OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean

Heather will decide to head for the hills:

Before her next hearing
1
3%
After her next hearing
2
5%
Before her trial
13
35%
Before her sentencing
17
46%
Never - she wants to experience BEing and DOing behind bars.
4
11%
 
Total votes: 37

User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 4532
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Gregg » Sun Feb 04, 2018 2:08 pm

No winners on Heather joining the Fugitive Class and getting a Sean David Morton Award. Those who chose "Never" can claim their prizes at the window.

My bets for forwarding addresses are Randy in Atlanta, Heather Danbury, based on their stated residences.

I think they're both looking at too much time to qualify for Minimum Security.

Mike Dunford at Fogbow posted a better informed guess on possible reservation lengths than I could, and seems to think that Heather is in for a longer sentence than Randy, according to Federal Sentencing Guidelines. The over under for both is 96 months, assuming a loss enhancement based on $1.5 million. Their is a case,though, USA v. Getzschman that if applied here, would mean the loss is more like $30 million, which could bump that up a bit.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.

User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 4532
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Gregg » Sun Feb 04, 2018 2:17 pm

In other news, it looks like Randy's last cellmate was a southpaw. :haha:
Image
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.

nancydrew
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 4:13 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby nancydrew » Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:52 pm

Gregg wrote:In other news, it looks like Randy's last cellmate was a southpaw. :haha:
Image


Lol can you imagine the reception he’s getting from his fellow inmates when he starts opining abou his theories of hokum and woo. I’m guessing it’s not well received!

Btw, if you recall from this summer, HATJ was writing that she was awakening every one from the prisoners to the guards while incarcerated in DC. Now she have a whole new set up marks!

Juisarian
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2017 1:00 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Juisarian » Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:41 pm

Hey don't tear up your tickets yet, there's still a chance the movement could pull off a daring H.M. Murdoch-style escape before the sentencing hearing... (cue the theme song)

BoomerSooner17
Captain
Captain
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:07 pm
Location: Katy, Texas

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby BoomerSooner17 » Sun Feb 04, 2018 4:50 pm

"In 2018 a crack financial duo were sent to prison for a crime they didn't commit. These two promptly escaped from a maximum-security installation to the Portland underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of (mis)fortune. If you have a problem, if you want to make it worse, and if you can find them, maybe you can hire...the Woo Team."
"Never in the field of human conflict, was so much owed (but not paid), by so few, to so many." - Sir Winston Churchill

Hercule Parrot
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:58 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Hercule Parrot » Sun Feb 04, 2018 5:56 pm

Resume wrote:Sheila claims Randy's close was " . . . the most beautiful thing I have ever heard in my life."

She needs to get out more.


Hearing them convicted and ordered into immediate custody was similarly transcendental for me. After the Bundy fiasco I had been worrying about the viability of jury trials in The Age of Woo.
"don't be hubris ever..." Steve Mccrae, noted legal ExpertInFuckAll.

Resume
Gunners Mate
Gunners Mate
Posts: 46
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:07 am

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Resume » Sun Feb 04, 2018 7:39 pm

Hercule Parrot wrote:
Resume wrote:Sheila claims Randy's close was " . . . the most beautiful thing I have ever heard in my life."

She needs to get out more.


Hearing them convicted and ordered into immediate custody was similarly transcendental for me. After the Bundy fiasco I had been worrying about the viability of jury trials in The Age of Woo.

Seeing grifters get theirs is pretty satisfying. Next up, Shrout getting clouted, then The Passion of Anthony Troy Williams.
Praeterea Preterea . . . Hasenpfeffer Incorporated!

Athis
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:26 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Athis » Sun Feb 04, 2018 8:19 pm

You're back!
I havent caught up on the thread yet but I want to post this from Doazic on Youtube
An excellent summary on the origins of the TDA myth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNAa8Uh ... 2404646544

One of the questions I have which some of you may be able to answer is this - what is the reasoning or reasons given by the scammers for why the government would create TDA accounts in people's names and deposit money in them? Why would they put money in secret accounts? Obviously the accounts must have some significance or function in government finances; or at least I presume so. Has anyone given an account of why?

User avatar
AnOwlCalledSage
Stowaway
Stowaway
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:56 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby AnOwlCalledSage » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:00 pm

Athis wrote:One of the questions I have which some of you may be able to answer is this - what is the reasoning or reasons given by the scammers for why the government would create TDA accounts in people's names and deposit money in them? Why would they put money in secret accounts? Obviously the accounts must have some significance or function in government finances; or at least I presume so. Has anyone given an account of why?

It's not the Guvmint. It's the Jewzz, er, zionists, er, Rothchilds.

The whole basis of the secrit accountz is a old racist trope, mutated into its current form.

User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:54 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby JohnPCapitalist » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:15 pm

Gregg wrote:No winners on Heather joining the Fugitive Class and getting a Sean David Morton Award. Those who chose "Never" can claim their prizes at the window.

My bets for forwarding addresses are Randy in Atlanta, Heather Danbury, based on their stated residences.

I think they're both looking at too much time to qualify for Minimum Security.

Mike Dunford at Fogbow posted a better informed guess on possible reservation lengths than I could, and seems to think that Heather is in for a longer sentence than Randy, according to Federal Sentencing Guidelines. The over under for both is 96 months, assuming a loss enhancement based on $1.5 million. Their is a case,though, USA v. Getzschman that if applied here, would mean the loss is more like $30 million, which could bump that up a bit.


Re Heather in Danbury: if she lands there, she's within a comfortable journey's distance for me to pay her a visit -- it's about 65 miles from Manhattan. Wonder what an interview with her would be like, if one could get her to agree to sit for a discussion with a skeptic.

It's not clear that they will put you closest to your residence. I'm not sure why Heather gave an address in MA given that she's from and has family in WA. Also, Martha Stewart lived in Bedford NY, about 25 miles from Danbury FCI, but they put her in "Camp Cupcake" in Alderson WV. That may have been due to lack of available space in Danbury but it may also have been to keep her from getting too many celebrity visitors or from her aides so she could try to run her company while in jail.

Siegfried Shrink
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 863
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 10:29 pm
Location: West Midlands, England

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Siegfried Shrink » Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:49 pm

Athis wrote:One of the questions I have which some of you may be able to answer is this - what is the reasoning or reasons given by the scammers for why the government would create TDA accounts in people's names and deposit money in them? Why would they put money in secret accounts? Obviously the accounts must have some significance or function in government finances; or at least I presume so. Has anyone given an account of why?


I have a theory about this that could answer that question, but it depends on what came first, the mythical Birth Bonds or the wqually mythical Cest que Vie Trusts.
If you are not familiar with the CQV mythology, an early scammer took a genuine a nd suitably old piece of UK legislation
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/ ... 60011_en_1
And here is a woosters version of what it means, which anyone reasing the act will see it does not.

The act being debated the Cestui Qui act was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. (back then operating in admiralty law, the law of the sea, so lost at sea).

The state (of London) took custody of everybody and their property into a trust, the state became the trustee/husband holding all titles to the people and property, until a living man comes back to reclaim those titles and can also claim damages. (Reclaim using UCC 1 and PPSA)


The idea being that the state, at first Britain and later the US, held secret funds, because of this mythical trust. My theory is that this was shorn of it's British connection and the mythical trust funds became mythical secret accounts.
As usual, from the beginning the motive for the grifters was selling the secrets of how to claim your trust funds, later, in my opinion, morphing into how to access your secret accounts.
Nothing is pure in the world of woo, every guru chops and changes the basic idea, making it hard to find where anything first appeared. Here is more nonsense from the source quoted above, you will see the familair elements that thread throughout the various schems according to taste. There is rather a lot of it but like a very rich stew, I think everything in the kitchen was thrown in.


The rule of the use of CAPITAL LETTERS used in a NAME: when CAPITAL letters re used anywhere in a NAME this always refers to a LEGAL ENTITY/FICTION, COMPANY or CORPORATION no exceptions.

e.g. John DOE or Doe: JANE (PASSPORT, DRIVER LICENSE, MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE and BIRTH CERTIFICATE)

CEST TUI QUE TRUST: (pronounced setakay) common term in NEW ZEALAND and AUSTRALIA or STRAWMAN common term in USA or CANADA is a LEGAL ENTITY/FICTION created and owned by the GOVERNMENT whom created it. I repeat owned by the GOVERNMENT.

Legally, we are considered to be a FICTION, a concept or idea expressed as a NAME, a symbol. That LEGAL PERSON has no consciousness; it is a juristic PERSON, ENS LEGIS, a NAME/word written on a piece of paper.

This traces back to 1666, London is a state, just like Vatican is a state, just like Washington DC is a state. The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated, its private, the temple bar is in London, every lawyer called to the "bar" swears allegiance to the temple bar. You can't get called, without swearing this allegiance. The Crown already owns North America and everything in it.

Your only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown created, become the trustee of the cest tui qui trust and remove yourself from the admiralty law that holds you in custody.
The subrogation of your rights
When London burned the subrogation of mens and womens rights occurred.
The responsible act passed... CQV act 1666 meant all men and women of UK were declared dead and lost beyond the seas.  The state took everybody and everybody's property into trust.  The state takes control until a living man or woman comes back and claims their titles by proving they are alive and claims for damages can be made.
This is why you always need representation when involved in legal matters, because you're dead.  The legal fiction is a construct on paper, an estate in trust.  When you get a bill or summons from court it is always in capital letters, similar to tomb stones in grave yards.  Capital letters signify death.  They are writing to the dead legal fiction.  A legal fiction was created when someone informed the government that there was a new vessel in town, based upon your birth.  Birth certificates are issued at birth, just as ships are given berth certificates.
Your mother has a birth canal, just like a ship.  All this information relates to how the general public are still legally tied.  Through admiralty law, through this ancient legal construct we can be easily controlled.  Learning about your legal fiction helps you to unlock yourself.  Otherwise you are just a vessel floating on the sea of commerce.  It is possible to be free from financial stress and debt. 
Parents are tricked into registering the birth of their babies.  In about 1837 the Births, Deaths and Marriages act was formed in UK and the post of registrar general was established.  His job was to collect all the data from the churches which held the records of birth.
Regis - from queen or crown.  All people are seen to be in custody of," The Crown". This allows people to function in commerce and to accept the benefits provided by state.
So we are in custody.  Worldwide - under the IMF the majority of people are fed, sheltered and provided for, however now it is the system that is benefitting while many are suffering, are poorly fed, housed and water is contaminated.  Many people are now getting sick and dying as a result - not to mention that as people evolve, they now seek to be independent of any system that seeks to control or oppress and harms the earth that this is all taking place on. 
We have legally elected representatives.  We have to understand who we are as men and women and how we can relate in the system.   
The City of London is a centre for markets, where merchants work.  Then there is mercantile law.  It comes from Admiralty.  Look at the symbols in the City of London that relate to Admiralty.
Our national banks are not our banks.  The private shareholders from the private banks own the banks.  It is all private, not public as we are led to believe.  "OF" also means "without", eg. The bank without England.  Private banks issue private currency. 
With WWI a change happened where money was not backed by gold or silver anymore, it is now based on peoples labour.  People are now pledged to the IMF as the surety to pay back the creditors in the global bankruptcy.   Men and women are not bankrupt, they are the only source of credit. The public is bankrupt. 
Regarding the currency that gets issued at the Bank of England, people are the gold or the treasure.  The government issues bonds or treasury bills that are bought by investors.  The money goes back into the economy in order to pay for the people to build things, e.g. an Olympic Stadium.  However, the people are paying taxes for the privilege of using someone else's currency and paying back the principal and the interest on the original loan that was given against the treasury bonds, bills and notes.  It is a private corporation that will own the Olympic stadium, be responsible for running it, be able to sell commercial rights, yet the people are actually the ones who own it and should be profiting from it.  However, principal and interest is coming through the people in order to raise the money. 
So where you have commerce and money, you also have "justice".  You need to understand the bankruptcy before you can understand the judiciary.  You need to accept the bankruptcy.  We have accepted the claim to accept the summons.  There is an obligation to accept any liability which has been created.  All you can do is accept the bankruptcy.  We are operating in admiralty.  A not guilty plea dishonours the bankruptcy.  The strawman, aka legal fiction is always guilty.  It needs to be accepted for value.  Barristers and solicitors make a living out of creating controversy.  By creating a controversy you become liable for the case. 
Honour and dishonour.  To remain in honour you have to accept a claim and settle it.  Then you add conditions.  I accept on proof of claim and proof of loss.  This gives the liability back to them.  The legal fiction is always guilty.  Only in the high courts, can the real man or woman appear.  Games are played on courts; hence the name court is a game with actors (acting on acts).  It has to be treated as a game and just business.  Court room dramas are misinformation.  In the public, we are operating in bankruptcy and you receive benefits.  It takes a lot of time, effort and study to use these tools.  You have to be prepared to go fully through the process, get the right tool out of your toolbox at the right time.  People need to learn how to act as creditors.
In summary...
Money is backed by labour.
We cannot exchange it fairly for gold or silver.
Capitalisation of "name" means a dead entity, a legal fiction.
Know who you are, you are not your strawman or dead fictitious entity.
Learn how to become a creditor in commerce.
 
 
 
 
IMPORTANT... Check out these links for valuable information on CQV Trust and knowing who you are...
http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/?p=164 and http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/?p=176
All the best with this!!!  Contact us for more information about what we are discovering - sincere inquiries by men and women who are committed to the road of a  Sui Juris
Winston Shrout addresses Cestui Qui Act/Trust
An intro into the ideas of how your (entity, strawman, allcaps name) was created. In 1666 an act of parliament created during the black plague, and great fires of london , behind closed doors, was called Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 you can read the act here:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatute...

The act being debated was the Cestui Qui act which was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. This was done during a crisis. The state took custody of everybody and their property into a trust, the Cestui Qui trust, the state became the trustee/husband holding all titles to the people and property, until a living man comes back to reclaim those titles and can also claim damages.

The Cestui Qui act or Trust created is an ALL-CAPITALIZED NAME, a 'dead entity' who had all his belongings put into a trust. This act still exists, and this trust still exists.

This is how it started. The videos by Winston Shrout, Irene Gravenhorst, Jordan Maxwell, ACriticalState, all speak about this subject. The basis of how bankers use the law to hijack an all-caps name that you didn't even know existed is briefly touch on in this 5 min video.

The intention is to give you a peek at the ideas from freedom based videos. If you were born on earth, if you have a birth certificate, this applies to you. The only way to claim your trust and get free from admiralty law, is to understand who you really are, and that admiralty law does not apply to you, but in order to get free you must do some homework, file forms and know how commerce applies to you.

COURT: Who’s Who and What to Say
Posted by Eoghan on December 19, 2010 at 15:37 in Tír na Saor - Top Discussions
View Discussions
My position on going to court has always been: never voluntarily go to court. Live men and women are not meant to be in any place designed solely for the business of fictional entities. When we attend court, we are deemed dead, in fact, they cannot deal with us until we admit to being dead….a legal fiction….a trust. Court is for titled persons: judge, prosecutor, defendant, bailiffs, cops, and attorneys. Live men and women are not recognized, so it makes sense to send in a dead person––an attorney––to handle our cases …. except for one thing: they do not know how the system works, due to their indoctrination.  If you can find one to do as you say, then you will prevail, but most of them would rather hang onto their BAR cards than behave honourably. The only thing that dead, fictional entities want from us is our life energy, and the only way they can get it is by our agreement. Without us, they cannot function, so, they are desperate to get us into court, to have us pay the debt which they created by charging the trust.
Since common law courts no longer exist, we know that the case never has anything to do with “facts” or live men and women and so, anyone who testifies (talks about the facts of the case) is doomed. ALL courts operate in trust law, based upon ecclesiastical canon law–– ritualism, superstition, satanism, etc.––which manifests as insidious, commercial law and we are in court to take the hit, if they can get us to do so. They use every trick in the book––intimidation, fear, threat, ridicule, rage, and even recesses, in order to change the jurisdiction, when they know they are losing, in order to make us admit that we are the name of the trust. When we do so, we are deemed to be the trustee––the one liable for administering the trust. Ergo, until now, it has been a waste of our time, energy, and emotion to go to a place where it is almost certain that we will be stuck with the liability.
We all know from our indoctrination, programming, and schooling that judges are impartial and have sworn an oath to this effect. This means he must not favour either plaintiff or defendant. But, our experience reveals that he does, indeed, favour the plaintiff, indicating a glaring conflict of interest––that the prosecutor, judge, and clerk all work for the state––the owner of the CQV trust. So, as the case is NOT about “justice”, it must be about the administration of a trust. They all represent the trust owned by the state and, if we are beneficiary, the only two positions left are Trustee and Executor. So, if you detect the judge’s partiality, although I doubt the case will get this far, you might just want to let them know that you know this.
If you consider court as entertainment and if you can stand the evil emanating from its officers, the fear and angst oozing from the walls, and the treacherous atmosphere, then go, knowing that under trust law we cannot be the trustee or the executor of a trust, whilst being beneficiary, as that would be a conflict. The position of beneficiary may lack clout, but the other positions hold liability. Since state employees want to be the beneficiaries of the trust, the only way they can do so is to transfer, to us, the liability which they hold, as trustees and executors, because they also cannot be both the administrators and beneficiary of the trust. So, trusteeship and executorship, i.e.: suretyship, becomes a hot potato and everyone wants to toss it so s/he can be beneficiary of the credit from the trust.
When we were born, a trust, called a Cestui Que Vie Trust (“CQV”) was set-up, for our benefit. Evidence of this is the birth certificate. But what is the value which must be conveyed to the trust, in order  to create it?  It was our right to property (via Birth into this world), our body (via the Live Birth Record), and our souls (via Baptism). Since the state/province which registered the trust is the owner, it is also the trustee…. the one that administers the trust. Since they, also, wanted to be beneficiary of this trust, they had to come up with ways to get us, as beneficiary, to authorize their charging the trust, allegedly, for our benefit (via our signature on a document: citation, application, etc.), and then, temporarily transfer trusteeship, to us, during the brief time that they want to be the beneficiary of a particular “constructive” trust.
This means that a trust can be established anywhere, anytime, and the parties of the trust are quickly, albeit temporarily, put into place. But, since a beneficiary cannot charge a trust––only a trustee can do so––it is the state that charges the trust, but they do so for their benefit, not ours (albeit occasionally we do reap some benefit from that charge but nowhere near the value which they reap. Think bank loan….. we reap a minute percentage of what they gain from our authorization). So, the only way, under trust law, for them to be able to charge the trust is to get the authorization from the beneficiary––us, and the only way for them to benefit from their charge is to get us to switch roles––from beneficiary to trustee (the one responsible for the accounting), and for them to switch their role––from trustee to beneficiary because no party can be both, at the same time, i.e.: within the same constructive trust. They must somehow trick us into accepting the role of trustee. Why would we do so when the trust is for our benefit? …. and how do they manage to do this?
Well, the best way is to get us into court and trick us into unwittingly doing so. But, if we know what has transpired, prior to our being there, it is easy to know what to say so that this doesn’t happen. The court clerk is the hot shot, even though it appears as if the judge is. The clerk is the trustee for the CQV owned by the state/province and it is s/he who is responsible for appointing the trustee and the executor for a constructive trust––that particular court case.
So s/he appoints the judge as trustee (the one to administer the trust) and appoints the prosecutor as executor of the trust. The executor is ultimately liable for the charge because it was s/he who brought the case into court (created the constructive trust) on behalf of the state/province which charged the CQV trust. Only an executor/prosecutor can initiate/create a constructive trust and we all know the maxim of law: Whoever creates the controversy holds the liability and whoever holds the liability must provide the remedy. This is why all attorneys are mandated to bring their cheque-books to court because if it all goes wrong for them…. meaning either they fail to transfer their liability onto the alleged defendant, or the alleged defendant does not accept their offer of liability, then someone has to credit the trust account in order to off-set the debt. Since the prosecutor is the one who issues bogus paper and charges the trust, it is the Prosecutor/Executor (“PE”) who is in the hot-seat.
When the Name (of the trust), e.g.: JOHN DOE, is called by the Judge aka Administrator aka Trustee (“JAT”), we can stand and ask, “Are you saying that the trust which you are now administrating is the JOHN DOE trust?”  This establishes that we know that the Name is a trust, not a live man. What’s the JAT’s first question? “What’s your name?” or “State your name for the record”.  We must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust because doing so makes us the trustee. What does this tell you about the judge?  If we know that the judge is the trustee, then we also know that the judge is the Name, but only for this particular, constructive trust. Now, think about all the times that JATs have become so frustrated by our refusal to admit to being the Name that they issue a warrant and then, as soon as the man leaves, he is arrested.  How idiotic is that? They must feel foolish for saying, “John Doe is not in court so I’m issuing a warrant for his arrest” and then, the man whom they just admitted is NOT there is arrested because he IS there. Their desperation makes them insane. They must get us to admit to being the name, or they pay, and we must not accept their coercion, or we pay. Because the JAT is the trustee––a precarious position, the best thing to say, in that case, is “JOHN DOE is, indeed, in the court!”  Point to the JAT. “It is YOU! As trustee, YOU are JOHN DOE, today, aren’t you?!”
During their frustration over our not admitting to being a trust name––the trustee and/or executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are. “Before we go any further, I need to know who YOU are.”  Address the clerk of the court––the trustee for the CQV trust owned by the state/province, “Are you the CQV’s trustee who has appointed this judge as administrator and trustee of the constructive trust case #12345?  Did you also appoint the prosecutor as executor of this constructive trust?”  Then point to the JAT: “So you are the trustee”, then point to the prosecutor, “and you are the executor?  And I’m the beneficiary, so, now we know who’s who and, as beneficiary, I authorize you to handle the accounting and dissolve this constructive trust. I now claim my body so I am collapsing the CQV trust which you have charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all laws!” Likely, we will not get that far before the JAT will order “Case dismissed” or, even more likely, the PE, as he clings tightly to his cheque-book, will call, “We withdraw the charges”.
We have exposed their fraud of the CQV trust which exists only on presumptions. The CQV has no corpus, no property, ergo, no value. Trusts are created only upon the conveyance of property and can exist only as long as there is value in the trust. But, there is no value in the CQV trust, yet, they continue to charge the trust. That is fraud!  The alleged property is we men and women whom they have deemed to be incompetent, dead, abandoned, lost, bankrupts, or minors, but that is an illusion so, if we claim our body, then we collapse the presumption that the trust has value. They are operating in fraud––something we’ve always known, but now we know how they do it. Our having exposed their fraud gives them only three options:
1.  They can dissolve the CQV trust––the one for which the clerk of the court is trustee and from which s/he created a constructive trust––the case––for which s/he appointed the judge and prosecutor titles which hold temporary liability––trustee and executor, respectively. But they cannot dissolve the CQV or the entire global system will collapse because they cannot exist without our energy which they obtain via that CQV trust.
2.  They can enforce the existing rules of trust law which means, as trustee, they can set-off their debt and leave us alone.  Now they know that we are onto their fraud and every time they go into court to administer a trust account, they will not know if we are the one who will send them to jail. The trustee (judge) is the liable party who will go to jail, and the executor (prosecutor) is the one who enforces this. This is why they want us to take on both titles, because then, not only do we go to jail but also, by signing their paper, we become executor and enforce our own sentence. They cannot afford to violate the ecclesiastical canon laws, out of fear of ending their careers, so they are, again, trapped with no place to run.
3.  They can dismiss the cases before they even take the risk of our exposing their fraud …. which also makes no sense because then their careers, again, come to a screeching halt.
What’s a court clerk to do!?  Pretty soon, none of these thugs will take any cases because the risk is too great. This will be the end of the court system. ‘Bout bloody time, eh?
Knowledge––not procedure––is power.
The means by which we have attempted to assuage our problems, inflicted upon us by the PTW (powers that were) have all been superficial, compared to the origins of all the black magic, superstition, satanic ritualism, trickery, mind-control, and clandestine practices. Under commercial law, dating back to the Code of Ur-Nammu––around 2100 BCE––the use of another’s property without permission puts one into dishonor and makes him liable for any debts. So, our using UCC forms, bills of exchange, AFV, or bonds, and altering documents of the Roman System can create penalties, as this is trading and/or using the property of a corporation we do not own …. the birth certificate proves that the “name” is, in fact, the property of the corporation which issued it. We can do all the paper perfectly but, in the end, they say, “Sorry; you’re not one of us.”  But, now, we get to inflict fear onto them. When we are forced to court, knowing that the Judge acts as the Trustee and the prosecutor acts as Executor of the CQV Trusts is empowering.  It gives us two choices:
1.  If we wish to expose the fraud of presumptions, by which the CQV trusts still exist, then the court is the perfect opportunity to have them dissolved or to prove the fraud because the Trustee is sitting on the bench. Dissolving the first CQV, dissolves them all; or,
2.  If we are not inclined to use something like the Ecclesiastical Deed Poll to expose the fraud of the CQV Trusts, then, at least, we ought to know that everything the judge says––even if it sounds like a command, order, or sentence––is actually an offer which we can choose to decline (“I do not consent; I do not accept your offer”). This is a fundamental principle of testamentary trusts…… the beneficiary can accept or decline what the trustee offers.
For 15 years, I have watched the alleged solutions in commerce come and go and nothing has worked for enough people on enough occasions to call anything a consistent win. Paying for information is insanity because those who sell information clearly have not prevailed or they wouldn’t need to sell anything, would they?  Buying express, private-contract trusts, e.g.: NACRS, is a huge waste of time and money because the entire process is too complicated for anyone with an IQ below 400 and …. “no refunds”.  I have found no solution in commerce because those who claim to have solutions still insist upon treating symptoms rather than curing the cause––the fraudulent CQV trust.
If we send an Ecclesiastical Deed Poll (see: http://one-heaven.org/canons_positive_l ... e_1330.htm ), as response to a summons or arrest warrant, then the judge who issues them has to think long and hard: “Am I willing to gamble that the man who walks into my court might call me on my role of trustee and expose the fraud that the CQV Trusts are still in place?
Canons of Positive Law:  http://one-heaven.org/canons_positive_l ... e_0000.htm
This knowledge is your power.   –– Frank O’Collins
History of Trusts
http://one-heaven.org/home.asp
The 1st Trust of the world
Unam Sanctam is one of the most frightening documents of history and the one most quoted as the primary document of the popes claiming their global power. It is an express trust deed. The last line reads:  “Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” It is not only the first trust deed in history but also the largest trust ever conceived, as it claims the whole planet and everything on it, conveyed in trust.
Triple Crown of Ba’al, aka the Papal Tiara and Triregnum
In 1302 Pope Boniface issued his infamous Papal Bull Unam Sanctam––the first Express Trust. He claimed control over the whole planet which made him “King of the world”. In celebration, he commissioned a gold-plated headdress in the shape of a pinecone, with an elaborate crown at its base. The pinecone is an ancient symbol of fertility and one traditionally associated with Ba’al as well as the Cult of Cybele.  It also represents the pineal gland in the centre of our brains––crystalline in nature–– which allows us access to Source, hence, the 13-foot tall pinecone in Vatican Square. Think about why the Pontiffs would idolize a pinecone.
See: Pharmacratic Inquisition:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnvEHObMMH4
The 1st Crown of Crown Land
Pope Boniface VIII was the first leader in history to create the concept of a Trust, but the first Testamentary Trust, through a deed and will creating a Deceased Estate, was created by Pope Nicholas V in 1455, through the Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex. This is only one of three (3) papal bulls to include the line with the incipit “For a perpetual remembrance.” This Bull had the effect of conveying the right of use of the land as Real Property, from the Express Trust Unam Sanctam, to the control of the Pontiff and his successors in perpetuity. Hence, all land is claimed as “crown land”.  This 1st Crown is represented by the 1st Cestui Que Vie Trust, created when a child is born. It deprives us of all beneficial entitlements and rights on the land.
The 2nd Crown of the Commonwealth
The second Crown was created in 1481 with the papal bull Aeterni Regis, meaning “Eternal Crown”, by Sixtus IV, being only the 2nd of three papal bulls as deeds of testamentary trusts.
This Papal Bull created the “Crown of Aragon”, later known as the Crown of Spain, and is the highest sovereign and highest steward of all Roman Slaves subject to the rule of the Roman Pontiff. Spain lost the crown in 1604 when it was granted to King James I of England by Pope Paul V after the successful passage of the “Union of Crowns”, or Commonwealth, in 1605 after the false flag operation of the Gunpowder Plot. The Crown was finally lost by England in 1975, when it was returned to Spain and King Carlos I, where it remains to this day.  This 2nd Crown is represented by the 2nd cestui Que Vie Trust, created when a child is born and, by the sale of
the birth certificate as a Bond to the private central bank of the nation, depriving us of
ownership of our flesh and condemning us to perpetual servitude, as a Roman person, or slave.
The 3rd Crown of the Ecclesiastical See
The third Crown was created in 1537 by Paul III, through the papal bull Convocation, also meant to open the Council of Trent. It is the third and final testamentary deed and will of a testamentary trust, set up for the claiming of all “lost souls”, lost to the See.  The Venetians assisted in the creation of the 1st Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540, to use this papal bull as the basis of Ecclesiastical authority of Henry VIII. This Crown was secretly granted to England in the collection and “reaping” of lost souls. The Crown was lost in 1816, due to the deliberate bankruptcy of England, and granted to the Temple Bar which became known as the Crown Bar, or simply the Crown. The Bar Associations have since been responsible for administering the “reaping” of the souls of the lost and damned, including the registration and collection of Baptismal certificates representing the souls collected by the Vatican and stored in its vaults.
This 3rd Crown is represented by the 3rd Cestui Que Vie Trust, created when a child is baptized. It is the parents’ grant of the Baptismal certificate––title to the soul––to the church or Registrar. Thus, without legal title over one’s own soul, we will be denied legal standing and will be treated as things––cargo without souls––upon which the BAR is now legally able to enforce Maritime law.
The Cestui Que Vie Trust
A Cestui Que Vie Trust is a fictional concept. It is a Temporary Testamentary Trust, first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II, through the CQV Act of 1666, wherein an Estate may be effected for the Benefit of a Person presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed “dead” after seven (7) years. Additional presumptions, by which such a Trust may be formed, were added in later statutes to include bankrupts, minors, incompetents, mortgages, and private companies. The original purpose of a CQV Trust was to form a temporary Estate for the benefit of another because some event, state of affairs, or condition prevented them from claiming their status as living, competent, and present, before a competent authority. Therefore, any claims, history, statutes, or arguments that deviate in terms of the origin and function of a CQV Trust, as pronounced by these canons, is false and automatically null and void.
A Beneficiary under Estate may be either a Beneficiary or a CQV Trust. When a Beneficiary loses direct benefit of any Property of the higher Estate placed in a CQV Trust on his behalf, he do not “own” the CQV Trust; he is only the beneficiary of what the Trustees of the CQV Trust choose to provide.  As all CQV Trusts are created on presumption, based upon original purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if these presumptions can be proven not to exist.
Since 1933, when a child is borne in a State (Estate) under inferior Roman law, three (3) Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created upon certain presumptions specifically designed to deny, forever, the child any rights of Real Property, any Rights to be free, and any Rights to be known as man or woman, rather than a creature or animal, by claiming and possessing their Soul or Spirit.
The Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate willingly and knowingly:
1.  convey the beneficial entitlements of the child, as Beneficiary, into the 1st Cestui Que (Vie) Trust in the form of a Registry Number by registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person and denying the child any rights to Real Property; and,
2.  claim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink impression of the baby’s feet onto the live birth record, or a drop of its blood, as well as tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the deceitful legal meanings on the live birth record which is a promissory note, converted into a slave bond, sold to the private reserve bank of the estate, and then conveyed into a 2nd and separate CQV Trust, per child, owned by the bank. When the promissory note reaches maturity and the bank is unable to “seize” the slave child, a maritime lien is lawfully issued to “salvage” the lost property and is monetized as currency issued in series against the CQV Trust.
3.  claim the child’s soul via the Baptismal Certificate. Since 1540 and the creation of the 1st CQV Act, deriving its power from the Papal Bull of Roman Cult leader Pope Paul III, 1540, when a child is baptized and a Baptismal Certificate is issued, the parents have gifted, granted, and conveyed the soul of the baby to a “3rd” CQV Trust owned by Roman Cult, which has held this valuable property in its vaults ever since. Since 1815, this 3rd Crown of the Roman Cult and 3rd CQV Trust representing Ecclesiastical Property has been managed by the BAR as the reconstituted “Galla” responsible, as Grim Reapers, for reaping the souls.
Each Cestui Que Vie Trust, created since 1933, represents one of the 3 Crowns representing the three claims of property of the Roman Cult: Real Property (on Earth), Personal Property (body), and Ecclesiastical Property (soul). Each corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the Galla of the BAR Courts: corporate commercial law (judge is the ‘landlord’), maritime and canon law (judge is the banker), and Talmudic law (judge is the priest).
What is the real power of a court ‘judge’?
Given what has been revealed about the foundations of Roman Law, what is the real hidden power of a judge when we face court?  Is it their superior knowledge of process and procedure or of magic? Or is it something simpler and far more obvious?
It is unfortunate that much of the excitement about Estates and Executors has deliberately not revealed that an Estate, by definition, has to belong to a Trust––to be specific, a Testamentary Trust or CQV Trust. When we receive legal paper or have to appear in court, it is these same CQV Trusts which have our rights converted into the property contained within them. Instead of being the Trustee, or the Executor, or Administrator, we are merely the Beneficiary of each CQV Trust, granted only beneficial and equitable use of certain property, never legal title. So if the Roman Legal System assumes we are merely the beneficiary of these CQV Trusts, when we go to court, who represents the Trustee and Office of Executor? We all know that all cases are based upon the judge’s discretion which often defies procedures, statutes, and maxims of law. Well, they are doing what any Trustee or Executor, administering a trust in the presence of the beneficiary, can do under Roman Law and all the statutes, maxims, and procedures are really for show because under the principles of Trust Law, as first formed by the Roman Cult, a Trustee has a wide latitude, including the ability to correct any procedural mistakes, by obtaining the implied or tacit consent of the beneficiary, to obviate any mistakes. The judge is the real and legal Name. The judge is the trust, itself. We are the mirror image to them––the ghost––the dead. It is high sorcery, trickery, and subterfuge that has remained “legal” for far too long. Spread the word.
ROLES of PARTIES to the TRUST

If we were to act as anything other than the beneficiary of the Cestui Que Vie (CQV) trust, we could assist in settling these matters but, as the Clerk is the Trustee of the CQV trust, she has appointed the judge as trustee and the prosecutor as executor of the constructive trust (case #…), so it is their job to settle the accounting. The prosecutor charged the trust account and created the debt, so it is he who is liable for repaying and balancing it.

They break their own rules, by their fraud of failing to perform their duties. Saying, “I will appeal this, as a matter of law, to a higher court, if court rules are broken” means the judge won’t get his commission, based upon his fraud.

TRUSTEESHIP

Since no one can be trustee of both the CQV (BC) Trust and the Constructive Trust (Case#….), at same time, they do a “bait and switch”. They use the CQV trust to create a temporary, constructive trust––the case. The matter/case is a trust apart from, but attached to, the CQV trust. The bonds are added to the constructive trust, at clerk’s office.

THREE FORMS of COURT

1 - UCC, equity, commerce: it’s all about property rights

2 - Maritime, Canon: only now can the judge cite for contempt, impose fines, jail time, etc.

3 - Talmud: the judge returns as priest. Most do not go this far, as, by now, he already knows that we know, and so he knows it’s over for him.

RECESS

When the judge calls for a recess, it means he is going for a bigger stick. He intends to change courts. We ought to say, “I do not consent to the form of court being changed. For and on record, I object to judge changing the form of court from Equity to Canon/Admiralty. If you insist, I’ll reassert my rights upon your return.”

FORECLOSURE

The clerk is the Senior Ecclesiastical Officer and can assign Title over to the bank. We are tenant, the mortgage is the lien/lease/loan. We do not and cannot ‘own’ anything. The bank does NOT want us to pay the mortgage which is the interest, aka rent, because they want us to be delinquent, i.e.: incompetent in performance––which is the main point of the contract––in order that we lose our claim. When we pay some form of rent, even if only $50 a month, we change our status from ‘delinquent’ to ‘competent’ and this allows us to remain in honour which is the entire matter. They do not want us to behave honourably. The bank/court cannot force us to leave property, yet, we must address our “standing”. Then we can use their procedure against them. We must challenge the CQV Trust.

If one gets to court re: foreclosure: “As a tenant in this matter, with only ‘right of use’ of property, I ask for a stay as I haven’t exhausted my administrative options.” We can do this in order to buy time to do an Ecclesiastical Deed Poll (EDP) on original issue, through the clerk (protonotary/trustee of the CQV trust) or the chaplain of the court. They must forgive, in open court, or they have lost their Ecclesiastical authority.

A woman told the attorney for the bank, “Just so you know, we will be coming in at a superior, property-holder, competent position and we know and understand the three forms of court.” The attorney rang her later and said the case is dropped.

PLEA

When asked how we plea, we can say, “I wish to ask, as a matter of law, are you presiding as Trustee of this matter––the Constructive Trust––case #1234? “ If a negative response, “Without seeking an appeal to another court, as a matter of law, I merely ask, are you presiding as administrator of CQV trust, from which the Constructive Trust is created?”

It is not good to mention “contract” because they DO have a contract… with our parents, which is how the CQV trust was created.

JAIL

There are 3 CQV trusts: name, flesh, soul. Due to this, we have no property rights, so they can ‘lawfully’ hold us, but if a friend of one who is incarcerated establishes himself as competent, he can demand that his property be returned. So, he changes his standing and demands his property be returned, as he has a higher claim. OR, the friend can send an EDP so, at the hearing, the EDP is in the court. “As friend of court, I seek leave of the court so my friend can complete EDP, witnessed by court.” If declined, “I seek leave of court for an appeal on a matter of law that you are not permitting this man a fair defence and to establish his standing.”

I know of a woman who was being transported from jail to prison. When she arrived, she was asked her name. As a body, she was worthless to them; they needed the name and they needed her to BE the name. She surprised them by saying, “If you don’t know who I am, how can you imprison me?” and they let her go because she refused to give them the name of the account which they intended to charge and against which to float the bond.

EDP (Ecclesiastical Deed Poll)?

All matters are about property and trusts. The EDP establishes us as property-holder and so, then we have rights and can claim our property, whether it is our friends in jail or our homes. All they have left is force, fear, threats, intimidation. They are criminals, pirates, and parasites.

For ANY presentment we receive, we ought to send an EDP.?http://one-heaven.org/ecclesiastical_deed_poll/edp_introduction.htm

“PAPER”

Attacking commerce commercially, –– from the level of commerce–– is a powerless venture. Since 1983 Canon Law, it is our “paper” which condemns us. The only paper which will work for us is the EDP process on blue paper, signed with our blood. We must attack commerce, ecclesiastically–– from the only level which the parasites respect, fear, and derive their alleged power. They can––and do––change the codes (e.g.: UCC) and rules of commerce which they operate, however, they are powerless to change Ecclesiastical Canon Law because they are under it and must obey it; they do not and cannot ‘operate’ it.

VEHICLES

I might go over to MVD (DMV)/Registry and put down the Certificate of Title and ask, “Who owns the vehicle represented by this?” She will look at it and read, “JOHN DOE”. Then, I’d ask, “Who owns the JOHN DOE Trust?” She won’t know so I would tell her, “It is owned by STATE (PROVINCE) OF ___. How do I know this? This (birth certificate) document proves it. Since the owner of anything is always the trustee and the trustee is always the liable party, then, “owner always pays”. (If A=B and B=C, then, A=C). Accordingly, since the vehicle is owned by STATE OF ___, then STATE OF ___ is the one which must pay for the insurance, registration, taxes, etc. If you claim I am inaccurate or that I am the one liable to pay, then, you’ll have to prove it.” We could just put the titles of our cars into the name of the state/province, as it already owns them, anyway. In a sense we will be donating the car, but, why not? How can the cops steal a car from the state when it belongs to the state?

ALLOCUTION

This is the time when the judge must quote all law he is using to sentence and it is also when we can comment on their offer of sentence. You are free to decline. Anything done or signed under duress has no legal standing. To “comply” under duress is not the same as to “consent”. “I state, for and on the record, that I was under threat of physical assault, so I signed. Now, I am lodging my appeal to a higher court, as a matter of law, because all I said or did was under duress and therefore unlawful. I was psychologically and physically abused.” If we, as beneficiary, accept the sentence, aka benefit, then they make us executor which means that it is we who enforce our own sentencing.

COURT

I still will not go to court. No one has the authority to tell me what to do. Send an EDP, in advance, or have someone go in your place, so that you will not, inadvertently, admit to being the trustee. What’s the worst that can happen to the representative, when he can prove he is someone other than the trust/trustee.

We must show our competence by asking questions, politely. We can stand at bar and say, “I have an important paper to give to clerk. May I ask, with respect, as a matter of law, before I cross bar, what role each of you is playing here today, with respect to the trust which is being charged.” Ask a second and THIRD time. “As a matter of law, is the Prosecutor acting as Executor of the Trust and are you acting as Trustee of the Trust of this matter?” They’ll likely be rude, but don’t sink to their level. “Respectfully, it is a matter of law for me to know the roles we’re all playing and then I’ll be willing cross the bar and engage. If you don’t answer, I’ll be lodging an appeal and I appeal now that this matter be suspended so I can request an interlocutory argument and have this question answered. If you are the Trustee, then here is my EDP.” The judge does not want the case appealed because, if it is over-turned, then he will pay, from his own trust account which is his commissions.

We are of absolutely NO value to them until we give them details of an account which they can charge. They cannot gain from us unless we give them the name of a trust to charge. The name, not we, is the only value we can offer. “Are you JOHN DOE?” “I couldn’t possibly be a trust account.” We do not require a name for anything other than commercial purposes––school, services, doctor, memberships, bank account, benefits, etc. This is why they are so adamant that we carry “ID”. What if we had nothing to identify the trust? Their system would crash if they couldn’t get any of us to BE the trust, in order to authorize them to use it. They would starve to death. We, as just plain-old men and women, without names, are no good to them. We are not slaves via our bodies; we are slaves, only via the account.

In California, the people complained that the “undocumented Mexican immigrants”, aka “illegal aliens”, were causing violence, crimes, vandalism, etc. and the cops and the courts were doing nothing about it. It seemed as if “illegal aliens” were the problem. But, the District Attorney said, “Anything short of murder we won’t prosecute.” If only the people knew what he meant, they would shift their rage from the “illegal aliens” to the DA and his ilk.

“Undocumented” means there is no trust account to charge, which is why the government wants them all to have driver licences. The DA won’t prosecute because he can’t; there is nothing and no one to charge. Men and women cannot be charged; only trust accounts can be charged and, since there is no account, due to no documents to create them, there is no way to make money off these “immigrants”. Murder is a different story. This means the “illegals” took out of the commerce game someone with an account and so, in that case, the DA will prosecute. Wait until the people of California figure out that the real “problem” of the “undocumented Mexican immigrants” is, as always, “ALL ABOUT MONEY”.

What about the cost to repair and compensate? Well, it comes from the Public Trust, as does everything else which requires public funding. They want us connected to ‘Named’ trust accounts which make up the Public Trust, solely to confiscate our cash. This is tantamount to “uninsured” drivers or people without passports. We don’t really require car insurance or passports because all payments for injuries come from the public trust which WE have already funded. Causing us to believe that we are “personally liable” is how they steal our cash.

I think the real question is, how can we render worthless the CQV trust account, so there will be nothing for them to charge, even if they do track down the account? If we all did this, it would end this insane system. They would prefer to keep it alive but the only way to do this, once we threaten to kill the accounts, is to begin to behave honourably and follow their rules.

“To find your life you must lose it”. I’ll bet this means: “Our life is commerce; commerce is our life.” The only way to lose our life is to get out of commerce. The only way to get out of commerce is to CLOSE THE CQV TRUST ACCOUNT.

The only way to close the CQV account is to claim our body to be in the Divine Trust. This will bring their fraud to a screeching halt.
http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/?p=176





TheNewSaint
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1186
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:35 am

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby TheNewSaint » Mon Feb 05, 2018 12:41 am

You can find the actual Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 online. It's an archaic estate law for people who went missing. Where people find all this modern meaning in it, I have no idea.

Athis
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 12:26 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Athis » Mon Feb 05, 2018 1:20 am

Yes I had a look at that old Cestui Que Vie Act. It looks straight forward and practical to me given the times. I dont see where the sovs get their arcane interpretations from. Sovs seem to abuse the letter of the law in a similar way fundamentalists abuse the word of god (as they usually refer to their holy books). They extract phrases out of context to make them say whatever they imagine or desire.
Perhaps I am expecting too much asking for a rational explanation as to why the government would deposit money in an account for every child born in the US. Apparently it began with Elvick who claimed $630,000 was deposited in each account. By the time it gets to Heather it has risen to several billion; and I understand she claimed in court in Knoxville that the sum owed to her now is several quintillions of dollars. She's charging them compound interest I guess.
I'm looking forward to the transcript.

User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Pottapaug1938 » Mon Feb 05, 2018 4:03 am

Burnaby49 wrote:
And, why couldn't Dubya Bush simply go to the TV station nearest wherever he was and make the broadcast from there? Certainly, he would have had a copy of the announcement with him, so that he could make sure that everything was in order (at the very least -- I mean, if someone is going to force Bush to broadcast the NESARA announcement, they are going to make sure that he broadcasts it; and if he says something like "oh -- I left the announcement in the White House/it's in New York", those who are forcing Bush to make the announcement will be only too happy to supply him with another copy of it)?


You've got it backward. In the Dove NESARA mythology Bush did not want to make the announcement. He is one of the Illuminati. He was being forced to do it by US Navy SEALs. If I remember correctly he was allowed to go to Florida because the SEALS had, on threat of death for treason, forced him to record it ahead of time and the recording was to be broadcast from the World Trade Center at 10AM. The dark forces made sure that the only copy of the recording was destroyed in the attack. Once Dove's followers swallowed this she knew she had them and she brought in the Blessed Saint Germain and friendly alien allies.


Silly me.

You'd think that any minimally competent SEAL unit would remember to... um, make a few copies of the effing announcement; and then descend on the nearest TV station, in helicopters, assault vehicles and whatnot, and get the announcement on the air.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 6033
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Burnaby49 » Mon Feb 05, 2018 4:18 am

Silly me.

You'd think that any minimally competent SEAL unit would remember to... um, make a few copies of the effing announcement; and then descend on the nearest TV station, in helicopters, assault vehicles and whatnot, and get the announcement on the air.


Silly you again. How could Dove have woven the tale of Bush having stopped NESARA at the last moment and then delayed the announcement for years if her story was based on minimally competent Navy SEALs?
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

Jeffrey
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2612
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 2:16 am

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Jeffrey » Mon Feb 05, 2018 4:57 am

So I was digging through the old OPPT thread and found this:

The newest thing is someone discovered the routing number for the US treasury and then a few them went and paid all their bills using the US treasury routing number and their social security number as the account (because they are "drawing from their strawmans," the common sov'run myth). They then celebrated because the payment's didnt bounce for a day or two, then freaked when all the payments bounced and they all got hit with late fees AND had their credit cards shut down for fraud.


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9038&start=1020#p165898

That was January 2014. Heather's first templates for accessing TDA accounts came out at the same time:

http://i-uv.com/wp-content/uploads/2013 ... _ECALL.pdf

You can see that she started with a Winston Shrout style bond, says it's trying to draw upon a "Treasury Direct Deposit Account", gives her account number as her social security number, routing number, etc, the whole shebang.

So I'm a bit confused on the three and a half year gap between Heather's first mention of TDA accounts and the flare up in July 2017.

User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Pottapaug1938 » Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:08 am

Burnaby49 wrote:
Silly me.

You'd think that any minimally competent SEAL unit would remember to... um, make a few copies of the effing announcement; and then descend on the nearest TV station, in helicopters, assault vehicles and whatnot, and get the announcement on the air.


Silly you again. How could Dove have woven the tale of Bush having stopped NESARA at the last moment and then delayed the announcement for years if her story was based on minimally competent Navy SEALs?


She would have found a way. When your entire premise is based on delusion and fantasy, anything can be devised to explain away the uncomfortable facts. If the SEALs (and Delta Force commandos -- don't forget them!) had forced their way into every TV station in the country, Dove and friends would have authoritative proof that a secret CIA frequency-deadener (or something like that) would have kept the announcement off of the airwaves.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools

User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby grixit » Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:18 am

"OF" also means "without"


Well that's a new one!

I wonder how they'd parse a sentence that contained both "of" and "includes".
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 5013
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby Pottapaug1938 » Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:29 am

Athis wrote:Yes I had a look at that old Cestui Que Vie Act. It looks straight forward and practical to me given the times. I dont see where the sovs get their arcane interpretations from. Sovs seem to abuse the letter of the law in a similar way fundamentalists abuse the word of god (as they usually refer to their holy books). They extract phrases out of context to make them say whatever they imagine or desire.

Perhaps I am expecting too much asking for a rational explanation as to why the government would deposit money in an account for every child born in the US. Apparently it began with Elvick who claimed $630,000 was deposited in each account. By the time it gets to Heather it has risen to several billion; and I understand she claimed in court in Knoxville that the sum owed to her now is several quintillions of dollars. She's charging them compound interest I guess.
I'm looking forward to the transcript.


It's also reasonable to ask why, if everyone is owed the quadrilahunkijamotchimajillions in their secret Treasury accounts, and the swag actually gets paid out to us all, there wouldn't be staggeringly high inflation which would put them right back into their double-wides.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools

User avatar
JohnPCapitalist
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:54 pm

Re: OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

Postby JohnPCapitalist » Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:36 am

Jeffrey wrote:So I was digging through the old OPPT thread and found this:

The newest thing is someone discovered the routing number for the US treasury and then a few them went and paid all their bills using the US treasury routing number and their social security number as the account (because they are "drawing from their strawmans," the common sov'run myth). They then celebrated because the payment's didnt bounce for a day or two, then freaked when all the payments bounced and they all got hit with late fees AND had their credit cards shut down for fraud.


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=9038&start=1020#p165898

That was January 2014. Heather's first templates for accessing TDA accounts came out at the same time:

http://i-uv.com/wp-content/uploads/2013 ... _ECALL.pdf

You can see that she started with a Winston Shrout style bond, says it's trying to draw upon a "Treasury Direct Deposit Account", gives her account number as her social security number, routing number, etc, the whole shebang.

So I'm a bit confused on the three and a half year gap between Heather's first mention of TDA accounts and the flare up in July 2017.


I'm going to speculate on this one: if she tried to actually present one of these at a bank, I'm sure it didn't go well. Either they told her to bugger off straightaway or they sent a copy to Risk Management or internal investigators who would check it out and determine that it was nonsense. She might have had a couple close calls if she actually attempted to pass this nonsense herself.

The idea of taking the concept and using it to scam the float on provisionally approved e-checks probably came later, maybe after she heard that other fraudsters had figured out how to rip off Amazon and then she figured that this was a lot easier to deal with. If you ordered stuff on Amazon with a fake name and a fake SSN on top of a Fed routing number, and they came after you you could just say "must be a scammer, I have no idea what is going on." At that point, she could go public with the scam.


Return to “US”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Common Crawl [Bot], Google [Bot] and 0 guests