Many friends in my circle are, like (to use the modern parlance) hey, chill out… stay kool, think higher thoughts, don’t worry, have another drink, anxiety is bad for you. Well my friends, I’ll tell what’s bad for me. It’s being threatened daily by a fraudulent and violent cabal (an intriguing society, a small group meeting privately) which is intent on dominating and controlling every single thing and being on Earth, displaying no particular difference to the Mafioso, other than they try to keep it even more of a secret. Having, in my lifetime, transmogrified England – a land of peace and plenty – into a corporate (meaning dead) controlled oligarchy the cabal are now exacting a comparable kind of punitive restitution demanded from the people of Germany between the two world wars.
Having since paid the piper the debt of sacrifice of the dead of those two world wars, after the ritual of seventy years they want it all back. All of it. The possession of all. The possession of power : the possession of control : the possession of authority. Mind : Body : Soul. The holy trinity – the Three Crowns of Royalty (fr. Realté).
We have been fooled into thinking that the increased or restored freedoms of the people we saw during the 60s, 70s and 80s of the last century were of a progressive, social consciousness derived from a perception of improved living conditions and better education, not to mention the coming of the Age of Aquarius. No. Now, as the scales come tumbling from our eyes, all those palliative measures were just part of the overall propaganda plan.
An inspection of history reveals that the true conspiratorial action plan derived from the arrival into ‘this sceptred isle’ of the occupying military force under William Duke of Normandy ‘The Bastard’, in the year – indelible upon our memories – as 1066 : and all that. That was the time when then the fraud began by fictionalising things. Things. By conquest of military might William claimed the Crown as King of England. Before his coronation he had vowed not to interfere with the law of the land or the land of the people. At great expense and energies his agents recorded every real thing of substance down in a book. (realty = land. Gold is seen as portable land Real. Re, res = thing, stuff) The Domesday Book, so called because it equates to “the Book of Judgement” its decisions being like those of the Last Judgement are unalterable. This was the birth of ‘Legal’ as distinct from ‘Lawful’ : a separation of the article of substance, that which is the material of our reality, (perceived or otherwise as discussed by our philosophers since the dawning of civilization) into the floatation of a completely new and separate Domain – into a new realm of the artifice of Fiction – that which exists only by contemplation of mind, not unlike the creation of the internet as a Domain is today. Everything recorded in the Domesday Book was registered (to write down, or enter a listing) starting with a Title e.g. Warwickshire. Then follows a description of what Warwickshire is, where it is and what it contained, and what the Title is linked-to is contained within the Estate (to stand, make or be firm : property). All these things were established by a description in writing. Thereby, whomsoever owns the book (the creator) owns the Title, and consequently the contents of the Estate described therein. All as a fiction, remember – existing solely by contemplation of mind, from words which only exist as contemplation of mind. The substance lays upon the land whichever way it always had been, separated from entries in the book. The book was managed by clever people, clerics (clerks), and was written in Latin. Clerics were the educated class of the time, the only folk who could use their mind instead of their physical prowess for advancing there careers or surviving the arduous life of those who had not the privilege of Titled persons. Noblemen (ennobled by the King for services rendered in the battle of conquest) had Titles bestowed. Dukes, Counts, Earls, Lords, Barons. And were allotted Estates. (Allotted : given something, especially a share of something available, for a particular purpose). Such allotments were conditional and could be withdrawn at the pleasure of the King.
Such was the birth of Trust law. That is where, unlike a contract – which usually involves two parties in a fixed and binding agreement – a trust has three parties (tri-partite) to a mutual arrangement concerning property. An Estate is the collection of titles to property in a ‘pot’ of assets (things of value or utility) also known as ‘res’ (remember re, real, realty, real are all words to define a kind of desirable property). Rights are also a species of property. The person donating the ‘res’ transfers the Titles of the thing into an imaginary pot called an Estate and encloses the Estate in an imaginary closet called a Trust (a fictional body : an embodiment) for the purpose of controlling rights or authorities or duties or benefits to suit the desires of the person who (i) creates the trust and (ii) transfers into the Estate things which become the property of the Trust. That person or entity that establishes a trust is usually known in England as the Settlor (also donor, grantor, trustor, trustmaker, maker). It is the settlor (he who settles – to fix or resolve conclusively – a creditor, the one who is owed) who determines all the rules, terms and conditions for operation of the trust. There are some rules which appear by default (constructive) unless they are specified (expressed). The second party to a trust is known as the trustee (also fiduciary) or indeed trustees, for there may be many. He/she/they is/are the one/s with the duties, responsibility and authority to uphold the rules and purpose of the trust. The third party to a trust is the beneficiary – or beneficiaries for there may be many. He/she/they is/are the one/s that benefit from the purpose or assets of the trust but are constrained by the rules established by the settlor.
There are many kinds of trust structures. For example, in a company trading for profit as a corporation it is an act of Commerce and has it’s own set of rules established since the market traders of medieval times (Law Merchant). Whichever way you wish to view a corporation, it essentially some dead thing brought to life from time-to-time by the enjoining with human energy – a conjuration). That means that it exists as a separate legal entity to the persons operating it. The shareholders who put the initial capital are settlors and also beneficiaries. The board of directors of a corporation are the trustees accountable to the shareholders. A director (trustee) may have shares in the corporation and so is a trustee and a beneficiary. So it is possible to be two out of three three parties but not at the same time. You can only wear one hat at any one time. You can’t wear two hats at the same time. Also you cannot singularly be all the three parties to a trust at all otherwise the trust fails and is extinguished. A bit like a game of musical chairs at a party that has it’s own rules. It is said that the first recognised trust arrangement in England was when King Richard l (1157– 1199) entrusted his Estate (the realm of the Kingdom of England) to his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine (who was a feisty and wealthy widow from France) as a Trustee while the King went off fighting the third crusade in1190. To be accurate they both went off to the brawl in Jerusalem, but sensible Eleanor got bored with military life after a few years and returned to England to manage the Kings affairs, and never saw Richard again as he died during a siege of a castle in France being hit in the shoulder by a crossbow and the wound turning gangrenous.
However in the fictional world of trusts, I have seen various documents from ancient Rome detailing trusts and testamentary arrangements distribution of property in the event of absence or death. That’s from where our Last Will and Testaments to provide inheritance derive.
Some trusts are thankfully not so complicated where they have established their own rules over time, as a common law principle. When, for example I take my car into the garage for a service, I am the settlor and beneficiary and the mechanic is the trustee. That is a constructive trust occurring naturally as established from our actions
Or, I borrow a garden fork from you to dig my friend’s garden. You are the settlor for you have lent my the fork (res). You tell me I must bring it back my five pm (rules). I am the trustee and am responsible for the digging and the security of the fork until I return it to you. And my friend is the beneficiary, as he gets his garden dug. The use of the garden fork is the ‘res’. No money or consideration passes between us or even an intent to create a legal relationship to make it a contract. So it’s a trust. If it looks like a trust, walks like a trust and talks like a trust it’s presumably a trust. In this case it is an ‘expressed trust’ for the parties are defined by expressing (stipulating) the rules. So trusts can be tricky little critters, so one should treat them with some respect in case they come back and bite you in the bum.
Before I return to the Mafioso threatening all our lives (and bums) I must deal with a misconception that has spoiled many an exposition of how trusts work and control our lives. It is repeated so often as to become credible. The assertion stems from the precept that we can actually only own that which we have ourself created. That concept is OK. It is accepted in law that we did not create the planet known as Earth, it is owned by the Divine Creator for our use. We have use of it and as mankind we have dominion over ‘every creepeth thing’ upon the land. But the land itself, the substance of it cannot be owned by any person; natural or artificial.
Omertà is a Southern Italian code of silence and code of honor that places importance on silence in the face of questioning by authorities or outsiders; …
