A Discourse on the Legal Name

Feb7 by wallydove
A Discourse on the Legal Name
What my Investigation Disclosed
by
Fartin Amit

Preamble:

The purpose of this treatise is to discuss the results of my investigation into what the legal name is, its
use, and its implications for every man woman and child in this nation.

I have heard many people say that we are living in slavery in this country and I have attended, and even
presented, many seminars exploring the unconstitutional nature of the federal income tax Act and many
other illegal acts of government, as they are termed.

However, the fact is, no one ever forced us to use the legal name and to enter the game of commerce
(similar to the game of Monopoly). We did that voluntarily and, I believe, we did it out of greed.

We would not go to work to give our labour free of charge to create all that is being created today.
Instead, we demanded to be paid for our labour. If we are going to demand to be paid, then we have to
enter the game of commerce, a game that is based on money. In fact, without money, the system of
commerce could not exist. Money is the fuel that turns the engine of commerce.

It was simply not good enough for us that we labour (work) free of charge to create all the things that we
are currently creating, in which case everything would be free to all of us. Instead, we demanded to be
paid, a commercial activity that has resulted in our enslavement.

If we had not demanded to be paid, then the International Banking Cartel would not exist, and it would not
have been able to secure the rights to create our money supply and loan it to us as if it were a valuable
commodity, and not simply a tool, and to add interest to it to boot!

This, I believe, is the sole cause of our problems today just as the Bible tells us; the love of money is the root
of all evil.

For those readers who do not believe in God or otherwise view the Bible as nothing more than a good
book written by man, let me suggest that all laws are nothing more than words written on pieces of paper
by man, yet we willing obey the law and even counsel one another to do the same. We will even throw
people in jail for not obeying some of these laws all written by man. I would certainly follow the Bible
and obey it rather than man made laws.

I will use the Bible as an authoritative reference book solely because it contains such wisdom, which, I
trust, will become evident as I reference it throughout this treatise. During my lifetime I have found the
solutions to all my problems and issues in life in the Bible. I have also found it to be a great law book.

For those of you who may not know, the U.S. Supreme Court has on the front of the building in which it is
housed, carvings of many former jurists and in the centre of them is a carving of Moses, a biblical
character who is considered to be, at least by the legal community, the original law-giver.

Additionally, the supremacy of God is recognized in the Coronation Oath, the Canadian Bill of Rights, the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Bible is present in every courtroom in Canada.

The Bible, therefore, is a recognized and accepted authoritative book from coast to coast in Canada and I
reference it for this and all the aforementioned reasons.

The System:

The system (not the system of commerce that I will explore later) that exists in this country today is based
on Gods plan and in my humble opinion, is perfect. The reason it is not working for us is that we are
serving this system and not allowing the system to serve us.

The Bible says that God is a Spirit (John 4:24), God is Love (1 John 4:8 & 1 John 4:16), and the Kingdom
of God is within you (Luke 17:21). So take from that what you will. Certainly God will be present in His
kingdom. God, therefore, is within you, and you might want to search for all your answers and solutions
from your source of life, or love, that is within you. Some refer that searching as praying.

It has been said that man cannot improve on Gods plan/system, and with that, I totally agree.

The system (not the system of commerce) that exists in Canada today is patterned after Gods system
laid out in Malachi 3:
10
Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove
me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a
blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

It might be difficult at first to agree with my position that the system we have today is patterned after
Gods plan (the underlined portion of the biblical quotation in the previous paragraph), but let me explain.

I respectfully submit, we might have no problem accepting that all natural resources existed before we
arrived on this planet and although you may not agree, I believe they were created by the one who
created me, and are made available to me and the rest of mankind, free of charge by our divine Creator
(Geneses 1:26-28).

The Bible states further, that labour is a gift from God (Ecclesiastes 2:24; 3:13; 5:19). We can use our
labour again and again, there is a never ending supply. Our labour ceases only when the spirit of life
(love or God) leaves the body and the body dies.

Therefore, when we use and enjoy our labour and collectively create everything on earth that has been
created (other than the natural resources that God created in the first place), we then place it in the
storehouse for people to come and pick it up. In other words, so that there may be meat in mine house.

You do not believe that?

Then what do you find in the grocery stores in your town? Our production!

What do you find in the computer stores, in the automobile stores, etc., etc.? Our production!

In all of these and many other storehouses, you find our (collectively speaking) production!

You see, once we have expended our creative labour and attached it to the natural resources
which God has supplied to us in abundance, we have created and paid for everything in the only
way we can, with our labour!

At that point, all our production is placed in the storehouses across the country and everyone is free to
pick up what they want.

Oh but wait, you say, we must pay for the things we take from the storehouse!

But do we?? Havent we already paid with our labour?

At this point, as a member of the labour pool, I have an interest in all the property created by us, the
labour pool. Money is not in the picture nor is it necessary! However, lets see what the purpose of
money might be, which I will cover in the next section.

The System of Commerce:

The system described in the previous section outlines the system (the system that organizes the labour of
mankind) we have in this country but it is somewhat obscured by the existence of another, very sinister
system of commerce (what the Bible refers to as mammon).

This commercial system is totally unnecessary because when one truly ponders this, it will become
very obvious that mans labour creates everything and when that is done, it should be the end of
the creation process. There should be no such thing as paying for things that we have already
created. Who benefits from that anyway?

You see, if you think about it, what I described in the previous section of this treatise is absolutely
correct. Man creates everything that is created on earth using his labour (gift from God) to attach to (to
manipulate) the natural resources supplied in abundance by God.

However, man thought he could improve upon a system like that so we demanded to be given money
in return for our labour (to be paid). Where there is a need, there will always be someone
waiting to supply that need. We must decide if that someone will be God or man.

To date, we have always chosen man and man made institutions such as government and myriad
government created legal fictions, to supply our needs and fulfill our desires.

The International Banking Cartel of today convinced us that we needed a commercial system (although
it did not take much convincing since we already believed it paying is a commercial activity)
and we needed money in order to make things better and easier for us. Further, they convinced us that
they could provide us with the money.

The history of how the International Banking Cartel achieved its objective of controlling the money supply
for virtually every nation on earth is a long a convoluted study. It is, in fact, a study that would be best
done on its own and there are many resources to aid one in that study. In the U.S. it happened in 1913
with the advent of the Federal Reserve System in the U.S. and the Bank Act or similar legislation in
Canada, the result of which was to give the Chartered Banks the right to create Canadas money supply.

As I alluded to earlier one way of looking at this situation is to view the system as two separate systems.
First there is the real system that involves man attaching labour to natural resources to create everything
that is created and having these products delivered to storehouses across the country. People should be
free to take anything they need or want from these storehouses, since everything is pre-paid (already
paid for with our labour, collectively speaking).

Then there is the system of commerce that is superimposed over the real system and is the cause of all
our woes today. The real system, if you think about it with an open mind, can function without the system
of commerce. This will not be easy to see and accept because we have spent a lifetime being trained or
indoctrinated to believe otherwise. The more schooled we are, the more difficult it will be to understand
this.

Albert Einstein is quoted as saying never let schooling interfere with your education. This is wisdom and
something to remember as you read the remainder of this treatise. What we have learned in school is
exactly what has caused us to believe the things we believe and think the things we think.

Remember, all schools are controlled by the state, at least their curriculums are. Therefore, we learn, or
are taught, exactly what the governments wants us to be taught. No different than what we have been
told communist Russia and Nazi Germany did to its people.

If that has served you well, then hang onto it for dear life. As for me, it has not served me well and that is
why I have spent the last ten years of my life studying to learn the truth.

Now I ask you, what could be easier than creating things we need and want and taking them to the
storehouse so there will be plenty for all, just as God exhorted us to do.

By the way, you may be thinking as some do, that Gods system only requires that 10% be taken to the
storehouse because that is what the tithe is. My question is; who decided that? People go to great
lengths to prove that the tithe is 10% because that is what they want to believe.

Well, I will not even bother to discuss these views further because it is not my belief, I will take you
instead to Acts 4:
32
And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of
them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

Further at Acts 4:
34
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or
houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold,
35
And laid them down at the apostles feet:
and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.
36
And Joses, who by the apostles was
surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus,
37
Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles feet.

You see, the title is actually 100%. From a study of these passages of the Bible one can clearly see that
in the early Church people brought everything and laid it at the Apostles feet (the storehouse). This is
further evidence of the fact that God wants us to place all of our production into the storehouses so that
there will be plenty for all. We will then, of course, take what we need for ourselves and our families,
leaving the remainder for others.

However, as I said, the bankers convinced us somewhere along the line that it would be better for us if we
used money, their money, and we bought it hook line and sinker.

I would like to suggest that what happened when we bought into their lies, is an additional system was
superimposed upon the one described in the first section and as I said, I refer to it as the system of
commerce.

The foundation of this system of commerce is money. Without it, the system of commerce would not
exist!

Once we use their money, we are tied to the system of commerce. Even if we never use the legal
name, the fact that we use money, their (banks) money, we have an interest in the money and that ties
us to the system of commerce. If all we wanted and took was the use of property, and refused to use the
money, then we would not be part of the system of commerce, at least in my view.

I believe, at least I believe it is possible, that is what Jesus meant when He said render unto Caesar that
which is Caesars. When we use the money that belongs to the system of commerce, just as when we use
Monopoly money which belongs to the game of Monopoly, we are subject to the rules of the game,
whether it be the game of Monopoly or the game of commerce.

Once this system of commerce is superimposed upon the perfect system, it obscures the perfect system
underneath it and we become slaves to the system of commerce. If we are subject to the rules of the
game of commerce, then we are slaves to it freedom being the state of not being subject to anothers
will.

Let me explain.

The only purpose of money, in fact, at lest the kind of money we have today (debt currency), is to enslave
the people and steal their production. Who does that? Why, the people who create the money, of
course. Today, these people, the International Banking Cartel, own the money creation powers of this
country and at this point in time, the entire world (with very few exceptions such as possibly Iran).

We are given many different reasons why we need money but they are almost all lies. The truth is,
we do not need money at all. This should have become obvious while reading the section
entitled The System.

We are told that money will make it easier for us to trade our goods and services. To an extent this is
true. However, there are other ways to accomplish this objective. For example, how about a central
accounting system which we could call a bank for ease of reference? With todays technology this would
be simple.

When we trade goods and services, we could make an entry in this bank (computer) and call the entries
credits. These could then be used as a medium of exchange to facilitate our trading of goods and
services. This is exactly what the banks do now, in fact. The only difference is, they create the credits
out of nothing and give nothing for them and loan them to the government, corporations and the people.
That is where our total money supply comes form today. Dont believe me? Then I challenge you; do
your own investigation and prove me wrong!

Do not do yourself the disservice that one CMA (Certified Management Accountant) did when he
accosted me after an all candidates meeting in the local municipal elections when I ran for Reeve (which I
will never participate in again) and he said, the money system does not work that way. I asked him, then
how does it work? He responded, I dont know, but it doesnt work that way (the way I had described).

Yes folks, that is just how stupid people can be! It is alarming and makes me sometimes feel that there is
just no hope for this country or the world. We will all wake up one day, slaves in the land that our
forefathers fought and died for, if we do not start listening to these voices crying in the wilderness who are
speaking the truth, as I am.

You will never hear the truth on T.V., radio or in any major media, because they are all owned by the
International Banking Cartel and that means we must all seek the truth for ourselves and a good start is
learning what is contained in this treatise. As I have said, and repeat again, do not believe anything I
say. Do your own investigation, even if you do it just to prove me wrong.

The problem, then, is not money per se. The problem is that government has abandoned its duty to the
people as laid out in subsections 91(14), (15) and (20) of the Constitution Act to create our money supply
and illegally transferred that power to private interests which I refer to as the International Banking Cartel
In other words, the banks.

If the government created our money for us, we would get it for free. But instead, we now have to borrow
all of our money supply from the banks. Once interest is added to the borrowings we have a situation
where we are being asked to do the impossible - to pay back a money supply plus interest when the
interest has never been created!

Money is a very involved topic and outside the scope of this treatise, but suffice it to say that because we
have to borrow all our money, money is no longer a tool for us, it is a tool used against us to enslave us
all and steal all of our production. And I reiterate here that it is not money per se, it is the type of money,
i.e. debt currency that I am referring to. I have attached as an endnote, some information written by
Eldon Warman, a man who has been a student of history surrounding these matters for a very long time

This system of commerce has created conditions whereby we are forced either to work for money
(which someone else had to borrow and has to pay back to the banks plus interest), or borrow money
(which we will eventually have to pay back to the banks [the only place we can obtain our
money supply] plus interest), all for the purpose of buying back what was ours to begin with
(we own it all once we have created it using our labour [collectively speaking that is]).

If this is not insanity, then I do not know what to call it.

However, lets talk about how they (most likely the International Banking Cartel) have caused us (we
volunteered into this system but we were deceived by the wiles of the Beast) to be the one doing the
paying, a commercial function in which only legal fictions (creations of the law) should engage. Men and
women created by God should never involve themselves in commerce.

Remember the Mark of the Beast spoken of in Revelations 13 and 17? It is described as a Mark without
which, one can neither buy nor sell! Buying and selling is a commercial function and not a function in
which men and women of God should be involved.

Legal Name:

What is a legal name and what is its purpose?

Has anyone actually thought about this?

We are all familiar with a name. A name is a word or phrase according to most dictionaries.

But what is a legal name?

Legal means of the law, so what does the law have to do with my name or what I name my name?
Certainly we all realize we are not a name (remember a name is a word or phrase). We are men and
women. A name is something we might be recognized by such as one having blond hair, blue eyes, tall,
short, etc.

I will submit that this thing called a legal name is a name that the law (government) created and it may
well be the root of our problems here. It may be why the government acts as if they are our authorities
instead of our servants.

You see, if we think we actually are the legal name, which government created by registration of the
Statement of Birth (SOB) which it holds title to, then we are their creation and they (government and its
agents) are indeed our authorities. How many times has someone such as a policeman or judge looked
at your birth certificate and asked, is this you? What was your answer? Mine was always, yes!

Oh how foolish we are. How can we be a name (a word or phrase)?

However, once we realize that we are men and women created by God, then God is our authority and not
government. Government has no authority over man unless man consents (generally by contract).

Lets explore this further.

The Vital Statistics Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER V.4, as well as similar legislation in all other provinces of
Canada, compel the providing of information (facts) related to every birth in the province (among these
provisions are s8(1), and s9).

This is similar to the process that is involved in the creating of a Bill of Lading or title document when an
automobile is manufactured. In the case of an automobile, the title document is known as a
Manufacturers Certificate of Origin, not the NVIS (New Vehicle Information Statement) as some have
claimed. In the case of a new birth, the title document is known as the Statement of Birth (SOB), or in
some provinces, Return of Birth.

In both cases, the title document is registered with, and maintained in the possession and control of, the
government. In the former case, the Department of Motor Vehicles and in the latter case, the Registrar
General of the province in which the birth took place.

Part of the compelled information is the name of the child, or fully extracted fetus. This name then
becomes part of the information registered by the government and archived in its records which are
maintained in the possession or control of the Registrar General of each province (see subsection 2(5);
5(2) of the Vital Statistics Act of Ontario).

The parents and others are compelled under penalty of law to register the event of the birth of a child. In
Ontario, in fact, the penalty is a fine of $50,000 for failure to do so (see subsection 55(1) of the Ontario
Act). Therefore, we cannot accuse our parents of selling (registering) us into slavery. What they did was
involuntary.

The name thus registered is a product of the law and irrefutably is known as a legal name. It is doubtful
that any legal person or court would ever deny that the name appearing on any Birth Certificate is a legal
name.

The definition of legal found in the Dictionary of Canadian Law is According to law, lawful.

Therefore, since the law compels the name be provided to it for registration by it, then it is a legal name.

The act of Registration is the act of securing rights in the property, in this case the legal name, to the
Registrant,.

The Statement of Birth (SOB) is archived with, and in the possession or control of the Registrar General
of the province and it was the governments intention that this be so.

Therefore, the law has been fulfilled and the government is the legal title holder of the legal name.
Possession is nine tenths of the law, as the old clich goes. The other one tenth is intent, often referred
to as men rea. There is no doubt the government is legal title holder of the legal name and intended to be
so.

A legal person, according to part of the definition of person found in the Dictionary of Canadian Law is; A
legal person is anything to which the law gives a legal or fictional existence or personality, with capacity for rights
and duties

Therefore, the legal name is a legal person and all statute law states within it that it applies to persons.
Statute law assigns rights and duties to persons, not men and women. The law can only do that to its
own creations, it cannot grant anything to men and women, only to persons, which are creations of the
law.

I like the phrase I once heard a man use. He said, I am not a person, but I have a person (referring to the
legal name that appears on the Birth Certificate in his possession and control).

A useful way of understanding what is going on in the system of commerce with the legal name is to view
the legal name as a ship.

In the system of commerce, everything has to be registered in the legal name or placed in the ship.

As we accumulate significant property (things such as food, etc. do not need to be recorded and placed
on the ship), it is recorded (registered) and placed on the ship (registered in the legal name).

The legal title holder in the name (legal name) also has legal title in the property registered (place in the
ship) in the legal name as well.

Bottom line is that we the people do not hold title in anything. The government, the title holder in the
ROB or SOB as the case may be, holds title in everything.

Since the title holder holds title, what are we doing paying, a commercial activity that we had no business
being involved in anyway? We can readily see why the system of commerce, with its money and statue
laws, is truly the root of all our problems.

Once the title holder in the legal name has been identified, then we have identified the party that the law
will hold responsible for the financial, legal and other obligations of the legal name (property).

The alternative, I might suggest, is to demand (demand means claim) the SOB be given to us since it is
the title document for the legal name and once in our possession, it will belong to us and within our
control.

If any other party uses the name without our permission, then that will constitute a trespass and is legally
actionable. For greater legal leverage, one might consider trade marking the legal name once it is in our
control, thus making it easier to take legal action against anyone using the name without our permission.

What is a Birth Certificate (BC) and Statement of Birth (SOB):

Everyone is undoubtedly familiar with a Birth Certificate and in fact, in this country today, you will not
obtain employment or open a bank account without one.

The name on that Birth Certificate is the legal name and as we discovered in the previous section,
belongs to the government (legal title holder or secured party).

When I say belongs to the government, I do not mean that they own it. Ownership is a foreign concept to
men and women created by God who created all things because, as creator, God owns all things, men
and women have possession or stewardship only.

The concept of ownership began with the introduction of money. When we pay for things, we believe we
own them, when in fact we only pay for the right to possess. This is true even within the law.

The law refers to legal title holder and not owner. However, the courts will often deem someone to be
the owner, normally the legal title holder, when it assigns responsibility for the legal obligations of a
property.

So why do we have to use the governments legal name to obtain employment?

Isnt using the governments name the same as using our employers name when we purchase things for
it? Paying for the purchases is not our responsibility in such cases. If the employers name is used to
make the purchase, then the employer pays!

The BC and SOB are admissible in any Ontario court as Proof of the facts so certified.

This is significant because no one has to authenticate the documents and they are, by law, considered
proof as opposed to mere evidence.

This is the law pursuant to the Vital Statistics Act of Ontario, which reads;
Admissibility of certificates, etc.
46. (1) A certificate purporting to be issued under section 44 or a certified copy of a registration purporting to be
issued under section 45 signed by the Registrar General or Deputy Registrar General or on which the signature of
either of them is reproduced by any method is admissible in any court in Ontario as proof, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, of the facts so certified, and it is not necessary to prove the signature or official position of
the person by whom the certificate or certified copy purports to be signed. [underline mine]
Therefore, it should be a simple process to enter the SOB into evidence and one does not have to get on
the stand and testify nor does one have to authenticate the document. In a court, however, it will be
necessary to have the document entered into evidence and that involves the court assigning it an Exhibit
number.

I believe this is where many people fail in court when dealing with any evidence. Most evidence has to be
entered through the witness stand. It is my understanding the if it is not, then it is not in evidence,
documents included.

One is then required to speak to the document and authenticate it, etc. Then the court will give that
evidence the weight that the court feels it deserves. In the case of the BC and SOB, this is not the case.
These documents have already been deemed by law to be proof, the highest form of evidence.

So what does the SOB Prove?

It proves that the legal name was registered, who registered it, and the date of registration, amongst
other things. Additionally, since the government (Registrar General) provided you with the certified copy
of the document, guess who holds it and the holder is the holder of the title in the name.

Since the Registrant of the legal name, by the act of registration, has secured the rights (both legal and
equitable) in the legal name, it also, therefore, proves that I have no rights in the legal name.

If I have no rights in the legal name, then by law, I cannot have any obligations.

Additionally, the government is in possession or control of the SOB (the document of title in legal name)
and it intended it to be so.

The Birth Certificate in my possession and control is evidence of a form of license to use the legal name
in commerce, a name in which the government holds legal title.

A license is generally defined as permission to do that which is otherwise illegal.

What is the definition of a title document? Lets reference a dictionary. Lets reference the dictionary at
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Document+of+Title


Document of title:

Any written instrument
, such as a bill of lading, a warehouse receipt, or an order for the delivery of goods, that in the usual course of
business or financing is considered sufficient proof that the person who possesses it is entitled to receive, hold,
and dispose of the instrument and the goods that it covers.
Formal commercial document (such as bill of sale, certificate of title, title deed) or shipping document (such as a
bill of lading, dock receipt, warehouse receipt) that confers and/or proves ownership. A document of title enables its
holder (possessor) to receive, retain, sell, or otherwise dispose of the document and the goods or property listed
therein.


That is the value of being the holder of SOBs. You hold title to the name you have claim to goods/assets in the name
and may for example pledge and same as collateral for credit. Again, how Canada backs the money.

So, ponder this.

Is the Statement of Birth a written document like a warehouse receipt? Then it is a document of title.

Who holds it? In other words, who has possession and control of the document? The government does,
of course.

Then who is responsible for the financial, legal and other obligations of the legal name? Why the
government, of course!

Compelled use of the Legal Name:

So, why do we have to use the governments legal name to conduct business? Because it is the law!

The law requires that all business (commerce) be conducted in the legal name.

If you do not believe that, then attend at any Bank to open an account in a name other than the legal
name appearing on your Birth Certificate and the bank will absolutely and unequivocally refuse to do so.
The reason all commerce must be done in the legal name!

One can attempt to open an account at CRA, or any other business using a name other than the legal
name, and they will be refused. In fact, the account at CRA is usually opened by the employer submitting
deductions and it then being followed-up with a tax return which is always prepared using the legal name
because we all believe that we are that name and even if we do not, they assume that it is the legal
name we are using unless we refute their assumptions and presumptions.

Try obtaining a Drivers License in a name other than the legal name, and I can assure you, you will be
refused.

It would follow then, that one should be asking why this is so?

I will suggest that it may be that it is the only way the federal government, for example, can discharge its
constitutional responsibility under subsection 91(2), the Regulation of Trade and Commerce.

I submit that the only way it can do this is to have control of the names.

The government cannot control or register people, since that would amount to involuntary servitude or
slavery, which has been abolished by myriad domestic and international laws and covenants.

Does the government register people:

The Deputy Registrar General of Ontario, Judith Hartman, said that the government does not register people
it registers events. A birth is an event and it is the information or facts surrounding a birth that are
submitted to, and registered by, the Registrar General on behalf of the government (see the Vital
Statistics Act of Ontario or any other province for that matter).

Therefore, there is no danger that the government is engaging in the slave trade, since it only registers
information related to an event, a birth, and does not register (secure the rights in) people.

Judith Hartman also said that the Birth Certificate (BC) is not, and was never intended to be, personal
identification. It just evolved into it.

Is the Birth Certificate personal identification:

Based on Judith Hartmans statement, the answer is no.

However, let us look further into the matter and see what the European Court of Human Rights had to say
on the matter in SHEFFIELD AND HORSHAM v. THE UNITED KINGDOM 22985/93;23390/94 [1998]
ECHR 69 (30 July 1998):
An entry is regarded as a record of the facts at the time of birth. A birth certificate accordingly constitutes a
document revealing not current identity but historical facts.
The Government point out that the use of a birth certificate for identification purposes is discouraged by the
Registrar General, and for a number of years birth certificates have contained a warning that they are not evidence
of the identity of the person presenting it. However, it is a matter for individuals whether to follow this
recommendation. [underline mine]
There is no question that a BC is not personal identification.

We can even use current knowledge about identification if we have flown with any airline lately. What is it
they always ask for? Government Identification not personal identification.

It is evident that we often miss the obvious. The truth is right in our faces every day, but because of our
indoctrination, I would submit, we simply cannot see it!

Who does the law hold responsible for the obligations of a property:

Blacks Law Dictionary 4
th
edition defines Owner (legal title holder) is the party that the law will recognize
and hold responsible as the owner of the property

In other words, the law holds the one who holds legal title in a property legally responsible for the
financial, legal and other obligations of the property, the legal name in this instance. Ask any lawyer if
this is so.

The one who registered the legal name then, has secured, by the act of registration, all rights (both legal
and equitable) in the legal name. The other fact is, the Registrant is also holding the title document in
the legal name.

A cursory review of the SOB or in the case of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Return of Birth, proves
that the government, through its agent, registered the name (legal name after registration) and thereby
secured the rights in it and became the legal title holder.

The implications of this are huge.

For example, everything we have ever purchased in our lives, and paid for by the way (a commercial
activity that only legal fictions are to engage in), is in a name that is not ours! If it is our name, then why is
the government holding the document of title, as it clearly is?

Included in these things purchased in a name that is not ours is the home you live in, the car you drive as
well as everything you will ever purchase because the legal owner (secured party or title holder) of the
legal name is the Registrant thereof and that is not you, as proven by the SOB.

Perhaps the government is simply holding the name in trust for us until the time we wake up to the
realization that we are the heirs of God. Perhaps, all we have to do to claim our inheritance is to make a
demand for the return of our property (the legal name) pursuant to the authority granted to us, as holders
of the BC, by section 337 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

However, and this is the bottom line, if the government refuses to return the title document and unless the
legal title holder of the legal name in which all purchases must be registered by law, reimburses you for
all purchases made to date, then there exists a criminal act of unjust enrichment (you pay and someone
else owns [holds title in] the property).

Of course, I for one do not want to be reimbursed because all I want is use of property as long as the
legal owner pays! Then there is no problem whatsoever.

Is one obligated to be recognized by the name on his/her Birth Certificate:

The answer is categorically NO!

Because we have unwittingly allowed ourselves to be so recognized to date is the very cause of all the
potential criminal acts of unjust enrichment that have heretofore taken place. I say potential because
until the truth is brought to the attention of the legal title holder, then the legal title holder is under no
obligation to take corrective action.

The process of bringing the truth to the legal title holder will cause corrective action to be taken because
government is, and will be, honourable.

The fact that we have a choice to be recognized by the legal name on the BC or not, is verified by
subsection 2(b) of the Ontario Change of Name Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.7, which reads:
2. (1) For all purposes of Ontario law,
(a) a person whose birth is registered in Ontario is entitled to be recognized by the name appearing on the
persons birth certificate or change of name certificate [underline mine]

Further, and this is extremely important when looking for proof that the government owns or holds title
and rights in the legal name, is that a prerequisite to anyone entitling us to use a property, is ownership
of, or rights in, that property.

Without rights in the property it is legally impossible to pass on rights in it to someone else because one
cannot pass on what one does not possess. There are a couple of applicable legal maxims that state, no
one can give what he does not own, and one cannot transfer to another a right which he has not.

So, therefore, this entitlement, speaks volumes to who has secured rights in the legal name and who the
secured party (legal title holder/owner) in the legal name is.

An entitlement is also viewed by the government as a privilege. In fact, the only thing a government (the
law) can offer people are privileges. All rights come from God, are inherent, and cannot be taken away
except by force. This has not happened because we have volunteered into this system of commerce, we
have never been forced to do so.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A privilegeetymologically private law or law relating to a specific individualis a special entitlement or
immunity granted by a government or other authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis.
A privilege can be revoked in some cases. In modern democracies, a privilege is conditional and granted only after
birth. By contrast, a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held by all citizens or all human beings from birth.
Miscellaneous privileges, e.g. the old common law privilege to title deeds, may still exist, though of little relevance
today.
[1]

In a broader sense, privilege can refer to special powers or de facto immunities held as a consequence of political
power or wealth. Privilege of this sort may be transmitted by birth into a privileged class or achieved through
individual actions. Compare elite.
One of the objectives of the French Revolution was the abolition of privilege. This meant the removal of separate
laws for different social classes (nobility, clergy and ordinary people), instead subjecting everyone to the same
common law. Privileges were abolished by the National Constituent Assembly on August 4, 1789.

Finally, we all know that an entitlement is not a compulsion. Therefore, whether we choose to be
recognized by the name on our Birth Certificate or not, is our choice. I for one, choose not to be so
recognized, partly at any rate, to avoid any confusion when I tell someone what I have named my name.
If it sounds like the one on the Birth Certificate, then people will assume that it is the legal name on the
Birth Certificate and voila, I am it, barring evidence to the contrary!

By being recognized by the legal name, I am held accountable for the financial, legal and other
obligations of that legal name; the property (legal name) in which someone else holds legal title.

Possession is nine tenths of the law, the other tenth would then, be intent to possess or as the law says,
mens rea or guilty mind. If you have that pound of cocaine in your suitcase, you are in possession of it.
You are then assumed to be guilty but the law requires one other element to be proven, at least in
criminal matters, you must have a guilty mind. In other words, you must have intended to be in
possession of it. If someone else placed the cocaine in your suitcase, then you did not intend to possess
it, and are not guilty of the crime of possession of a controlled substance with intent.

Likewise, the law or government is in possession of the legal name (ROB), and because they wrote laws
compelling the parents, or others, to submit the information that gave birth to the legal name, then the
government also intended to possess it. The ROB is in the possession or control of the Registrar General
on behalf of the government of Newfoundland and Labrador, and it was intended to be that way.
Therefore, there can be no argument that they are the legal title holder of the legal name.

Further, the law will hold the legal title holder (owner/government) responsible for the financial, legal and
other obligations of the legal name.

As we learned earlier, the legal owner is the one the law recognizes and holds liable for the property, in
this case, the legal name.

Therefore, any contract, bank account, bill or other liability in the legal name is the responsibility of the
government.

This makes sense if we understand that the system of commerce is superimposed over the real system
that organizes the labour and production of men. The former involves the buying and selling using
money, a commercial activity applicable only to legal fictions. The latter, is a system engaged in by men
to create and ensure there is plenty in the storehouses for all to enjoy. Money and other commercial
activities have no part in such a system, nor are they required.

Are births required to be registered:

Yes they are. Pursuant to s8(1), and s9 of the Vital Statistics Act of Ontario parents and others attending
at the birth are required to report and give notice of it. The parents, in fact, are required to file the
information or SOB, with the Registrar General.

This compulsion results in the products thereof being legal or born of the law. This, as we discussed
earlier, is why the name on the BC is referred to as the legal name.

Summary:

The name that appears on all court documents, all accounts and other documents within the system of
commerce, is the legal name. There will likely never be any argument with this because system people
all know that anything that the law gives birth to is a legal creation and not a natural creation like man.

The Source or document of title of the legal name is the SOB.

The Registrar General of the province is in possession or control of the SOB and intended to be in
possession of it and consequently is the legal title holder.

The certified copy of the SOB which can be obtained from the Registrar General of ones particular
province of birth, Proves who registered the name and other information (Registrant and Secured Party),
thus securing the rights in the legal name.

The Secured Party or legal title holder is the one the law holds responsible, as owner of the property, for
the financial, legal and other obligations of the property, in this case the legal name, a.k.a. a person.
Remember, I am not a person but I have a person, the legal name.

No man or man-made institution has authority over another man without his consent, otherwise we are
living in slavery.

The SOB Proves that I have no rights in the legal name (other than the right to use it in commerce a
form of license). If I have no rights in the legal name, then I certainly cannot have any obligations.

Other evidence that the government is the Secured Party or title holder in the legal name is the very fact
that para. 2(1)(a) of the Ontario Change of Name Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter C.7, entitles me to be
recognized by the name (legal name) on my BC. A prerequisite to this entitlement is that the one
extending it must own or have rights in the property, legal name.

Additionally, an entitlement is not a compulsion which means I have a choice. I can either be recognized
by the name on the BC or one from my head.

However, in every business or commercial situation, one must use the legal name. Therefore, the BC is
a license or form of license.

One possibility, amongst many, is that we are entitled to use the legal name to acquire property for the
Estate or Trust (constructive or otherwise) known as Canada. The government owns (as legal title
holder) the legal name and, therefore, owns all property purchased in that name including, but not limited
to the homes we live in and the automobiles we travel in. Therefore, the government must be the
Trustee. Either the government is the trustee of the estate to which I am
beneficiary, or they are holding my name in trust for me.

The only thing that would be required if the latter were the case, if for me to claim my name by demanding
it (the SOB) be returned to me.

If they do not want to return it to me, it is perfectly o.k. with me as long as I have use of what I want and I
am not required to pay, a commercial activity in which only legal fictions participate and I am not a legal
fiction but the legal name is.

Bottom line as always the legal owner of the legal name is responsible for all financial, legal and other
obligations of the legal name and that is not me!

Possible Solution:

I personally have tried just about everything I could think of over the past 10 years to have the
government take responsibility for the financial, legal and other obligations of its entity, the legal name. I
have met with nothing but resistance and denial.

One of the most common responses is that the name is mine, the one my parents gave me at birth. This
has even come from a lawyer.

So, in the spirit of non-resistance, I decided to write to the Registrar General of the province in
which I was born and demand (demand means to claim), pursuant to the authority granted me by
section 337 of the Criminal Code of Canada, the return of the Return of Birth (I was born in
Newfoundland), which is the title document in the name.

No response was forthcoming. Therefore, we attempted to lay criminal charges against the Registrar
General for failing to deliver a document that was demanded under section 337 of the Criminal Code of
Canada. The Crown Attorney intervened saying we had not proven the essential elements of the section.

We did not disagree with this because it actually proves that the name is not ours and therefore, we are
not authorized to demand the document of title thereto.

If I had received the document of title to the name, then I would control the name. This would have
given me control over who uses my name and why.

Since they resisted, it can only mean one thing, the name is not mine and they will have to take
responsibility for the financial, legal and other obligations of the legal name, just as I have wanted them
to for about ten years now.

As Judith Hartman has stated, the government does not register people, it registers events (remember
the words of the Judi Hartman, Deputy Registrar General for Ontario?). This means that the government
is not attempting to enslave us, they are simply attempting to control us and prevent chaos until we grow
up and realize that we are Sons of God (Galatians 4:1-11) and can be trusted to be self-governing. Once
this happens we can also claim our inheritance, the earth and all things in it (Geneses 1:26-28)

Her Majesty the Queen, through her governments has expressed her will and intent through the law. In
fact, it is the only way in which Her Majesty expresses her will and intent. So lets take a look at what her
will and intent as expressed through her government(s) statutory laws.

Section 2 of the Change of Name Act of Ontario is one such law. It offers each of us the entitlement to
be recognized by the legal name appearing on our Birth Certificates. As we all know, an entitlement is
not a compulsion.

Therefore, it is Her Majestys will and intent that we not be recognized by the legal name unless we
insist. The problem with us electing to be recognized through the legal name is that we assume all the
burdens associated with the legal name.

For example, we will have to pay taxes, file tax returns, work for money, buy and sell (a commercial
function that no man or woman of God should ever involve themselves as described earlier). The Bible,
in Revelations 13 tells us that if we do such as thing (take the Mark or name of the Beast), we are
doomed.

There are only two parties to the legal name, the recipient of the Birth Certificate containing the legal
name, and the issuer of the Birth Certificate, the one holding the document of title.

If we elect not to be recognized by the legal name, as is our absolute right, then anyone attempting to
impose obligations upon the legal name must look to the issuer (the government) to meet those
obligations.

This is then, the solution.

We can either elect to be recognized by the legal name appearing on our Birth Certificates and
consequently take on all the burdens associated with the legal name, or we can allow the government to
be recognized through the legal name, as was their will and intent, and thereby allow the government to
take on all the burdens associated with the legal name.

Which do you choose?

Postscript:

Geneses 1:26-28 tells me that I am created in the image of God, therefore, a re-presentation of God
(some might put it this way, Gods representative on earth). Further it tells me that I have been given
dominion (supreme authority) over the earth and all things in it. As far as I can tell, I have never ceded
my dominion to anyone. Therefore, no one has the authority to lord over me or force me to participate in
commerce, a game in which I cannot win.

Additionally, Galatians 4:1&2 tells me that when I am a child I am no more than a slave and until the time
appointed by the Father, I shall be, and remain, under the authorities.

However, Galatians 4:3-7 tells me that when I awaken to who I really am, I will realize I am a Son of God
and if a Son then an Heir. My inheritance is outlined in Geneses 1:26-28.

As a Son of God, I can have no earthly authorities and must be under the authority of my heavenly Father
ONLY, whose law book and guide for my life, is the Bible.

The analysis that precedes this section is simply to show that mans law actually recognizes my authority
once it is understood in its true context and the truth is revealed.

What if we simply stood in court when charges of tax evasion were being laid against the legal name and
announced;

On and for the record,

My interest here today is to protect and preserve the interests of Her Majesty. Ensuring
compliance with her Will and Intent as expressed through the laws of her government(s) is
the way in which I propose this be done.

The decision to be recognized by the legal name is mine and mine alone. You have no
authority to recognize me by the legal name without my consent which I do not give.

This, I would suggest, is the clear intent of Her Majesty the Queen as expressed through
statute, specifically section 2 of the Change of Name Act of Ontario, which indicates that I
am entitled to be recognized by the name on the birth certificate.

Entitled does NOT mean required.

Looks to me as if we may have found the solution to our problems, doesnt it?

Perhaps the government is simply holding the name in trust for us until the time we wake up to the
realization that we are the heirs of God. Perhaps, all we have to do to claim our inheritance is to make a
demand for the return of our property (the legal name) pursuant to the authority granted to us, as
holders of the BC, by section 337 of the Criminal Code of Canada.
[1:48:37 AM] Padre Illuminato of Eterna: (y)
[1:48:47 AM] Padre Illuminato of Eterna: someone else having the same idea
[1:49:35 AM] Padre Illuminato of Eterna: However, and this is the bottom line, if the government refuses
to return the title document and unless the legal title holder of the legal name in which all purchases
must be registered by law, reimburses you for all purchases made to date, then there exists a criminal
act of unjust enrichment (you pay and someone else owns [holds title in] the property).



Of course, I for one do not want to be reimbursed because all I want is use of property as long as the
legal owner pays! Then there is no problem whatsoever.
[1:49:51 AM] Padre Illuminato of Eterna: http://wallydove.wordpress.com/2009/02/07/a-discourse-on-
the-legal-name/
[1:49:55 AM] Padre Illuminato of Eterna: I think I sent that