really Admiral Scott (Taken Name) not any family and/or GIVEN name. I hold the AQUILAE trust, and GIVEN names are for COMMERCE.>> <<Scott Duncan: You need to CLAIM the VALUE you have contributed to the name. Lien the shit out of it, and call yourself something else. No "given" name. Only TAKEN names have power.>> Ok, is this correct, or not? : <<So, the GRANTOR is ME, under a TAKEN NAME. And the TRUSTEE corporation, per the wishes of the CREATOR/GRANTOR, LIENS the name for ME.>> What do you all think? :(

So the GRANTOR should be Joseph-Pierre-Gilles, in my case, which seems to be the BENEFICIARY of the Birth Certificate (Person) ??

If you are getting the NAME out of COMMERCE, how can the NAME be used as the PERSON SETTLOR for the TRUST? I'm confused. :(

On that birth certificate, I AM, the Man, identified as the BENEFICIARY.......it says, Joseph-Pierre-Gilles, which is NOT the person, the PERSON is PIERRE DAOUST.....not Joseph-Pierre-Gilles.....that's how I get it..... It's like a CERTIFICATE in a corp. minute books, that certificate identifies the BENEFICIARY of that share, NOT THE EPRSON (corp.) itself....

It is an ACT done by ACTORS... operation under title. Think about that, given names only for commerce. How can you be recognized if you use something outside of commerce? My understanding is that I need to use a recognized form to establish the trust once established it is all private and taken name is just that taken from some one. Is where I am at.

A birth certificate CERTIFIES that a person has been created, and IDENTIFIES the beneficiary....

The TAKEN NAME of Scott is Admiral Scott. The GIVEN NAME of his person is JOHN SCOTT DUNCAN. He said we could use our middle name as a TAKEN NAME (or any other TAKEN name), and must avoid using GIVEN NAME or FAMILY NAME. So I ask again: If you are getting the NAME out of COMMERCE, how can the NAME be used as the PERSON SETTLOR for the TRUST?

My TAKEN name is Pierre, I could have choose Joseph, Pierre or Gilles......that's what the birth certificate IDENTIFIES as the beneficiary of the PERSON that has been created...

So, Pierre, the Man, 11852 (Life Birth Registration number) IS THE FUCKING GRANTOR ?? :D

But the whole point is to KILL the PERSON, take it out of commerce. We are supposed to leave behind "believing" we are "BENEFICIARIES" to some government trust, that evidently we don't control, and create OUR thing. I am confused, but I will sort this out.

it has a PERSON :P

I HAVE A FUCKING PERSON IN MY POCKET

But that person, that I happen to have in my pocket, CLEARLY identify a MAN, as the BENEFICIARY

Ok, It's a 2 pronged attack: 1)The formation of a trust 2) the formation of the corporation to administer the trust and hold trust property I thought if we liened it then it was taken, looking for simplicity. The taken name thing I stand corrected, I misunderstood. I have been trying to wrap my cocoanut around that, and it slips. So my taken name is Fredrick ( middle name) if I so choose , but when you go to fill out the forms that is not an identity recognized in their legal system, Once set up in trust we then kill him. Is my thinking. the lien kills him

WE ARE NOT BENEFICIARIES to any TRUST, is all bullshit. The NAME is not OURS! I want to see ONE fucking BENEFICIARY from a government trust come forward saying "Here are the benefits of the TRUST!". Everything is set-up to only be able to act as trustees for the government. So, I'm confused.

We are trustees in the current set up. As holders of the document ( person) we are also subject to benefits like jail if we accept surety, We are reassigning surety by accounting.

A person can hold more than one title in trust.

Beneficiary and trustee for example.

WE ARE NOT BENEFICIARIES to any TRUST, is all bullshit. The NAME is not OURS! I did not said that Mackximus Minimus.... I said, I, the man, I am the BENEFICIARY of the person that is KEPT in trust

copy

Yes, but my question is: Has ANYONE here been notified that they are the OBJECT of a TRUST, to which one has been declared BENEFICIARY of some PROPERTY being held in TRUST, and have one received that alleged PROPERTY for BENEFIT? I don't think so. Now if I start a new world for me, it seems logical to establish it with my NEW NAME, not someone else's property/NAME. I can't get pass the idea.

The Grantor is "ME", the Man, who took Pierre as a name, and have a LIFE BIRTH REGISTRATION that has 11852 as a number :D

I'm talking about the famous government TRUST that some BELIEVE they are BENEFICIARIES to.

Well from my comprehension, the grantor needs to be recognized, the person my back pocket is recognized, thru that account I establish a trust, So the grantor of the trust can be a taken name who's wishes are set up in the Covenant assigning duties to the administrative body who in turn acts under a charter derived from covenant. Assigning the title to given name as a director to to still be recognized in their system and they recognize him as dead and trust property...

And I will CLAIM the person I happen to have in my pocket, by LIEN it.... :P

I am, the Man, beneficiary of the PERSON, not the trust.....

Fuck, it says it on the birth certificate....clearly... !!! :/

my head is going to explode

What, Pete? :(

BENEFICIARY of a PERSON? Really? No TRUST involved? I think some of us need to take a break. :(

It says on the BC, that "ME", Joseph-Pierre-Gilles, a fucking Man with a penis, is the BENEFICIARY of the person named PIERRE DAOUST Hellossss !!! :D

<<Beneficiary An organization or a person for whom a trust is created and who thereby receives the benefits of the trust. One who inherits under a will. A person entitled to a beneficial interest or a right to profits, benefit, or advantage from a contract. West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. beneficiary n. a broad definition for any person or entity (like a charity) who is to receive assets or profits from an estate, a trust, an insurance policy or any instrument in which there is distribution. There is also an "incidental beneficiary" or a "third party beneficiary" who gets a benefit although not specifically named, such as someone who will make a profit if a piece of property is distributed to another. (See: incidental beneficiary)>> http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/beneficiary

Entity A real being; existence. An organization or being that possesses separate existence for tax purposes. Examples would be corporations, partnerships, estates, and trusts. The accounting entity for which accounting statements are prepared may not be the same as the entity defined by law.

The BC is not my identity it is a thing created by strangers The strangers told me all my life it was mine and I believed them hence the thinking I am the beneficiary. I am not the document is... I am not a document. We operate under title to be recognized it has to be the person created at birth assigned the title of GRANTOR

Fuck... I DID NOT SAID the BC was me, I said it identifies ME, as the beneficiary of the PERSON...... Do you guys have a corp. minute book somewhere ? :(

Look in a Corporation minute book, you'll find at one point some CERTIFICATES in this, these certificates IDENTIFIES the share holders of that corp., and it's CERTIFIED...... Same thing with the BC, it identifies the SHARE HOLDER (or beneficiary) of that PERSON, thas heas been created.....

A trustee who is not in the role of administrator, but in the role of beneficiary and trustee at same time. We are Transferring titles and therefore surety in to a place where it is administered privately. The trust enables a Catch 22. They are bound to honour by their laws. The Trust needs to be granted by a recognized authority. Which in this case is the title of legal person granting the trust and creating it under title. Enabling the commerce system to recognize the trust, we then utilize a taken name as another title to be boss of Administrative body overseeing the trust.

So the trust is granted and created by the creator and author, ( legal person) the corporation is the holder of trust property and duly authorized to deal with the affairs or trust property. The legal system is bound by the seal of jurisdiction on the articles of incorporation and us acting under title When we form the trust to which the government has no authority, it is a private trust. The authorship of the trust is private as well. So it is multiple roles in the see of commerce to enable recognition in their private system and still be operating under private jurisdiction.

Assign taken name title of first director

And have legal person acting vp or something like that.

Corporate Charter derived from covenant.

Thanks Joey and Mack... Interesting times indeed.

I have good reasons to belive that the government see "ME", the Man, as a CONSIGNOR regarding the PERSON. Now, by establishing a TRUST, they won't have any other choices to see "ME" as a GRANTOR. :P

CONSIGNOR, contracts. One who makes a consignment to another.

Boys...the grantor is the one who puts the res into the trust. They also create the indenture. It should of course be a real living man (creditor) as it is a private express trust we are talking about. This is of course to be clearly defined from the person (debtor) in the indenture in which ever way you see fit.

:D

Is it mean I am on the right track ?? :D

Like HE said ?

Private or Common Law trust

So the GRANTOR is:

Pierre, life birth registration no. 11852 :D

Blake Gardner, don't leave!

:D

Yes Blake, put the guitar aside for a few minutes :P

I have the same books he does on this topic but haven't finished reading them.

just as he said, define the grantor (creditor) from the person in the indenture.

It's knobs as opposed to strings at the moment (mixing) and they are beckoning me with intense veracity.....

You got the books Bev:-) they are quite expensive too from memory...there approach is very by the book so to speak, Brandon's is a little more adventurous and Scott's is unto its self:-) oh the variety!!!:-)

Of course depending on your choice of life style one can easily make do with the person alone -

Nessesity is the mother of creativity and invention...

Ok Blake, is you had a TRUST, and you are the GRANTOR, what name would you use for a living man in the indenture document: your taken name, or the given name, or what? If you can clear this up for me, I would GREATLY appreciate it.

"Anyone with beliefs, it's incapable of acting in Trust Law." "believing" we are "BENEFICIARIES" "But the whole point is to KILL the PERSON, take it out of commerce. We are supposed to leave behind "believing" we are "BENEFICIARIES" to some government trust, that evidently we don't control, and create OUR thing" "WE ARE NOT BENEFICIARIES to any TRUST, is all bullshit. The NAME is not OURS! "

Intense outburst BIYU...am I sensing frustration:) If you are referring to the surname as the taken name and the first or second name as the given names - I may tend to go with the latter and avoid the former.

"Anyone with beliefs, it's incapable of acting in Trust Law." "believing" we are "BENEFICIARIES" "But the whole point is to KILL the PERSON, take it out of commerce. We are supposed to leave behind "believing" we are "BENEFICIARIES" to some government trust, that evidently we don't control, and create OUR thing" "WE ARE NOT BENEFICIARIES to any TRUST, is all bullshit. The NAME is not OURS! " Above in thread The hammer drop: ONE way trip. Just hit home. One needs to leave it. One is tied to it by belief. IN original person, in legal person , in reality. Trust law trumps Canon Law - GOOD. I must deal with one matter. They Damaged the vessel. Otherwise = *HUGE FUCKIN FACE PALM*

As far as not being beneficiaries - well look around at the beautiful infrastructure and technology...YOU provided via credit...

You are the bunny and the BC is the Duracell:-D

Bobis Youruncle, WHO said that we are beneficiary of a TRUST ? :/ ....who said that ??

Huh?

I thought it, from another perspective.

Bobis, Blake, Pete, and everyone, I'm trying to make sense of what I have learned from Scott, and what I'm reading here, specifically I'm talking about the name of the Grantor. How can we start OUR CREATION, using THEIR CREATION? It just doesn't make sense to me. What should we make of Scott's information on the TAKEN NAME, that I have posted here?

I was still believing... I have let it go. It was a statement of awakening.

I am, Pierre 11852, a MAN, and I am the BENEFICIARY of a person. Not a trust, the person is NOT A TRUST......it is KEPT IN TRUST....

The name of the grantor, in my case, is : Pierre 11852

Any objections ^^^^ :D

And now, since I am the ONLY one that can give VALUE to that person, I will lien it, using a new person (corp.) and put it in a PRIVATE trust, which I, Pierre 11852, happens to be the GRANTOR :D

I can agree to Pierre! :D I'm not sure about the numbers. I want to stay away as far away from their shit as I can. My new programming tells me the name of the GRANTOR must be a/the TAKEN NAME, an not a NAME that does not belong to us. I determine what my name is. No one else does.

I really like: Pierre 11852 :D

Maybe this name, Pete? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM1P7GMnd38

We are claiming title to the vessel that is named * monkeys are us*, The Vessel with one sole on board is named by others thru deception at berth. The sole on board wishes to trust another sole with the given name. The other ( corporation ) is created, the other is then a legal creation separate completely from the * monkeys are us* Then that separate sole created is entrusted by the vessel by covenant to handle its affairs. It receives benefits that are administrated thur Private Charter to the benefit to the sole on board - taken into trust

:P

The vessel with one sole on board wishes a new name So he takes it, whatever it is. Where the confusion lies with me is that I have modelled My approach after Scott. I programmed myself wrong some how I think I have taken the name so why not use it...

The hammer drop: ONE way trip. Just hit home. One needs to leave it. One is tied to it by belief. IN original person, in legal person , in reality. Trust law trumps Canon Law - GOOD. I must deal with one matter. They Damaged the vessel. Otherwise = *HUGE FUCKIN FACE PALM*

I just don 't get the obsession of still wanting to use the GIVEN NAME in some way, shape, or form, like some invisible umbilical chord, or something. :( But, if a TRUST can be either notarized, or we can use 3 witnesses, if we use the later (3 witnesses we can TRUST), couldn't we use whatever name we want? Who the fuck is going to tell us we are NOT the taken name? Am I alone on this? :(

No, just working on comprehension. Now it makes sense. I just had to get thru the clutter, and yes there is an umbilical cord, Have been bound to law since birth, it does not want let me go. it was sucking the life out of me. I am learning to deal with it. It is an energy thing, I can sense it. And know it. It is tangible from my perspective. I just discovered it and do not like it. At the risk of ridicule I am bound by law. I can sense its energy.

The overlay programming is very effective. I was trauma programmed. I have documented evidence, it has led me here.

I really like: Pierre 11852 :D

I Like Boobies :-D

I think it's a sexy TAKEN name

I was a casualty of spelling. Really.

From Strangers

It's TRUST LAW, we are KINGS! What's the obsession with the NAME? DETACH FROM THE NAME! I am NOT a fucking NAME! Hell, I am whoever I want to be! And my name it's NONE OF YOUR FUCKIN' BUSINESS! If I was a free-dumb, I had considered using "Formerly Known as Huge Cock" as my taken name. But times are a changing! :D

It explains all the down time while learning this stuff. I would learn and be drained for weeks. So I am king and will decide on a new name. Just stating from this end it is a battle to learn.

Mackximus, I think that the GIVEN NAME is the one you put VALUE into (in commerce) to date. It is still attached to you but you do have a private capacity within that entity as well.

Not only drained but would have to ingest all Knowledge learned here over again. Repeatedly, concepts would be here then be gone, unable to access memory. Blocked.

The alice syndrome...too many rabbit holes, fill them in:-)

Pierre 11852 :P

Time to cut the cord, again. It is new day in the kingdom. hmmmm name to take... ah fuck .... zzzzt zzzzt zzztt pop .... spark...overload...

Yes, Beverly! But the questions was/is: Is the GIVEN NAME the one to use in the indenture documents, as the GRANTOR, or is it a TAKEN NAME we must use instead?

Yeah Bev - there is a private and a public dimension in any given situation

What is your dimension of preference in the given situation, sometimes it's public other times it private.

So much possibility, so little appreciation...

Blake, how would you differentiate your private capacity from public in a trust indenture exactly then? I didn't finish the books...

I would avoid an 'exact' rendition of the BC name.

It needs to recognized we need to grant thru legal person as holder in due course, duly authorized by: Legal person, signature of authorized personnel Enabling recognition in the legal world part of the system yet separate it is a catch 22. Once something is granted that's it, it is done. Trust is established: no more need for legal person he can then be killed with the lien transferring all property of legal person to be held in trust, sealing the borders. Once the legal person grants the trust he is finished , kaput done. Grantor has done his thing.

Correction; not holder in due course but Duly authorized by: Only.

The taken name is the only one to use in granting the trust.

We can use a TAKEN NAME. Who is going to rebut that claim? Who will have any OBJECTIONS on the TRUST? The government? :D Haha! No thank you, I'll use MY SHIT, I don't need any pre-owned name, with a rapist Master attached to it.

Your trust will be tested just as any other administrative remedy you may have used!

The can test, sure. On the terms established in Proper Notice at their expense. In canada the clerk of the court is at the wishes of the lienor it is privatized in Alberta so ppsa is an ACT of a king, they issue the writ of enforcement from the lien. Which is a judgement based on the fee schedule and other terms of lien. They are bound by Proper Public Notice.

It would be the same as an affidavit or any other public document/notice. Authorized representative of..., beneficiary of..., whatever.

There are definitions to ACTS, which designate a specific meaning for words, we can do the same...

No whatever, Specifically assigned by Private Charter.