Benefits Accepted Equal Jurisdiction

[palani]

Fairly reasonable writeup at the link below. Read it carefully. It is why 100% of people claiming to be sovereign are wrong.


http://highfrequencyradionetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/trustees-in-commerce.pdf

[palani]

More

http://freedom-school.com/books/new-trustee-handbook-2008.pdf

[Glass]

I've read the first one and I agree with some parts but disagree with the obstacles he puts in the way of running your own afairs etc.

I will need probably the same amount of text to respond to what I think are the issues. I am not sure I have the time right now but I will make some notes as I go and see if I can put together a reasonable response over the next week.

This man is a gate keeper. one of them.

I haven't read the second.

I agree with this premise. To be sovereign, you cannot dabble or involve in their world of commerce as a citizen and step in and out at will. Your best bet is ZERO contact and ZERO mercantile contract.

His position is that this is not possible at all AND his reasoning is that everything in existence is in existence solely and only because it was made by the trust, the resources of the trust and the money or currency of the trust. The Trust I am talking about is the over lying whole of western world economy system... which is the Grand Daddy trust of them all.

Like the farmer who owns a cow and the cow has a calf. Is the calf a free calf if the mother cow is a possession? No the increase becomes the property of the Trusty farmer.

This is the socialist view. Not an socialist view. It is "THE" socialist view. as a result they claim only the state can be soveriegn.

[cheka.]

adhesion is fraudulent....no matter how many words of art they frame it in

spending extended time studying the gory details of adhesion is time wasting

just like obsessing with how/why the towers fell

[palani]

This man is a gate keeper. one of them.

He presents his views on the issues of trust, commerce and sovereignty fairly clearly. I don't believe his views represent the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth but he has reason on his side.

Sovereignty is responsibility. Everything that is sovereign is responsible. Everything that is responsible is sovereign.

Here is the mathematical concept of the superposition principle


For a linear homogeneous ordinary differential equation, if y_1(x) and y_2(x) are solutions, then so is y_1(x)+y_2(x)

For the sake of the topic under discussion, if sovereignty were the only solution then there is no second, third or more solutions. If sovereignty is only one of several possible solutions then we might want to consider what other solutions might be. One of these solutions might be the trust and the trustee approach. Another might be living in a state of nature without relying upon others for your needs.

Presuming life and relationships with others to be a LINEAR network is a bit of a stretch but the point of the exercise is to show that perhaps you might be sovereign in one aspect, in a state of nature in another aspect and engaging others as an agent of a trust in yet a third aspect. Which solution you choose or all three at the same time is quite possibly a function of reason.

[palani]

adhesion is fraudulent

Adhesion is generally used in the material, and adherence in the metaphysical sense. [Johnson]

An adhesion contract is one where the details are set out in a take it or leave it manner by one party. Such a contract is an offer only until accepted. The fraudulent part comes about when there is not full disclosure prior to acceptance.

All contracts are negotiable any time, any where and under any situation. Contracts are fluid. Quasi-contracts are less fluid unless you choose to terminate the relationship. When you do terminate the relationship then YOUR offer to cancel becomes the adhesion contract. It is after all a contract offer where YOU are the one setting the terms.

You don't do fraudulent things do you?