______________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog >
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
(62 min 22 Mb)
______________________________
Hello and thanks for listening. This is Frank O’Collins with the audio blog
for Wednesday, November 27, 2013. The topic tonight is the destruction of
Trust by <http://one-evil.org/content/
bankers and why the restoration of Oaths and Vows is key to saving the
world. If you have been listening to the audios, the blogs and the Talkshoe
<http://www.talkshoe.com/
and A that we do, I will apologize this week for those of you listening to
this audio, that I am unable to do a Q and A blog this. I will return to
the
<http://www.talkshoe.com/
and A next week.
If you have been listening for the last few weeks, you know that what we did
last week after many months and months of deep research is that we
re-launched the Ucadia Will and Testament model , the forms, the background,
and the logic as to the absolute importance of reclaiming your Estate. It
is the critical importance of having documentary evidence that you are not
an animal, you are not a slave, you have taken a stand against the system
and you are able to demonstrate that you are perfectly capable of managing
your own affairs. These are the documents that we have uploaded to the
website <http://www.restorelaw.com/> www.restorelaw.com under
<http://restorelaw.com/
<http://restorelaw.com/
With any material in particular that discusses Law there can be quite a deal
of confusion. As I have said many times across this journey, if you are
going to do the kind of investigative research and the kind of “deep-diving’
into history that we are doing with the Ucadia model, you are going to have
change sometimes and realize that an original position taken in good faith
may not in fact be the true essence of a concept of law. That is not
because we are quick to judge, make assumptions or don’t do our due
diligence. It’s the fact that if we take the present system as I have said
in the four sessions and the you-tube videos that are now available
concerning estates, law has become so complex, so convoluted and so
contradictory that you can read every page of every legal dictionary and
every statute which certainly has been in one respect part of this research
and find wholly different attitudes, wholly different definitions. In any
event it has created some confusion and some uncertainty.
For example, I’ll address later on, one of the outstanding claims that is
out there where people say, ‘Why go to the effort of this Will and
Testament? Why go to the effort of this material? I don’t need to fill
this material in.” Why not simply stand there in a court if you know your
identity and you know who you are, that you don’t need these documents? You
just simply go and stand and express who you are. That sounds fine. It
sounds perfectly fine until you get into the history, for example, of the
conversion of law being auricular to the necessity of their being written
evidence that comes in form of such acts as the Act in 1676 against frauds.
In 1676 under King Charles II, unless something is written it has no
existence in law.
So we need to address some of these misunderstandings, confusions or false
presumptions. In the audios and sessions of the YouTube workshop (see
<https://www.youtube.com/
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
tals.pdf> Slides, <https://www.youtube.com/
and
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
es_funds_corporations.pdf> Slides,
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
ncy_business.pdf> Slides and <http://www.youtube.com/watch?
Session 4 and
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
iness.pdf> Slides) and over the last year or longer, I have been referring
to the power of affidavits. The power of affidavits is an essential tool in
moving forward. Yet early on at the beginning of some of our audios we did
have an uncertainty regarding the strength of affidavits. One of the
reasons for that is this issue of oaths, the issue of vows.
Given the confusion and given the fact that the evidence is overwhelming
that <http://one-evil.org/content/
have at least for the last 200 or more years systematically, forensically
and comprehensively sought to destroy Trust within society. And, given that
oaths and vows are fundamental to the formation of Trust, then there must be
something to oaths and there must be something to vows that frightens or
concerns such <http://one-evil.org/content/
and bankers.
Tonight I want to clear the air on these issues. I want to make as certain
as we can the central role that oaths and vows have played in society much
like the concept of Rule of Law has played from the beginning of civilized
society. I want to address why these things have been under siege and
attack by a segment of society that wants to destroy the concept of Trust.
I want to look at the reasons why they have done this and why we should have
no fear regarding these concepts, why we should have no fear in the proper
use of affidavits and why we need to absolutely restore these concepts
moving forward as we have in the concept of Rights and Justice and in the
concept of Rule of Law that all are equal under the law and of course in the
concept of Due Process.
A quick reminder of what is a Trust?
Let’s begin and start with the definition of Trust that we can see under the
Canons of Positive Law when we go to the website,
<http://www.one-heaven.org/> www.one-heaven.org. We will look at
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
I’m going to read some of thee tonight as they are already referenced. I
want to cover some of these because they give us the context. Since we are
talking about trusts, what do we mean about the concept of trust? Here is
Canon 1901 under
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
Trusts in Positive Law:
Canon 1901
A Trust is a fictional Form of Relations and Agreement whereby certain Form,
Rights and Obligations are lawfully conveyed by a Trustor to the control of
one Person created through the Oath of Office of Trustee to manage such
property in accord with the will of the Trustor for the benefit of one or
more other Persons.
That’s a pretty long-winded definition but the key elements that I want to
refer to tonight is the issue that office of Trustee is essential to the
existence of the Trust. And, the office of Trustee is created by the Oath
of the candidate that accepts to become the Trustee. Here we see the oath
being an essential part of the Trust. If one goes to look at definitions
such as implied and constructive trusts, then the definition and the
formality of what I have just described does not exist. We will get to
that in a moment when we talk about Trustee. What I want to emphasize here
is that a Trust cannot exist by the history of Trusts if we exclude this
pseudo-concept of constructive or implied trusts. A Trust cannot only
exist unless there is a Trustee and a Trustee cannot hold an office, who
does not hold the office of Trustee unless there is an oath. That is a
symbiotic relationship that we can find under different language right back
to the very beginning of civilized society.
What then is a Trustee?
A Trust depends on the Trustee and the Trustee depends on the Office of
Trustee and the Oath. Let’s look at
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
Trustee under the Canons of Fiduciary Law under
<http://www.one-heaven.org/> www.one-heaven.org and I will some of these out
as they are critical for us in seeing the power and importance of Oath and
Vow and why they were so essential for the
<http://one-evil.org/content/
destroy, to abrogate and to minimize.
Canon 6993
A Trustee is an Office formed by an Oath to the Terms of Trust and done
before Witnesses to take possession of certain Rights and Property and
perform certain Obligations. The manner and character of a Trustee may be
described as a position of Trust which is equivalent to the term Fiduciary.
Canon 6994
The origin of the concept of Trustee and the fact that such an Office cannot
exist except under sacred Oath is as old as the origin of civilized society
and law itself and has been one of the most constant concepts of law
throughout every age and era. It is founded on the most basic principle that
a man or woman cannot legitimately possess the rights or property of others,
unless they demonstrate the most exemplary and scrupulous character of good
faith, good character and good conscience. Therefore, any repudiation of
this fundamental concept is the repudiation of the Rule of Law and law
itself.
Canon 6995
The valid Oath taken as to the Terms of Trust creates the Office of Trustee.
Therefore in the absence of a valid Oath, no Office may exist.
Canon 6996
The Office of Trustee can only exist and be valid if all the following
criteria exist:
(i) The Trustor has the proper authority to grant, donate, assign or
delegate the property for the proposed Trust; and
(ii) Clear purpose, intent and terms for the proposed Trust exist; and
(iii) Certainty of subject matter (the property) exists for the proposed
Trust exists; and
(iv) The candidate for Trustee comes with good faith, good character and
good conscience; and
(v) The candidate for Trustee accepts the position with full knowledge of
the terms and obligations; and
(vi) The candidate makes a formal sacred oath to a higher Divine power upon
a sacred object representing the form of law connected to such higher Divine
power, before witnesses; and
(vii) The event of making such a formal sacred oath is memoralized into some
document, that itself is signed, sealed and executed.
Canon 6997
When a person who claims to be a Trustee, but evidence exists of one or more
of the following elements, then such a person is an imposter with no such
Office or Trust existing:
(i) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that is
recorded as performing any formal or sacred ritual to repudiate Oaths or
Vows made in the past or into the future; or
(ii) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that
requires the making of one or more Oaths or Vows that are contradictory to
the Golden Rule and Rule of Law, Justice and Due Process; or
(iii) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that
requires the making of one or more Oaths or Vows that result in behavior
that results in less than exemplary character of honesty and fidelity and
the disregard of good faith, good character and good conscience; or
(iv) Where one or more of the criteria for the valid creation of the Office
of Trustee does not exist.
Canon 6998
No judge, magistrate or justice of the peace may adjudicate any matter of
law within a competent forum of law or oratory unless they are presently a
valid Trustee under Oath and secondly prepared to demonstrate under Oath the
exemplary character of a valid Trustee or valid Fiduciary:
(i) As a valid Oath is required to create and sustain the Office judge, or
magistrate or justice of the peace, the absence of a valid Oath of Office
means such a person is the worst kind of imposter an without any legitimacy
whatsoever; and
(ii) As any adjudication concerning rights or property requires exemplary
character, any judge, magistrate or justice of the peace that is unwilling
or refuses to be entrusted under Oath by all parties to perform in good
faith, good character and good conscience is not a valid Fiduciary.
The disregard to such a fundamental principle is the admission of the
absence of any proper Rule of Law, Justice or Due Process.
The historic origins of the concept of Trustee
Let’s look at the history of the concepts of Trustee and the origins of
Trustee. What we find is that the concept of Trustee and the concepts of
elements of Trustee go rights back to the origins of history and the first
appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute you see in Canon 7000. I
will get to the meaning of Vows and Oaths in a second, but I want to paint a
picture here so that you can see it. The fundamental roles of Oaths in
history of civilization informing sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately
diminished by Westminster in 1775 under 7 &8 Will III c34. The promotion
of anti-Oath takes place on absurd corruptions inserted into the sacred
Bible to imply that Oaths were contrary to Divine Law. Such groups as the
Quakers and the Brethren were granted exception through the concept of
Affirmation. Quakers and Brethren were promoted to the roles of Trustees in
banks, merchant industries and civil service.
Canon 7000
The first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute under
Western-Roman law originates under King Charles II of England through the
laws of Westminster in 1676 under (29 Car 2 c.3) in relation to the historic
shift from the custom of auricular testimony under oath to written evidence
as primacy proof concerning all Trusts and conveyances:
(i) From 1676 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_and_perjury.pdf> 29 Car. 2 c.3), documents and “paper” took precedence in
Western-Roman Law concerning the establishment and existence of valid
Trusts, Wills and Testaments, Conveyances, Titles and Agreements to the
detriment of auricular testimony; and
(ii) The fundamental role of Oaths in the history of civilization in forming
sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1695
(7 & 8 Will. III c.34) and the promotion of anti-Oath sects based on absurd
corruptions inserted into the Holy Bible to imply Oaths were contrary to
Divine Law. The Quakers were granted exemption from Oaths through the
concept of Affirmation and Quakers then promoted to “Trustee” roles in
Banks, Merchant Industries and Civil Service dealing with property”; and
(iii) The “State” and its agents assuming greater powers and control as
Trustees under Western-Roman Law was significantly extended under Queen Anne
in 1707 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_of_life.pdf> 6 Ann. c.18) concerning people presumed “dead” and in 1708 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
s.pdf> 7 Ann. c.19) concerning the property of “infants”. In both cases, the
concept of “secret trusts”, also known as “Cestui que vie trusts” were used
and to be administered by the crown as Trustee; and
(iv) In 1731 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
tics.pdf> 4 Geo. II c.10) under King George II of Great Britain, Westminster
expanded the power and scope of itself as Trustees and the use of “
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
trusts” to include the concept of the property of “lunatics” and “idiots”
being held in such trusts; and
(v) In 1775, Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident
to enclose the very concept of a valid Oath for the first time in civilized
history through (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
Geo.III c.39) by claiming Justices of the Peace then be empowered to
administer (valid) Oaths. Thus the evidence in writing of a valid oath and
then witnessed in writing by a Justice of the Peace became primary proof,
not the auricular event itself and associated witnesses; and
(vi) In 1825 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
6 Geo. IV c.74), with the Bank of England assuming effectively the role of
the Crown (Corporation), Westminster consolidated and then expanded its
powers and authorities as Trustees by combining the concepts of Cestui que
vie trusts for “idiots, lunatics, infants or trustees of unsound mind”
ensuring that such property was to be administered by the Bank of England;
and
(vii) In 1850 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
13 & 14 Vict. c.60), Westminster revised the laws concerning property held
by Trustees and Mortgagees with particular emphasis in watering down the
historic nature of Trusts and Trustees to include the concepts of “implied
and constructive trusts” being fictions and pseudo-trusts resembling (in
name) trusts but having none of the customary characteristics with the
operation of such pseudo trusts being determined by the laws of Westminster.
Hence, the birth of deliberately false trusts being nothing more than
implied contracts; and
(viii) In 1872 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
.pdf> 35 & 36 Vict. c.79) Westminster extended the concept of secret
“implied or constructive” cestui que vie trusts to all persons by assuming
all people who do not redeem themselves are by default some form of idiot,
lunatic, infant or trustee of unsound mind. Under the guise of “health”,
sanitary districts were identified as “wards” for implied lunatics. The
effect being that the Bank of England operating as the Crown was now the
“trustee” for all persons in England, Great Britain and the Dominions and
Colonies of England and Great Britain.
(ix) In 1888 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
51 & 52 Vict. c.59) and then in 1893 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
56 & 57 Vict. c.53) the role of the Trustee fundamentally changed from
executor and administrator to a role with full investment and personal
wealth creation capacity. Now, agencies, corporations, independent
contractors and other bodies “acting” in the capacity of a trustee (such as
judges, magistrates and others) stood to obtain substantial financial
enrichment in complete contradiction to the public expressed history and
principles of fiduciary responsibility and trust. Thus, the end of any
pretence of Rule of Law for Great Britain and its dominions and previous
colonies can be said to be this watershed in defiling all known respect for
law.
The concept of Vow
Let me go back to the history and the evolution of Trustees in a moment. I
want to switch for a second and look at the origin of Oaths and the origin
of Vow to try to make sense of this enclosure and the significance of this
enclosure to history. If you look at a Vow to begin with under Positive
Law, we see the definition of Vow in
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
Canon 2269 gives us the definition:
Canon 2269
A Vow is a solemn promise or pledge to perform or refrain from some act, or
to be faithful and firm in some allegiance or union, or to behave in the
manner prescribed by some form of rule or law. By its nature a Vow obliges
only the person who makes it.
Canon 2270
The origin of the concept of a Vow as a solemn promise or pledge is as old
as the origin of civilized society and law itself and similar to the concept
of Oaths is one of the most fundamental and constant concepts of law
throughout every age and era:
(i) The earliest forms of Vows in civilized law originates from the
Cuilliaéan (Holly) of Ireland and the 3rd/4th Millennium BCE Irish word
plead meaning “promise” and the word “guide” meaning “solemn promise,
pledge, prayer”; and
(ii) The ancient Greeks continued the distinction between the concept of a
general and “secular” vow and a solemn religious vow in the word vow (xóv)
meaning “promise” and the word charis (κάρης) meaning “solemn promise,
pledge, prayer, religious vows”; and
The point I want to make here is that we are seeing these words are evident
in cultures well before the ministry of Jesus Christ and well before the
origin of Christianity. We see these concepts as essential and fundamental
to the law. These concepts were fundamental to society; the existence of
society could not exist if the concept of Vow did not exist. There would
have been no Sumerian civilization. There would have been no spread of
religion itself. There would have been no Cuilliaéan or Holly spread of the
concepts of religion and the concepts of law itself. There would have been
no Hittite; there would have been no Canaanite, no Roman, and no Greek
societies. No societies would have been formed if these concepts did not
exist as the foundation of Law.
Then, when we get to the Carolingians in the 8th century, regarding Vow, we
see the revival of the ancient Holly language and the Law and the use of the
word “promissa” from which the word “promise’ arrived, meaning promise and
the word “pleigo” from which we get the words plea and pledge meaning
promise, pledge prayer and religious vows. What about Oaths? As you heard
me say, there was a dramatic corruption that took place at the end of the
17th Century.
The concept of Oaths
I want to get back to the origin of Trustees and why
<http://one-evil.org/content/
to absolutely destroy the concept of Trust. Let’s look at Oaths now as we
have briefly described and discussed the importance of Vows. In contrast
to a Vow being a promise or a pledge, an Oath, when we look at Article 121
is defined as follows in Canon 2261:
Canon 2261
An Oath is a solemn petition and invocation to a Deity in the presence of at
least two witnesses and sworn upon some object representing the laws of the
Deity that a testimony is true or a pledge is binding. A valid Oath is
essential to forming a true Office of Trustee and therefore a valid Trust.
If you want to look at the difference here a Vow is a promise that only
binds the one making the Vow, whereas an Oath involves a transference of
some authority or some power and is forming essentially in that process a
three-part relation between some deity, between some beneficiaries and
between the candidate that makes the Oath and then forms the office of
Trustee. Canon 2262 gives us some rationale, reason, and logic behind why
every single civilization including the present, has regarded Oaths as so
fundamental to the framework of Law even though presently they hide it.
We
see the concept of Divine Source as the primal religious beliefs of the
ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Mesopotamia, Greeks, Romans and right through
even Christianity. The source of knowledge and of our creation comes from a
Deity in Heaven. Under Divine Law we see the connection that is always with
an Oath. An Oath is not merely an indication of a Deity but it is the
swearing on Law and on the Truth of Law and that is what makes it so
fundamental. All Law comes from the Divine. We see a perfect synergy
between the concepts of Oaths, Rule of Law, Justice, Due Process and Vow.
Now we have definitions concerning Oaths and we have one concerning Vow.
Canon 2262
The origin of the concept of Oath as key to forming an Office of Trustee and
therefore a valid Trust is as old as the origin of civilized society and law
itself and has been one of the most fundamental and constant concepts of law
throughout every age and era. It is founded on three most basic ancient
beliefs being Divine Source, Divine Law and Divine Authority:
(i) Divine Source is the primal religious belief at the foundation of almost
all civilized societies of mankind until the past few hundred years that
Heaven and one or more Divine Deities are the source of all knowledge,
existence and creation; and
(ii) Divine Law is the ancient civilized belief that as all existence,
knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source, the highest law of all
possible law is Divine Law, usually expressed through one or more sacred
texts transmitted by one or more prophets; and
(iii) Divine Authority is the ancient belief that as all existence,
knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source and the highest law is Divine
Law, then all authority and power to rule comes not only from the consent of
the people but Divine Authority.
If we look briefly through the history of Oath in Canon 2264 it gives us
some origin to the history of the words. We find that the earliest form of
Oath and the word “Oath” literally originates from the Cuilliaéan. The word
itself comes from the Cuilliaéan and the Holly and it means “sacred, binding
bond or surety, but words, through the ritual of seal, meaning that my words
bind me to some law:
Canon 2264
In terms of the history and origins of Oaths as central to the Rule of Law
and Justice for most societies for thousands of years:
(i) The earliest form of Oath and the word “oath” itself literally
originates from the Cuilliaéan (Holly) of Ireland and the 3rd/4th Millennium
BCE Irish word oath meaning “sacred binding/bond/surety by (words)” through
the ritual of séal meaning “my words bind (bond) me (to some promise/oath)”;
and
(ii) The ancient Greek form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the
Alexandrian Empire was the word omnuó (ομνύω) meaning “to swear, take an
oath to Divine (derived) law or nomoi (νόμοι); and
(iii) The Roman form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the Roman Empire
called in Latin iuro meaning “I swear/take an oath upon the law (in the name
of the Divine)”; and
(iv) The Carolingian form of Oath revived in the 8th Century CE was called
committo from the Latin of the same name meaning "I bind myself according to
the law" and was the central element of the ritual of Fealty between Lord
and Vassal under Sacre Loi (Sacred Law); and
(v) In the 17th Century, the merchant and banking families of England,
Venice and the Netherlands began to deliberate enclose and diminish the
essential nature of an Oath, upon the creation of secret financial
securities and debts (slave bonds) against their own people. This included
the clumsy and deliberate corruption of sacred scripture within the New
Testament of the Holy Bible to promote the absurd concept of making oaths
(for the first time in the history of mankind) as a transgression.
The Roman form of Oath, called “iuro” in Latin is the word we get juro,
jury, justice and all are connected. “Iuro” means, “I swear, I take an Oath
upon the Law.” The Carolingians modified committo from Latin as the concept
of sacred Oath. We use the word “committo” as committal is still used today
as the form of sacred Oath within their commercial courts. Something
happened along the way regarding Oaths and regarding Vows. Something
happened after the concept of the Bank of England, the Bank of Amsterdam and
the concept of annuities and other instruments. Annuity was a slave bond
and it is the origin as it was corrupted into a slave bond. It doesn’t mean
Annuity is always a slave bond, but that is how it was conceived by the Bank
of England and the Bank of Amsterdam.
Something happened when these banks realized they had a way to unjustly
claim us as slaves and as things and batteries for energy that they could
monetize and sell without our knowledge and without our consent. This
compelled the banks to seek to destroy the very essence and knowledge of
Trust and to destroy Trust between people. You have heard me say before
that the only true capital is Trust. If you think about the problem that
most people have today, it is the absence of Trust. No wonder people are
desperate for money, loans and finding ways to get money from banks.
Because there is no Trust any more.
Before we get back to Trustee let me explain what I am saying. This is all
connected. The existence of Trust means that if you were to open a
business, you wanted to open a business and you needed to rent and refurbish
a building and fill it with the supplies you need to run your business, if
the man or woman that owned the business trusted you, then you could form an
agreement with them that you start to pay rent the day that you start the
business. That would be Trust. You wouldn’t need to borrow a single cent
to pay for the lease. The lease would start, but the rent would not start
until the business was opened. If people trusted you, suppliers trusted you
then you could come to an arrangement with suppliers that would provide all
the fittings and fixtures of your building if it is, for example, a
restaurant. They would put all the fittings and fixtures in on the Trust
that once you open up you will begin to repay the money and the cost of
those fittings and fixtures because they Trust you.
If we had trust, then people that provide the produce that you need in order
to cook and supply and they would provide that to you that once the doors
open, they trust you to pay that back for the produce the minute people
start to pay for meals. The same would go for your staff. People would
start to work for you and not even ask for a wage until customers started to
come. In days gone by that is how people were able to do things without
access to central capital controlled by central banks. In the modern world
the banks that are supported by
<http://one-evil.org/content/
fields of law, psychology, and economics which are the troika of nihilism,
they sought to damage and create mistrust and confusion so that we look to
banks and the central banks as the sole source of capital and Trust, and
government as the sole source of Trust.
In a moment I’m going to specifically address the question of that reference
in the Bible concerning the non-swearing of Oaths. Before I do that I want
to go back to the history of Trusts and Trustees that we were referring to
and continue through to the present day. As we are saying, look at Canon
7000 under Trustees under Fiduciary Law under point 2. We said that in 1695
we see the beginning of the promotion of anti-Oath groups in the support of
Quakers and the Brethren also known as the Mennonites that were given
permission not to swear Oaths. We see now the beginning of the diminishing
and enclosure of Oaths. These canons are crucial references and I will
also include direct links to the statutes.
Canon 7000
The first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute under
Western-Roman law originates under King Charles II of England through the
laws of Westminster in 1676 under (29 Car 2 c.3) in relation to the historic
shift from the custom of auricular testimony under oath to written evidence
as primacy proof concerning all Trusts and conveyances:
(i) From 1676 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_and_perjury.pdf> 29 Car. 2 c.3), documents and “paper” took precedence in
Western-Roman Law concerning the establishment and existence of valid
Trusts, Wills and Testaments, Conveyances, Titles and Agreements to the
detriment of auricular testimony; and
(ii) The fundamental role of Oaths in the history of civilization in forming
sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1695
(7 & 8 Will. III c.34) and the promotion of anti-Oath sects based on absurd
corruptions inserted into the Holy Bible to imply Oaths were contrary to
Divine Law. The Quakers were granted exemption from Oaths through the
concept of Affirmation and Quakers then promoted to “Trustee” roles in
Banks, Merchant Industries and Civil Service dealing with property”; and
(iii) The “State” and its agents assuming greater powers and control as
Trustees under Western-Roman Law was significantly extended under Queen Anne
in 1707 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_of_life.pdf> 6 Ann. c.18) concerning people presumed “dead” and in 1708 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
s.pdf> 7 Ann. c.19) concerning the property of “infants”. In both cases, the
concept of “secret trusts”, also known as “Cestui que vie trusts” were used
and to be administered by the crown as Trustee; and
(iv) In 1731 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
tics.pdf> 4 Geo. II c.10) under King George II of Great Britain, Westminster
expanded the power and scope of itself as Trustees and the use of “
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
trusts” to include the concept of the property of “lunatics” and “idiots”
being held in such trusts; and
(v) In 1775, Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident
to enclose the very concept of a valid Oath for the first time in civilized
history through (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
Geo.III c.39) by claiming Justices of the Peace then be empowered to
administer (valid) Oaths. Thus the evidence in writing of a valid oath and
then witnessed in writing by a Justice of the Peace became primary proof,
not the auricular event itself and associated witnesses; and
1775 was the time that Lloyd’s Bank gets going. It is the largest insurer
in the world and one of the largest banks in the world. Westminster and the
Bank of England were sufficiently confident to enclose the very concept of
valid Oath for the first time in civilized history through 25 Geo III c.39.
They claimed Justices of the Peace were then empowered to administer valid
Oaths. Number (vi) above is the first time that all the concepts were
brought together and included Cestui que vie trusts for idiots, lunatics,
infants, or trustees of unsound mind. The Bank of England assumed itself to
be the Trustee of all property of idiots, lunatics, those assumed dead or
abandoned and those considered trustees but of unsound mind.
We are going to get the heart of the issue of why the
<http://one-evil.org/content/
saw Oaths as the fundamental enemy to their system of financial control.
Would it surprise you, as a rhetorical question, that the groups that
magically appear, and I do mean “magically appeared” at the end of the 17th
Century did so at the same time that Westminster changed the Law and at the
same time that dramatic changes were occurring in texts. These are groups
that refused to swear an Oath, disavowed the concept of Vow, and seek all
possible remedy to remove any question of their being bound by an Oath or a
Vow.
In terms of the Quakers who we are told are born out of the period of the
17th century and persecution, we find that the Quakers end up being the
dominant group for industrialists during the Industrial Age in charge of
heavy industry and using people as slaves. We find that the Quakers are the
dominant group in Rhode Island and deeply involved in the slave trade. We
find the same group as central to the position of banks, bankers and the
Bank of England and in forming their own banks including Lloyds’, the larges
insurer in the world. Lloyd’s was founded by Sampson Lloyd. Iron making
was founded by Abraham Darby. By 1750 more than 75% of the iron industry
was in the hands of Quakers.
Let me say this: if the poor laws of Westminster had not had taken place,
and the land of people and villages had not been seized, leaving the
villages to starve unless a few of them found places in workhouses.
Workhouses functioned literally as prisons and prison is too nice a word.
Think of hell and then multiply that by 100. Think of a place where people
are imprisoned to work to death. That is the system that was controlled by
Quakers. These people said that for religious reasons that they couldn’t
take Oaths or Vows, but they were “honorable” people. Barclay’s Bank from
Jay’s Barclay and William Penn from Pennsylvania were both Quakers.
They weren’t the only group that took advantage of this magical chain of
events that coincided with their appearance as groups that would not “swear
an oath.” History shows that whole civilizations were founded on Vows and
Oaths. Vows and Oaths were the checklist and the safety mechanism for Rule
of Law. If you played with Vows and Oaths, then Rule of Law was at
jeopardy. What kept Rule of Law solid and protected were Vows and Oaths?
They were immutable from the very, very first civilization to the time that
these groups magically appear. Westminster started arrogantly enclosing
these concepts of Vows and Oaths. We will get to the Bible references in a
moment.
The other group that appeared at the same time was called the Brethren, also
known as the Mennonites and the Anti-Baptists. The wealthiest of the
Brethren were those that came to America and were granted by Congress
enormous sections of land. Go see the Congressional Acts that gave the
Brethren huge chunks of the United States. In fact the Methodist Church
under Wesley was largely formed by Brethren. Arguably the most famous
family and group, tribe of Brethren, came out of Switzerland. The Swiss
Brethren were the wealthiest of all Brethren and they were the group called
the Roth. The Roth was the largest and most influential coming out of the
Brethren in Switzerland. You might know them as the Roth’s Shield, or the
Rothschilds.
There is a huge amount of falsity, counter intelligence and just plain and
outright stupidity concerning the origin of the Rothschilds. The
Rothschilds did in fact change from being Brethren and effectively,
Mennonite, back to professing themselves to be Jewish in the 19th century.
That was only after all the Acts of Parliament in terms of the persecution
of Jews and religious tolerance was well and truly settled. Only after
England was capable of demonstrating the ability to elect a Jewish Prime
Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, did we see a change in the profession of faith
of the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds as bankers originated and gained their
power, not by being Jewish, because they were not able to exercise such
influence in that position. They were Brethren and yet another of these key
groups with extraordinary influence who refused to swear and refused to give
Oaths and Vows.
Let’s continue in this history of Trustees and get to the point of exactly
why they did this before we address the issue of the references in the
Bible. The last reference we made in terms of the history of Trustees, we
said that in 1825 we see the Bank of England consolidating all these
concepts around Cestui que vie trusts where they and they alone become the
trustees of anyone who is a lunatic, idiot, infant, a trustee of unsound
mind or lost or abandoned. Look under Canon 7000 and point (vii) regarding
1850 and the first time concepts of “implied and constructive trusts.” They
broke the back of Oaths and Vows and then they broke the back of Trusts by
creating pseudo trusts:
(vi) In 1825 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
6 Geo. IV c.74), with the Bank of England assuming effectively the role of
the Crown (Corporation), Westminster consolidated and then expanded its
powers and authorities as Trustees by combining the concepts of Cestui que
vie trusts for “idiots, lunatics, infants or trustees of unsound mind”
ensuring that such property was to be administered by the Bank of England;
and
(vii) In 1850 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
13 & 14 Vict. c.60), Westminster revised the laws concerning property held
by Trustees and Mortgagees with particular emphasis in watering down the
historic nature of Trusts and Trustees to include the concepts of “implied
and constructive trusts” being fictions and pseudo-trusts resembling (in
name) trusts but having none of the customary characteristics with the
operation of such pseudo trusts being determined by the laws of Westminster.
Hence, the birth of deliberately false trusts being nothing more than
implied contracts; and
(viii) In 1872 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
.pdf> 35 & 36 Vict. c.79) Westminster extended the concept of secret
“implied or constructive” cestui que vie trusts to all persons by assuming
all people who do not redeem themselves are by default some form of idiot,
lunatic, infant or trustee of unsound mind. Under the guise of “health”,
sanitary districts were identified as “wards” for implied lunatics. The
effect being that the Bank of England operating as the Crown was now the
“trustee” for all persons in England, Great Britain and the Dominions and
Colonies of England and Great Britain.
(ix) In 1888 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
51 & 52 Vict. c.59) and then in 1893 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
56 & 57 Vict. c.53) the role of the Trustee fundamentally changed from
executor and administrator to a role with full investment and personal
wealth creation capacity. Now, agencies, corporations, independent
contractors and other bodies “acting” in the capacity of a trustee (such as
judges, magistrates and others) stood to obtain substantial financial
enrichment in complete contradiction to the public expressed history and
principles of fiduciary responsibility and trust. Thus, the end of any
pretence of Rule of Law for Great Britain and its dominions and previous
colonies can be said to be this watershed in defiling all known respect for
law.
The systems described above are now global. Everybody who does not redeem
themselves is considered a complete lunatic and they criminalized lunacy as
well at this time. In 1888 and 1893 the role of trustee changed to a role
with full investment and personal wealth creation capacity. Agencies,
corporations, independent contractors are able to corrupt, steal and
unjustly enrich themselves fully with impunity. This is the beginning of
the end and the beginning of the rampant corporations and the problems of
the world today where we have false trustees who do not take Oaths or Vows
and who manage pseudo trusts that bear no resemblance to Trusts. They are
controlled by laws dictated by Westminster and other Parliaments where these
people who claim to us to act in our benefit rape and pillage our energy
daily, every single moment. Those that are too lazy, too stupid, or too
distracted to stand up and demonstrate in writing that they are not slaves,
not paupers, not idiots, not lunatics, not infants or wards and not dead
have allowed them to get away with this for all this time.
Why did the nihilists and bankers want and need to destroy Oaths, Vows and
Trusts?
Why did the <http://one-evil.org/content/
the bankers destroy Oaths, Vows and Trusts? It should be obvious. If Oaths
and Vows are upheld as they always were and as they were under Carolingians,
under the Christian Carolingians who founded the Universal Church, the
Catholic Church, that honored Oaths and Trusts from the 8th century onwards
as fundamental to the Rule of Law and Justice. Oaths and Vows were honored
by the Roman Empire as fundamental to the survival of the Roman Empire and
the Rule of Law. Oaths and Vows were honored by Constantine and the Holy
Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire up until the 15th century and it’s
final ending as fundamental to the Rule of Law. Oaths and Vows were honored
at the time of Alexander and the time of the Egyptians, the Hyksos and the
times of every single culture except the last 200 years since we have been
living under the control of bankers and nihilists. Oaths and Vows were
fundamental to the very fabric of Law.
You know why they had to destroy Trust. By destroying Trust they controlled
trusts and by destroying Oaths and Vows they became the sole trustees. By
destroying these concepts they have been able to rape and pillage with
immunity, absolute immunity. Do you know what they want to do now? You
know what the nihilists think now? Thankfully, they are finally being
exposed as more and more people wake up. Finally they are being exposed
because good people have started to realize that we have to restore the Law.
Do you know what the nihilists now think is the answer? It’s not to change
behavior; they don’t want to change behavior. They want to kill us. They
want to let us starve and they are betting on your neighbors that don’t give
a damn and won’t listen to these audios and won’t read, that get distracted,
they are making what they think is an informed bet that people are so
infected with mind virus and so selfish that they are going to ignore this
message and they are going to starve to death.
They are going to shrivel up and die and that is what they are hoping will
happen. In fact everything is on course for that to come true. Did you
know that in America there are more people in poverty today than at any
other time in history, and still we have people who do not give a damn?
They lose everything and they still cannot get rid of mind virus because of
the teachings of the nihilists, because of the golden calf and the worship
of gold and money of the bankers. They are doing this in Europe and across
the world and there is every chance that they will succeed. Why? Because
on a daily and weekly basis, I assure you that I see time and time again
people are too interested in watching porn, people are too interested in
watching a bunch of kittens playing on Youtube. They are more interested in
what the Kardashians are doing. They are more interested in how to make
money. They have no interest in truth. Many people have no interest in
truth and don’t want to know the truth.
The ultimate betrayal of the nihilists in corrupting sacred texts
This leads me to this complication that many people have felt in regards to
the Bible and the reference in the Bible to the swearing of Oaths. Let me
put this reference in the Bible before I read it, into context. To the
Protestant Church and one might argue to most Christians of the four gospels
the one that most people find is the most enriching would be the Gospel of
Matthew. In Matthew we find two of the most significant events and one
uniquely in Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7 in the speech of Jesus and the
recitation of Law, The Sermon of the Mount. It is arguably the most
important and continuous sermon claimed to be spoken by Jesus Christ out of
any of the four Gospels. So, the Sermon on the Mount and every single word
in it one could rightly assume to those founding the Protestant religion
were paramount in the 16th Century. I am referring to people like Calvin
and Martin Luther.
If you want to get context on the Sermon on the Mount through Chapters 5, 6
and 7 of Matthew, then one begins at line 17, and then 18 of Matthew 5, for
the opening of the Sermon, the context of the Sermon and what Jesus is about
to say about tonight: the Rule of Law, the concept of Justice and Due
Process, the Concept of Oath and Vow being fundamental to society from the
beginning of time. This is what is allegedly said from Jesus and I pulled
this out of the new King James Version to make it easier and this is 17, 18,
19 and 20:
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not
come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven
and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the
law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of
these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom
of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in
the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness
exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means
enter the kingdom of heaven.
As the opening to the claimed Sermon on the Mount, the most important words
attributed to Jesus Christ in the entire Bible, here we are told that Jesus
sets the scene by saying that what you are about to hear and what Jesus is
about to talk about is not contradicting the Law, but fulfilling and
therefore restoring the Law. That is what he says. Now let me go to the
end of the Sermon which you can call the conclusion where you see the
vindication of the Sermon. This is at Matthew 7 chapter 12:
Matthew 7—12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them,
for this is the Law of (and) the Prophets.
This should probably say “of the Prophets.” The word “and” is in there and
it has never made sense. So, under verse 12 chapter 7, we see the
conclusion of the Golden Rule and that all are equal under the law. The
Golden Rule, the Rule of Law, is the concluding argument of the key opening
and ending of the Sermon on the Mount. That is a fact. By referring back
to the Law of the Prophets we see the consistency and what I have just said
to you should be consistent with the Law and not contradict the Law.
Now let’s look at the version in Old English of Matthew 5, verses 33 to 37.
Then I will recite it in Matthew 5, 33 to 37 where there is a distinct
difference. So, let me read the Old English verses 33 to 37:
33. Again, you have heard that it has been said by them of old time, You
shall not forswear thyself, but shall perform unto the Lord your oaths:
34. But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's
throne:
35. Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it
is the city of the great King.
36. Neither shall you swear by thy head, because you cannot make one hair
white or black.
37. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is
more than these came of evil.
Before I get to the new King James Version, I ask you if that phrase is
consistent with what we know as an absolute fact of the consistent law from
the beginning of time that Oaths and Vows are fundamental to the Rule of
Law. They bind men and women to perform and if they are diminished then
groups that refuse to tell the truth, constantly lie, and always corrupt are
able to take positions of power and society becomes a prison and slavery can
thrive. If you don’t believe me, why did Calvin and why did Luther
emphasize Oaths and Vows in the formation of the Protestant movement.
Why, in the Church of England, were oaths and vows essential before the
bankers took control? To say that a Protestant movement that placed the
Sermon on the Mount more importantly than any other reference to the Bible,
any other sections of the Bible, suddenly missed this instruction and turned
themselves into heretics is absurd. To say that it was left up to groups of
people called Quakers and Brethren who ultimately become the very worst
slave masters under which hundreds of thousands of people died in absolute
agony and became the very worst bankers, are you telling me that they got it
right and we all got it wrong?
see the concept of Divine Source as the primal religious beliefs of the
ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Mesopotamia, Greeks, Romans and right through
even Christianity. The source of knowledge and of our creation comes from a
Deity in Heaven. Under Divine Law we see the connection that is always with
an Oath. An Oath is not merely an indication of a Deity but it is the
swearing on Law and on the Truth of Law and that is what makes it so
fundamental. All Law comes from the Divine. We see a perfect synergy
between the concepts of Oaths, Rule of Law, Justice, Due Process and Vow.
Now we have definitions concerning Oaths and we have one concerning Vow.
Canon 2262
The origin of the concept of Oath as key to forming an Office of Trustee and
therefore a valid Trust is as old as the origin of civilized society and law
itself and has been one of the most fundamental and constant concepts of law
throughout every age and era. It is founded on three most basic ancient
beliefs being Divine Source, Divine Law and Divine Authority:
(i) Divine Source is the primal religious belief at the foundation of almost
all civilized societies of mankind until the past few hundred years that
Heaven and one or more Divine Deities are the source of all knowledge,
existence and creation; and
(ii) Divine Law is the ancient civilized belief that as all existence,
knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source, the highest law of all
possible law is Divine Law, usually expressed through one or more sacred
texts transmitted by one or more prophets; and
(iii) Divine Authority is the ancient belief that as all existence,
knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source and the highest law is Divine
Law, then all authority and power to rule comes not only from the consent of
the people but Divine Authority.
If we look briefly through the history of Oath in Canon 2264 it gives us
some origin to the history of the words. We find that the earliest form of
Oath and the word “Oath” literally originates from the Cuilliaéan. The word
itself comes from the Cuilliaéan and the Holly and it means “sacred, binding
bond or surety, but words, through the ritual of seal, meaning that my words
bind me to some law:
Canon 2264
In terms of the history and origins of Oaths as central to the Rule of Law
and Justice for most societies for thousands of years:
(i) The earliest form of Oath and the word “oath” itself literally
originates from the Cuilliaéan (Holly) of Ireland and the 3rd/4th Millennium
BCE Irish word oath meaning “sacred binding/bond/surety by (words)” through
the ritual of séal meaning “my words bind (bond) me (to some promise/oath)”;
and
(ii) The ancient Greek form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the
Alexandrian Empire was the word omnuó (ομνύω) meaning “to swear, take an
oath to Divine (derived) law or nomoi (νόμοι); and
(iii) The Roman form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the Roman Empire
called in Latin iuro meaning “I swear/take an oath upon the law (in the name
of the Divine)”; and
(iv) The Carolingian form of Oath revived in the 8th Century CE was called
committo from the Latin of the same name meaning "I bind myself according to
the law" and was the central element of the ritual of Fealty between Lord
and Vassal under Sacre Loi (Sacred Law); and
(v) In the 17th Century, the merchant and banking families of England,
Venice and the Netherlands began to deliberate enclose and diminish the
essential nature of an Oath, upon the creation of secret financial
securities and debts (slave bonds) against their own people. This included
the clumsy and deliberate corruption of sacred scripture within the New
Testament of the Holy Bible to promote the absurd concept of making oaths
(for the first time in the history of mankind) as a transgression.
The Roman form of Oath, called “iuro” in Latin is the word we get juro,
jury, justice and all are connected. “Iuro” means, “I swear, I take an Oath
upon the Law.” The Carolingians modified committo from Latin as the concept
of sacred Oath. We use the word “committo” as committal is still used today
as the form of sacred Oath within their commercial courts. Something
happened along the way regarding Oaths and regarding Vows. Something
happened after the concept of the Bank of England, the Bank of Amsterdam and
the concept of annuities and other instruments. Annuity was a slave bond
and it is the origin as it was corrupted into a slave bond. It doesn’t mean
Annuity is always a slave bond, but that is how it was conceived by the Bank
of England and the Bank of Amsterdam.
Something happened when these banks realized they had a way to unjustly
claim us as slaves and as things and batteries for energy that they could
monetize and sell without our knowledge and without our consent. This
compelled the banks to seek to destroy the very essence and knowledge of
Trust and to destroy Trust between people. You have heard me say before
that the only true capital is Trust. If you think about the problem that
most people have today, it is the absence of Trust. No wonder people are
desperate for money, loans and finding ways to get money from banks.
Because there is no Trust any more.
Before we get back to Trustee let me explain what I am saying. This is all
connected. The existence of Trust means that if you were to open a
business, you wanted to open a business and you needed to rent and refurbish
a building and fill it with the supplies you need to run your business, if
the man or woman that owned the business trusted you, then you could form an
agreement with them that you start to pay rent the day that you start the
business. That would be Trust. You wouldn’t need to borrow a single cent
to pay for the lease. The lease would start, but the rent would not start
until the business was opened. If people trusted you, suppliers trusted you
then you could come to an arrangement with suppliers that would provide all
the fittings and fixtures of your building if it is, for example, a
restaurant. They would put all the fittings and fixtures in on the Trust
that once you open up you will begin to repay the money and the cost of
those fittings and fixtures because they Trust you.
If we had trust, then people that provide the produce that you need in order
to cook and supply and they would provide that to you that once the doors
open, they trust you to pay that back for the produce the minute people
start to pay for meals. The same would go for your staff. People would
start to work for you and not even ask for a wage until customers started to
come. In days gone by that is how people were able to do things without
access to central capital controlled by central banks. In the modern world
the banks that are supported by
<http://one-evil.org/content/
fields of law, psychology, and economics which are the troika of nihilism,
they sought to damage and create mistrust and confusion so that we look to
banks and the central banks as the sole source of capital and Trust, and
government as the sole source of Trust.
In a moment I’m going to specifically address the question of that reference
in the Bible concerning the non-swearing of Oaths. Before I do that I want
to go back to the history of Trusts and Trustees that we were referring to
and continue through to the present day. As we are saying, look at Canon
7000 under Trustees under Fiduciary Law under point 2. We said that in 1695
we see the beginning of the promotion of anti-Oath groups in the support of
Quakers and the Brethren also known as the Mennonites that were given
permission not to swear Oaths. We see now the beginning of the diminishing
and enclosure of Oaths. These canons are crucial references and I will
also include direct links to the statutes.
Canon 7000
The first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute under
Western-Roman law originates under King Charles II of England through the
laws of Westminster in 1676 under (29 Car 2 c.3) in relation to the historic
shift from the custom of auricular testimony under oath to written evidence
as primacy proof concerning all Trusts and conveyances:
(i) From 1676 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_and_perjury.pdf> 29 Car. 2 c.3), documents and “paper” took precedence in
Western-Roman Law concerning the establishment and existence of valid
Trusts, Wills and Testaments, Conveyances, Titles and Agreements to the
detriment of auricular testimony; and
(ii) The fundamental role of Oaths in the history of civilization in forming
sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1695
(7 & 8 Will. III c.34) and the promotion of anti-Oath sects based on absurd
corruptions inserted into the Holy Bible to imply Oaths were contrary to
Divine Law. The Quakers were granted exemption from Oaths through the
concept of Affirmation and Quakers then promoted to “Trustee” roles in
Banks, Merchant Industries and Civil Service dealing with property”; and
(iii) The “State” and its agents assuming greater powers and control as
Trustees under Western-Roman Law was significantly extended under Queen Anne
in 1707 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
_of_life.pdf> 6 Ann. c.18) concerning people presumed “dead” and in 1708 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
s.pdf> 7 Ann. c.19) concerning the property of “infants”. In both cases, the
concept of “secret trusts”, also known as “Cestui que vie trusts” were used
and to be administered by the crown as Trustee; and
(iv) In 1731 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
tics.pdf> 4 Geo. II c.10) under King George II of Great Britain, Westminster
expanded the power and scope of itself as Trustees and the use of “
<http://one-heaven.org/canons/
trusts” to include the concept of the property of “lunatics” and “idiots”
being held in such trusts; and
(v) In 1775, Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident
to enclose the very concept of a valid Oath for the first time in civilized
history through (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
Geo.III c.39) by claiming Justices of the Peace then be empowered to
administer (valid) Oaths. Thus the evidence in writing of a valid oath and
then witnessed in writing by a Justice of the Peace became primary proof,
not the auricular event itself and associated witnesses; and
1775 was the time that Lloyd’s Bank gets going. It is the largest insurer
in the world and one of the largest banks in the world. Westminster and the
Bank of England were sufficiently confident to enclose the very concept of
valid Oath for the first time in civilized history through 25 Geo III c.39.
They claimed Justices of the Peace were then empowered to administer valid
Oaths. Number (vi) above is the first time that all the concepts were
brought together and included Cestui que vie trusts for idiots, lunatics,
infants, or trustees of unsound mind. The Bank of England assumed itself to
be the Trustee of all property of idiots, lunatics, those assumed dead or
abandoned and those considered trustees but of unsound mind.
We are going to get the heart of the issue of why the
<http://one-evil.org/content/
saw Oaths as the fundamental enemy to their system of financial control.
Would it surprise you, as a rhetorical question, that the groups that
magically appear, and I do mean “magically appeared” at the end of the 17th
Century did so at the same time that Westminster changed the Law and at the
same time that dramatic changes were occurring in texts. These are groups
that refused to swear an Oath, disavowed the concept of Vow, and seek all
possible remedy to remove any question of their being bound by an Oath or a
Vow.
In terms of the Quakers who we are told are born out of the period of the
17th century and persecution, we find that the Quakers end up being the
dominant group for industrialists during the Industrial Age in charge of
heavy industry and using people as slaves. We find that the Quakers are the
dominant group in Rhode Island and deeply involved in the slave trade. We
find the same group as central to the position of banks, bankers and the
Bank of England and in forming their own banks including Lloyds’, the larges
insurer in the world. Lloyd’s was founded by Sampson Lloyd. Iron making
was founded by Abraham Darby. By 1750 more than 75% of the iron industry
was in the hands of Quakers.
Let me say this: if the poor laws of Westminster had not had taken place,
and the land of people and villages had not been seized, leaving the
villages to starve unless a few of them found places in workhouses.
Workhouses functioned literally as prisons and prison is too nice a word.
Think of hell and then multiply that by 100. Think of a place where people
are imprisoned to work to death. That is the system that was controlled by
Quakers. These people said that for religious reasons that they couldn’t
take Oaths or Vows, but they were “honorable” people. Barclay’s Bank from
Jay’s Barclay and William Penn from Pennsylvania were both Quakers.
They weren’t the only group that took advantage of this magical chain of
events that coincided with their appearance as groups that would not “swear
an oath.” History shows that whole civilizations were founded on Vows and
Oaths. Vows and Oaths were the checklist and the safety mechanism for Rule
of Law. If you played with Vows and Oaths, then Rule of Law was at
jeopardy. What kept Rule of Law solid and protected were Vows and Oaths?
They were immutable from the very, very first civilization to the time that
these groups magically appear. Westminster started arrogantly enclosing
these concepts of Vows and Oaths. We will get to the Bible references in a
moment.
The other group that appeared at the same time was called the Brethren, also
known as the Mennonites and the Anti-Baptists. The wealthiest of the
Brethren were those that came to America and were granted by Congress
enormous sections of land. Go see the Congressional Acts that gave the
Brethren huge chunks of the United States. In fact the Methodist Church
under Wesley was largely formed by Brethren. Arguably the most famous
family and group, tribe of Brethren, came out of Switzerland. The Swiss
Brethren were the wealthiest of all Brethren and they were the group called
the Roth. The Roth was the largest and most influential coming out of the
Brethren in Switzerland. You might know them as the Roth’s Shield, or the
Rothschilds.
There is a huge amount of falsity, counter intelligence and just plain and
outright stupidity concerning the origin of the Rothschilds. The
Rothschilds did in fact change from being Brethren and effectively,
Mennonite, back to professing themselves to be Jewish in the 19th century.
That was only after all the Acts of Parliament in terms of the persecution
of Jews and religious tolerance was well and truly settled. Only after
England was capable of demonstrating the ability to elect a Jewish Prime
Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, did we see a change in the profession of faith
of the Rothschilds. The Rothschilds as bankers originated and gained their
power, not by being Jewish, because they were not able to exercise such
influence in that position. They were Brethren and yet another of these key
groups with extraordinary influence who refused to swear and refused to give
Oaths and Vows.
Let’s continue in this history of Trustees and get to the point of exactly
why they did this before we address the issue of the references in the
Bible. The last reference we made in terms of the history of Trustees, we
said that in 1825 we see the Bank of England consolidating all these
concepts around Cestui que vie trusts where they and they alone become the
trustees of anyone who is a lunatic, idiot, infant, a trustee of unsound
mind or lost or abandoned. Look under Canon 7000 and point (vii) regarding
1850 and the first time concepts of “implied and constructive trusts.” They
broke the back of Oaths and Vows and then they broke the back of Trusts by
creating pseudo trusts:
(vi) In 1825 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
6 Geo. IV c.74), with the Bank of England assuming effectively the role of
the Crown (Corporation), Westminster consolidated and then expanded its
powers and authorities as Trustees by combining the concepts of Cestui que
vie trusts for “idiots, lunatics, infants or trustees of unsound mind”
ensuring that such property was to be administered by the Bank of England;
and
(vii) In 1850 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
13 & 14 Vict. c.60), Westminster revised the laws concerning property held
by Trustees and Mortgagees with particular emphasis in watering down the
historic nature of Trusts and Trustees to include the concepts of “implied
and constructive trusts” being fictions and pseudo-trusts resembling (in
name) trusts but having none of the customary characteristics with the
operation of such pseudo trusts being determined by the laws of Westminster.
Hence, the birth of deliberately false trusts being nothing more than
implied contracts; and
(viii) In 1872 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
.pdf> 35 & 36 Vict. c.79) Westminster extended the concept of secret
“implied or constructive” cestui que vie trusts to all persons by assuming
all people who do not redeem themselves are by default some form of idiot,
lunatic, infant or trustee of unsound mind. Under the guise of “health”,
sanitary districts were identified as “wards” for implied lunatics. The
effect being that the Bank of England operating as the Crown was now the
“trustee” for all persons in England, Great Britain and the Dominions and
Colonies of England and Great Britain.
(ix) In 1888 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
51 & 52 Vict. c.59) and then in 1893 (
<https://ucadia.s3.amazonaws.
56 & 57 Vict. c.53) the role of the Trustee fundamentally changed from
executor and administrator to a role with full investment and personal
wealth creation capacity. Now, agencies, corporations, independent
contractors and other bodies “acting” in the capacity of a trustee (such as
judges, magistrates and others) stood to obtain substantial financial
enrichment in complete contradiction to the public expressed history and
principles of fiduciary responsibility and trust. Thus, the end of any
pretence of Rule of Law for Great Britain and its dominions and previous
colonies can be said to be this watershed in defiling all known respect for
law.
The systems described above are now global. Everybody who does not redeem
themselves is considered a complete lunatic and they criminalized lunacy as
well at this time. In 1888 and 1893 the role of trustee changed to a role
with full investment and personal wealth creation capacity. Agencies,
corporations, independent contractors are able to corrupt, steal and
unjustly enrich themselves fully with impunity. This is the beginning of
the end and the beginning of the rampant corporations and the problems of
the world today where we have false trustees who do not take Oaths or Vows
and who manage pseudo trusts that bear no resemblance to Trusts. They are
controlled by laws dictated by Westminster and other Parliaments where these
people who claim to us to act in our benefit rape and pillage our energy
daily, every single moment. Those that are too lazy, too stupid, or too
distracted to stand up and demonstrate in writing that they are not slaves,
not paupers, not idiots, not lunatics, not infants or wards and not dead
have allowed them to get away with this for all this time.
Why did the nihilists and bankers want and need to destroy Oaths, Vows and
Trusts?
Why did the <http://one-evil.org/content/
the bankers destroy Oaths, Vows and Trusts? It should be obvious. If Oaths
and Vows are upheld as they always were and as they were under Carolingians,
under the Christian Carolingians who founded the Universal Church, the
Catholic Church, that honored Oaths and Trusts from the 8th century onwards
as fundamental to the Rule of Law and Justice. Oaths and Vows were honored
by the Roman Empire as fundamental to the survival of the Roman Empire and
the Rule of Law. Oaths and Vows were honored by Constantine and the Holy
Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire up until the 15th century and it’s
final ending as fundamental to the Rule of Law. Oaths and Vows were honored
at the time of Alexander and the time of the Egyptians, the Hyksos and the
times of every single culture except the last 200 years since we have been
living under the control of bankers and nihilists. Oaths and Vows were
fundamental to the very fabric of Law.
You know why they had to destroy Trust. By destroying Trust they controlled
trusts and by destroying Oaths and Vows they became the sole trustees. By
destroying these concepts they have been able to rape and pillage with
immunity, absolute immunity. Do you know what they want to do now? You
know what the nihilists think now? Thankfully, they are finally being
exposed as more and more people wake up. Finally they are being exposed
because good people have started to realize that we have to restore the Law.
Do you know what the nihilists now think is the answer? It’s not to change
behavior; they don’t want to change behavior. They want to kill us. They
want to let us starve and they are betting on your neighbors that don’t give
a damn and won’t listen to these audios and won’t read, that get distracted,
they are making what they think is an informed bet that people are so
infected with mind virus and so selfish that they are going to ignore this
message and they are going to starve to death.
They are going to shrivel up and die and that is what they are hoping will
happen. In fact everything is on course for that to come true. Did you
know that in America there are more people in poverty today than at any
other time in history, and still we have people who do not give a damn?
They lose everything and they still cannot get rid of mind virus because of
the teachings of the nihilists, because of the golden calf and the worship
of gold and money of the bankers. They are doing this in Europe and across
the world and there is every chance that they will succeed. Why? Because
on a daily and weekly basis, I assure you that I see time and time again
people are too interested in watching porn, people are too interested in
watching a bunch of kittens playing on Youtube. They are more interested in
what the Kardashians are doing. They are more interested in how to make
money. They have no interest in truth. Many people have no interest in
truth and don’t want to know the truth.
The ultimate betrayal of the nihilists in corrupting sacred texts
This leads me to this complication that many people have felt in regards to
the Bible and the reference in the Bible to the swearing of Oaths. Let me
put this reference in the Bible before I read it, into context. To the
Protestant Church and one might argue to most Christians of the four gospels
the one that most people find is the most enriching would be the Gospel of
Matthew. In Matthew we find two of the most significant events and one
uniquely in Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7 in the speech of Jesus and the
recitation of Law, The Sermon of the Mount. It is arguably the most
important and continuous sermon claimed to be spoken by Jesus Christ out of
any of the four Gospels. So, the Sermon on the Mount and every single word
in it one could rightly assume to those founding the Protestant religion
were paramount in the 16th Century. I am referring to people like Calvin
and Martin Luther.
If you want to get context on the Sermon on the Mount through Chapters 5, 6
and 7 of Matthew, then one begins at line 17, and then 18 of Matthew 5, for
the opening of the Sermon, the context of the Sermon and what Jesus is about
to say about tonight: the Rule of Law, the concept of Justice and Due
Process, the Concept of Oath and Vow being fundamental to society from the
beginning of time. This is what is allegedly said from Jesus and I pulled
this out of the new King James Version to make it easier and this is 17, 18,
19 and 20:
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not
come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven
and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the
law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of
these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom
of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in
the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness
exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means
enter the kingdom of heaven.
As the opening to the claimed Sermon on the Mount, the most important words
attributed to Jesus Christ in the entire Bible, here we are told that Jesus
sets the scene by saying that what you are about to hear and what Jesus is
about to talk about is not contradicting the Law, but fulfilling and
therefore restoring the Law. That is what he says. Now let me go to the
end of the Sermon which you can call the conclusion where you see the
vindication of the Sermon. This is at Matthew 7 chapter 12:
Matthew 7—12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them,
for this is the Law of (and) the Prophets.
This should probably say “of the Prophets.” The word “and” is in there and
it has never made sense. So, under verse 12 chapter 7, we see the
conclusion of the Golden Rule and that all are equal under the law. The
Golden Rule, the Rule of Law, is the concluding argument of the key opening
and ending of the Sermon on the Mount. That is a fact. By referring back
to the Law of the Prophets we see the consistency and what I have just said
to you should be consistent with the Law and not contradict the Law.
Now let’s look at the version in Old English of Matthew 5, verses 33 to 37.
Then I will recite it in Matthew 5, 33 to 37 where there is a distinct
difference. So, let me read the Old English verses 33 to 37:
33. Again, you have heard that it has been said by them of old time, You
shall not forswear thyself, but shall perform unto the Lord your oaths:
34. But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's
throne:
35. Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it
is the city of the great King.
36. Neither shall you swear by thy head, because you cannot make one hair
white or black.
37. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is
more than these came of evil.
Before I get to the new King James Version, I ask you if that phrase is
consistent with what we know as an absolute fact of the consistent law from
the beginning of time that Oaths and Vows are fundamental to the Rule of
Law. They bind men and women to perform and if they are diminished then
groups that refuse to tell the truth, constantly lie, and always corrupt are
able to take positions of power and society becomes a prison and slavery can
thrive. If you don’t believe me, why did Calvin and why did Luther
emphasize Oaths and Vows in the formation of the Protestant movement.
Why, in the Church of England, were oaths and vows essential before the
bankers took control? To say that a Protestant movement that placed the
Sermon on the Mount more importantly than any other reference to the Bible,
any other sections of the Bible, suddenly missed this instruction and turned
themselves into heretics is absurd. To say that it was left up to groups of
people called Quakers and Brethren who ultimately become the very worst
slave masters under which hundreds of thousands of people died in absolute
agony and became the very worst bankers, are you telling me that they got it
right and we all got it wrong?
Something doesn’t add up.
I leave it up to you. I hope the clarity concerning Oaths and Vows has made
this clear to you. I hope you will embrace then, these concepts when you
move forward in the restoration of Law. I hope you will have greater
confidence in what we have said. I hope you see that the people you are up
against don’t care for anything. They see nothing as sacred; they are
nihilists. They think nothing of corrupting the Bible, nothing of
destroying countries, nothing of destroying the world. You are dealing with
severely mentally ill people. Until good people realize that these people
are severely mentally ill and have no right to stay in power, until we
restore Law and primacy of Oaths and Vows in telling the truth, then these
people will continue to get away with what they are doing.
I’m sorry I can’t speak this week on Q and A. I want to thank those of you
who find a way despite all the difficulties and restrictions that this world
places on energy, for you to find a way to <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
help and support and <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
I ask for those of you who can please <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
donate, thank you.
Thank you for your help in supporting Ucadia. Until we speak next week,
please be safe and be well.
I leave it up to you. I hope the clarity concerning Oaths and Vows has made
this clear to you. I hope you will embrace then, these concepts when you
move forward in the restoration of Law. I hope you will have greater
confidence in what we have said. I hope you see that the people you are up
against don’t care for anything. They see nothing as sacred; they are
nihilists. They think nothing of corrupting the Bible, nothing of
destroying countries, nothing of destroying the world. You are dealing with
severely mentally ill people. Until good people realize that these people
are severely mentally ill and have no right to stay in power, until we
restore Law and primacy of Oaths and Vows in telling the truth, then these
people will continue to get away with what they are doing.
I’m sorry I can’t speak this week on Q and A. I want to thank those of you
who find a way despite all the difficulties and restrictions that this world
places on energy, for you to find a way to <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
help and support and <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
I ask for those of you who can please <http://one-heaven.org/donate/
donate, thank you.
Thank you for your help in supporting Ucadia. Until we speak next week,
please be safe and be well.
No comments:
Post a Comment