The Tender For Law

Volume 8

Nov 13, 2014 10:15 PM

Pete Daoust

Ok, here it is�.

I give power of attorney to 9111-1111 Quebec Inc, to take care of PIERRE DAOUST�s administration.

Because, Obviously, I CAN�T do it my self, and no one will tell me WHY :D

Then, when a bill is picked up in PIERRE DAOUST�s mailbox, well that bill will be brought directly to 9111-1111 Quebec Inc.

Same thing with �money�, if money is sent to PIERRE DAOUST, for ANY reasons, well that money will be brought to 9111-1111 Quebec Inc.

Now, 9111-1111 Quebec Inc will PAY these bills, by keeping the originals, and make photo copies, and will have to send PIERRE DAOUST a statement of account, with a remittance voucher attached to that statement (same shit we receive) to PIERRE DAOUST at each end of the month, because 9111-1111 Quebec Inc needs to balance its books.

Then this remittance voucher will be turned into a Bill of Exchange by �ME�, and will be sent to 9111-1111 Quebec Inc, it will be done EXACTLY the same as I am doing right now.

Then, 9111-1111 Quebec Inc will go see his Chartered Accountant, so this guy can verify if everything is true, and will then CERTIFY that bill of exchange. (this step was pulled right from my ass, because I think it�s a logical step, I will know soon if it�s true)

And then, 9111-1111 Quebec Inc will deposit that Bill of Exchange, with its Private Banker, at the CIBC, because this shit seems to need to stay in PRIVATE. (This also was pulled right from my ass, we�ll see as well :D )

Of course, PIERRE DAOUST�s security is NOT damaged, in that scenario

I wonder HOW many �persons� 9111-1111 Quebec Inc can ADMINISTRATE like this� :D

These are NOT legal advices, it�s for entertainment only

By: ME All Rights Reserved / No Prejudice

:D

Read Comments

Gerry Odonothing

I think it would be even more entertaining if you did a one-man play on this and you play all the parts. I would be fascinated to see it as I know you know what you are about and you also have the seriousness and sense of humour to carry it off.

Chris Evan

I will....but we have a snow event coming in 3 hours and I ned to sleep...tomorrow. But most of what you wrote is a stain shit....For starters, PETE should not be used in commerce any more. Use a proxy, the BILLS are worth the same....

Chris Evan

9111-1111 Quebec is a bank. THAT'S IT! Its a bank. Its for depositing, its not for commerce. The very idea that it would send a bill to PIERRE DAOUST is commerce. It would also be a self authenticating security....which no one will trust. But, 9111-1111 Quebec has an undertaking of balancing the TRUST that it holds, and it was entrusted with PIERRE DAOUST, therefore, with only EXCHANGING money, it must balance the books.

For instance....a bill comes in PIERRE DAOUSTs mailbox. Well, this bill is for something that the Sole Authorized Administrator of PIERRE DAOUST asked for. The order was made, the bill is just a formality and the TRUSTEE must buy that thing. So, the TRUSTEE sends some Money of Exchange and it becomes the lawful holder of the bill. It simply creates a Bill of Exchange out of it and endorses it For Deposit Only [or some other wording possibly to transfer the instrument to 9111-111 Quebec (on the back of course)]. Note: no commerce has happened...this is simply an exchange.

Another example....a bill comes in PIERRE DAOUSTs mailbox and the Sole Authorized Administrator did not ask for that thing. Upon inspection, it is an offer to buy some public debts. Now, presuming that the man that is authorized to use this account, PIERRE DAOUST, has resigned and the security has been damaged, the instrument is the property of 9111-1111 Quebec, but the liability belongs to the owner of PIERRE DAOUST.

Maybe this is a good time to discuss damaging the security....The BC is a way for them to claim rights to the PERSON. They want the money generated from commerce using the PERSON. By liening the security, you are invoking the jurisdictional traffic cop known as the UCC to direct the rights to the lienholder. Without damaging the security, 9111-1111 Quebec doesn't have an interest in the PERSON...remember, a lien is simply a claim to the value.

Now Pete, you are also the Administrator of a commercial venture called SFC Inc. As I see the situation (minus that marriage, I don't know about that, but lets just say that its just PIERRE, SFC, and 9111-1111 Quebec), 9111-1111 Quebec should issue 2 shares of stock. One to PIERRE DAOUST and one to SFC, Inc. That share would replace the function of the BC and act as a claim to value for 9111-1111 Quebec to its persons money. SFC, Inc is required to balance its own accounting, but, it can deposit its value to its holding company.

A couple weeks back, I came to the realization that the only reason to get into commerce is to buy a bunch of debt....profit, as you know it traditionally, is a red herring.

Now, lets look at the elephant in the room...these fucking marriages. If you are married, you need to create a new person to do commerce with...call it Joseph Gilles. Joseph Gilles is now the person which you and your wife will do commerce with. It will be a corporation..This thing will make agreements, buy debts, etc...it would also have to be a shareholder of 9111-1111 Quebec and that would give 9111-1111 Quebec a claim to the value of that Person.

This whole thing is all about creating proxies to buy a bunch of dbt that is deposited and secured by a trust holding company.

That is my comprehension of it....I am pretty sure it is accurate, but I am sure Scott will gladly correct me if I have left a stain shit.

Oh...one final point....The Chartered Accountant is the person who registers the accounting on the correct ledgers. See, the lien is a public notice of damaging the security, but the Chartered Accountant actually does the damage. Just because we file a UCC1 or a PPSA, it doesn't mean that it is etched in stone (right Gail?). The Chartered Accountant 'etches' the lien in stone because that person REGISTERS the lien. [I think that person can also register deposits, but I am not entirely sure yet...I think this is the person we will meet with quarterly to register all deposits and they will perform the accounting and certify the value as such...but I don't know yet]

Chris Evan

Again further...about monetizing these securities...I am not sure. But, some banks will create shell entities to hold a bundle of these things, then sell the shares at par...that could be an option.

I think there is a market within Private Banking that will buy these things, but I am not sure I really want to sell them...or exchange them rather. I am hoping they wish to receive a share of stock for the term neeed as a valuable consideration for the exchange.

I am nor sure about any of this, but I know this is what other banks are doing!

Pete Daoust

Scott Duncan, how many PERSONS 9111-1111 Quebec Inc can ADMINISTRATE ? :D

I am asking because some folks I know, seems to have problems trying to administrate their persons, it looks like the actual TRUSTEE can't be TRUSTED :D

Pete Daoust

First confirmation from this accountant: Yes, a Chartered Accountant can CERTIFY a Bill of Exchange.

Yes, Bills of Exchange is cash :D

Yes, All this need to stay in PRIVATE, so therefor, PRIVATE BANKING is the way to go.

No, he can NOT help me with this, I need to go to a large accounting firm, I think it has to do with AGENT and AGENCY.....not sure.

Yes, his head was spinning all over the place....

So now, I will have to take an appointment with one of these large firms :/

Any suggestion ? :D

Pete Daoust

The TOP 10 in Quebec :D

Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton (RCGT) Samson B�lair /Deloitte & Touche (Deloitte) PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Ernst & Young (E&Y) KPMG Mallette RSM Richter Chamberland BDO Canada Groupe RDL Fauteux Bruno Bussieres Leewarden (FBBL)

Sue Rakestraw

Chris, question on this....

"I think there is a market within Private Banking that will buy these things, but I am not sure I really want to sell them...or exchange them rather. I am hoping they wish to receive a share of stock for the term need as a valuable consideration for the exchange. "

WHY would you offer a "share of stock" for "exchange"? The consideration should be the "things"; not a share of stock.

Correct my thinking here....

Age Thomson

"Pete Daoust First confirmation from this accountant: Yes, a Chartered Accountant can CERTIFY a Bill of Exchange. Yes, Bills of Exchange is cash

Yes, All this need to stay in PRIVATE, so therefor, PRIVATE BANKING is the way to go.

No, he can NOT help me with this, I need to go to a large accounting firm, I think it has to do with AGENT and AGENCY.....not sure.

Yes, his head was spinning all over the place....

So now, I will have to take an appointment with one of these large firms

Any suggestion ?"

Did you get that resolved and find the help at the large firm Pete?

Pete Daoust

Adrian Thomson, the way I get this is, if I go to a large firm, and one of the hundreds of accountant in that large firm takes care of my stuff, he is doing it as an AGENT of that large firm, so he won't get into troubles with the government.....

That's what came to mind, when I was there....

Anibal Jose Baez

I do not think Revenue Canada can answer the question of surety, being that the ORGANIZATION was NOT the creation of that AGENCY/Revenue Canada, but ANOTHER AGENCY. Why would we ask that question to RC/IRS, I am still debating about it. Maybe the question should be made to/answered by the creator of the security/organization? Still, I do not think they will put it in writing. It's like putting in writing a company secret. Why would they do that?

One of a few options is, other than administrating that BILL, for the AGENT to forward those BILLS to it's owner, which is the PRINCIPAL. It is JOHN BARRET that owes. JOHN BARRET is the PROPERTY of the PRINCIPAL.

The government is a TRUST, but it's operation is via AGENCIES. That LAW of AGENCY cannot be ignored when dealing with government.

Pete Daoust

That's WHY I ask the question, because if I can't administrate the PERSON, I need to know......I don't care to re-direct ALL these bils to the party who signed the surety bond, I really don't, but if I have the right to the surety, and I choose to administrate, and no one can OBJECT to it, well so be it, I want to ADMINISTRATE :D

Anibal Jose Baez

Yes, that appears to be one of a few options, in this particular case. Another possible option is for the Administrator to "pay", and then, after previous notice, ask the PRINCIPAL for reimbursement by showing proof that an expense FOR the organization was made. That would also make sense to me.

Anibal Jose Baez

Humm... I have to think better about that one. In essence, it would make sense to "pay" AS the PRINCIPAL. Meaning payment was tendered by the PRINCIPAL, and/or on behalf of the PRINCIPAL. But yes, the PERSON is the one that "pays."

When I say Administrator has to "pay," I meant that in REALITY it is the MAN that has to exchange his time, for money, to then "pay."

Anibal Jose Baez

Hey, I am going thru this myself. Have you seen this? https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10205383465014392&set=p.10205383465014392&type=1&theater

To me, in REALITY, it boils down to how much harm I want to inflict me, and/or my family. so my options must consider this. I already know there IS slavery in place, so what is the price I am willing to "pay" to prove that?

If that LAW of AGENCY is in place, then my beef has to be with the PRINCIPAL, the MASTER! My "employer." Who the fuck cares in the Tax AGENCY if the man does not want to buy any more public debt? They cannot do anything about it. That sound like something that needs to be heard/solved by the PRINCIPAL. It should be able to do something about it.

Does this ^^^ makes sense to you, Pete?