Note: a Trust is a Partnership, that is the Legal Entity/Person for whom you are the Representative. How can you REpresent yourself in court, a Representative is an Agent. You do not Present yourself in court, but only represent your Legal PERSON. It is a Word Game, you could be Free if you knew how to play it.
A deed of Trust, you get equitable and beneficial title, they get legal title, so they got jurisdiction over the property, but you settled the Trust, so you get to set the terms, if indeed you are the grantor and beneficiary, and they as the trustee are the fiduciary who is really responsible to you. But in our ignorance we play the victim and let our servants run amuck. So they have fabricated via fraud a Municipal Corporate feudal system. We now pay rent to the Corporate Lord, or PERSONal Property tax. Note: Private Property is not taxed, personal is. The Birth Certificate is the beneficial title to your Estate in Trust entrusted to the State. Same as a REGIStered Car Title, only equitable title do you hold, but We Signed up for it. Ignorance of Law is gross negligence, he who does not assert his rights has none. How can We assert our Rights if We are ignorant to them?
A car Title, a Birth Cert, a Deed of Trust, all Partnerships attached to the Legal Person whom you Represent, all voluntary Contracts that you Submitted Applications for, you signed the contract. Your Social Security Account is just Old Age Insurance, it's a Contract where you applied for the Benefit, so you must pay the cost which is Income Tax, and you put yourself under their jurisdiction by agreeing to the Terms. Via the Common Law, you have the Right to contract, or not to contract. However, the Deed of Trust, the Registration of a Car, and the holding of an Estate Trust signified by the Birth Certificate of Trust, in all these Trust Partnerships or Legal Persons/Entities, you are the Beneficiary which makes the State or Federal Municipal Corporations the Trustee and Fiduciary, making them liable, not you. If you wanna play the game, it helps to know the Rules.
**Not legal advice.
Insight by Learned Scholar
"The worst trap imaginable is having to win “as the good guys” or trying to appeal to ignorant people’s ethics. We aren’t going to win this war by writing the victory narrative about how nice we were. They take absolutely every possible criminal liberty against you at every possible level and if you complain that one of these high-ranking officials committed an offence, they will tag your name and at some point, charge you with public mischief. These powers and principalities are going to extinguish you, harvest your children and pilfer and implode everything millions of your ancestors fought tooth and nail for you to pass on to your children.
They’ve been heinous and malevolent with us; at some point we need to let them know we aren’t just better than them, but fiercer at that too."
"I’ve sat in on a lot of legal proceedings for my Law research. Beyond the institutionalized discrimination against whites through the standardization of Gladue reports and such, I have seen judges almost invariably throw the book at white men who are adamant they did nothing wrong. They then impose court orders that institutionally recriminate their victims when there’s no possible way they could have avoided being in breach. Concurrently people in the grievance hierarchy do the most insane shit and plead guilty and don’t even get a record. it’s absolute madness.
There are some pretty great judges out there, BUT the pattern I’m seeing is an endless stream of white men in orange jumpers getting dragged through a system by an army of POCs and leftards. I feel so sorry for them. It’s humiliating, it’s deliberate, and it’s systematic.
One time I sat in on a matter where a native guy had broken into a white girl’s house and taken her belongings and then refused to leave so the cops caught him there. He blamed racism, colonialism and being native and pled that he’s working a job as a roofer and they applied “sentencing provisions” according to his identity group, which resulted in no sentence for forced entry or theft, and no record, even though he pled guilty. Bizarre."
"The police use their “discretion” to pick and choose what to forward to attorneys, the attorneys use their discretion on charging relative to statutes to dismiss charges against favored groups, and the courts use their discretion in terms of “interpretation” “probability” and “relevance” to advance an agenda against us which is ultimately pioneered by politicians in Canada setting anti-white policy and legislation. Every institution is utterly rotten to the core in Canada."
"Judges in civil courts, by rule of law, make determinations on the “balance of probabilities”. However, probability is a mathematical concept. At no point in any reasons handed down in any case law have I ever seen any evidence suggesting mathematics probability was exercised, ever. Already this year, I have even watched a Supreme Court Justice refer to his reasons for a ruling on an application as his “calculus”. Lmfao. The moment someone gets a judge on the stand to be cross-examined on their reasons, the whole fraud will implode."
"I earned a history degree with distinction while serving as faculty in an unrelated field. I don’t recall “morality” ever being described as a facet of historiography, aside plagiarism, however 2 decades later I have realized around the time I wrote my papers, the idea that “historical negationism” is “immoral” had arisen.
The fact a VERY PARTICULAR historical narrative cannot be questioned by academia PROVES that the “academic field” of history is (((fundamentally religious))) since it is precluded not by the rigors of rationally accommodated discourse, but outright by “morality". Interestingly, that historical negationism just so happens to increasingly serve every agenda advanced by a certain (((ethnic milieu)))."
"God wants you to make peace with your enemies (which they know and so they will bleed you so dry you will wonder if your service to them are reflected in the phrase ”the wage of sin is death”), or to know that if you proceed to trial you will end up penniless and in prison, but also to recognize that the administrators of Justice are fully sanctioned and appointed by God (according to Paul), so go pray for what you want knowing full well. Grist stated “judge righteous judgement” and that “it would be better for those who cause any Christlike follower stumble to be fastened to a millstone and tossed into the abyss” so which is it? Am I to become the contemporary manifestation of Voltaire or is my pointed question to the Judge I trudging “who is the God referenced in the Charter?”… but regardless: if you follow Paul, can I watch? I’m sorta starting to see why God is so sadistic.
Alas so go out there and become “separate from them and touch not the dirty thing that you may be loved by the Lord.” In the process, though, surrender unto them everything that they demand. Fuck this shit."