Print this page
  “When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” Opening Paragraph of Declaration of Independence, 1776  
  As the above opening paragraph to the United States Declaration of Independence states so eloquently, the right to withdraw one’s consent is considered as essential a right as much as the right to grant it.  
  As we have discussed under the opening section of these notes concerning Ecclesiastical deeds, consent is a key concept of the vast majority of legal system as well as systems of government – including communism! Indeed, having the consent of the people has historically been as significant an issue for dictators, tyrants and overlords as it is under constitutions of allegedly “democratic” nations.  
  Even when considering how the people express their right of consent through elections, there is the extraordinary fact that even under the Soviet Union regular elections were held to claim valid consent of the people – even if only one candidate was on the ballot paper. Yet while our ability to express our consent seems freely promoted and supported by our societies, what about our rights of non-consent?  
  It is only when someone encounters a problem such a court case, or some desire on the part of a government agency to take something away do we finally realize just how hard and seemingly impossible the recognition of our “non-consent” appears. Some people scream out “I do not consent” as they are dragged away to prison. Others cry out they “do not consent” when their homes or other valuable possessions are repossessed.  
  It seems our societies on the one hand promote the claim they are democratic and free, yet on the other hand make it virtually impossible to have your non-consent recognized.  
  To those of you reading this article who has sent your Ecclesiastical deed and made every effort with respect to withdraw your consent, it still appears the agents of the present system ignore us. Why? How can they continue to do this and still claim it is lawful and legal? What have we missed? And how might we rectify any deficiency?  
     
  The ghost of Cestui Que Vie and non-consent  
  Through the introduction of the Cestui Que Vie (“CQV”) Acts of 1540, then 1666 and 1707, the English Crown, later most Commonwealth countries and then most western democracies considered their citizens to be lost, abandoned, incompetent and permanent minors for life, thus giving them powers to form estate trusts in their name and to not disclose the financial accounts of such estates, nor benefits to the people.  
  The private bar guild and some of its sycophantic supporters are at pains to claim that these laws act only as a safeguard under the generalized umbrella of the state as the “responsible parent” in ensuring property is not withheld from its rightful owners and that proper accounting of people disconnected to their property may be rectified.  
  It is true that the CQV Acts have been connected to subsequent acts dealing with Guardianship, Custodial Duties, Powers of Attorney and Stewardship / Protection – all of which come into play with the concepts of being lost or abandoned or incompetent or minor as defined by Cestui Que Vie acts.  
  It is true that the Cestui Que Vie Acts may be interpreted on the one hand as largely benign, with any claims of negativity associated with such public laws then dismissed as mere conspiracy and ignorant conjecture. However, to assert this is the only function and interpretation of the Cestui Que Vie acts is also quite disingenuous. This is because the concepts upon which the CQV was formed being lost or abandoned or incompetent or a minor can also be interpreted as someone being considered lost AND abandoned AND incompetent AND a minor.  
  So now instead of having to satisfy and rebut merely one false assumption, the reality of the CQV framework and associated acts put us under not one but five separate kinds of control. So that even if one legitimately revokes the Powers of Attorney-In-Fact of the state, four more positions of control remain and the powers of attorney can be secretly re-invoked against our consent.  
     
  The five headed monster of control  
  Many people have recognized over the years and more recently that part of the problem of having the society accept our non-consent is to first re-establish our competent standing as an adult, without need for representation. This is the idea behind sending off notices of withdrawal of consent or deeds of revocation of attorney in fact.  
  The importance and argument of re-establishing your competence first is typically explained by the logic of considering us to be young children trying to conduct “adult” business. Yes, we may sit in the seat and sent the letters, but because we are “children”, the agency concerned is not permitted to even consider our request- kind of like an invisible force field.  
  Yet with this new insight into the CQV introducing not simply a range of representative controls but five, the challenge of re-establishing your competence is even greater.  
  What then are these five representative positions of control?  
  Lost (property) = Custodian --> Custos Rotalorum (Keeper of the Rolls)  
  Abandoned (property) = Protector/Steward --> Chancellor/Treasurer  
  Incompetent = Attorney In Fact--> Attorney General  
  Minor = Guardian --> Public Trustee  
  Filial = Parent --> Executive Government  
  1st Point of Control – Lost (at See). You are considered mere property “lost at See” – you are considered “Human Flotsam” by your society, permitted to be salvaged from the time of birth. Flotsam in this context means not only “floating wreckage”, but “emigrants or castaways (aliens)”. Thus the 1st Representative of Control is the Custodian or the Custos Rotalorum of the Slave Rolls. This first point of control is vital in making the trickery of what happens at Birth and the subsequent sale of the extract (salvaged) birth record crucial “lawful” as well as legal.  
  2nd Point of Control – Abandoned (at See). You are considered mere property “abandoned at See” – therefore considered “Human Jetsam” by your society, permitted to be salvaged from the time of the age of seven. Jetsam in this context means “part of a ship, its equipment, or its cargo that is purposefully cast overboard or jettisoned to lighten the load in time of distress and that sinks or is washed ashore”. Thus the 2nd Representative of Control is the Protector or Steward, usually represented in the office of Chancellor or Treasurer of your society. This second point of control is vital in making the trickery and corruption of issuing bonds as well as currency notes against your trusts - without you receiving any direct benefit other than taxing you - both “lawful” as well as legal.  
  3rd Point of Control – Minor. You are considered a mere child, someone like Peter Pan who has never grown up and accepted your true responsibilities to society by announcing your majority the ruling elite in the way they demand at the age of eighteen. Instead, they still view you as an irresponsible naughty child, who shows a lack of self discipline and occasionally needs to be “taught a lesson” which is why they appointed a Guardian over you, usually the Public Trustee, who occasionally calls upon a Clerk of a Court to punish you when you have done “wrong” in their system.  
  4th Point of Control - Incompetent. You are considered an idiot, a complete moron - someone not deserving of being considered as anything more than a sheep (sheople) or cattle (chattel) by the elite that run your society when you still failed to restore you standing by the age of twenty one. Instead, they consider you are happy being a slave and to accept what little they give back in return, while they live off your energy like the classic parasites they are which is why they appoint an Attorney In Law, usually the main Attorney-General where you live to make legal decisions on your behalf concerning the affairs of most of the property of your estate they keep from you.  
  5th and Key Point of Control - Filial . You are considered a child belonging to the State as your parents abandoned you, even if they had no idea what they were signing when you were borne. The State is now your mother and father as a quasi-replacement to the claim of the Roman Pontiff of the Roman Cult to being the father of all on Earth. Thus, even if you escape the control of the other four points of control and curse, they have designed a system which believes it is impossible to escape this fifth point of the pentagram of control.  
  These five points of the Pentagram of energy controlling you cannot simply be dissolved by writing a Deed of Revokation, a Writ or Notice of Withdrawal of Consent. The head of the Pentagram of energy enslaving you (Filial) cannot even be approached until the other four points (lost, abandoned, incompetent,minor) are addressed. yet if you seek to dissolve one point of enslavement, it can be legally created once again by the head (Filial) or the remaining three. Thus the Pentagram is designed as both a perpetual binding and curse.  
  So how do you break free? You do so, but evoking the reverse words of the system of control through a public pronouncement of restitution to key officials.  
     
  Pronuntio Restitutum  
  Remember the story of the Prodigal Son from the Bible? First there is a big announcement, then the feast. The feast and celebration did not occur until after the public announcement of the return of the son. This is the same thing here.  
  Similarly, for each claim of control there is the key reverse word. For Lost, it is found. For abandoned, it is returned. For incompetent it is competent and for Minor it is majority.  
  However, for the society claiming to be your parents, the reverse is far more significant, evoking the ancient ritual of disavowing them three times, thus breaking any bonds after you have reversed the previous claims.  
  For more information, please have a look at the revised 1st Ecclesiastical Deed  
     
  Plausible deniability  
  Despite what is written, there will be many who refuse to accept, who openly deny and even some who claim that a Deed of Revocation or a simple Notice of Withdrawal of Consent is all that is needed and that the idea up to five points of control have been created against each and every one of us will sound preposterous.  
  Everyone has a right to their own opinion. In the end it is up to you to decide whether to consider this information or not.  
     
     
Copyright © One-Heaven.Org Ab Initio. All Rights Reserved