The Tender For Law

Volume 6

Jun 13, 2014 12:16 AM

Pete Daoust

Great find by Chris Evan....

chattels

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

Definition of chattels in the Legal Dictionary by TheFreeDictionary.com

Read Comments

Will Bed

I really need to try and figure the trust and maritime and lien stuff inside and out, just I feel like I've got a bit too much on my plate right now to even think about learning that lingo and trying to connect the dots...

Like most everything Beverly Berta Braakschmack posts, I read and read again and somehow it's not like I even start to get a clue..? So please keep dumbing that shit down for me all you can Chris ! Hopefully I'll wrap my head around it before Scott's war gets full blaze..........

Anthony Buisc

chattel = capital

chattel (n.) early 13c., chatel "property, goods," from Old French chatel "chattels, goods, wealth, possessions, property; profit; cattle," from Late Latin capitale "property" (see cattle, which is the Old North French form of the same word). Application to slaves (1640s) is a rhetorical figure of abolitionists, etc.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=chattel

cattle (n.) mid-13c., "property," from Anglo-French catel "property" (Old North French catel, Old French chatel), from Medieval Latin capitale "property, stock," noun use of neuter of Latin adjective capitalis "principal, chief" (see capital (n.1)). Compare sense development of fee, pecuniary. Sense originally was of movable property, especially livestock; it began to be limited to "cows and bulls" from late 16c.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=cattle&allowed_in_frame=0

capital (adj.) early 13c., "of or pertaining to the head," from Old French capital, from Latin capitalis "of the head," hence "capital, chief, first," from caput (genitive capitis) "head" (see capitulum). Meaning "main, principal, chief, dominant, most important" is from early 15c. in English. Capital letter for an upper case one is attested from late 14c. The modern informal sense of "excellent, first-rate" is dated from 1762 in OED (as an exclamation of approval, OED's first example is 1875), perhaps from earlier use of the word in reference to ships, "first-rate, of the line," attested from 1650s.

A capital crime (1520s) is one that affects the life or "head;" capital had a sense of "deadly, mortal" from late 14c. in English, a sense also found in Latin. The felt connection between "head" and "life, mortality" also existed in Old English: as in heafodgilt "deadly sin, capital offense," heafdes �olian "to forfeit life." Capital punishment was in Blackstone (1765) and classical Latin capitis poena. Capital gain is recorded from 1921. Capital goods is recorded from 1899. Related: Capitally.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=capital&allowed_in_frame=0

Anthony Buisc

Right? It's interesting to inspect where concepts are derived and how they are augmented for various purposes, legalese being one of 'em. Of course, I don't live in a legal anything. But that doesn't mean I can't use legal instruments in commerce. I've got an appropriate LEGAL instrument in my wallet, as a matter of fact.

CONVEY: To pass or transmit the TITLE to PROPERTY from one to another; to transfer property or the title to property by deed or instrument under seal.

To convey real estate is, by an *APPROPRIATE INSTRUMENT*, to transfer the legal title to it from the present owner to another.

And what does that plastic piece of juridical PERSON convey? The CHATTEL, of course. :)

http://thelawdictionary.org/convey/

Anthony Buisc

It ain't a fiction if you're drinking it. But I don't mix corporations with my whiskey, nor caramel based soda pop....I prefer ginger ale.

Is there a corporation called GINGER ALE? And should I invest?!? :D

Anthony Buisc

The JURIDICAL PERSON is a legal fiction when you believe that it's as real as the plastic or paper it's printed on....kinda like the BIBLE. :D

But eh, don't take my word for it.

What is LEGAL FICTION?

Believing or assuming something not true is true. Used in judicial reasoning for avoiding issues where a new situation comes up against the law, changing how the law is applied, but not changing the text of the law.

http://thelawdictionary.org/legal-fiction/

Legal Fiction An assumption that something occurred or someone or something exists which, in fact, is not the case, but that is made in the law to enable a court to equitably resolve a matter before it.

In order to do justice, the law will permit or create a legal fiction. For example, if a person undertakes a renunciation of a legacy which is a gift by will the person will be deemed to have predeceased the testator�one who makes a will�for the purpose of distributing the estate.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Legal+Fiction

Pete Daoust

The legal fiction occurs when ME become the PERSON.

This is when it becomes a FICTION, it's when I AM THE PERSON, but when I am a MAN that has a PERSON, there is NO fucking fiction.....everything is real when it's true....

Anthony Buisc

Yeah, the fictional stuff is an agreement governed by logical rules. Math is the same way; numbers are just ideas that can be compatible with the real world when we agree on the rules of the game. Same goes for contracts.

Pete Daoust

I'll try another way....

When a Man believes he is the person, we call this a LEGAL FICTION.

When a Man knows he has a person, we call this a REAL fucking Man, having a REAL fucking person.

That's the best I can do, if you don't get it, kill yourself :(

Anthony Buisc

Yup, Kent, the concept of 1 or 0 is just a concept.

If you wanna make that concept more tangible, then start counting real things. Once you get somebody else to agree with your count, then you have a contract.

It's all accounting after all.

Scott Duncan

Anthony Buisc, 1 and zero are NOT "just a concept". You are talking out of your ass...

...and ironically saying it on a machine that is the byproduct of COMPUTER SCIENCE.

Those 1's and 0's are REAL THINGS... they're called "transistors".

Anthony Buisc

Yup, legal fictions are not as real as the plastic or paper they're printed on....just like the BIBLE. But the electronics and electricity in your computer is real. HOWEVER binary code is a form of math. Math is conceptual.....so too is your juridical person. But who cares, IT'S ALL ACCOUNTING.

Speaking of ACCOUNTING, a man's property is collateralized in order to generate credit, because legal fictions CAN'T cognitively claim, touch, taste or see the properties of man (they only deal in debt or credit). And as possession is 9/10 of the law, Legal Fictions can only be GRANTED legal right to title, privilege to credit and/or duty to debt as a party to a LAWFUL contract.

How do they do it?

COMMERCIAL INVOICE: Document used in *foreign* trade to determine true value of the *imported* GOODS.

-- Unlike the juridical PERSON, a man is foreign to the fictional U.S. Corporation and it's agents.

Also, a judge can't utilize UCC regulation on behalf of the Trust until jurisdiction is established over some manner of "GOODS": all tangible, MOVABLE items. (If there are no goods on the table, then the issue is subject to common law, not UCC)

NOT considered "goods": -Real Estate -Valuable Paper (stocks, bonds, securities) -Services -Rights

BILL OF LADING: A document signed by a carrier (a TRANSPORTER of GOODS). Carriers, using ALL modes of *transpiration*, issue bills of lading when they undertake the transportation of *cargo*

CARGO: In mercantile law. The load or lading of a *vessel*; goods, merchandise or whatever is CONVEYED in a ship or other merchant VESSEL (juridical persons may also be vessels)

CONVEY: To pass or transmit the TITLE to PROPERTY from one to another; to transfer property or the title to property by deed or instrument under seal. To convey real estate is, by an *appropriate instrument*, to transfer the legal title to it from the present owner to another.

-- Sooooo, the juridical PERSON is the MERCANTILE VESSEL (appropriate instrument) used to CONVEY cargo. Man�s blood sweat and tears are the cargo presumed to be abandoned �at sea� each time man fails to identify himself as the principal.

MERCANTILE AGENT: Agent who a PRINCIPAL authorizes to purchase and liquidate assets, and to raise funds by using the principal�s assets as loan collateral.

-- That collateral is then used to generate credit that can then be moved through the Trust (via The Court Registry Investment System and Federal Financing Bank under the general supervision of the Secretary of the Treasury) to the appropriate parties WITHIN the trust.....but man is just a third party to the trust, as far as i can tell....man is not a legal fiction within the trust. Which is why it's important to know who / what the principal is....

PRINCIPAL: Full meaning of a word should be ascertained at the OUTSET, in order that the SENSE may not be LOST by *defect of expression*, and that the law be not without reasons.

The party with authority in a business relationship. Or a business transactions face value. Refer to agent and notional.

-- Basically, according to Blacks Law, it's up to the principal to decide what the principal is if it's to lawfully be the party of authority.

BILL: (Formal declaration), noun allegation of facts, claim.

-- Principal is ACCOUNTED for by CLAIM of FACT.

So, if you, a man, are the principal / party with authority, then logically you must define yourself as principal from the OUTSET of a CLAIM advanced before a 7th Amendment common law court of record, like as follows...

i, a man; commonly known as ___________________________ claim;

- Leroy Schmo (acting as fiduciary �judge�) wrongfully administrates my property, and; - i gave no entity consent to administrate my property, and; - i require the immediate restoration of my property, and; - i require compensation from Leroy Schmo for each minute of trespass upon said property, starting the date of ______, and; etc�

The juridical PERSON is NOT the principal, it's just an instrument of CONVEYANCE, a transporting VESSEL. Man is the principal and whatever goods and non-goods man claims as exclusive to himself, are his assets / property.

So, when man FAILS to distinguish and DEFINE the principal before a common law venue, then man has no lawful claim in fact, and his assets are thus considered abandoned. Why? Because though man IS the principal, the rule is that non compos mentis, mutes, corpses and legal fictions are ALL incapable of claiming the property of man, as only man can make and VERIFY a CLAIM / BILL to property advanced before a court of record.

Undefined principal = no man = abandoned property.

At that point man can�t claim shit because the matter is now before an administrative venue / court, and administrative venues only hear legal fictions, as legal fictions may only deal in credit or debt.

What is ADMINISTRATION?

The assets in an estate used to pay debt and beneficiaries.

The crux and linchpin to the system is that legal fictions CAN'T lawfully nor physically show up to claim rights to property under oath or affirmation before a 7th Amendment claims court of record, they can only be heard before administrative courts wherein the Judge may momentarily be relieved from his common law oath if there's NO CLAIM BY A MAN obliging the Judge uphold Oath to protect man's property. Thus, as there is no lawful claim to property before the court, and seeing as public servants are tasked with BOTH protecting [wo]man's property AND administrating the national debt, they, the public servants, must take care of any property "abandoned at sea".

That's when Admiralty Jurisdiction kicks in and the judge can lawfully and legally administrate a commercial UCC transaction so that the Trustee Corp can legally use the juridical PERSON to contract the Principal, allowing them to collateralize the Principal's property.

Anthony Buisc

So, if you go in as the principal and start trying to administrate the Trustee's PERSON / beneficiary, instead of lawfully compelling a court to administrate on behalf of your OWN property, then don't be surprised if a judge decides you're making false claims to the trustee's property by committing fraud and perjury through IMPERSONATING a public entity with authority to administrate juridical PERSONS.

As the principal you can only control your own property within the law, not with UCC. If you wanna do UCC, set up your own trust.

If not, then look on the bright side, if the judge decides you mistakenly committed fraud, then you're just another NON COMPIS MENTUS, and thus can't make claim as principal to any of your own assets / property.....thus, that property is considered abandoned cargo for the Judge to administrate on behalf of the "Trustee" Corporation.....but are they really your trustee? Nope....they're the juridical person's trustee.

The proverbial "You" is not a beneficiary. You just got tricked into pledging a man's assets for the sake of THEIR beneficiary, a legal fiction.

Scott Duncan

MATH IS NOT "CONCEPTUAL". Saying such bullshit means that NO engineering task is real.

Algebra, and trigonometry can't be real, so there CAN'T be Roman Aqueducts! They're just a concept, and NOT the result of PRECISE MATH.

Anthony Buisc

Pete, it comes down to this. You've got to be an idiot or a fucking fraud to assume control of some corporation's juridical PERSON. Is that YOUR property or asset? Are YOU the legal FICTION that is the beneficiary party within the TRUST? No, you're a living breathing chimp, Pete, not a fiction.

Just pray the judge deems you NON COMPIS MENTUS for being so inbred that you can't even fucking distinguish the difference between reality and FICTION. But its ok, you play PRETEND all ya want.

Chris Evan

Math is a fiction?? Did he say that?? So is science also a fiction? Is observable, duplicatable phenomena and/or experimentation fiction? Because that is what math is idiot. Or perhaps you are taking issue with the fictional language used to describe these observations...???

Chris Evan

I have so many of them blocked. Once I could see the difference between knowledge and belief, I realized those relying on belief couldn't and don't want to gain any knowledge...they feel good. This was a very important lesson from the Admiral!!

Scott Duncan

BELIEF IS THE END of thought. The retard had FUN lying, and calls US "frauds"...

...where are my "victims" then?

They can't conceive NOT having victims, because they lie so much, so they just presume I have them too...

Chris Evan

Newbies here who don't know you or what you teach have just been harmed by that sack of shit. There are no less than a dozen of us who aren't in jail for victimless crimes (using the term crime loosely) due to your teaching. And one moron who FEELS good can ruin it.

Pete Daoust

Here's the one I received

: D HAHAHAH....i love making you squirm like a maggot. Yup, you're a fraud, alright....and it's so fucking EASY to pull your kind out of the woodwork, too.

You SQUIRM like a worm every time somebody exposes the fraud YOU are teaching. HA!.....

GOD DAMN that was FUN. ;D

Thanks, kiddo. You're either really fucking stupid, or you and your boyfriend Scott are just a couple of con-artists. Actually, you're both. Which is why it's rather satisfying beating a conman at his own game of logic.

Why? Because, you parasites are frightened, which is why you suspend all reason as if your cult followers are as stupid as you believe them to be.

They're not. So ya better just pussy up like the cowards you are and erase those comments i left before somebody else realizes the fraud you're teaching them to perpetrate. But hey (shrugs), at least you publicly document the fraud you're teaching. What's great is i figured all this shit without having to go to jail or law school. Meanwhile you're on all fours taking it in the ass while sucking Scott Duncans dick. Enjoy that!

Neens Jean

I must, Pete. There are nuggets, gold, in them there posts, and I am on a mission to find each and every last one of them. This one, chattel, was so obvious once you learn to parse their data via the legal dictionary. I LOVE Scott's comment asking if it was made for fucking decoration?