It is not up to the system to awaken.

“I prefer not to operate in Commerce at all. That is for the trustee and I am not a trustee, I am ONLY the “Beneficiary of a Private trust/ estate” and can only act as authorized agent for the entity – I am not the entity itself. With that over-stood position, I have no worries of incorrectly identifying myself as “the name” they use to entrap us, nor do I worry or have any of the difficulties that people run into when asserting that “I am not the name on the Birth certificate”. I would rather be known as Grantor for the name, or better yet, am only “agent” for that estate (the ALL CAPS NAME IS AN ESTATE TRUST). I act in a 3rd party capacity and fulfill a limited duty as the “registered agent” by forwarding on any presentments or charges to the responsible party – the executive office of the Governor for settlement and satisfaction. This would apply to tickets, summons, etc.. Once you enter yourself as “Grantor (or Agent) For the Name” you indicate a Private trust exists, and enter the new (old) world of Equity. Just watch how things change in court.”

Google: Christian Walters on Equity

Jean Keating on Invoking Equity:

While you read about Secret Trusts in English Law:

And be sure to watch the video on the difference between a Cestui Que Trust

and the Cestui Que Vis Act:


Then with this trust stuff I was studying all along the more I studied trust my eyes got opened up to the fact that hey it’s been trusts all along.

All of us has been talking about trusts but we have been talking about trusts only in a protection method for protecting assets. That was just a device for protecting assets of the debtor from the creditor attacking him. We want to put it into trusts, treating trusts not as a defense move, but solely as an offensive move. I’ve been finding out that’s what they have been coming at us with all along. It just looked like debtor-creditor because debtor-creditor and trust relationships are so closely related they look similar on the surface.

When you dig down in there you will find out they are a little bit different. When you find out trusts are operating in a totally different world, in equity, and here we thought it was Admiralty all along, which is nothing more than debtor-creditor. They were taking you into Admiralty to force you into breach of contract but really there can’t be any contract because there is no money. You can’t give a value for consideration.

Under trusts you don’t have to give a value of anything, it’s a thing.

Whatever the thing is, the res, that is what is put into the trust. That’s the principal, that is the property. Trust is Intellectual Property. Whose soul is it? That is an intellectual struggle.

Plus, trusts operate solely in equity and that is where the trust power is.

That was like the Admiralty coming at you under debtor-creditor, which was operating and taking you into equity and then for the enforcement. Then you got the breach of the duty under equity because equity is not compelling you to do the duty. When you didn’t do the duty you wound up in jail or you owed a debt and they foreclosed.

Really it is the same as the trust. What we thought was Admiralty, or debtor-creditor, was really trust. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it’s a duck! We are talking about the actions of a trust. If it walks like a trust, talks like a trust, then it is a trust. That’s the whole secret.

No parties in the trust need to know they are forming a trust, including the Grantor, the Trustee, and the Beneficiary. That does not negate the fact that a trust was formed. If the law recognizes a trust then there is a trust.


Views: 1493

Reply to This


Sevan Bomar created this Ning Network.

© 2022   Created by Sevan Bomar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service