 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
http://blog.ucadia.com/2013/03/trusts-what-are-theyhow-do-they-work.html
So I read and I find this:
Definition:The claim of the word "trust" being from as early as the 12th Century from Old Norse origins is deliberately misleading. In its strictest sense, a trust is a fictional religious and legal concept --therefore a Trust does not exist unless some formal oath, pact and agreement exists in good faith.
Here
So the evidence suggests that Frank is working toward investments in producing defensive voluntary associations so as to offer a competitive alternative to the existing Involuntary Association Monopoly that he called The Roman Cult, and the same Monopoly Power that I call Legal Crime.
Not cutting and pasting, as a rule, rather an inspiration, and cutting and pasting when inspired, at the moment I choose only to comment, and I choose not to cut and paste.
My comment at this time is to say that it appears as if Frank is creating a reference of ideas to be offered to anyone who may want to choose something other than Legal Crime as a choice.
In other words, it is one thing to say to someone, hey, look, here are these criminals, and they are perpetrating these crimes, and that is very bad for these victims, and you are included in the list of victims, and so it may be a good idea to stop being a victim, if you don't want to be injured in this way, and in this way, and in this way, and if you don't want your children, or any children, to be injured here, and here, and here, in this way, and in this way, and in this way, then you aught to find a way to stop being a victim.
It is one thing to say there is a clear and present danger in this precise form.
It is one thing to say that it might be a good idea to avoid injury due to the clear and present danger that takes this precise form.
It is one thing to say warning, warning, warning, and point to that warning, and it is another thing to point to a form in which remedy can be realized if someone decides to realize remedy.
I do this too.
I say look here, here is Legal Crime, and it is very bad for the victims.
Then I write things like this:
1.
End the FED
2.
End the IRS
3.
Bring the Troops Home (look in the mirror)
4.
Start now, and have the job completed by July 4th, 2013.
Current Example
Now, what I am thinking, at this moment, is a memory, which is a record of what I have seen, the form of the record is a Movie, and the movie is called First Encounters.
In that movie there is an idea recorded as a series of visual scenes, and the idea was such that many people from many different places were finding each other based upon a shared perception of some measurable commonality.
This person meets that person and they find that they share a measurable commonality, a shared idea, as if to say, hey, I am thinking thoughts similar to your thoughts.
That is a record of an idea I have in the form of a memory.
If you, anyone, shares that idea, in a similar form, then that exemplifies the sharing of common, or agreeable, ideas.
Those are my thoughts at this point in the study of Frank's records of ideas.
1. Shared, common, or at least similar, ideas.
2. Enforced thoughts and behavior enforced by criminals who use deceit, threats, and violence upon the innocent as the common, shared, ideas, and actions shared by people who define the meaning of crime as those criminals willfully perpetrate crime, with or without the deceit of a false claim of authority.
Cutting and pasting again:
Any claimed ownership, conveyance, lien, or other fictional device over any Form within a Divine Trust that are not in accordance with these canons is a fraud and gross injury to the Divine Creator and therefore automatically null and void from the beginning.
What power brings me to this time and place? Sergey, to me, is as spiritual as anyone I've ever met, being a person in tune with the power of knowing, for that is my idea of this power I call spirituality.
Sergey is, on the other hand, very anti-enforced (criminal) religion.
Mike is, perhaps, an unknown, but his words express a competitive viewpoint, so Mike, when he does manage to offer a viewpoint, can be considered as a random factor at this point.
There is an abundance of information that can stand as the viewpoint known as Legal Crime, or Nihilism, or whichever term accurately identifies those people whose shared idea is to find, and then injure, anyone who has any power worth stealing.
bear is strictly religious according to a record of a specific religion, while, again, apparently, there is an identifiable, quantifiable, or perceptible measure of individual spirituality originating from her, as she is an individual spirit, or human being, or in my way of perceiving, she is an individual perspective in time and place, a source, or origin, of perspective.
Frank shows up in my field of vision and apparently there are, from Frank, many sources of information that do not agree with many perspectives including the perspectives gathered on this specific forum.
I look for common denominators, things that agree, things that are voluntarily welcome among competitive perspectives.
I think one thing that does agree is the accurate identification of the existence of fraudulent messages, whereby the origin of the fraudulent messages, invariably, invent the message so as to deceive those who are targeted, those who will be connected to the message, and those who will then be adversely affected by the message that is false on purpose, and the purpose is, again, accurately measurable as a transfer of power from the target to the criminal.
I don't know if the message I intend to send with the last paragraph will reach anyone intact, but I think that the message intended is a commonly agreed upon message known by anyone who understands how crime works.
Knowing how crime works is one thing. Knowing how to avoid being a criminal or victim is another thing.
In accordance with these canons, every child or higher order spirit that is borne from now until the end of time possesses a Divine Personality through the creation of their Divine Trust before any other legal entity or claim.
Source
The above is a curious source compared to all the other sources of information I've come across because that source is easy to find, and ask questions, right now. Frank is answering questions each Wednesday.
The objective in those messages appears to me to be a counter-claim referring to the often made claim made by criminals who target innocent people so as to then perpetrate injury (take power from) the targets that they target, and in order to cover up, hide, their crimes, those criminals make these deceitful claims to which Frank is offering a counter-claim.
Frank is offering a counter claim to the specific claim that Frank says is the origin of Modern Law, which I call Legal Crime (or counterfeit Law).
The Papal Bull that documents the original claim made by The Roman Cult, a claim that claims that God gave the people running The Roman Cult the power to control everything, or "own" everything, including all the people, absolute power in a nutshell, is linked on Frank's site.
The original (fraudulent or criminal) claim, to which Frank's counter-claim is made, was an original version of a specific FRAUD, a claim made by people who define the meaning of the word crime, as those people, those criminals, target and then injure innocent people for fun, and profit, or for the purpose of gaining power at the expense of the innocent targets.
What constitutes a target? The criminals do not target rocks. The criminals target any living being, any human being, whereby there is power that can be taken from the human being. The criminals target rocks that contain power, such as rare earth minerals, sure, but the same process is at work, any power worth stealing is a power targeted by a criminal.
So Frank offers a counter claim as a counter to the claim that The Roman Cult of old, and anyone picking up that form of crime today, which can be called an Involuntary Association, or Crime, or Legal Crime, anyone making that false claim is now faced with a counter claim made by Frank, as Franks offers anyone who cares to accept, voluntarily, the use of that same counter claim.
What form does the voluntary counter claim take, when the competitive voluntary counter claim is the one offered by Frank?
If you care to know, you don't have to ask me, since Frank is available for questions on Wednesday.
When a particular Divine Person of an organic higher order life form no longer has any valid association to a True Trust and a living flesh vessel, then an association is permitted whereby one hundred (100) Divine Persons in similar condition come together as an aggregate to form a Supreme Divine Trust.
I will look for a similar message written by Lysander Spooner in reference to a time and place where the victims worked effectively to avoid being victims and there was at that time a threshold number of 100 employed by those people who agreed to form a voluntary association and the number of members in that historical voluntary association was the number 100.
Before I do that searching, or researching, I want to say something concerning the concept of Black Magic, and Spells.
Who has a mysteriously bad feeling associated with the number 666?
Where does that power to cause a mysteriously bad feeling associated with mere numbers?
666 is just a number like 999 or like 12, or like 5. I like 5. I have a mysterious feeling about the number 5. I like 5. 12 is a number that is competitive with the number of 5, or the number 100 if the idea is to measure the power of collective thought.
Collective thought can be understood with such things as the Jelly Bean Experiment, also known by the phrase The Wisdom of Crowds.
Back to research and the question of the number 100.
Trial by Jury Essay by Lysander Spooner
Here
But we have additional evidence that, up to the time of Magna Carta, the laws of the king were not binding upon the judicial tribunals; and if they were not binding before that time, they certainly were not afterwards, as has already been shown from Magna Carta itself. It is manifest from all the accounts we have of the courts in which juries sat, prior to Magna Carta, such as the court-baron, the hundred court, the court-leet, and the county court, that they were mere courts of conscience, and that the juries were the judges, deciding causes according to their own notions of equity, and not according to any laws of the king, unless they thought them just.
[11] The court-baron was the court for a single manor, and there was a court for every manor in the kingdom. All these courts were holden as often as once in three or five weeks; the county court once a month. The king's judges were present at none of these courts; the only officers in attendance being sheriffs, bailiff's, and stewards, merely ministerial, and not judicial, officers; doubtless incompetent, and, if not incompetent, untrustworthy, for giving the juries any reliable information in matters of law, beyond what was already known to the jurors themselves.
65 [12] It is plain that the juries, in these courts, must, of necessity, have been the sole judges of all matters of law whatsoever; because there was no one present, but sheriffs, bailiffs, and stewards, to give them any instructions; and surely it will not be pretended that the jurors were bound to take their law from such sources as these.
[13] Of those that were written, few copies only were made, (printing being then unknown,) and not enough to supply a11, or any considerable number, of these numerous courts. Beside and beyond all this, few or none of the jurors could have read the laws, if they had been written; because few or none of the common people could, at that time, read. Not only were the common people unable to read their own language, but, at the time of Magna Carta, the laws were written in Latin, a language that could be read by few persons except the priests, who were also the lawyers of the nation. Mackintosh says, "the first act of the House of Commons composed and recorded in the English tongue," was in 1415, two centuries after Magna Carta. [14]. Up to this time, and for some seventy years later, the laws were generally written
Cutting and pasting is not working well.
This:
These courts, it must be considered, were very numerous, and held very frequent sessions. There were probably seven, eight, or nine hundred courts a month, in the kingdom; the object being, as Blackstone says, "To bring justice home to every man's door." (3 Blackstone, 80.) The number of the county courts, of course, corresponded to the number of counties, (36.) The court-leet was the criminal court for a district less than a county. The hundred court was the court for one of those districts anciently called a hundred, because, at the time of their first organization for judicial purposes, they comprised, (as is supposed) but a hundred families. [11] The court-baron was the court for a single manor, and there was a court for every manor in the kingdom. All these courts were holden as often as once in three or five weeks; the county court once a month. The king's judges were present at none of these courts; the only officers in attendance being sheriffs, bailiff's, and stewards, merely ministerial, and not judicial, officers; doubtless incompetent, and, if not incompetent, untrustworthy, for giving the juries any reliable information in matters of law, beyond what was already known to the jurors themselves.
This from Spooner on Trial by Jury:
The hundred court was the court for one of those districts anciently called a hundred, because, at the time of their first organization for judicial purposes, they comprised, (as is supposed) but a hundred families.
This from Frank and his offering:
When a particular Divine Person of an organic higher order life form no longer has any valid association to a True Trust and a living flesh vessel, then an association is permitted whereby one hundred (100) Divine Persons in similar condition come together as an aggregate to form a Supreme Divine Trust.