Trusts for Dummies

The nature, history and formation of Trusts.

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:15 pm

Highspirit wrote:Kenny, this is where we must agree to disagree.

Using Trusts to 'eliminate' debt is not what is occuring. What is in fact happening is that tiltes of the trust are being moved to the advantage of the Grantor/Settlor. Money does not exist, it is all titles that are merely being moved.

HS :)


Thank you, its a pleasure, and that fact we dis-agree is of great worth. Just to note that this thread is in 'commercial redemption' but that aside.. :wink:

"tiltes of the trust are being moved to the advantage of the Grantor/Settlor...........it is all titles that are merely being moved." -- this is not proven, I have seen no proof to date.!!! at least where I am in england. If there is some proof of outcome, then what needs to happen is someone needs to share the light.

Until then I maintain that settling alleged utility debt in such a manner is... 'well dodgy to say the least'

NO probs, we are not here to agree, we are here to get to the bottom of it all....

peace.
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby Highspirit » Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:42 pm

Thank you Kenny, I agree, get to the bottom of this we must. It was not me that started the thread in commercal redemption, I am merely adding my knowledge to an existing thread :)

Commercial Redemption it is fair to say only ever deals with the fictional notion of debt in the private and deals with negotiable instruments in the main.

Is it proven that Trusts can be used the way we have indicated? Well I think I answered that earlier in the thread, but, what we do know for certain is that there is no money, it is merely currency and a 'promise to pay' and the only real value anywhere is 'sweat equity'.

So, let's look at firstly why we believe we are in Trusts before we can start to see why remedy must be here and how that remedy may be used.

As you know Kenny, all the Trusts we are finding ourselves in are 'Implied/Secret' Trusts and all the companies and Banks etc that we deal with have decided to place us into these Trusts. So can we actually prove that? I think we can, they help us a great deal in doing so.

But we must first look why we are in an Secret Trust and how we got there and how we know.

In an Implied Trust, they can imply us to be the 'Trustee' and therefore responsible for the accounts. They issue paperwork and 'agreements' (a Trust term) in place of contracts. They do this as you know because we cannot have legal contracts when there is no money/value of considertion.

So we see our Utility company 'agreement' that we signed and because most are completely oblivious to the fact that there is no money they really think they are sigining a 'con-tract' and the utility company or lender do not want to upset that perceived relationship. That way, they send you d/c paperwork and you respond as a debtor and perform the functions of an implied Trustee, ie settle the accounts. Volia, you act like a Trustee in their Implied Trust.

So, we all agree there is no money and therefore no con-tracts are possible, therefore, because you can form an Implied Trust around something that has no value (like currency), and if you read all your 'agreements', no matter who it is with it will scream Trust terminology, then it is pretty dam safe to assume we are in an implied trust.

So, why do people act as a Creditor to the Bankruptcy and conduct A4V? when there just simply is no money and no con-tracts? And if they are in an Implied Trust then why bother acting like a Creditor in d/c when quite simply when any matter is taken to court you are construed by the court as the Trustee.

How do hey construe as Trustee? Well, first of all they cannot and will not express the Trust and point the finger at you as the Trustee and I will tell you why in a second.

You get taken to court by a utility company or lender and all their documents that you signed thinking were a contract do in fact scream out Trust, BUT, the lender or company are never going to say this and the court do not have to tell you this, but you are 'construed' as the Trustee and therefore guilty for a breach of trust for lets say failing to make payments.

So, why does the company or lender not express the trust? Because if they did then guess whose signature is on the account paperwork? Yes , yours and that makes you the Grantor/Settlor in charge of organising the Trust. You really think they want you to know;

A. There are no contracts
B. There are no con-tracts cuz there aint no money (because you might just ask)
C. That you signature forms the Trust

and

D. You can move titles how you see fit when you realise there is no money. So, how can you pay when there is no money? Well the Trustee can then be appointed (like the utility company for ex.) and told to get on with making sure the obligation is zero'd because you own the trust and there is no money so they must know how to settle the account. Thats why it's an Implied Trust in the first place.

Remember, he who claims trust must prove trust but when he does there is a trust, no argument.

So, if you claim and prove trust (relatively straight forward), then of course the law says there is now a trust, no dispute and then you are suddenly the Settlor/Grantor.

Now apply this theory to the system and see how one may want to express the impled trust, move title of Trustee to where it should be (with the utility company) and express yourself as the Grator/Beneficiary.

Apply that theory to the trust and see what is possible.

Makes much much more sense than d/c and is so much more straight forward when you know the theory of the trust approach. Also it is fair to say that right at this moment in time this theory is being tested but I am also happy to say that no-one as far as I know will be telling amyone a step by step process of how this is done becuase one should appreciate Trusts not just use the theory to pay a debt and then carry on in the totally corrupt system.

People have to learn for themselves and see the power and sense of Trusts.

So overall Kenny, it is not dodgy atall and makes much more sense than A4V.

I hope this has gone some way of explaining the possibilities and theory behind Trusts. It is also very fair to say that A4V has been around for 20yrs+ and Trust information in its raw form for just a few months but you have to admit, it makes an awful lot of sense.

HS
Know Thyself
Highspirit
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Sat Mar 27, 2010 8:34 am

again Highspirits, great post. Your weakness is not in your research technique

We agree that a trust has nothing to do with money. We agree that money has no intrinsic value.

From there hopefully we can agree that we are surrounded by many many implied fiat trusts.( which are fake but have the legal world behind them)

Essentially we agree that there are many titles that can be linked to a 'bill'/remitance, and fiddling/moving with these titles a TPTB have reaped great debt reward.

Such is their way, as you will agree i'm sure they are a bunch of pirattes on the sea. ( under colour of law)



If my bill is fake and the amount asked for is fiat why O why would yourself or any other honourable common law /wo/man take a known agreed fake peice of accounting and add it to your asset register and then use it. What does that imply?

We agree completely about private/public - Do we agree about co-mingling? avoiding co-mingling is basically keeping those two virtual arenas apart ( public arena is that stuck pig, that exists only to be sucked on, fed on)

Before anyone goes about redeeming, settling, paying, moving titles.....claiming fraud, shouting wolf...whatever: Get yourself and your family's dealings out of the public. That is the real first thing, thats a long thing and a thing well worth the effort, something that I posted here on fmotl way back 6+ months.

This mean names, accounts,transactions any anything that implies your willingness to be part of the public melee needs to go,. And it is a long road ( depending on how big your family is...) And it is not what people like to hear because it is not a quick fix and it is not like one can just wave a wand and have it done in an instant.

You see Highspirit if we are saying we have been duped by rats - where are those rats now? and should we use the tools of the rat? I shall say that they are everywhere all over the public arena everything we touch is stained as you know ( even this communication is based on blood money http://www.cellular-news.com/coltan/ technology and someone else has paid so that we can hash this out, so lets make the most of it.... I'm sure you know all this.

short version: If I give you a fake gold coin and you, knowing it is fake, use it as an asset who is at fault ?(from a common law perspective)

This is the focus. Intend your privacy!! top of the list.

Add to that the only way we can boil it down is if a few people take opposing corners so to speak, so thank you for that ,this and what's to come.

Good work
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Previous

Return to Trusts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron