Redeem From Public To Private Venue

[salsero]

Exactly!!!!

Boris has a new video and you are gonna luv it. I did not see all of it yet. But he does talk about Treasury Form 1048 Fling a claim for lost, stolen or destroyed US savings bond and notes and he goes back into the "spiritual aspect of the system and how it operates".

Gentlemen - we all want to be on the same page - so let's bring about this. Even the 12 USC 411 is playing in their sandbox. I am not saying this is not remedy but what I am saying is if Boris - who is clearly on a Freedom Path has a step by step simple instruction moving MANY of us forward to the Christ [and he does mention successes on this video], let us all begin to THINK OUTSIDE OF OUR BOXES AND TRY TO BE OPEN and this is more about removing the dross so we become pure Gold.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWXFtUcmUeE

Making claim to what has been already seized will NOT get one "off the battlefield".

Acknowledgment of the seizure and a recognized record formed regarding a cease and surrender of reversionary/usufructuary interest claims makes for a peaceful walk "off the battlefield" - no "fighting" required.

[Keith Alan]

Making demand itself is not adverse; it is our lack of acknowledgement that TITLE to all property has been seized, and; all "money" has been appropriated, and; ALL administrative/commercial activity regarding 'United States'' interests [ie. 'FIRST MIDDLE LAST'] need be done by an official and oath-sworn agent for the 'United States', that creates the "adverse claimant" status.

If we continue acting as if we "OWN" or that we possess good, true and full TITLE to the "fruits" and "profits" derived from ANY commercial activity, we perpetuate the presumption of being an "Enemy of the State", an adverse claimant and a belligerent combatant within the realm of commerce - the extant "war" on the [commercial] battlefield.

They need to provide us with a light bulb button. Thanks! That makes perfect sense!

[Anthony Joseph]

This screenshot shows who the 'Secured Party' is after the assignment.

[ag maniac]

Here's a link to the filing history off the original UCC-1 - file # 201400717971

https://www.floridaucc.com/uccweb/Fi...ii=Y&ft=3&epn=

[David Merrill]

I can understand why Boris continues down that bunny hole; the initial presumption that the birth certificate is a financial security is so far-fetched that nobody in the State government will even try addressing it. - At least in the USA. Therefore we have to resort to a letter a little closer to the Crown, in Canada:

I recall how during the development of this mythology Fidelity's "Random Number Generator" would throw people into thinking they had found a CUSIP # for their birth certificate. When I first linked to Fidelity though, I tried various tests and found that I could get a CUSIP # for anything at all, even for something in the future!

Be careful.

If you never get information that refutes your hypothesis, that does not mean you are onto a valid theory. If the birth certificate has monetary value then it is regulated by the SEC and has a valid CUSIP #. There has never been any CUSIP # ever, assigned to a birth certificate! Never! The reason is obvious to the most casual observer...


Regards,

David Merrill.

[allodial]

In Greek mythology, the Labyrinth ... was an elaborate structure designed and built by the legendary artificer Daedalus for King Minos of Crete at Knossos. Its function was to hold the Minotaur, a mythical creature that was half man and half bull .... Daedalus had so cunningly made the Labyrinth that he could barely escape it after he built it.[1] Theseus was aided by Ariadne, who provided him with a skein of thread, literally the "clew", or "clue", so he could find his way out again.

Attachment 1686

Related: Ariadne's thread; Hybrid Monsters.

I believe the 'SF-95' info is outdated as far as Boris' current stance goes.

According to Boris, the 'recognized record' of cease and surrender is the UCC-1/UCC-3 reversionary interest assignment which leaves the 'United States' as USUFRUCTUARY [Secured Party] of all TITLE and interest in 'FIRST MIDDLE LAST' and everything TITLED in the same. The 'United States' is obligated and responsible for ALL bills, costs, maintenance, discharge, acquittals, etc. regarding 'FIRST MIDDLE LAST'.

Our use of the 'NAME', in that assigned capacity, benefits SOLELY the 'United States' public trust since we are the volunteer 'pledgers' and THE source of ALL value converted into the commercial realm. We derive no benefit whatsoever since everything on earth has been granted to us in covenant absent tax or fee by the Creator, Most High God. It is the illusion of TITLE and PROFIT that we surrender claim to which reinstates our inherent heirship of the earth and everything in it. So long as we do not interfere with another man's rights, property and pursuit of happiness, we are free to use and claim as we wish.

JUST BE A RIGHTEOUS AND GOOD STEWARD.

The resident revenue officer has a 'profit sharing agreement' perhaps? (See: Internal Revenue Code, etc.) Imagine if a King John sends Captain Jack on a mission to find lost treasure and then Captain Jack absconds with it? Would King John treat him like an enemy or not?



Related: tax protester.

On the topic of things 'commercial', it might be worth noting the distinctions between 'artificer' (an artificer is not a merchant and is outside of 'commerce') and 'merchant'.



(Note: buying and selling.)

Related: The Legal Meaning of the Commerce Clause (Robert G. Natelson); The Proper Scope of the Commerce Power (Richard A. Epstein)

(Hint: the "Commerce Clause" has perhaps been too widely interpreted.)

In Greek mythology, Daedalus (Ancient Greek: ... meaning "clever worker"; Latin: Daedalus; Etruscan: Taitale) was a skillful craftsman and artist. He is the father of Icarus, the uncle of Perdix and possibly also the father of Iapyx although this is unclear.

Daedalus is first mentioned by Homer as the creator of a wide dancing-ground for Ariadne. He also created the Labyrinth on Crete, in which the Minotaur (part man, part bull) was kept. In the story of the labyrinth as told by the Hellenes, the Athenian hero Theseus is challenged to kill the Minotaur, finding his way with the help of Ariadne's thread. Daedalus' appearance in Homer is in an extended metaphor, "plainly not Homer's invention", Robin Lane Fox observes: "he is a point of comparison and so he belongs in stories which Homer's audience already recognized". In Bronze Age Crete, an inscription da-da-re-jo-de has been read as referring to a place at Knossos, and a place of worship.

In Homer's language, objects which are daidala are finely crafted. They are mostly objects of armor, but fine bowls and furnishings are daidala, and on one occasion so are the "bronze-working" of "clasps, twisted brooches, earrings and necklaces" made by Hephaestus while cared for in secret by the goddesses of the sea

"The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce...." 15 U.S. Code § 17

(For some reason as I read the thread the first thing that popped in mind was the myths and stories about labyrinths, minotaurs, centaurs and Ariadne's thread. Go figure....)

[Anthony Joseph]

I can understand why Boris continues down that bunny hole; the initial presumption that the birth certificate is a financial security is so far-fetched that nobody in the State government will even try addressing it. - At least in the USA. Therefore we have to resort to a letter a little closer to the Crown, in Canada:

I recall how during the development of this mythology Fidelity's "Random Number Generator" would throw people into thinking they had found a CUSIP # for their birth certificate. When I first linked to Fidelity though, I tried various tests and found that I could get a CUSIP # for anything at all, even for something in the future!

Be careful.

If you never get information that refutes your hypothesis, that does not mean you are onto a valid theory. If the birth certificate has monetary value then it is regulated by the SEC and has a valid CUSIP #. There has never been any CUSIP # ever, assigned to a birth certificate! Never! The reason is obvious to the most casual observer...


Regards,

David Merrill.

"There is no monetary value associated with birth certificates." - Agreed; I do not believe Boris espouses anything contradicting this statement through his current theory.

"Canadian [or U.S.] citizens do not have any personal property rights or obligations with respect to the public debt." - Couldn't have said it better myself.

The "bunny hole" you speak of is not being explored by Boris IMO; that is the process of 'freemen on the land' and 'Security of the Person' as put forth by Robert Menard and others. The Boris reversionary/usufructuary interest assignment process written about here is 180 degrees from your "bunny hole". The assignment is executed pursuant to [while absent benefit from] Title 12 U.S.C. §95 a (2) whereby ALL actions against, and transactions through, 'FIRST MIDDLE LAST' are fully acquitted and discharged by operation of law.

This should interest you since you rely heavily on Title 12 U.S.C. §411 for your remedy process.

Perhaps if you didn't assume what this process is about, you might not erroneously label it as "MENARD REHASHING".

[doug555]

"There is no monetary value associated with birth certificates." - Agreed; I do not believe Boris espouses anything contradicting this statement through his current theory.

"Canadian [or U.S.] citizens do not have any personal property rights or obligations with respect to the public debt." - Couldn't have said it better myself.

The "bunny hole" you speak of is not being explored by Boris IMO; that is the process of 'freemen on the land' and 'Security of the Person' as put forth by Robert Menard and others. The Boris reversionary/usufructuary interest assignment process written about here is 180 degrees from your "bunny hole". The assignment is executed pursuant to [while absent benefit from] Title 12 U.S.C. §95 a (2) whereby ALL actions against, and transactions through, 'FIRST MIDDLE LAST' are fully acquitted and discharged by operation of law.

This should interest you since you rely heavily on Title 12 U.S.C. §411 for your remedy process.

Perhaps if you didn't assume what this process is about, you might not erroneously label it as "MENARD REHASHING".

Thanks Anthony for supplying documents and your insights.

I also agree about COLB value. It makes sense that the birth "certificate" (COLB) has no value, BECAUSE the value is attached to the original signed birth "application"... which we never see. Wonder if a FOIA/PA Request could get a certified copy of the application, which is the true "pledge" or transfer of property "abandoned" at "birth"?

Here is LINK to History of UCC filings by Boris, including UCC-3.

I also stored them HERE.

Here are my questions and concerns:

1. Are not UCC Filings only NOTICE that an event has occurred, and not the event (transfer) itself? If so, then Boris's filings are not effective, and are "frivolous" if they are not based upon a event/transfer that occurred in reality via some other documents that have been executed?

2. Such "STRAWMAN" filings have been addresses recently (April,2014) by the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) report (final-nass-report-bogus-filings-040914.pdf) located in same folder link above. Perhaps Boris's filings need to be revised to avoid earmarks defined in this report.

3. I do not understand how the UNITED STATES became the Secured Party in Boris's filings. In particular, the box #2 "current record" entries do NOT make sense. Would not box 7 first be used to change the Parties BEFORE being listed as such in the box #2 "current record"?

4. Can one legitimately make a full assignment conditional?

5. Perhaps it would be better to assign this property to "Alien Property Custodian" (APC) in accordance with 12 USC 95a and 50 USC App, section 6 and section 7 since the APC is charged with the duty of paying the bills of the "enemy"?

50 USC App 7(e):
(e) No person shall be held liable in any court for or in respect to anything done or omitted in pursuance of any order, rule, or regulation made by the President under the authority of this Act [sections 1 to 6, 7 to 39, and 41 to 44 of this Appendix].
Any payment, conveyance, transfer, assignment, or delivery of money or property made to the alien property custodian hereunder shall be a full acquittance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same to the extent of same. The alien property custodian and such other persons as the President may appoint shall have power to execute, acknowledge, and deliver any such instrument or instruments as may be necessary or proper to evidence upon the record or otherwise such acquittance and discharge, and shall, in case of payment to the alien property custodian of any debt or obligation owed to an enemy or ally of enemy, deliver up any notes, bonds, or other evidences of indebtedness or obligation, or any security therefor in which such enemy or ally of enemy had any right or interest that may have come into the possession of the alien property custodian, with like effect as if he or they, respectively, were duly appointed by the enemy or ally of enemy, creditor, or obligee. The President shall issue to every person so appointed a certificate of the appointment and authority of such person, and such certificate shall be received in evidence in all courts within the United States. Whenever any such certificate of authority shall be offered to any registrar, clerk, or other recording officer, Federal or otherwise, within the United States, such officer shall record the same in like manner as a power of attorney, and such record or a duly certified copy thereof shall be received in evidence in all courts of the United States or other courts within the United States.

[Anthony Joseph]

Thanks Anthony for supplying documents and your insights.

I also agree about COLB value. It makes sense that the birth "certificate" (COLB) has no value, BECAUSE the value is attached to the original signed birth "application"... which we never see. Wonder if a FOIA/PA Request could get a certified copy of the application, which is the true "pledge" or transfer of property "abandoned" at "birth"?

Here is LINK to History of UCC filings by Boris, including UCC-3.

I also stored them HERE.

Here are my questions and concerns:

1. Are not UCC Filings only NOTICE that an event has occurred, and not the event (transfer) itself? If so, then Boris's filings are not effective, and are "frivolous" if they are not based upon a event/transfer that occurred in reality via some other documents that have been executed?

2. Such "STRAWMAN" filings have been addresses recently (April,2014) by the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) report (final-nass-report-bogus-filings-040914.pdf) located in same folder link above. Perhaps Boris's filings need to be revised to avoid earmarks defined in this report.

3. I do not understand how the UNITED STATES became the Secured Party in Boris's filings. In particular, the box #2 "current record" entries do NOT make sense. Would not box 7 first be used to change the Parties BEFORE being listed as such in the box #2 "current record"?

4. Can one legitimately make a full assignment conditional?

5. Perhaps it would be better to assign this property to "Alien Property Custodian" (APC) in accordance with 12 USC 95a and 50 USC App, section 6 and section 7 since the APC is charged with the duty of paying the bills of the "enemy"?

Thanks for the link to that UCC Report.

I find no correlation of this process to any of the three "fraudulent filing types" mentioned in the report: Harassment, Strawman or Authentication. [cf. I see no evidence that 'making demand for lawful money' is "frivolous"]

The UCC filings are a memorialization of what has already been done [a man's free will act and deed] in a format recognized and understood by the relevant party. One may have to verify, if and when the time comes, by voicing what is on paper for first hand evidence that it is true. In the realm of commerce, UCC filings are used as evidence and are accepted forms of executing liens in court - an "event" which has occurred. In this case, there is NO "lien", or any other belligerent act being committed; the assignment is done and the filing is the evidence required for the record in the commercial realm.

The "condition" is what would and should be done anyway under proper administration; the public trust is the entity that benefits from this process and the oath-sworn trustees MUST execute that "condition" regardless of our mentioning it.

[allodial]

There is no monetary value associated with birth certificates.....

Although a birth certificate may lack "monetary value", it likely has value underlying it or associated with it. Consider that a blank check has no monetary value either. The birth certificate and the entry associated with it are highly significant. The number on the back of a social security card (called a 'control number') or a birth certificate is uniquely identifies that instance of printing on a birth certificate blank (typically on exchequer paper or bank note paper)--as in it uniquely identifies that certificate blank. Vick Beck and his old talk show guests (pre 2009) are probably the only "public legal theorists" to have gotten close to revealing what a "birth certificate" is.

"Canadian [or U.S.] citizens do not have any personal property rights or obligations with respect to the public debt."

U.S. subjects != the People. Canadian subjects != the Crown. See: odious debt; The Concept of Odious Debt In International Public Law (UN/UNCTAD)

State v Manuel (State v. Manuel, North Carolina, Vol. 20, Page 121 (1838)): The sovereignty has been transferred from one man to the collective body of the people - and he who before was a "subject of the king" is now "a citizen of the State."

#1 The sovereignty transferred to the people of North Carolina;
#2 Former British subjects become subjects of the State of North Carolina but not of the United States.

(Note: the Crown and the Monarchy are not the same.)

CUSIP#s...

For reasons withheld I am convinced of lack of requirement or need for any person named on a birth certificate or on a social security card to have any CUSIP # even though the typical registered corporation might have such a requirement with respect to SEC regulations.