This blog: IN NAME ONLY; is a response to a comment from an earlier blog called: IT’S THE FIRST OF THREE KEYS.  I am replying in a paragraph-by-paragraph manner, because the comment, while shows that the commenter is truly thinking; there are elements of “over-thinking” certain issues.  One of those issues is: “who owns property since you are not your name or and someone else…some Wizard behind the scenes…owns YOUR NAME?”  Another issue,  if everything in the system is “IN THE NAME” and you don’t own your own NAME/name; then who has the fiduciary duties?

Okay…see what I mean?  The issue is getting complicated for me, just trying to describe it.  But, this is what the Patriot Rabbit does.

In addition to a line-by-line analysis; “we” have produced an audio that is just over one hour long that goes along with this commentary.  It is something like a “fireside chat” between Aaron and I.  Although we vaguely talk about blog and comments; what is discussed in the audio, more than anything else is having an “IMPERATIVE MINDSET” versus indulging in “SUBJECTIVE THINKING”.   For the sake of providing a quick “Reason”; take the founders of the United States of America.  They formed a New Compact to get away from the “Arbitrary Nature” of the King of Great Britain.  It was an IMPERATIVE ACT for them.

And the RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION requires an IMPERATIVE MINDSET.   If I were asked to sum up this Imperative Nature into one word; that word would be… MUST.

This is a long three page study, but necessary.  The rest of the first page is dedicated to Terry’s comment to me and the last two pages will cover my responses. The audio will immediately follow in the next blog “Its Imperative Fireside Chat“.  Enjoy.    —-dpw

---

Terry 
smonebull@???
2010/10/07 at 6:11 am

It’s the First 3 Keys

A very inter­est­ing con­ver­sa­tion (about the 3 KEYS TO FREEDOM) and I can see the angle that Dario has taken to try and help out the ‘man on the street’ who unfor­tu­nately doesn’t ‘see’ any of this because of the rea­sons David has given. If Joe Schmo was helped out for the house then he would imme­di­ately revert back to every­thing else that got him into that sit­u­a­tion in the first place. A quick solu­tion, for one thing, does not make the entire problem/issue go away.

Some­thing I find most inter­est­ing is the aspect of alle­ga­tion of fraud on the mort­gages though. In fact, any­thing else for that mat­ter that has been entered into by way of a sup­posed ‘con-tract’.

My own research is lead­ing me to see that the cor­po­rate struc­ture of the world is essen­tially Vat­i­can dri­ven with all roads lead­ing to Rome. The UK and the City State of Lon­don cer­tainly seem to be a seat of the ‘Crown’ where the ‘Tem­ple Bar’ etc are located. There are obvi­ous con­nec­tions to the Vat­i­can from here and the belief that the ‘Crown’ is, in fact, the ‘Pope’ with a frontwoman called QEII.

As we know and as is well doc­u­mented, the ‘Pope’ claims to own the entire world.

This brings me to the ‘Name’. The Birth Cer­tifi­cate in the UK has 2 dis­tinct­ful points upon it which clearly state;
1) It should never be used as per­sonal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion
2) It is clearly marked as ‘Crown Copyright’.

Now, I know there is much talk about the ‘Name’ and its use­age but there does seem to be some very inter­est­ing aspects to this as well.

The ‘Name’ which is the ‘Given Name’ by the parent/Informant is, in law, ‘Prop­erty’. This prop­erty is ‘Given’ to the Crown rep­re­sen­ta­tive (The Regis-trar) and is recorded accord­ingly. It would appear that the ‘Name’ as ‘Prop­erty’ then has a Fidu­ciary Owner (The Crown).

How­ever, the child grows up believ­ing that the ‘Name’ is theirs and treats it as such.

Of course, the Birth Cer­tifi­cate lends itself to the fact that the ‘Name’ is indeed ‘owned’ by the ‘Crown’ (The Pope) as of course, the Pope seems to own everything.

It could be that when the ‘Name’ is ‘Given’ (Gifted) by the parent/informant to the regis-trar then, of course, it is then sent to the ‘Recorder General’s Office’ (obvi­ously a mil­i­tary appoint­ment) where a ‘con-version may take place. The ‘Name’ (which is prop­erty) is gifted to the State. One of the def­i­n­i­tions of ‘con­ver­sion’ in law is ”the con­ver­sion of real prop­erty to a per­son­al­ity and vice versa”. (Person-ality).

If we then look closer at this then it would be rea­son­able to accept that the ‘Name’ is owned by the Crown and that as such they have the Fidu­ciary respon­si­bil­ity for its ‘use’.

If the ‘Name’ has been used to enter into mort­gage agree­ments to pur­chase prop­erty then this tells me 2 things;
1) It is the ‘Name’ that is pur­chas­ing the prop­erty, not the ‘Man’/‘Woman’
2) The ‘Name’ may be ‘owned’ by the Crown, not the ‘Man’ using the ‘Name’

This tells me that a ‘fraud’ can­not be com­mit­ted by the ‘Man’ as the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ is not him.

Of course, it is easy to point out that the ‘Man’ has been using the ‘Name’ as an owner and there­fore should accept that respon­si­bilty but some­thing tells me it isn’t as easy as that and ‘mis-takes’ have been made.

We all know or cer­tainly sus­pect we are being treated as slaves as per the maxim that you are the slave to the one you are in debt to. How­ever, we also know that you may not own the ‘Name’ and by way of regis-tration of a house/property, you do not ‘own’ the prop­erty either. This is where they are split­ting titles using Trusts. There­fore, the lia­bil­ity of the alleged ‘debt’ goes to the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’.

Money itself cer­tainly seems to be pri­vate and copy­right and tied into the sys­tem of the ‘Name’ and prop­erty. If the Crown owns every­thing then yes, they can deal with it in sim­ple Trust Law for­ma­tions to split titles and give the illu­sion of own­er­ship. They can do what­ever they want with the ‘Name’ as they ‘own’ it.

It would also be rea­son­able to con­clude that each time you ‘claim’ the ‘name’ (some­one else’s prop­erty — The Crown’s maybe) then that could be deemed an act of War. In fact, any­time you use it to claim own­er­ship of any­thing at all then it could be deemed an act of War as the Crown (Pope) is deemed to own everything.

So, if there is suf­fi­cient evi­dence to sus­pect you are not the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ then it would be fair to con­clude that if you make any claims on that name you are in fact plac­ing your­self firmly into the role of a Cit­i­zen and a ‘slave’ and com­mit­ting acts of War.

I did some research into ‘Inden­tured Ser­vants’ and it cer­tainly appeared that those who entered into it were totally owned by their ‘Mas­ters’. Stran­g­ley enough, around the same time that for­mal ‘Inden­ture Cer­tifi­cates’ of this nature were phased out, Birth Cer­tifi­cates quickly fol­lowed. This is around the mid-1800’s. Mas­ters were how­ever respon­si­ble for the feed­ing, cloth­ing and aco­mo­dat­ing of the ‘servant/slave’.

Any­way, I’m just pick­ing up on the ‘fraud’ aspect and belief that the ‘Man’ com­mits this fraud by ‘sign­ing’ mort­gage agree­ments and I’m not fully con­vinced that may be true. The lia­bil­ity of the ‘Name’ used is not upon the one using it if the mis-take is cor­rectly iden­ti­fied and for­give­ness sought. In any case, the ‘Man’ does not own the house, the ‘Name’ does and the ‘Man’ does not seem to ‘own’ the ‘Name’. The only advan­tage the ‘Man’ has gained is to have shel­ter and if the mar­ket turned upwards then the pos­si­bil­ity of a ‘profit’ by way of ‘ben­e­fi­cial title’ of the house. We must not lose sight of the fact that the ‘Man’ may have put a lot of his own time and effort, sweat equity and ‘money’ into extend­ing, dec­o­rat­ing and improv­ing and main­tain­ing the house. All the ben­e­fit of this swiftly taken away by the manip­u­la­tion of the mar­ket prices being forced down­wards quite delib­er­ately (or so it seems to me now and even historically).

If we look at ‘usufruc­tary’ and the fact that ‘Man/Woman’ has nat­ural domin­ion of the earth (no-one can claim to ‘own’ it really) then it may be rea­son­able to assume that the ‘Name’ can be used but not claimed.

I agree with the aspect of the State being at war with the cit­i­zen as per the Lieber Code in the USA but is the State at War with Peace­ful Inhab­i­tants who make no claims of ownership?

Does a ‘Peace­ful Inhab­i­tant’ who oper­ates strictly as such have to look to form a new Nation State?

Can a Peace­ful Inhab­i­tant con­tinue to live and use the house he is cur­rently using if there is no other higher claim? Does the bank have a higher claim if they did not oppose the Man when he moved in?

If you realise you do not ‘own’ but merely ‘use’ the ‘Name’ in com­merce then can you be deemed to be ‘State­less’? If you ‘use’ the ‘Name’ in any­thing at all and you don’t ‘own’ it, and this fact has never been pointed out to you, then should you really carry the respon­si­bil­ity once you have realised the mis-take? (like fraud for example)

If I use the ‘Name’ to do a process of cre­at­ing my own new State and I do not ‘own’ the ‘Name’ I am doing the process in, then could that be deemed an act of War as well?

If we are say­ing there is no issue around the own­er­ship of the ‘Name’ then why is it used the way it is and who ben­e­fits from its ‘use’? I would sug­gest it quite rightly is ‘prop­erty’ and does have an owner/fiduciary with lia­bil­ity. If that ‘owner’ is me then it’s high time I started issu­ing ‘user’ agree­ments for any­one try­ing to extract my value by using my prop­erty. If how­ever as I sus­pect I am not the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ and realise my mis-take then it is high time the ‘owner’ started to meet his oblig­a­tions. If I can­not ‘own’ any­thing then why should I pay (and how can I ) and how can I (the Man) com­mit fraud?

As per the Birth Cert. It says clearly upon it ”not to be used as per­sonal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion” and of course, there is no law that I know of that says the ‘Name’ can be used as per­sonal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion or that the ‘Name’ is per­sonal iden­ti­fi­ca­tion. Unless one vol­un­teers to claim it as such of course which we now know may be an act of War as you tres­pass on some­one else’ prop­erty (The Crown’s), fall into dis­hon­our and cause con­tro­versy for the courts.

The Ego wants to ‘own’ the ‘Name’ and any­thing else it can ‘empire build’ with. I agree, it is time to con­trol the Ego. If every­one wants to ‘own’ it causes peo­ple to hoard and wants more.

Wow, my com­ment has turned into a book.

Any­way, there may be some other very valid points around the ‘Name’ I have not con­sid­ered and I may be totally wrong in my con­clu­sions so far. I am always happy to learn more and change my think­ing in line with new information.

Thank you

---

Terry,

This is a long comment…yes a “book” if you will.  And, it would be impossible for me to be able to answer so many points by merely “commenting” below your comment.  This requires some analysis and I believe it will be good for you and many others in terms of “straightening out” certain “perceptions” about the current Global or US/UK system.   My answers to your queries and “wondering about the system” and “who’s the responsible fiduciary”; starts in your comments at Paragraph #5.  I will use different colors for your comments and mine…so that hopefully people don’t get lost in this.

If the ‘Name’ has been used to enter into mortgage agreements to purchase property then this tells me 2 things;1)  It is the ‘Name’ that is purchasing the property, not the ‘Man’/’Woman’  2)  The ‘Name’ may be ‘owned’ by the Crown, not the ‘Man’ using the ‘Name’.

It may not even be owned, but held in trust (by the US or the UK or whatever Nation) and trademarked.  When you use the Trademark; you are using trust property.  The Nation-State was the grantor of the trust. I hear Patriots claim all the time that “you” granted the Trust when you were born.  Really now; how could it be that you granted anything “when you are born”?   You had no physical or legal capacity to do anything; much less making a decision on Granting a Trust.

No, the state to and for which you were “enrolled” into their “registry” is the Grantor.  The parents surrendered that to the State; because they themselves were slaves and had no right to do otherwise.

In any case, this comes from to “who’s operating the Trust”; acting on behalf of or making a decision for the Trust.  Are the decisions and actions in accordance with the wishes of the Grantor.  The Grantor did pledge the slave ( a commercial energy unit) to a previously existing debt; to which the “parens” agreed, because they (themselves) already had a similar pledge.  The word: pledge also can mean a “pawn” and they became pawns and submitted you to the same pawn-program.

This tells me that a ‘fraud’ cannot be committed by the ‘Man’ as the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ is not him. He is the operator, Trustee, beneficial holder, middleman…etc.  These are meanings for the position out of the code.  And the beneficial holder/middleman/trustee is identified in their code as the “adverse party” to the Grantor.

Of course, it is easy to point out that the ‘Man’ has been using the ‘Name’ as an owner and therefore should accept that responsibility but something tells me it isn’t as easy as that and ‘mis-takes’ have been made. He’s been using it as “trustee”.  The only reason that people in the United States go to prison is for being a bad trustee.  I have told people that for many years.

We all know or certainly suspect we are being treated as slaves as per the maxim that you are the slave to the one you are in debt to.  However, we also know that you may not own the ‘Name’ and by way of regis-tration of a house/property, you do not ‘own’ the property either.  This is where they are splitting titles using Trusts.  Therefore, the liability of the alleged ‘debt’ goes to the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’.

They transfer that through “use”.  Look up “constitutor” in Black’s Law Dictionary.  It means: “One who by simple agreement becomes responsible for the payment of another’s debts”.   If you look at a bank account holder contract; and they’re all the same, it states: “Your position with the Bank is that of Debtor.”  This is how you’re paying the debts, as a Federal Agent of one of their Federal Banks under Title 12: Section 90.   You are their Trustee…to help them pay the debt as an agent of the constitutor called “Founders or People of the United States”.  They set it up….you operate it.  It is through use and usury that you are “in the DEBT/DEATH system”.  People have “sown the wind”…nothing; and that is what they are going to reap.  But, “their energy” or “current” has been used as “Debt/death currency” or “Current of the SEE…i.e. “THE HOLY SEE”; to foster death and murder and destruction around the planet.  And Universally, people are not going to be absolved of this collusion…and the “Powers” are here to make sure that “you or people” that are allied with the “unrighteous Throne” and allied with this Debt/Death system “pay the price” for “licensing” (lie-sins) all of this Licentiousness.  There is only one SOLUTION to handle this problem…and that is to “be in the world” but not “of their world” by creating “our own world”.  That is the right of self-determination.

Money itself certainly seems to be private and copyright and tied into the system of the ‘Name’ and property.  If the Crown owns everything then yes, they can deal with it in simple Trust Law formations to split titles and give the illusion of ownership.  They can do whatever they want with the ‘Name’ as they ‘own’ it. There is more to it that this, but the principle is sound.  They don’t “need or want” to use the name; except to “raise Capital”.  That is why they “CAPITALIZE THE NAME”; to raise capital/capitol.  They do it from the Capitol because it is a Capital Idea.

It would also be reasonable to conclude that each time you ‘claim’ the ‘name’ (someone else’s property – The Crown’s maybe) then that could be deemed an act of War.  In fact, anytime you use it to claim ownership of anything at all then it could be deemed an act of War as the Crown (Pope) is deemed to own everything. I would agree unless there was an exception called for using Variation by Agreement and Modification of Treaty.

So, if there is sufficient evidence to suspect you are not the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ then it would be fair to conclude that if you make any claims on that name you are in fact placing yourself firmly into the role of a Citizen and a ‘slave’ and committing acts of War. The claims fall specifically within that category.  The claims made are attempts to shift the debtor “NAME” from the Trust-Grantor to any other party, including that “Secured Party Creditor” position; are acts that “defraud the United States” under Title: 12 Section 1003 and 1005.  These violations are worth at least 1 million ($) in fines and up to 30 years in prison.  These violations are also acts of Treason, Insurrection, and Rebellion; and during a state of Wartime in the US (which is perpetual); these violations are punishable by death.  Re: Jerry Kahne and the shoot-out in Memphis, TN…for “questioning the debts of the United States”.

Until you are out of their System…the Matrix….you are in it.

Anyway, I’m just picking up on the ‘fraud’ aspect and belief that the ‘Man’ commits this fraud by ‘signing’ mortgage agreements and I’m not fully convinced that may be true.  The liability of the ‘Name’ used is not upon the one using it if the mis-take is correctly identified and forgiveness sought.  In any case, the ‘Man’ does not own the house, the ‘Name’ does and the ‘Man’ does not seem to ‘own’ the ‘Name’.  The only advantage the ‘Man’ has gained is to have shelter and if the market turned upwards then the possibility of a ‘profit’ by way of ‘beneficial title’ of the house.   We must not lose sight of the fact that the ‘Man’ may have put a lot of his own time and effort, sweat equity and ‘money’ into extending, decorating and improving and maintaining the house.

The “man” is the one that moves the pen.  This Universe is about “intent”, and the paper proves the intent.   The word: “deed” is the Old English word for the word: “dead”.   So the “deed” in Equity is “dead” and it can grant no ownership; because that would be “onerous”.  Therefore, the transfer that takes place is only for an “equity interest” in the property as Trustee, or beneficial interest “holder”.  The man is “holding” the interest, but does not own it.  In the United States, all private property is “in the hands of State”, and everyone else is a “mere user” according to the Penhallow v. Doane’s case and according to Senate Resolution #62.

And, of course, according to Executive Order and the IRS Code; the “Man” is an ENEMY OF THE STATE and the ADVERSE PARTY to the Grantor as a member of “that State” or “their State.

---

All the benefit of this swiftly taken away by the manipulation of the market prices being forced downwards quite deliberately (or so it seems to me now and even historically).

The markets are controlled, but you cannot dis-count that ac-count-ability factors of the participation of people in “choosing” to accept and believe in the system…as if it is their “god”.  It is in fact, their “god” because they want “guarantees” from “it”….their “God-overnment”.  The “G” is Masonic and it’s in the Square.   The root words “over” and “men” are likewise in THE WORD.  This is their “logos” or “logo”; their flag.  That flag is the King’s colors (i.e. UK); and the colors of their “vessel”:  the East India Company.

So, the “Man” is in a company of other men for the EIC; and are paid wages to wage war for the EIC.  So, the Universe moves the scale up and down based on the misrepresentation of the “Man” or “people” within the culture/Society; who claim that they want peace while paying for and supporting a war.  What’s the point?

Let’s look how this plays out in pure “representation” of people’s “intent”.  We’re talking about markets and the “Man”ipulation of them…in this case, “the housing market”.  So, the “system” offers to “Man” the ability to “mortgage” property for debt/death based on a formula for payback via verified ability and track record to “pay off the loan”.   What happens in 2002 is that the System “test” the “Man/people” by offering NO DOC/STATED INCOME loans.   All these loans create a fictitious and felonious increase in the price of property…or a “bubble”.

Why?

Because these are now affectionately called “Liar’s Loans” and the bubble comes from all the “hot air” that “Man/people” are pumping into the World/system.  So, who’s at fault, the SYSTEM or the “Man/people”?

No one forced all of these people to lie and “misrepresent” themselves.  See, this is a microcosm of the big picture or macrocosm.  It leads to the understanding of the ancient maxim: “All people end up getting the “God-over-N-Men-t” that they deserve.”

This Planet must have “government” due to “Man’s nature”; since every individual is not willing to Self-govern and act in accordance with higher universal principles; without the lying and misrepresentation.  But, since “we” don’t believe in the lies and misrepresentations, then to have the kind/form of government “we” deserve; we must build it.  Simple.

I agree with the aspect of the State being at war with the citizen as per the Lieber Code in the USA; but is the State at War with Peaceful Inhabitants who make no claims of ownership? It depends on what you’re in collusion with.  If the State you belong to is “at War”, then you are “at War”.  You’re in a COMPANY OF SOLDIERS…ie. “Souls/sols that SOLD themselves”.  There is no fence.   In the International Law, it states that the Federated State or International Juristic Person (a Nation) is viewed as a “Sole Person”.  In the US they tell you on that stuff called “money” that the System is E PLURIBUS UNUM; which means “out of many; ONE”.  You saw the MATRIX.  Didn’t those plugged into the MATRIX TOWERS look like “one unit”

Does a ‘Peaceful Inhabitant’ who operates strictly as such have to look to form a new Nation State? Look at the predecessors.  How did anyone ever “come out” from under tyranny?  The founders of the U.S.A. formed a “new state” and wrote in their Declaration that “governments are instituted among men to secure their Rights.  And among those Rights, they listed peace, safety, and happiness.  I will tell you plainly that building the State is the Ultimate Asset Protection Program.  It brings IMMUNITY by Agreement. And, it identifies you “intent” and “States” to a candid world why you are here on Earth.  Otherwise; there is no fence and you belong to them.  Either that or you are “stateless”; which is the single most undesirable “status” on this Planet…because you’re all alone.  Watch the video clip called Barzoon.  THEY are telling the messages to everyone.

Can a Peaceful Inhabitant continue to live and use the house he is currently using if there is no other higher claim?  Do the banks have a higher claim if they did not oppose the Man when he moved in? The banks belong to the state.  The state has the higher claim, here; due to the original willingness of the founders to PLEDGE their lives, fortunes, and honor.  Everyone else abdicated their RESPONS-ABILITY.

If you realize you do not ‘own’ but merely ‘use’ the ‘Name’ in commerce then can you be deemed to be ‘Stateless’?  If you ‘use’ the ‘Name’ in anything at all and you don’t ‘own’ it, and this fact has never been pointed out to you, then should you really carry the responsibility once you have realized the mis-take? (like fraud for example) THE SYSTEM is not responsible for training you in the ways of Contractual Intent and Knowledge.  Those that brought you into this world are responsible for training you.  THE POWERS THAT BE…if you want to call these “men” by that term….THEY train their Posterity.   Are you training yours (if you have offspring)?

If I use the ‘Name’ to do a process of creating my own new State and I do not ‘own’ the ‘Name’ I am doing the process in, then could that be deemed an act of War as well? When you “become the State” and join with others; your name then becomes your name.  And, you may change your name; after all, someone with the gumption and wherewithal to “assume their separate and equal station among the Powers of the Earth”; has the Capacity/Standing to Self Determine their own “name”, or symbol/logo(s), or “logos”…..“calling/Call-sign”.   THE RIGHT OF SELF DETERMINATION is under Peaceful Settlement; and once you assume TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY to be the State (with others of like-mind) and “determine” to develop your cultural, political, and ECONOMIC status (state-us)…then can truly call yourself what you want.  Even in the days of old, there were times that when a Man’s Character changed; there was an associated “name” change.   It’s not necessary, but I offer this concept for your consideration.

If we are saying there is no issue around the ownership of the ‘Name’ then why is it used the way it is and who benefits from its ‘use’? You are right about all of this “inside the box” material; but not about a couple of assumptions that you’re making.  Look at the mortgage for instance.  The entire contract is a fraud, but it is the “Man” that starts the fraud by “lying to the bank” on the first document.  And, the “Man” signs first while the bank watches.  This is the reason that banking requires a “license” (lie-sins) because it is the “Man” who is lying.  But, they call the “Man” the “nominal borrower”.  Nominal means NAME.

The entire “system” is “nominal”; which means “in NAME only”.   But, that is only the FORM and not the Substance of things.  THEY benefit due to the abdication of responsibility to self-govern.  Not to tout “Re-Legion” at all, but look at the “story” about the Hebrews and how they asked for a “king” like the “other nations” had…to “judge them and rule over them and fight their battles for them”.   Have think things changed in 2500 years?  NO.  Read SILENT WEAPONS FOR QUIET WARS…(online search).

I would suggest it quite rightly is ‘property’ and does have an owner/fiduciary with liability.  If that ‘owner’ is me then it’s high time I started issuing ‘user’ agreements for anyone trying to extract my value by using my property. You do this only if you have standing to do so.  Otherwise, you will get pounded by your Master.  And, that is the relationship…Master-Slave.  You must assume your separate and equal station to be the Master of your own vessel/ship.   Remember PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN; AT WORLD’S END?

The “system” or THEY have told everyone in these movies that “UP is DOWN” and that to “get out of hell-Davie Jones’ Locker”, you must “rock the boat”, then turn the ship “upside-down” to be able to right the ship at the “right time”.

If however as I suspect I am not the ‘owner’ of the ‘Name’ and realise my mis-take then it is high time the ‘owner’ started to meet his obligations.  If I cannot ‘own’ anything then why should I pay (and how can I ) and how can I (the Man) commit fraud? You owe due to “usury”.  You are “using” the system and Trust that THEY created.  THEY are not “using it”.  THEY don’t sign for it or on behalf of “it”…the “Man” signs for it.    In the real world, everything is about “use”, because it is the “Man” that moves the pen to sign for or on behalf of; which proves “intent”.  It’s all about “intent” and “volition”.

There is only one factor: you either have Immunity or you do not.  It is the “Man” that has immunity or not; regardless of the “use” of Names.  Then, you operate with Immunity by treaty and agreement on a global International scale.

As per the Birth Cert.  It says clearly upon it ”not to be used as personal identification” and of course, there is no law that I know of that says the ‘Name’ can be used as personal identification or that the ‘Name’ is personal identification.  Unless one volunteers to claim it as such of course which we now know may be an act of War as you trespass on someone else’s property (The Crown’s), fall into dishonour and cause controversy for the courts.  The Ego wants to ‘own’ the ‘Name’ and anything else it can ’empire build’ with. I agree, it is time to control the Ego.  If everyone wants to ‘own’ it causes people to hoard and want more.Ok…I have addressed this, specifically because it is the sort of mental gymnastics that the Patriot Rabbit Hole or Legal Rabbit Hole causes.   In the real world; you have a calling or “call sign”. The world calls that a NAME.  In the real world; it doesn’t matter that the NAME is what “owns” something because it’s all about “contract: use, control, and Immunity”.  You can be what you want and do what you want within the confines of the International Public Order…just as the US and other States/Nations do.

Pledging to build a new State/society makes all of these “arguments” and this type of mental gymnastics a moot point.  Until you become the “State” and pledge with others of like mind to “come out” of their system by assuming the Responsibility and Total Liability to create your own State; then you have no “credit-ability” with which to have Immunity (by Agreement).

The MATRIX is real.  It exist.  You and everyone else are in it.  This concern of dealing with the “nominal system” is only relevant as long as you “deal” as a citizen of THEIR Jurisdiction.

In July, I posted about 6 books and/or PDFs to read.  Among the recommendations was the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Immunity and Protecting Foreign Nationals Abroad.   I suggest that you should read all of this material….along with the Law of Nations; in order to broaden you view of the system, while at the same time… “tightening” you view of the system.

Wow, my comment has turned into a book.  Any­way, there may be some other very valid points around the ‘Name’ I have not con­sid­ered and I may be totally wrong in my con­clu­sions so far. I am always happy to learn more and change my think­ing in line with new information. Not a problem.   Most or many of the conclusions are accurate, but it like saying that you read HUCKLEBERRY FINN and passed a test on a book that was a “made up story”.  If you think that HUCKLEBERRY FINN is a living character; then you will end up in an exercise of futility and drawing a conclusion based on something else besides Reality.

I hope the book I wrote you back was helpful.