r.i.p.

[palani]

The XIV amendment is trust law. The first thing the trust does is establish a corporation. They are both persons. Is it a trust? Is it a corporation? The answer is yes to both questions. The reason for this is that persons don't stray far from the intent of their authors. A corporation created by a trust is a trust.

Was the organic constitution a charitable trust? Or is it a last will and testament? The U.S. constitution was established for themselves and their posterity making the constitution sound like a last will just like the XIV amendment SOUNDS like a trust.

Nobody has posterity until they are dead the same way that nobody has the status of heir until a passing occurs. Could the U.S. constitution have been drafted in contemplation of death? This is quite a change from the Articles of Confederation which declared the federation 'perpetual'. Nowhere will you find the word 'perpetual' expressed in the U.S. constitution.

Personally I do not choose to speak of the dead except with respect. What is important are

1. Are you of the posterity?
2. Are you one of the signers?

If you can truly answer yes to no 1. then the constitution is a last will and testament with conditions annexed (use of gold/silver et al).

If you can truly answer yes to no 2. then you are still alive and have no posterity (again .. you don't get a posterity until you are dead).

Who is the 'posterity' of the XIV amendment? Is there any? The original drafters of the XIV amendment are all dead. If there is no posterity intended how could any court apply the the XIV amendment to anyone living? So do any living actually appear in court or does the court represent a seance attempting to communicate with the spirits of the dead?

Puts a little different slant upon the phrase "ALL RISE" doesn't it? All SPIRITS present must rise. As for me I CHOOSE TO REMAIN SEATED!!!

[Glass]

Not sure I agree with #2. If you were a signer (signatory), you would be dead due to the passage of time surely.

Courts summon everyone. They summon the defendant. The summon the plaintiff (the moaner). Courts at the first level are convened and conducted by a majistry/majistrant/magistrate/magician. All good magicians conduct their craft with ethereal assistance.

Person is a fiction. Non living. After 7 years of silence it is assumed abandoned or maybe it is exorcised/excised. A clamour of Trust me! Trust me! follows. Should anyone rise from the dead, they can have their legacy but everyone should be aware that death passing does not an heir make. There must be a vestment, a testament as well. A Will makes the way. Follow in my way that you shall inherit the earth. I think you can find that or something like that in the first book of law.

[palani]

Not sure I agree with #2. If you were a signer (signatory), you would be dead due to the passage of time surely. As to the Declaration of Independence a precedence was set when one signer not present until several months later was permitted to sign. Anyone can sign the Declaration of Independence.

I am conflicted whether one really wants to sign the U.S. constitution ... it is purely a financial arrangement with no salient benefits.


Courts summon everyone. They summon the defendant. The summon the plaintiff (the moaner). Courts at the first level are convened and conducted by a majistry/majistrant/magistrate/magician. All good magicians conduct their craft with ethereal assistance. The Romans (Attic Nights by Gailus) claimed no duty to appear to a summons except perhaps by the Chief Magistrate. Unsure whether this meant Caesar or God.


Person is a fiction. Non living.
Trusts are non-living. Corporations are non-living. Constitutions are non-living. And wills are certainly composed by the soon to be non-living. Heirs too are non-living since they magically assume this status with the passage of a single event.

[Glass]

A corporation created by a trust is a trust.

interesting comments on the corporation trust. let me type a lot of stuff before I get to my point and question.

A topic I'm very interested in down here is the question of what we call local governments. Colony's were often settled by corporations of some sort. Their reach was based on physical presence. At some point Colony's became Cities. I don't know if there are stages in between. I have not been alive that long.

These Cities were wrapped in larger areas called States. In amateur legal research circles the designation of City is usually cited as evidence of a corporation. City of London. Vatican City.

Down here our local councils and shires (based on UK styled districts. A Shire = a County, Council = a muni). In fact correct term is "Shire Council" all started clalling themselves Cities.

They say that councils (cities) are now run as corporate businesses, when they should be a department of state government. I like the position but not sure of the foundation to it. I see ideal government as trustee but it is clearly a corporation. Local council, City of X is registered as a business/corporation and it can't be registered that way unless it is doing business. This I know 100% with correspondence confirming this.

So is this Council/City of X a corporation or a trust. Does one or the other really change anything?

Question. If a foreign corporation - no legal standing in the country, issues serial numbers to local (legal) companies within the country based on what the foreign corporation assessed them as, what would that mean?

[palani]

These Cities were wrapped in larger areas called States.
A State has a capital. The capital is a city.

The body politic of a county consists of villages, cities and townships. No people. The body politic of a State are counties. Again ... no people.

The capital city has territory annexed to it. That is its' function. An anchor to attach things to (or possibly a container to drop things into). All law is municipal law. Now that is a connection that should be pretty obvious.



Question. If a foreign corporation - no legal standing in the country, issues serial numbers to local (legal) companies within the country based on what the foreign corporation assessed them as, what would that mean?
There are things that are not within the state. (hint ... people are one of those things... whilst persons are not). If you want to refer to things not within the state you say "these things are within the EXTERIOR boundaries of the state".

Here is the clue from the Law of the Forrest (Manwood). Boundary markers are owned by the king. Not the land. The markers. Most places I travel I see signs stating XXX County. On a recent trip to Michigan I see they even announce when you are arriving at a township. The county owns no land. Neither does the township. THEY OWN THE MARKER. Hurray Hurray!!!!

Ok .. back on point. I have showed you how to declare you are out of the state. How do you tell if you are in the state? Well, for starters you use the phrase "within the INTERIOR boundaries of the state". In the case of things like deeds you are totally FOOBARED. Almost all the deeds (I am excluding the ones I execute) have a starting point of a TOWNSHIP and a RANGE. It is impossible to separate a deed from the state because a TOWNSHIP is an integral part or subdivision of the state.