https://www.instagram.com/tv/CgevzLXAwj1/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

@Video_Saver_Robot orqali yuklab olindi!

Robotimiz rivoji uchun kanalimizga obuna bo'ling:
💥 @azamat_fgc

Spotted today by a member in NSW, BP service station 🤮🤮🤮 🐛🐜🐞
This is so sick….
Oh wow… just in time for foot and mouth 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢🤢

Curious what your name means? If you have a birth record, they know what your potentials were right then and there. If life was really hard, it’s because of your potentials.

What their trans-humanist agenda devolves into: The Internet of Bodies (3 min 5 seconds) Prepare now to fight back against their catastrophic cyborg agenda for humankind.

check.

Despite the fact that no one asked, the World Economic Forum is now advocating for the merger of human and artificial intelligence systems to censor “hate speech” and “misinformation” online before it is even allowed to be posted.

https://summit.news/2022/08/12/world-economic-forum-calls-for-merging-of-human-and-ai-intel-to-censor-hate-speech-misinformation/

This is one of the more powerful videos I’ve seen.

This is Dr. Bill Deagle a decade foretelling of the New World Order via biopharmaceutical enslavement.

This is a MUST watch & a Must Share!

Chilling but true!

Subscribe: https://news.1rj.ru/str/+dmTGUHJv491iZGQy

'UPDATE ON WALMART CONTAINERS IN THE PARKING LOT...THEY ARE DIGIGING A HUGE HOLE NEXT TO THE STORE???' on YouTube
https://youtu.be/-lyIeiAVKTw

Seems alot of Wallmart facilities have storage containers outside and they are digging 🕳 holes

Looks like the zombie apocalypse is starting 🤣

The Truth About Trusts . . . and the Courts
🔗By Author and Publisher DAVID E. ROBINSON

Basically, courts are charging the all-caps NAME which is a TRUST. They hope that you will identify yourself as the trust — and give them access to the trust via your signature.

In the corporate Matrix, everything is held in a Public Trust, and the way the Elite get access to the trust, is to CHARGE the TRUST and then get you to admit that you are the TRUST/NAME.

Illegal aliens aren’t usually charged — unless it’s a common law violation — because they have no TRUST attached to them — so there’s no profit in charging them.

Observe the three “forms” of court. Remember what Jean Keating said about “substance and form”. You are the “substance” — and application and filing forms are the “form”.

Asking the Judge/Administrator, “Is this about substance or form?” is usually a show-stopper that should get you thrown OUT of Court and your case dismissed.

Our position has always been to never voluntarily go to court. Live men and women are never meant to be in a place designed for the business of fictional entities.

When we attend court we are deemed dead; they can only deal with legal fictions … trusts.

Court is for “noscriptd persons” — judges, prosecutors, defendants, bailiffs, clerks, cops, and attorneys. Live men and women are not recognized in court; they are not “persons”(corporations).

Attorneys do not know how the system works, due to their indoctrination. If you can find an attorney who will do as you say then you will prevail, but most attorneys would rather keep their BAR cards, rather than behave in honor.

The only thing that dead, fictional entities want from us is our life energy, and they can only get that with our consent. They cannot function without us, so they want to get us into court to pay the debt which they created by charging the trust/name.

Common law courts no longer exist. The case has nothing to do with live men and women or “facts” so anyone who testifies (talks) about the facts of the case is doomed.

ALL courts operate in trust law — based upon ecclesiastical canon law — that manifests as commercial law — and we are in court to take the hit if they can get us to give them our consent.

To do this they use every trick in the book –– intimidation, fear, threat, ridicule, rage, and even recesses to change the jurisdiction when they are losing, to make us admit that we are the name of the trust — the trustee — the one liable for administering the trust.

Therefore, until now, it has been a waste of our time and energy to go to a place where it is almost certain that we will be stuck with the liability.

We are told in our public-school indoctrination that judges are impartial, and have sworn an oath to this effect; that he must not favor the defendant or plaintiff. But experience shows otherwise— that he favors the plaintiff — a glaring conflict of interest.

The prosecutor, judge, and clerk (the cleric) all work for the state –– the owner and grantor of the CQV trust.

The case is not about “justice” — it’s about administering a trust.

They represent a trust owned by the state and, if we are the beneficiary, the only two positions left are the executor and trustee.

So if you detect a judge’s partiality — although I doubt the case will get this far — you could let them know that you are aware of these roles.

Under trust law you cannot be the executor or trustee of a trust while being the beneficiary, as that would conflict for the beneficiary cannot act for himself.

I recommend having someone go in your place so that you don’t become confused and consent to being the trust/trustee.

What’s the worst that can happen to your representative, when he can prove he is NOT the trust/trustee. The position of beneficiary may lack clout, but the other positions are liable.

The only way state employees can be the beneficiary of the trust is to transfer the liability they hold to us, because they cannot be both the administrator and beneficiary of the trust.

Page 1 of 4 🔗 go to page 2

CONT; So trusteeship and executorship are the hot potates that everyone wants to toss, so they can be the beneficiary of the credit of the trust.

When we were born, a trust — a cestui que vie trust (CQV) — was set-up for our benefit.

Evidence of this is the birth certificate. But what was the value conveyed to the trust to create it? The value was our right to property via our birth into this world, our bodyvia the Live Birth Record, and our soul via Baptism Certificate.

The state that registered the trust is the owner and the trustee… the administrator of the trust.

Since they want to be the beneficiary of the trust, they must get us (the actual beneficiary) to permit them to charge the trust, by our signature on a document (a citation, application, etc.), and transfer trusteeship to us during the time that they want to be the beneficiary of a particular “constructive” trust.

A trust can be established anywhere and anytime the parties of the trust can be put into place.

And since the beneficiary cannot charge a trust (only a trustee can do so) it is the state, as trustee, that charges the trust, but they do so for their benefit, not ours.

So, under trust law, the only way for them to benefit from their charge against the trust is to get us to switch roles –– from beneficiary to trustee (the one responsible for the accounting), while they switch roles — from trustee to beneficiary (because no party can play both roles at the same time within the same constructive trust).

So, under trust law, the only way for them to charge the trust is to get our — the beneficiary’s — consent.

Why would we consent to switch roles when the trust is for our benefit? … And how do they manage to do this?

Well, the best way is to get us into court and trick us into unwittingly doing so. But if we know what has transpired, prior to our being there, it is easy to know what to say so that this doesn’t happen.

The court clerk is the key party, even though the key party appears to be the judge. The clerk is the trustee for the CQV trust owned by the state. He or she is responsible for appointing the trustee and the executor for the constructive trust of that particular court case.

In a “last will and testament” trust, the opposite is the case –– the executor of the estate appoints the trustee.

So the clerk appoints the judge as the trustee (the one to administer the trust) and appoints the prosecutor as the executor of the trust (the one to execute the trust).

The executor is ultimately liable for the charge because it was he or she who brought the case into court in behalf of the state (created the constructive trust) which charged the CQV trust.

Only an executor/prosecutor can initiate/create a constructive trust, and whoever creates the controversy holds the liability and must provide the remedy.

This is why all prosecutors are mandated to bring their check-books into court because if they fail to transfer their liability onto the alleged defendant (the accused), or the alleged defendant (the accused) does not accept the state’s offer of the liability of the charge, then someone has to credit the trust account in order to off-set the debt and discharge the charge, and the prosecutor is that “someone”.

Since the prosecutor is the one who charges the trust, the Prosecutor/Executor (PE) has to satisfy the charge.

When the Judge/Administrator/Trustee (JAT) calls the Name of the trust, JOHN DOE, we can stand and ask, “For, and on the record, are you saying that the trust, which you are now administrating, is the JOHN DOE trust?”

This establishes the fact that we know that The Name is a trust, not a living man.

What is usually the judge/administrator/trustee’s first question? “What’s your name?” or “State your name for the record”.

We must be very careful not to identify with The Name of the trust because doing so switches the roles and makes us the trustee and the judge the beneficiary.



Page 2 of 4 🔗 Go-to page 3