Feb 17, 2014 8:39 PM

ask them for confirmation that they have NO POA to administrate.. for the persons.. or economic relationship they call a marriage..

POA ?? :(

power of attorney

Perhaps you can consider - if they don't answer- or the typical non responsive attitude is returned to you - you can remind them that All unconscionable contracts are subject to rescission and void ab initio under the common law for failure to make the proper disclosures in order to constitute an acceptance. Where there is no meeting of the minds there is no contract. Therefore, any and all Marriage License Applications and Certificates bearing the name FIRST MIDDLE LAST or any derivatives thereof are null and void, ab initio, through various elements of concealment and failure to make the proper disclosures.

Fuck, I am doing too many things at once :(

Just ,do it thru some one you trust, the common law shit is for pussies and freetards. In matters handled in privates. Equals fuck offo govenrmento. The corporation, will hold the power of attorney in Private law. Fuck off with this common shit.

ok, my lien search came back stating that there was no lien match to the PERSON'S NAME. I did the search on the PERSON in the province of birth, could it be that I also need to perform a search on the PERSON'S NAME here in BRITISH COLUMBIA where it has been "RESIDING" as well?

Hmmmmm” do you have the print out?

give me a second.

I did mine live as officer in being at their branch, I got a print out, It said there was an agreement in place, I liened it anyway and it is still valid today.

only a car loan showed up on my lien search

Bobis are you saying or suggesting that after your private agreements are in place, and the corporation holding the trust has put forth the lien that this rescued from the civil body and you should not bother with any kind of status correction with the public contracts that you willingly voluntarily entered into because its common law freetard pussie law shit? I am trying to understand this... so perhaps we can all learn something.. value added.

I am wondering if my "criteria" was correct? Gail Marie I suspected i would see something due to the MARRIAGE. Scott Duncan posted that the PERSONS get secured by the GOVERNMENT as a result of the MARRIAGE private trust.

I think Scott said "The person named TOMMY AND CARA " got liened.....which is a different person than TOMMY or CARA....

i think if i remember correctly, the couple together become one side of the relationship...the govt the other

so the marriage certificate is like the bc in that regard..a new person is created?

I can say with absolute certainty that no woman on the planet has loved me more than Tara. However, no amount of love would compel her to JOINDER herself to a "BILL OF LADING", and hand it over to the GOVERNMENT. That means "getting married" (for the stupid amongst you). I'm sorry if that sounds condescending (that means talking down to people). Now think about this marriage transaction. The marriage INCLUDES "Scott" AND "Tara", not "Scott" OR "Tara". This means marriage makes you effectively ONE PERSON UNDER THE LAW. Since the marriage actually consists of THREE ENTITIES, "Scott" AND "Tara", which by its nature EXCLUDES the GOVERNMENT, still remains an "ORGANIZATION". A marriage ORGANIZES these "entities" into their respective roles. If "Scott" AND "Tara" remain "Scott AND Tara", the GOVERNMENT HAS NO STANDING. However, if Tara sought a divorce, the MARRIED PERSON is no longer "Scott AND Tara", and the GOVERNMENT gets to intervene. This most certainly wouldn't be the case if it was "Scott" OR "Tara". Therefore, the above CRIMINAL CODE definition of "PERSON" defines HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ***INSERT PROVINCE HERE***, which is both "HER MAJESTY" AND an "ORGANIZATION".

Scott Duncan "Marriages are PRIVATE TRUSTS with a GOVERNMENT LIEN on the parties.

That is why PRENUPTUAL AGREEMENTS are so EASY to kill. POST NUPTIAL agreements are ROCK solid. I have NEVER seen a challenged POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT succeed. Not even once.

If you make an amendment to the marriage, the GOVERNMENT has no say. It's TRUST business now."

Scott Duncan "Well if you are CURRENTLY married, you are CURRENTLY fucked. It's a bill of lading that secures your PERSONS in the same way Rogueupport has secured Tara and My "PERSONS". You need the government's PERMISSION to disolve the "bill of lading". We only require the SHAREHOLDER'S permission...and they're WAY nicer than the government. If both parties lien their names, then wouldn't that take the surety out of the equation? That's "WILFUL DAMAGE to a SECURITY INSTRUMENT". The Marriage came first. IT has the claim, not you. Liening your name just makes you "next in line".

How about a DECREE that the signatures are now rescinded by free will of both parties and marriage is now and forever null and void? That damages the security. The trustee you LICENSED from, will demand payment, which will, by happy coincidence, consist of everything you own. If there is lien in place then our corp would be "first in line"? (yes?)"

"Marriages are PRIVATE TRUSTS with a GOVERNMENT LIEN on the parties. " Parties is plural, if Scott Duncan said party, than i would be more inclined to look at the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE PARTY for the lien, as the two parties become one PARTY through it, anyone see what I am getting at here? I have been told to take his words as deliberate and precise.

That was my t hought, I need to get a copy of the marriage certificate to get the number of it

So” they created a new person, LIEN it. That is all.

All this bush-wackin for me is interesting, I do get your point Bobis Youruncle on the lien, I really just want to verify. You see I consider this due-diligence.

Cara ordered a copy of your certificate didn't she Tommy?

I have the certificate in front of me, we ordered the instrument with our signatures on it which allegedly permitted this TRUST.

on google it looked similar to the bc...does yours?

Gail Marie is your PERSON in such a TRUST? you can tell me its none of my fucking business and i wont be hurt.

yes

I would be happy to upload a generic version if you are interested, it would take me a bit, my scanner is not up.

it's ok....i just found it interesting when i googled how they resembled the bc....i'll have to order mine and get the number from it for the lien

Great, well not great, but glad more than one party has interest in this, so you too found no lien on the PERSON you have regarding the MARRIGE too?

no, only a car loan

I suspect we would need to find out what they named the marriage person to start....I'm not overly concerned about that....the lien on the certificate will be at worse case scenario a precaution...with the assumption that they have hidden this without being able to verify it beyond Scott telling us.

It's not really our issue is it...we don't do the accounting?

The PPSA covers it. It is off limits to anybody after that. We then as officers account for it as per wishes of the board.

YES Gail Marie would be good information to find a new NAME if that were the case; what is on the certificate is some red numbers X8 and a Registration No. but I can't seem to find a way to lien search with that information.

I don't think they created a new person... if the Marriage created a private trust...and the government lien is on the parties.. how does a trust become a person? I don't believe that is possible..

liens are on property

Doesn't matter what they did a PPSA will take care of it. You can't but some you trust can” The Trustee corporation is the only recognized person with the authority to do this.

So I just found the quote I was looking for: above. He does not actually say lien, he says the Bill of Lading, which is the Marriage, SECURES the persons (plural) like Rogue Support did for the PERSONS he and his partner have.

I, mistakenly, thought "lien"

So, lien the bill of lading” Secure it in private.

the trustee corporation is someone you trust...?

YES, good, a thinker.

Tommy Atherton good for you for whacking your own bush, you will find this is all verifiable. It needs to be verified, if nothing shows up on the lien search then good, for me going in live, it was about being able to stand to challenges. I have faced them. I have made mistakes. I am still here. All of this just made me stronger. So it is good practice to verify everything for accuracy and truth. Interesting, that the original security agreement issued at the same time as the birth certificate, did not turn up on your on lien searches.. I had idiots at the alberta registries who, did not know what they were doing, and printed me of 50 pages of shite to find my name amongst hundreds , that all had a security agreement in place”

So the WILLFUL DAMAGE if one's trustee were to attempt to lien the PERSONS involved in a MARRIAGE, would be caused because they are already securing another INTEREST. So then one's trustee liens the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE thus securing it in the private. Once secured in the private could one's trustee then VOID the signatures on the contract creating the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE, thus performing a private DIVORCE? Once done, then, could one's trustee secure the PERSON the beneficiary has in the private as well?

You cannot but some one you trust can, they are licensed by private charter, so yes to all of the above. Or you could monetize the lien, by giving it a value, no idea where to find that, one thinks ones own formula could do it, make one up, and then the trustee can make up a bill, to submit for payment somewheres :-)

Yes, it is all verifiable. In private, you can verify anything, as long as you can account for it. It is your law. The government has no standing it is a trust.

Right Bobis, edited

I feel satisfied

Funny thing is, the financial institutions act verifies most of it”

I like having Tommy around here....he isn't like some of these other newbies that float around here. He really has followed this stuff here!

I need to start with translating that thing to something I understand, glad it is short.

Yes, He has studied and read it is obvious by the thought full questions. It is a pleasure to be of assistance. As much as I can be anyway “

Thanks Chris, I have been received well here, and wish not abuse the efforts being made. I feel lucky to jump in line behind others who have broken a lot of ground for me. Perhaps I can break trail one day.

Get some bug spray”. :-D

and a machete” :-D

Oh ya.. and a nice van to do everything out of” A mobile trust unit” :-D

Gail, I ordered a copy of the marriage license. We have the certificate.

Scott Duncan, thankyou for looking at through the confusion, and sorting process. I see the "like" on: " I am wondering if my "criteria" was correct? Gail Marie I suspected i would see something due to the MARRIAGE. Scott Duncan posted that the PERSONS get liened by the GOVERNMENT as a result of the MARRIAGE private trust." 15 hours ago · Like · 1. I realize this was intentional, are you willing to expand? I will open up the PPSA site once again and ponder.

I also had a thought, Is a lien the only way to SECURE a PERSON or could it be that the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE is evidence of the SECURITIZATION of the PERSONS, hence no PPSA lien?

Yes. The marriage would be the PRIOR (superior) claim.

Got that, but I flail, being stuck on the concept that it should show up in the PPSA, or is that hidden, in front of out eyes, AS the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE, so as to not red flag the sheep, yet still BE COMMERCIALLY LEGAL.

If the government is TRUSTEE and BENEFICIARY, in regards to that marriage trust, no need to REGISTER a lien on it ??.. :/

PETE, government is a trust, they can only recieve, IMO

Would they not have to be a PERSON to benefit?

IMO= in my opinion.

The ETAT CIVIL DU QUEBEC, or REGISTRAR GENERAL, is NOT a trust, I think .....and they are the one that seems to hold titles, in regards to this certificate..... NO ?? :/

?

That's EXACTLY what I have in my brain, a huge ?

:D

ok, cool, a "like" its like the "warmer" "cooler" game.

The marriage IS the trust tho, is it not?

no

It's a bill of lading.

Cara, please stay OUT of this conversation, this is a MAN conversation :D

Ok. So if the marriage is a bill of lading is there no trust?

The CERTIFICATE seems to be a pice of paper that CERTIFIES a TRUST was established, somewhere :D

So therefore, a bill of lading :)

Ask Derek Moran... ..

Oh wait !! :(

Why is PETE the only one with a clue?

Please don't.

Then would the license be evidence of the trust?

So anyway, I did answered this to the lady... :D

Bonjour Madame Lamy, et merci pour votre réponse rapide”

Pour tout vous dire, je vois le certificat de mariage comme une FIDUCIE, et je vois moi et mon épouse comme étant CONSTITUANT, concernant cette fiducie.

Par contre, je vois le Gouvernement comme étant Bénéficiaire, et Fiduciaire de cette fiducie, ce qui me chatouille un peu, sans vous vexer bien entendu”. Donc, je me demande si le gouvernement possède une PROCURATION quelconque, et/ou un LIEN, et/ou un PRIVILÈGE LÉGALE concernant ce certificat de mariage, et/ou fiducie.

Désolé pour toutes ces questions, mais lorsque nous nous sommes mariés, nous étions TOTALEMENT ignorants concernant l’aspect LÉGALE du mariage.

If you need a translation, ask Will Bed or Janick Paquette, I am fed up with that translation shit :P

No, just some words defined.

chatouille

Tinggling :D

Tingling or tickling?

You choose :P

Chatouille = You know when you start kissing Tommy, this mysterious feeling you happen to have in your vagina ??......that is "chatouille" :D

Pete. Don't go there. You KNOW what happens when I am around.

Why do you care?

Could it also be that we don't even need to know?

Just lien the fucker. Be done and move on.

I AGREE THIS IS GETTING CLUBHOUSE-ISH!

It is just property.

Make it private property.

You only need to show INTENT to claim. A MARITIME lien is actually SECRET. Derek Moran Circle-Jerking NEVER helps. If it's hard, you're doing it wrong.

In other words Scott, whatever that TRUST may be, one thing is for SURE, ME and Nadine are the ONLY ONE that can give VALUE to it, so therefore, LIEN it... ??

hence no PPSA lien showing up!

So would putting a lien on the marriage cert be any different than putting a lien on the person?

The lien is on "COLLATERAL" instead of a PERSON?

The lien is a new security created, it puts a stop sign up to third party interlopers.

MY apologies for any CLUBHOUSE RULE SHIT, I sort of got sucked in to the ditch there.

You have to know a little clubhouse rules to get out of their clubhouse, by creating your own clubhouse in private. It is easy to go down the rabbit hole of their clubhouse. A lien on any property created in their clubhouse via trusted third party is that key. Then you stay out in private.

So the trust is the "private" being trustee-d by the public corp. Do I understand that correctly?

Private corp.

Ok, so it is a private corp. registered into the public?

Yes it is registered publicly but according to its, private charter it is private, which is al public knowledge via public notice.

Going to start on the "Public Notice" here shortly. Gail Marie (Gail MacLean) has been helpful here.

hehe I have too many facebook accounts lol you found the one with my maiden name...on a thread talking about marriage certificate no less :P

I did not expose anything sensitive I hope.

nope :)

One less problem for me where mariage is concern! :)

I was reading this thread, and thought of this word :/

Consideration

Something of value given by both parties to a contract that induces them to enter into the agreement to exchange mutual performances.

Consideration is an essential element for the formation of a contract. It may consist of a promise to perform a desired act or a promise to refrain from doing an act that one is legally entitled to do. In a bilateral contract—an agreement by which both parties exchange mutual promises—each promise is regarded as sufficient consideration for the other. In a unilateral contract, an agreement by which one party makes a promise in exchange for the other's performance, the performance is consideration for the promise, while the promise is consideration for the performance.

Consideration must have a value that can be objectively determined. A promise, for example, to make a gift or a promise of love or affection is not enforceable because of the subjective nature of the promise.

We know the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE is a bill of lading, and the Bill of Lading is the MARRIAGE. Being a Bill of Lading one's trustees are going to lien it as it moves into PRIVATE PROPERTY, so what exactly is the proper name and/or label and/or commercial SECURITY code of the PROPERTY known as the bill of Lading, Is it the red, in our case 8 digit number? Obviously one's trustees have to be able to identify the PROPERTY properly to lien it.

No, the bill of lading is NOT the marriage, the bill of lading is the CERTIFICATE. :-P

Here in Quebec, it's THE INSCRIPTION NUMBER, same as the birth certificate, but instead of the number starting with 199, it starts by 2199404XXXXXX

219 = married in the 1900's 94 = the year we got married 04 = Province of Quebec And the last six digits, I have no idea where they come from :/

PIERRE DAOUST's birth certificate also have an INSCRIPTION number, which is 1196604XXXXXX

119 = Born in the 1900's 66 = Year of birth 04 = Province of Quebec (It's not really a Province but they don't want to say it) And the six last digits are the Life Birth Registration number....

Anyone have an idea on where the last six digits of the Marriage Certificate came from ?? :/

Oh, and by the way, tomorrow is MY birthday, so I want each and everyone of you to send me 10,000 dogecoin, that's an ORDER, so you know now why I have chose dogecoin :D

Nope. Where did you find the info about the first 7 digits?

I called the Government :/

HAHA. It is MY birthday next wed so you could send them back.

OOPs I mean the 23rd.

Do you wanna do it?

I don't mind, and plus, you send them first so.... :D

I'm game.

Great....

DL5yDdcJPQGd9TMHPAY1zBc4PGfkByQ35N

Not before tomorrow

Nope.

So now there is 3 things to lien....

CARA TOMMY CARA AND TOMMY

Right ??

Ok and mine is on the 21st! in case you feel generous Pete! And that is not an order! ;)

I would say yes from what I've been reading here!

Well, it depends on HOW you will be generous tomorrow Janick Paquette :D

Pete. Send them to Janick. Janick, you send them to me.

Well, you mean on top of the order? :P

o.O

Me to you. You to Janick. Janick to me.

10 000 Doge,...that's an order...!!! Helloooo!

Ok, I am lost !!! :(

Janick Paquette, it's Heelloossss....., not helllo....for fuck sakes, be a real token please :D

Really? OK. I send you 10 000. You send Janick 10 000 on th 21st. Janick will send me 10 000 on the 23rd.

Ok, but seriously.....

So now there is 3 things to lien....

CARA TOMMY CARA AND TOMMY

Right ??

I am not sure about that but I do know the marriage must be liened before anything else. Then I would think that yes we would have to lien the persons but only when we have destroyed the marriage cert.

We are thinking we would also send in the copy of the license after we lien the marriage with "new original" and our signatures with a VOID on top.

WHY ?

Well we are thinking this forces the issue and we can maybe move on to the persons after.

Well, what's the use of liening something, and void it after ??......just void it ??...no ?? :/

I dont think we have to send it in, its in the trustees private jurisdiction at that point, and it is private what we do with it.

Are you guys in the same room ??

I am thinking Tommy is right about that myself.

:/

Yes.

tete a tete

Are you guys kind of crazy or something ?? :D

oui

I can barely keep my hands off of him and my clothes on.

o_O

We think differently so it is helping a great deal for both of us to be on here.

back to the subject matter. I think if our trustees lien the marriage certificate it is possible the lien on the persons may be affected in the public as well, so yes that is a concern for the trustees to be schooled on, I know of one man who may have the answer to that.

I like Tommy's thinking, Cara's thinking is more like women bullshit's thinking :D

These a 3 "DIFFERENT" persons Tommy Atherton, right ?

Lets say...

MacDonald PEPSI COKE

If you lien the three, how does one can "affect" the other ? :/

I think by liening the marriage certificate, the GOVERNMENT would lose their claim to LIEN the PERSONS as they no longer will be the TRUSTEES of the marriage, thus no rightful claim to SECURE an instrument now out of their jurisdiction.

We have signed (I think) our persons into the marriage.

It has been secured by that contract and if we lien the certificate there is nothing for the persons to secure.

They are trustee of the PERSON that marriage created.....

You don't lien the certificate, you lien CARA AND TOMMY the person :(

Why would you lien a freaking bill of lading, you would lien the goods, not the bill that describes the goods....no ??

Do you know how to describe the CARA AND TOMMY PERSON, I have been trying to figure out how that PROPERTY is described too, so I figured that perhaps one of the numbers on the bill of lading is representative of the "CARA AND TOMMY" PROPERTY, but I do not know.

Do you know how to describe MacDonald, the person ?

If you want to perform a lien on MacDonald, would you care about HOW to describe MacDonald ??

It's a person, so lien it, same with CARA AND TOMMY, it's a person.....enough of a description.....no ??

So ....

Lien CARA for 12.5 Millions Lien TOMMY for 12.5 Millions Lien CARA AND TOMMY for 25 Millions

:D

On the PPSA site you are given certain fields to select from for the lien, I, today, with my given knowledge would have the trustee lien "COLLATERAL" and describe all information on the Certificate, thus encapturing any PROPERTY on it. I would not attempt to LIEN CARA at this time, I think that is the willful damage to a security.

Tommy Atherton, I think you need to lien CARA AND TOMMY first....

And to lien CARA AND TOMMY first, CARA AND TOMMY needs to be ok with it,

I think we are talking about the same thing, I agree Lien the PROPERTY ON THE BILL OF LADING known as the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE FIRST, the problem arises for me here as I do not know exactly how to acurrately describe this new UNIFIED PROPERTY to the PPSA LIEN REGISTRATION. RED NUMBERS? AND/OR REGISTRATION NO. these two seem like the only options as the NAMES on the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE are the PERSONS B/C NAMES and Birthdate, and I am feeling confident that is a no no.

If both parties lien their names, then wouldn't that take the surety out of the equation? That's "WILFUL DAMAGE to a SECURITY INSTRUMENT". The Marriage came first. IT has the claim, not you. Liening your name just makes you "next in line".

Right, so the property being CARRIED should be listed on the BILL OF LADING, I think that by putting a lien on the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE, it REPRESENTS the "CARA AND TOMMY PROPERTY", to use your terminology.

I am in full agreement with you, we are just struggling to describe with perfection the TOMMY AND CARA PROPERTY

Mhhhh....I would describe it the same as it is written on the bill of lading....

If

Cara Tommy Cara & Tommy

are 3 different persons, why do you need to do the marriage/person first?

Why not do them all at the same time?

Is it because of you need to undo reversely what you have done and/or registered?

What difference does it make if you Lien Pepsi Coke or Mc Donalds first?

I am going to upload our "certificate of marriage" as it lists two PERSONS, The two b/c PERSONS. 1 . as "bridegroom" 2 . is the "Bride". We have learned we can not have our trustees lien THESE PERSONS as it will damage the SECURITY of the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE. To me, by liening the CERTIFICATE one liens the PROPERTY on the BILL OF LADING.

I could so be wrong.

And so fucked up :D

Me too, no worries :D

So I'm guessing by your none response that my questions don't make sens? :)

:D

ok! Thanks Pete! :)

;/

Janick Paquette here is some of the material we are working off of: Scott Duncan "Well if you are CURRENTLY married, you are CURRENTLY fucked. It's a bill of lading that secures your PERSONS in the same way Rogueupport has secured Tara and My "PERSONS". You need the government's PERMISSION to disolve the "bill of lading". We only require the SHAREHOLDER'S permission...and they're WAY nicer than the government. If both parties lien their names, then wouldn't that take the surety out of the equation? That's "WILFUL DAMAGE to a SECURITY INSTRUMENT". The Marriage came first. IT has the claim, not you. Liening your name just makes you "next in line".

How about a DECREE that the signatures are now rescinded by free will of both parties and marriage is now and forever null and void? That damages the security. The trustee you LICENSED from, will demand payment, which will, by happy coincidence, consist of everything you own. If there is lien in place then our corp would be "first in line"? (yes?)"

Thanks Tommy! I was actually copy/pasting all these posts on a word document to study them! :) Will study some more...

I almost made this mistake once! Fuck am I glad I didn't!

What mistake Chris?

Getting MARRIED!!!! :-D :-D :-D

:D

A Married couple can do HUGE damage to government. Just sayin'.

OOOOHHHHH????? :-D

Yes.

I think my fear of commitment is gonna trump my desire to do HUGE damage to the government on this one....unless..........Hey Lana, will you marry me? No commitment, but I would like to consummate the agreement. AND do HUGE damage to the government

How can you ask for "PERMISSION", to the gouvernment, to disolve a Bill of Lading?

You don't. You make it too costly to hold it.

So if I understand correctly, by Liening the person or persons you happen to have, you f*ck up there debt world where you inhable them to use this credit and this person's name to there advantage.

This way when you get anything regarding that person, it's there creation therefore it's there shit therefore all the shit you get for that person belongs to them and you can just send it back to the owner?

And this way you are clear of all the BS?

Do I understand at least something out of all this? :/

married with little ones, more damage

I GOT AN ANSWER FROM THE GOVERNMENT !!! :/

that is a sad face ?

The answer is: nous vous invitons — vérifier auprès d’un conseiller juridique

They are INVITING me to seek LEGAL ADVICES :D

As usual.....that is the answer I receive ALL THE TIME....to ALL these questions I send them.....ALL OF THEM :D

in other words..."affirmative"

... so I'm guessing... still wrong, right? :/

"You make it too costly to hold"- Scott Duncan. IF we are the CARRIERS of the BILL OF LADING known as the MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE, perhaps making the CARRIER FEES astronomical, then perhaps it would be "too costly to hold?" If I were contracting transport, that is what I would do if I were CARRYING undesirable CARGO.

From a common sense perspective: we have been CARRYING this cargo for free up to this point. Sole Signatory party on the BILL OF LADING is SURETY, to me this PARTY is in need of a BILL. A BIIIIIIIIG BIll?

CLAIM the Cargo until PAYMENT is made, the BILL OF LADING describes the CARGO.

So the first question from me was”.

Hellos, Following some research I have made, I have good reason to believe that the Government of Quebec recorded a legal privillege (lien) on the marriage certificate that we, me and my wife, have, could you confirm whether I'm right or wrong ? Thank you in advance

Their first answer: What do you mean by LIEN ( privilege legal) :-o

So, I followed by: Hello Ms. Lamy, and thank you for your quick response ...

To be honest, I see the marriage certificate as a TRUST, and I see myself and my wife as GRANTORS concerning this trust.

I see the government as Beneficiary and Trustee of the Trust, which bothers me a little”

So I wonder if the government has any POWER OF ATTORNEY and / or Lien and / or LEGAL PRIVILEGE on this marriage certificate, and / or trust.

Sorry for all these questions, but when we got married, we were TOTALLY ignorant about the LEGAL aspect of marriage.

Thanks in Advance.

Then they answered: Seek for LEGAL advices, and we suggest to contact the Ministere of Justice :-o

WHY THEY ARE SUGGESTING to contact the ministere of JUSTICE, Scott Duncan ?? :/

Oh fuck, just received 10,000 dogecoin from I don't know who :D

Happy B-day Pete Daoust :)

Hey....THANK YOU, I reaaaallllyyyy appreciate that :D

Does it not make sense if the BILL is not paid for CARRYING, then any ASSETS of the GOV would be vulnerable to a lien, Force them to collapse the TRUST of the MARRIAGE, just for starters one's trustees lien the property of the CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE, each day after the DEBT accumulates. This is the DEBT collection process they do to us.

I'm guessing they want you to contact him because he is really good at giving people the "runaround". :(

And they don't want to be surety for the answer.

What's a "runaround" ?? :/

Pete Daoust whats with the CLUBHOUSE love letters

ha ha

runaround = never giving a straight answer

If I was to do work for some one and the work is described in a contract, I wouldn't lien the contract. I would lien the property of the one who signed. To me the Marriage cert describes the property and the one who signed is the Director of Vital Statistics.

Well, I have to admit that I "love" having files filled with their so called "answers"......it makes me SECURE :D

sending you all over the place and never getting an answer and after talking to a whole bunch of people, the last person suggests that you need to speak to the person that you started with. That happens to me all the time. I've spent days on the phone being sent from one person or ministry to another and after 20 or more calls been told that I need to speak with the person or ministry where I satrted.

From me Pete Daoust I have a lot!!

:D

Sorry Tommy, but we are in a profound conversation in another thread, and have no time for this marriage shit.....stay tune...

no worries! I am just fishing for clarity.

Wow Tommy, even me I couldn't fucked it up like you just did :-D

its gone

That is why PRENUPTUAL AGREEMENTS are so EASY to kill. POST NUPTIAL agreements are ROCK solid. I have NEVER seen a challenged POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT succeed. Not even once.

If you make an amendment to the marriage, the GOVERNMENT has no say. It's TRUST business now."

I think the remedy to the MARRIAGE is to be found in the above quote! Amend the marriage through a POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT. The contents of this post nuptial agreement are to make the MARRIAGE too costly for the Current Trustee (Gov) to hold.

"It's Trust business now" what is the significance of this part? how can a post nuptial agreement (amend) the MARRIAGE between TOMMY and CARA so as to make the TRUSTEES want to drop it like a hot potato ?

Business between TRUSTED parties, I guess :D

amend. v. to alter or change by adding, subtracting, or substituting. One can amend a statute, a contract or a written pleading filed in a law -suit.

Are the Gov Trustees of the MARRIAGE, obligated to carry out any amendments made to the MARRIAGE contract by the sole authorized administrators for TOMMY and CARA if they agree to the terms as cited in a Post nuptial agreement?

Well, TRUSTEES takes ORDER from the Authorized Administrator ?

Who are the SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR ? :D I guess Cara & Tommy are ? .......no ? :D

So Cara and Tommy will gives some very specific ORDERS to that trustee, and that Trustee will EXECUTE these orders .....right ? :)

Hey Trustee, here is a very special POSTnuptial agreement from the ADMINISTRATORS......these agreements takes effect RIGHT NOW :P

We, the administrators, WISH to receive, from that trust, $1000.00 each, every Fridays of Every week :D

From the SURETY :P

Oh fuck, Am I thinking wrong and value the wrong things again ? :(

I just can't put it all together on a piece of paper, but I will, soon I will :/

Thats what I am thinking!

Good, put something nice on a piece of paper, we'll start this process.....I REALLY want to do this :D

NOTICE of POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT

from: Sole Authorized Administrators for the PERSON TOMMY, THE PERSON CARA, AND THE PERSON TOMMY/CARA

Just need a Body to that document now, haha

I'll post one, in a few hours, you do the same, and we will finish it up together... :-)

Also, i think the relevance that the PERSONS have been moved into the the private, via the MARRIAGE private TRUST, must be looked at. Perhaps this can be used by the MARRIED PERSONS we have to our advantage.

The TRUSTEES are now performing functions in the PRIVATE, what can we do there? Is this not our jurisdiction if we make it?

The Post nuptial agreement could be compared to a corporations charter, it is a marriage charter. The SOLE ADMINISTRATORS for the PERSONS IN MARRIAGE agree to appoint a corporation (say Quebec xxx inc.) as the duly authorized sole administrator. This, new, administrator now ACCEPTS BILLS as well as directs the Trustees to carry out policy of the "MARRIAGE CHARTER" (POST NUP) and gets paid for administrative duties out of the security of the MARRIAGE. This then sets the grounds for the corp to lien. It kind of like what we could do had the MARRIAGE not taken place, same parties, slightly different roles.

Could this be RETROACTIVE ? :D, it's been fucking 20 years now !! :/

If not, pay the new admin, a lot to make up for the past!

I can't see WHY it couldn't be retroactive though :/

I'm sure your MARRIAGE CHARTER can figure something out.

Not sure? more thinking to come!

Did you guys not see the ethereum contract for marriage? just "transfer" by declaration :D

Oh my! (head about to explode) I assumed it couldn't be done, yet I thought about it.

Scott Duncan said just "transfer" by declaration, so I think (not sure) he meant :

We, me and Nad, DECLARE that we transfer the MARRIAGE contract No. 2199404XXXXXX, to.......with these NEW clauses....

:D

Meanwhile at Ethereum,

We're over capacity

Please wait a moment and try again

:D

We had a little Ethereum drinkup in Utrecht, The Netherlands where Nick, Yves and Joris did a little pair programming on a marriage contract with divorce clause: https://github.com/jorisbontje/cll-sim/blob/master/examples/i_want_half.cll

With CLL Simulation testing all the marriage scenarios : https://github.com/jorisbontje/cll-sim/blob/master/examples/i_want_half.py

Usage: * Both parties should send their marriage proposal to the contract; with the address of other partner that they'd like to marry. * Once they are married, they can deposit whatever value to this shared contract. * To withdraw, both parties should send a transaction with the withdrawal request, recipient and amount. Once both request the same the transaction is made. * To divorce, both parties should send a transaction with a divorce request. Once both send the request, the remaining balance is split 50-50 among both partners... I WANT HALF!

HAHAHAHA!!!!! :D

My direction shall shift. Thanks for the declination.

"transfer" to a Named Trustee of choice?

Or, to a "trustless" chain block of choice ? :D

I've got some homework to do on Ethereum and block chain-ing so I can understand this.

#ScottIsAlwaysRight

Shit, I didn't remembered that one! :D

Chain block !! :D ....fuck me :D

Paul O'Shea was just joking about this chain block yesterday

I remember this thread. I said little because I was trying to prevent myself from blurting out HOLYFUCKJUSTSHUTTHE FUCKUPANDDOWHATYOUARETOLD!

I amazed at my restraint.

Still trying to understand just what is the "do what you are told" part. Based on this thread, it's my understanding that my new trustee liens JEFF AND NINA, JEFF, NINA too along with any other PERSON that lives with them and was created after their creation. Right or wrong? As these PERSONS are now held in PRIVATE TRUST and a POST NUPTIAL AGREEMENT between these PERSONS makes the original TRUSTEE leave them alone? Shit stain?

Pretty much.

It all goes to shit if the two of you want to "divorce" though.