The destruction of Trust by nihilists and bankers: Why the restoration of Oaths and Vows is key to saving the world

_________________________________________________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here   (62 min 22 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________

Hello and thanks for listening.  This is Frank O’Collins with the audio blog for Wednesday, November 27, 2013.  The topic tonight is the destruction of Trust by nihilists and bankers and why the restoration of Oaths and Vows is key to saving the world.  If you have been listening to the audios, the blogs and the Talkshoe  Q and A that we do, I will apologize this week for those of you listening to this audio, that I am unable to do a Q and A blog this.  I will return to the Q and A next week.  

If you have been listening for the last few weeks, you know that what we did last week after many months and months of deep research is that we re-launched the Ucadia Will and Testament model , the forms, the background, and the logic as to the absolute importance of reclaiming your Estate.  It is the critical importance of having documentary evidence that you are not an animal, you are not a slave, you have taken a stand against the system and you are able to demonstrate that you are perfectly capable of managing your own affairs.  These are the documents that we have uploaded to the website www.restorelaw.com under Education and Estate Forms.  

With any material in particular that discusses Law there can be quite a deal of confusion.  As I have said many times across this journey, if you are going to do the kind of investigative research and the kind of “deep-diving’ into history that we are doing with the Ucadia model, you are going to have change sometimes and realize that an original position taken in good faith may not in fact be the true essence of a concept of law.  That is not because we are quick to judge, make assumptions or don’t do our due diligence.   It’s the fact that if we take the present system as I have said in the four sessions and the you-tube videos that are now available concerning estates, law has become so complex, so convoluted and so contradictory that you can read every page of every legal dictionary and every statute which certainly has been in one respect part of this research and find wholly different attitudes, wholly different definitions.  In any event it has created some confusion and some uncertainty.  

For example, I’ll address later on, one of the outstanding claims that is out there where people say, ‘Why go to the effort of this Will and Testament?  Why go to the effort of this material?  I don’t need to fill this material in.” Why not simply stand there in a court if you know your identity and you know who you are, that you don’t need these documents? You just simply go and stand and express who you are.  That sounds fine.   It sounds perfectly fine until you get into the history, for example, of the conversion of law being auricular to the necessity of their being written evidence that comes in form of such acts as the Act in 1676 against frauds.  In 1676 under King Charles II, unless something is written it has no existence in law.  

So we need to address some of these misunderstandings, confusions or false presumptions.   In the audios and sessions of the YouTube workshop (see Session 1 and Slides, Session 2 and Slides, Session 3 and Slides and Session 4 and Slides) and over the last year or longer, I have been referring to the power of affidavits.  The power of affidavits is an essential tool in moving forward.  Yet early on at the beginning of some of our audios we did have an uncertainty regarding the strength of affidavits.  One of the reasons for that is this issue of oaths, the issue of vows.  

Given the confusion and given the fact that the evidence is overwhelming that nihilists and bankers have at least for the last 200 or more years systematically, forensically and comprehensively sought to destroy Trust within society.  And, given that oaths and vows are fundamental to the formation of Trust, then there must be something to oaths and there must be something to vows that frightens or concerns such nihilists and bankers. 

Tonight I want to clear the air on these issues.  I want to make as certain as we can the central role that oaths and vows have played in society much like the concept of Rule of Law has played from the beginning of civilized society.   I want to address why these things have been under siege and attack by a segment of society that wants to destroy the concept of Trust.  I want to look at the reasons why they have done this and why we should have no fear regarding these concepts, why we should have no fear in the proper use of affidavits and why we need to absolutely restore these concepts moving forward as we have in the concept of Rights and Justice and in the concept of Rule of Law that all are equal under the law and of course in the concept of Due Process.

A quick reminder of what is a Trust?

Let’s begin and start with the definition of Trust that we can see under the Canons of Positive Law when we go to the website, www.one-heaven.org.  We will look at Article 84 and I’m going to read some of thee tonight as they are already referenced.   I want to cover some of these because they give us the context.   Since we are talking about trusts, what do we mean about the concept of trust?  Here is Canon 1901 under Article 84 on Trusts in Positive Law:

Canon 1901

A Trust is a fictional Form of Relations and Agreement whereby certain Form, Rights and Obligations are lawfully conveyed by a Trustor to the control of one Person created through the Oath of Office of Trustee to manage such property in accord with the will of the Trustor for the benefit of one or more other Persons.

That’s a pretty long-winded definition but the key elements that I want to refer to tonight is the issue that office of Trustee is essential to the existence of the Trust.  And, the office of Trustee is created by the Oath of the candidate that accepts to become the Trustee.  Here we see the oath being an essential part of the Trust.  If one goes to look at definitions such as implied and constructive trusts, then the definition and the formality of what I have just described does not exist.   We will get to that in a moment when we talk about Trustee.  What I want to emphasize here is that a Trust cannot exist by the history of Trusts if we exclude this pseudo-concept of constructive or implied trusts.   A Trust cannot only exist unless there is a Trustee and a Trustee cannot hold an office, who does not hold the office of Trustee unless there is an oath.  That is a symbiotic relationship that we can find under different language right back to the very beginning of civilized society. 

What then is a Trustee?

A Trust depends on the Trustee and the Trustee depends on the Office of Trustee and the Oath.  Let’s look at Article 5 - Trustee under the Canons of Fiduciary Law under www.one-heaven.org and I will some of these out as they are critical for us in seeing the power and importance of Oath and Vow and why they were so essential for the nihilists and bankers to destroy, to abrogate and to minimize.  

Canon 6993

A Trustee is an Office formed by an Oath to the Terms of Trust and done before Witnesses to take possession of certain Rights and Property and perform certain Obligations. The manner and character of a Trustee may be described as a position of Trust which is equivalent to the term Fiduciary.

Canon 6994

The origin of the concept of Trustee and the fact that such an Office cannot exist except under sacred Oath is as old as the origin of civilized society and law itself and has been one of the most constant concepts of law throughout every age and era. It is founded on the most basic principle that a man or woman cannot legitimately possess the rights or property of others, unless they demonstrate the most exemplary and scrupulous character of good faith, good character and good conscience. Therefore, any repudiation of this fundamental concept is the repudiation of the Rule of Law and law itself.

Canon 6995

The valid Oath taken as to the Terms of Trust creates the Office of Trustee. Therefore in the absence of a valid Oath, no Office may exist.

Canon 6996

The Office of Trustee can only exist and be valid if all the following criteria exist:

(i) The Trustor has the proper authority to grant, donate, assign or delegate the property for the proposed Trust; and

(ii) Clear purpose, intent and terms for the proposed Trust exist; and

(iii) Certainty of subject matter (the property) exists for the proposed Trust exists; and

(iv) The candidate for Trustee comes with good faith, good character and good conscience; and

(v) The candidate for Trustee accepts the position with full knowledge of the terms and obligations; and

(vi) The candidate makes a formal sacred oath to a higher Divine power upon a sacred object representing the form of law connected to such higher Divine power, before witnesses; and

(vii) The event of making such a formal sacred oath is memoralized into some document, that itself is signed, sealed and executed.

Canon 6997

When a person who claims to be a Trustee, but evidence exists of one or more of the following elements, then such a person is an imposter with no such Office or Trust existing:

(i) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that is recorded as performing any formal or sacred ritual to repudiate Oaths or Vows made in the past or into the future; or

(ii) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that requires the making of one or more Oaths or Vows that are contradictory to the Golden Rule and Rule of Law, Justice and Due Process; or

(iii) Where a person belongs to a religion, society, entity or order that requires the making of one or more Oaths or Vows that result in behavior that results in less than exemplary character of honesty and fidelity and the disregard of good faith, good character and good conscience; or

(iv) Where one or more of the criteria for the valid creation of the Office of Trustee does not exist.

Canon 6998

No judge, magistrate or justice of the peace may adjudicate any matter of law within a competent forum of law or oratory unless they are presently a valid Trustee under Oath and secondly prepared to demonstrate under Oath the exemplary character of a valid Trustee or valid Fiduciary:

(i) As a valid Oath is required to create and sustain the Office judge, or magistrate or justice of the peace, the absence of a valid Oath of Office means such a person is the worst kind of imposter an without any legitimacy whatsoever; and

(ii) As any adjudication concerning rights or property requires exemplary character, any judge, magistrate or justice of the peace that is unwilling or refuses to be entrusted under Oath by all parties to perform in good faith, good character and good conscience is not a valid Fiduciary.

The disregard to such a fundamental principle is the admission of the absence of any proper Rule of Law, Justice or Due Process.

The historic origins of the concept of Trustee

Let’s look at the history of the concepts of Trustee and the origins of Trustee.  What we find is that the concept of Trustee and the concepts of elements of Trustee go rights back to the origins of history and the first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute you see in Canon 7000.  I will get to the meaning of Vows and Oaths in a second, but I want to paint a picture here so that you can see it.  The fundamental roles of Oaths in history of civilization informing sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1775 under 7 &8 Will III c34.   The promotion of anti-Oath takes place on absurd corruptions inserted into the sacred Bible to imply that Oaths were contrary to Divine Law.   Such groups as the Quakers and the Brethren were granted exception through the concept of Affirmation. Quakers and Brethren were promoted to the roles of Trustees in banks, merchant industries and civil service.   

Canon 7000

The first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute under Western-Roman law originates under King Charles II of England through the laws of Westminster in 1676 under (29 Car 2 c.3) in relation to the historic shift from the custom of auricular testimony under oath to written evidence as primacy proof concerning all Trusts and conveyances:

(i) From 1676 (29 Car. 2 c.3), documents and “paper” took precedence in Western-Roman Law concerning the establishment and existence of valid Trusts, Wills and Testaments, Conveyances, Titles and Agreements to the detriment of auricular testimony; and

(ii) The fundamental role of Oaths in the history of civilization in forming sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1695 (7 & 8 Will. III c.34) and the promotion of anti-Oath sects based on absurd corruptions inserted into the Holy Bible to imply Oaths were contrary to Divine Law. The Quakers were granted exemption from Oaths through the concept of Affirmation and Quakers then promoted to “Trustee” roles in Banks, Merchant Industries and Civil Service dealing with property”; and

(iii) The “State” and its agents assuming greater powers and control as Trustees under Western-Roman Law was significantly extended under Queen Anne in 1707 (6 Ann. c.18) concerning people presumed “dead” and in 1708 (7 Ann. c.19) concerning the property of “infants”. In both cases, the concept of “secret trusts”, also known as “Cestui que vie trusts” were used and to be administered by the crown as Trustee; and

(iv) In 1731 (4 Geo. II c.10) under King George II of Great Britain, Westminster expanded the power and scope of itself as Trustees and the use of “Cestui que vie trusts” to include the concept of the property of “lunatics” and “idiots” being held in such trusts; and

(v) In 1775, Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident to enclose the very concept of a valid Oath for the first time in civilized history through (25 Geo.III c.39) by claiming Justices of the Peace then be empowered to administer (valid) Oaths. Thus the evidence in writing of a valid oath and then witnessed in writing by a Justice of the Peace became primary proof, not the auricular event itself and associated witnesses; and

(vi) In 1825 (6 Geo. IV c.74), with the Bank of England assuming effectively the role of the Crown (Corporation), Westminster consolidated and then expanded its powers and authorities as Trustees by combining the concepts of Cestui que vie trusts for “idiots, lunatics, infants or trustees of unsound mind” ensuring that such property was to be administered by the Bank of England; and

(vii) In 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c.60), Westminster revised the laws concerning property held by Trustees and Mortgagees with particular emphasis in watering down the historic nature of Trusts and Trustees to include the concepts of “implied and constructive trusts” being fictions and pseudo-trusts resembling (in name) trusts but having none of the customary characteristics with the operation of such pseudo trusts being determined by the laws of Westminster. Hence, the birth of deliberately false trusts being nothing more than implied contracts; and

(viii) In 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c.79) Westminster extended the concept of secret “implied or constructive” cestui que vie trusts to all persons by assuming all people who do not redeem themselves are by default some form of idiot, lunatic, infant or trustee of unsound mind. Under the guise of “health”, sanitary districts were identified as “wards” for implied lunatics. The effect being that the Bank of England operating as the Crown was now the “trustee” for all persons in England, Great Britain and the Dominions and Colonies of England and Great Britain.

(ix) In 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c.59) and then in 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. c.53) the role of the Trustee fundamentally changed from executor and administrator to a role with full investment and personal wealth creation capacity. Now, agencies, corporations, independent contractors and other bodies “acting” in the capacity of a trustee (such as judges, magistrates and others) stood to obtain substantial financial enrichment in complete contradiction to the public expressed history and principles of fiduciary responsibility and trust. Thus, the end of any pretence of Rule of Law for Great Britain and its dominions and previous colonies can be said to be this watershed in defiling all known respect for law.

The concept of Vow

Let me go back to the history and the evolution of Trustees in a moment.  I want to switch for a second and look at the origin of Oaths and the origin of Vow to try to make sense of this enclosure and the significance of this enclosure to history.  If you look at a Vow to begin with under Positive Law, we see the definition of Vow in Article 126 and Canon 2269 gives us the definition: 

Canon 2269

A Vow is a solemn promise or pledge to perform or refrain from some act, or to be faithful and firm in some allegiance or union, or to behave in the manner prescribed by some form of rule or law. By its nature a Vow obliges only the person who makes it.

Canon 2270

The origin of the concept of a Vow as a solemn promise or pledge is as old as the origin of civilized society and law itself and similar to the concept of Oaths is one of the most fundamental and constant concepts of law throughout every age and era:

(i) The earliest forms of Vows in civilized law originates from the Cuilliaéan (Holly) of Ireland and the 3rd/4th Millennium BCE Irish word plead meaning “promise” and the word “guide” meaning “solemn promise, pledge, prayer”; and

(ii) The ancient Greeks continued the distinction between the concept of a general and “secular” vow and a solemn religious vow in the word vow (xóv) meaning “promise” and the word charis (κάρης) meaning “solemn promise, pledge, prayer, religious vows”; and

The point I want to make here is that we are seeing these words are evident in cultures well before the ministry of Jesus Christ and well before the origin of Christianity.  We see these concepts as essential and fundamental to the law.  These concepts were fundamental to society; the existence of society could not exist if the concept of Vow did not exist.  There would have been no Sumerian civilization.  There would have been no spread of religion itself.  There would have been no Cuilliaéan or Holly spread of the concepts of religion and the concepts of law itself.  There would have been no Hittite; there would have been no Canaanite, no Roman, and no Greek societies.  No societies would have been formed if these concepts did not exist as the foundation of Law.  

Then, when we get to the Carolingians in the 8th century, regarding Vow, we see the revival of the ancient Holly language and the Law and the use of the word “promissa”  from which the word “promise’ arrived, meaning promise and the word “pleigo” from which we get the words plea and pledge meaning promise,  pledge prayer and religious vows.  What about Oaths?  As you heard me say, there was a dramatic corruption that took place at the end of the 17th Century.  

The concept of Oaths

I want to get back to the origin of Trustees and why nihilists and bankers had to absolutely destroy the concept of Trust.  Let’s look at Oaths now as we have briefly described and discussed the importance of Vows.   In contrast to a Vow being a promise or a pledge, an Oath, when we look at Article 121 is defined as follows in Canon 2261:

Canon 2261

An Oath is a solemn petition and invocation to a Deity in the presence of at least two witnesses and sworn upon some object representing the laws of the Deity that a testimony is true or a pledge is binding. A valid Oath is essential to forming a true Office of Trustee and therefore a valid Trust.

If you want to look at the difference here a Vow is a promise that only binds the one making the Vow, whereas an Oath involves a transference of some authority or some power and is forming essentially in that process a three-part relation between some deity, between some beneficiaries and between the candidate that makes the Oath and then forms the office of Trustee.  Canon 2262 gives us some rationale, reason, and logic behind why every single civilization including the present, has regarded Oaths as so fundamental to the framework of Law even though presently they hide it.   We see the concept of Divine Source as the primal religious beliefs of the ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Mesopotamia, Greeks, Romans and right through even Christianity.  The source of knowledge and of our creation comes from a Deity in Heaven.  Under Divine Law we see the connection that is always with an Oath.  An Oath is not merely an indication of a Deity but it is the swearing on Law and on the Truth of Law and that is what makes it so fundamental.   All Law comes from the Divine.   We see a perfect synergy between the concepts of Oaths, Rule of Law, Justice, Due Process and Vow.  Now we have definitions concerning Oaths and we have one concerning Vow.     

Canon 2262

The origin of the concept of Oath as key to forming an Office of Trustee and therefore a valid Trust is as old as the origin of civilized society and law itself and has been one of the most fundamental and constant concepts of law throughout every age and era. It is founded on three most basic ancient beliefs being Divine Source, Divine Law and Divine Authority:

(i) Divine Source is the primal religious belief at the foundation of almost all civilized societies of mankind until the past few hundred years that Heaven and one or more Divine Deities are the source of all knowledge, existence and creation; and

(ii) Divine Law is the ancient civilized belief that as all existence, knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source, the highest law of all possible law is Divine Law, usually expressed through one or more sacred texts transmitted by one or more prophets; and

(iii) Divine Authority is the ancient belief that as all existence, knowledge and creation is from a Divine Source and the highest law is Divine Law, then all authority and power to rule comes not only from the consent of the people but Divine Authority.

If we look briefly through the history of Oath in Canon 2264 it gives us some origin to the history of the words.  We find that the earliest form of Oath and the word “Oath” literally originates from the Cuilliaéan.  The word itself comes from the Cuilliaéan and the Holly and it means “sacred, binding bond or surety, but words, through the ritual of seal, meaning that my words bind me to some law:

Canon 2264

In terms of the history and origins of Oaths as central to the Rule of Law and Justice for most societies for thousands of years:

(i) The earliest form of Oath and the word “oath” itself literally originates from the Cuilliaéan (Holly) of Ireland and the 3rd/4th Millennium BCE Irish word oath meaning “sacred binding/bond/surety by (words)” through the ritual of séal meaning “my words bind (bond) me (to some promise/oath)”; and

(ii) The ancient Greek form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the Alexandrian Empire was the word omnuó (ομνύω) meaning “to swear, take an oath to Divine (derived) law or nomoi (νόμοι); and

(iii) The Roman form of Oath central to the Rule of Law of the Roman Empire called in Latin iuro meaning “I swear/take an oath upon the law (in the name of the Divine)”; and

(iv) The Carolingian form of Oath revived in the 8th Century CE was called committo from the Latin of the same name meaning "I bind myself according to the law" and was the central element of the ritual of Fealty between Lord and Vassal under Sacre Loi (Sacred Law); and

(v) In the 17th Century, the merchant and banking families of England, Venice and the Netherlands began to deliberate enclose and diminish the essential nature of an Oath, upon the creation of secret financial securities and debts (slave bonds) against their own people. This included the clumsy and deliberate corruption of sacred scripture within the New Testament of the Holy Bible to promote the absurd concept of making oaths (for the first time in the history of mankind) as a transgression.

The Roman form of Oath, called “iuro” in Latin is the word we get juro, jury, justice and all are connected.  “Iuro” means, “I swear, I take an Oath upon the Law.”  The Carolingians modified committo from Latin as the concept of sacred Oath.  We use the word “committo” as committal is still used today as the form of sacred Oath within their commercial courts.  Something happened along the way regarding Oaths and regarding Vows.  Something happened after the concept of the Bank of England, the Bank of Amsterdam and the concept of annuities and other instruments.  Annuity was a slave bond and it is the origin as it was corrupted into a slave bond.  It doesn’t mean Annuity is always a slave bond, but that is how it was conceived by the Bank of England and the Bank of Amsterdam.  

Something happened when these banks realized they had a way to unjustly claim us as slaves and as things and batteries for energy that they could monetize and sell without our knowledge and without our consent.  This compelled the banks to seek to destroy the very essence and knowledge of Trust and to destroy Trust between people.  You have heard me say before that the only true capital is Trust.  If you think about the problem that most people have today, it is the absence of Trust.  No wonder people are desperate for money, loans and finding ways to get money from banks.   Because there is no Trust any more.   

Before we get back to Trustee let me explain what I am saying.  This is all connected.  The existence of Trust means that if you were to open a business, you wanted to open a business and you needed to rent and refurbish a building and fill it with the supplies you need to run your business, if the man or woman that owned the business trusted you, then you could form an agreement with them that you start to pay rent the day that you start the business.  That would be Trust.   You wouldn’t need to borrow a single cent to pay for the lease.   The lease would start, but the rent would not start until the business was opened.  If people trusted you, suppliers trusted you then you could come to an arrangement with suppliers that would provide all the fittings and fixtures of your building if it is, for example, a restaurant.   They would put all the fittings and fixtures in on the Trust that once you open up you will begin to repay the money and the cost of those fittings and fixtures because they Trust you.   

If we had trust, then people that provide the produce that you need in order to cook and supply and they would provide that to you that once the doors open, they trust you to pay that back for the produce the minute people start to pay for meals.  The same would go for your staff.  People would start to work for you and not even ask for a wage until customers started to come.  In days gone by that is how people were able to do things without access to central capital controlled by central banks.  In the modern world the banks that are supported by nihilists and academia in fields of law, psychology, and economics which are the troika of nihilism, they sought to damage and create mistrust and confusion so that we look to banks and the central banks as the sole source of capital and Trust, and government as the sole source of Trust. 

In a moment I’m going to specifically address the question of that reference in the Bible concerning the non-swearing of Oaths.   Before I do that I want to go back to the history of Trusts and Trustees that we were referring to and continue through to the present day.  As we are saying, look at Canon 7000 under Trustees under Fiduciary Law under point 2.  We said that in 1695 we see the beginning of the promotion of anti-Oath groups in the support of Quakers and the Brethren also known as the Mennonites that were given permission not to swear Oaths.  We see now the beginning of the diminishing and enclosure of Oaths.   These canons are crucial references and I will also include direct links to the statutes.    

Canon 7000

The first appearance of the concept of Trustee in statute under Western-Roman law originates under King Charles II of England through the laws of Westminster in 1676 under (29 Car 2 c.3) in relation to the historic shift from the custom of auricular testimony under oath to written evidence as primacy proof concerning all Trusts and conveyances:

(i) From 1676 (29 Car. 2 c.3), documents and “paper” took precedence in Western-Roman Law concerning the establishment and existence of valid Trusts, Wills and Testaments, Conveyances, Titles and Agreements to the detriment of auricular testimony; and

(ii) The fundamental role of Oaths in the history of civilization in forming sacred and valid Trusts was deliberately diminished by Westminster in 1695 (7 & 8 Will. III c.34) and the promotion of anti-Oath sects based on absurd corruptions inserted into the Holy Bible to imply Oaths were contrary to Divine Law. The Quakers were granted exemption from Oaths through the concept of Affirmation and Quakers then promoted to “Trustee” roles in Banks, Merchant Industries and Civil Service dealing with property”; and

(iii) The “State” and its agents assuming greater powers and control as Trustees under Western-Roman Law was significantly extended under Queen Anne in 1707 (6 Ann. c.18) concerning people presumed “dead” and in 1708 (7 Ann. c.19) concerning the property of “infants”. In both cases, the concept of “secret trusts”, also known as “Cestui que vie trusts” were used and to be administered by the crown as Trustee; and

(iv) In 1731 (4 Geo. II c.10) under King George II of Great Britain, Westminster expanded the power and scope of itself as Trustees and the use of “Cestui que vie trusts” to include the concept of the property of “lunatics” and “idiots” being held in such trusts; and

(v) In 1775, Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident to enclose the very concept of a valid Oath for the first time in civilized history through (25 Geo.III c.39) by claiming Justices of the Peace then be empowered to administer (valid) Oaths. Thus the evidence in writing of a valid oath and then witnessed in writing by a Justice of the Peace became primary proof, not the auricular event itself and associated witnesses; and

1775 was the time that Lloyd’s Bank gets going.  It is the largest insurer in the world and one of the largest banks in the world.  Westminster and the Bank of England were sufficiently confident to enclose the very concept of valid Oath for the first time in civilized history through 25 Geo III c.39.  They claimed Justices of the Peace were then empowered to administer valid Oaths.   Number (vi) above is the first time that all the concepts were brought together and included Cestui que vie trusts for idiots, lunatics, infants, or trustees of unsound mind.  The Bank of England assumed itself to be the Trustee of all property of idiots, lunatics, those assumed dead or abandoned and those considered trustees but of unsound mind.  

We are going to get the heart of the issue of why the nihilists and why bankers saw Oaths as the fundamental enemy to their system of financial control.  Would it surprise you, as a rhetorical question, that the groups that magically appear, and I do mean “magically appeared”  at the end of the 17th Century did so at the same time that Westminster changed the Law and at the same time that dramatic changes were occurring in texts.  These are groups that refused to swear an Oath, disavowed the concept of  Vow, and seek all possible remedy to remove any question of their being bound by an Oath or a Vow.  

In terms of the Quakers who we are told are born out of the period of the 17th century and persecution, we find that the Quakers end up being the dominant group for industrialists during the Industrial Age in charge of heavy industry and using people as slaves.  We find that the Quakers are the dominant group in Rhode Island and deeply involved in the slave trade.  We find the same group as central to the position of banks, bankers and the Bank of England and in forming their own banks including Lloyds’, the larges insurer in the world.  Lloyd’s was founded by Sampson Lloyd.  Iron making was founded by Abraham Darby.  By 1750 more than 75% of the iron industry was in the hands of Quakers.

Let me say this:  if the poor laws of Westminster had not had taken place, and the land of people and villages had not been seized, leaving the villages to starve unless a few of them found places in workhouses.  Workhouses functioned literally as prisons and prison is too nice a word.  Think of hell and then multiply that by 100.  Think of a place where people are imprisoned to work to death.  That is the system that was controlled by Quakers.  These people said that for religious reasons that they couldn’t take Oaths or Vows, but they were “honorable” people.  Barclay’s Bank from Jay’s Barclay and William Penn from Pennsylvania were both Quakers.

They weren’t the only group that took advantage of this magical chain of events that coincided with their appearance as groups that would not “swear an oath.”  History shows that whole civilizations were founded on Vows and Oaths.  Vows and Oaths were the checklist and the safety mechanism for Rule of Law.   If you played with Vows and Oaths, then Rule of Law was at jeopardy.  What kept Rule of Law solid and protected were Vows and Oaths?  They were immutable from the very, very first civilization to the time that these groups magically appear.  Westminster started arrogantly enclosing these concepts of Vows and Oaths.  We will get to the Bible references in a moment.

The other group that appeared at the same time was called the Brethren, also known as the Mennonites and the Anti-Baptists.  The wealthiest of the Brethren were those that came to America and were granted by Congress enormous sections of land.  Go see the Congressional Acts that gave the Brethren huge chunks of the United States.  In fact the Methodist Church under Wesley was largely formed by Brethren.  Arguably the most famous family and group, tribe of Brethren, came out of Switzerland.  The Swiss Brethren were the wealthiest of all Brethren and they were the group called the Roth.  The Roth was the largest and most influential coming out of the Brethren in Switzerland.  You might know them as the Roth’s Shield, or the Rothschilds.  

There is a huge amount of falsity, counter intelligence and just plain and outright stupidity concerning the origin of the Rothschilds.  The Rothschilds did in fact change from being Brethren and effectively, Mennonite, back to professing themselves to be Jewish in the 19th century.  That was only after all the Acts of Parliament in terms of the persecution of Jews and religious tolerance was well and truly settled.   Only after England was capable of demonstrating the ability to elect a Jewish Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, did we see a change in the profession of faith of the Rothschilds.   The Rothschilds as bankers originated and gained their power, not by being Jewish, because they were not able to exercise such influence in that position.  They were Brethren and yet another of these key groups with extraordinary influence who refused to swear and refused to give Oaths and Vows.

Let’s continue in this history of Trustees and get to the point of exactly why they did this before we address the issue of the references in the Bible.   The last reference we made in terms of the history of Trustees, we said that in 1825 we see the Bank of England consolidating all these concepts around Cestui que vie trusts where they and they alone become the trustees of anyone who is a lunatic, idiot, infant, a trustee of unsound mind or lost or abandoned.  Look under Canon 7000 and point (vii) regarding 1850 and the first time concepts of “implied and constructive trusts.”  They broke the back of Oaths and Vows and then they broke the back of Trusts by creating pseudo trusts:

(vi) In 1825 (6 Geo. IV c.74), with the Bank of England assuming effectively the role of the Crown (Corporation), Westminster consolidated and then expanded its powers and authorities as Trustees by combining the concepts of Cestui que vie trusts for “idiots, lunatics, infants or trustees of unsound mind” ensuring that such property was to be administered by the Bank of England; and

(vii) In 1850 (13 & 14 Vict. c.60), Westminster revised the laws concerning property held by Trustees and Mortgagees with particular emphasis in watering down the historic nature of Trusts and Trustees to include the concepts of “implied and constructive trusts” being fictions and pseudo-trusts resembling (in name) trusts but having none of the customary characteristics with the operation of such pseudo trusts being determined by the laws of Westminster. Hence, the birth of deliberately false trusts being nothing more than implied contracts; and

(viii) In 1872 (35 & 36 Vict. c.79) Westminster extended the concept of secret “implied or constructive” cestui que vie trusts to all persons by assuming all people who do not redeem themselves are by default some form of idiot, lunatic, infant or trustee of unsound mind. Under the guise of “health”, sanitary districts were identified as “wards” for implied lunatics. The effect being that the Bank of England operating as the Crown was now the “trustee” for all persons in England, Great Britain and the Dominions and Colonies of England and Great Britain.

(ix) In 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c.59) and then in 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. c.53) the role of the Trustee fundamentally changed from executor and administrator to a role with full investment and personal wealth creation capacity. Now, agencies, corporations, independent contractors and other bodies “acting” in the capacity of a trustee (such as judges, magistrates and others) stood to obtain substantial financial enrichment in complete contradiction to the public expressed history and principles of fiduciary responsibility and trust. Thus, the end of any pretence of Rule of Law for Great Britain and its dominions and previous colonies can be said to be this watershed in defiling all known respect for law.

The systems described above are now global.  Everybody who does not redeem themselves is considered a complete lunatic and they criminalized lunacy as well at this time.  In 1888 and 1893 the role of trustee changed to a role with full investment and personal wealth creation capacity.  Agencies, corporations, independent contractors are able to corrupt, steal and unjustly enrich themselves fully with impunity.  This is the beginning of the end and the beginning of the rampant corporations and the problems of the world today where we have false trustees who do not take Oaths or Vows and who manage pseudo trusts that bear no resemblance to Trusts.  They are controlled by laws dictated by Westminster and other Parliaments where these people who claim to us to act in our benefit rape and pillage our energy daily, every single moment.  Those that are too lazy, too stupid, or too distracted to stand up and demonstrate in writing that they are not slaves, not paupers, not idiots, not lunatics, not infants or wards and not dead have allowed them to get away with this for all this time. 

Why did the nihilists and bankers want and need to destroy Oaths, Vows and Trusts?

Why did the nihilists and the bankers destroy Oaths, Vows and Trusts?  It should be obvious.  If Oaths and Vows are upheld as they always were and as they were under Carolingians, under the Christian Carolingians who founded the Universal Church,  the Catholic Church, that honored Oaths and Trusts from the 8th century onwards as fundamental to the Rule of Law and Justice.  Oaths and Vows were honored by the Roman Empire as fundamental to the survival of the Roman Empire and the Rule of Law.  Oaths and Vows were honored by Constantine and the Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire up until the 15th century and it’s final ending as fundamental to the Rule of Law.  Oaths and Vows were honored at the time of Alexander and the time of the Egyptians, the Hyksos and the times of every single culture except the last 200 years since we have been living under the control of bankers and nihilists.  Oaths and Vows were fundamental to the very fabric of Law.  

You know why they had to destroy Trust.  By destroying Trust they controlled trusts and by destroying Oaths and Vows they became the sole trustees.  By destroying these concepts they have been able to rape and pillage with immunity, absolute immunity.  Do you know what they want to do now?  You know what the nihilists think now?  Thankfully, they are finally being exposed as more and more people wake up.  Finally they are being exposed because good people have started to realize that we have to restore the Law.  Do you know what the nihilists now think is the answer?  It’s not to change behavior; they don’t want to change behavior.   They want to kill us.  They want to let us starve and they are betting on your neighbors that don’t give a damn and won’t listen to these audios and won’t read, that get distracted, they are making what they think is an informed bet that people are so infected with mind virus and so selfish that they are going to ignore this message and they are going to starve to death. 

They are going to shrivel up and die and that is what they are hoping will happen.  In fact everything is on course for that to come true.   Did you know that in America there are more people in poverty today than at any other time in history, and still we have people who do not give a damn?  They lose everything and they still cannot get rid of mind virus because of the teachings of the nihilists, because of the golden calf and the worship of gold and money of the bankers.   They are doing this in Europe and across the world and there is every chance that they will succeed.  Why?  Because on a daily and weekly basis, I assure you that I see time and time again people are too interested in watching porn, people are too interested in watching a bunch of kittens playing on Youtube.  They are more interested in what the Kardashians are doing.  They are more interested in how to make money.  They have no interest in truth.  Many people have no interest in truth and don’t want to know the truth. 

The ultimate betrayal of the nihilists in corrupting sacred texts

This leads me to this complication that many people have felt in regards to the Bible and the reference in the Bible to the swearing of Oaths.  Let me put this reference in the Bible before I read it, into context.   To the Protestant Church and one might argue to most Christians of the four gospels the one that most people find is the most enriching would be the Gospel of Matthew.  In Matthew we find two of the most significant events and one uniquely in Matthew chapters 5, 6 and 7 in the speech of Jesus and the recitation of Law, The Sermon of the Mount.  It is arguably the most important and continuous sermon claimed to be spoken by Jesus Christ out of any of the four Gospels.  So, the Sermon on the Mount and every single word in it one could rightly assume to those founding the Protestant religion were paramount in the 16th Century.  I am referring to people like Calvin and Martin Luther.

If you want to get context on the Sermon on the Mount through Chapters 5, 6 and 7 of Matthew, then one begins at line 17, and then 18 of Matthew 5, for the opening of the Sermon, the context of the Sermon and what Jesus is about to say about tonight:  the Rule of Law, the concept of Justice and Due Process, the Concept of Oath and Vow being fundamental to society from the beginning of time.  This is what is allegedly said from Jesus and I pulled this out of the new King James Version to make it easier and this is 17, 18, 19 and 20:   

17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

As the opening to the claimed Sermon on the Mount, the most important words attributed to Jesus Christ in the entire Bible, here we are told that Jesus sets the scene by saying that what you are about to hear and what Jesus is about to talk about is not contradicting the Law, but fulfilling and therefore restoring the Law.  That is what he says.  Now let me go to the end of the Sermon which you can call the conclusion where you see the vindication of the Sermon.   This is at Matthew 7 chapter 12:

Matthew 7—12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law of (and) the Prophets.

This should probably say “of the Prophets.”  The word “and” is in there and it has never made sense.  So, under verse 12 chapter 7, we see the conclusion of the Golden Rule and that all are equal under the law.  The Golden Rule, the Rule of Law, is the concluding argument of the key opening and ending of the Sermon on the Mount.  That is a fact.  By referring back to the Law of the Prophets we see the consistency and what I have just said to you should be consistent with the Law and not contradict the Law. 

Now let’s look at the version in Old English of Matthew 5, verses 33 to 37.  Then I will recite it in Matthew 5, 33 to 37 where there is a distinct difference.  So, let me read the Old English verses 33 to 37:

33. Again, you have heard that it has been said by them of old time, You shall not forswear thyself, but shall perform unto the Lord your oaths:

34. But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35. Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36. Neither shall you swear by thy head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.

37. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these came of evil.

Before I get to the new King James Version, I ask you if that phrase is consistent with what we know as an absolute fact of the consistent law from the beginning of time that Oaths and Vows are fundamental to the Rule of Law.  They bind men and women to perform and if they are diminished then groups that refuse to tell the truth, constantly lie, and always corrupt are able to take positions of power and society becomes a prison and slavery can thrive.  If you don’t believe me, why did Calvin and why did Luther emphasize Oaths and Vows in the formation of the Protestant movement.  

Why, in the Church of England, were oaths and vows essential before the bankers took control?  To say that a Protestant movement that placed the Sermon on the Mount more importantly than any other reference to the Bible, any other sections of the Bible, suddenly missed this instruction and turned themselves into heretics is absurd.  To say that it was left up to groups of people called Quakers and Brethren who ultimately become the very worst slave masters under which hundreds of thousands of people died in absolute agony and became the very worst bankers, are you telling me that they got it right and we all got it wrong?  Something doesn’t add up.  

I leave it up to you.  I hope the clarity concerning Oaths and Vows has made this clear to you.  I hope you will embrace then, these concepts when you move forward in the restoration of Law.  I hope you will have greater confidence in what we have said.   I hope you see that the people you are up against don’t care for anything.  They see nothing as sacred; they are nihilists.  They think nothing of corrupting the Bible, nothing of destroying countries, nothing of destroying the world.  You are dealing with severely mentally ill people.  Until good people realize that these people are severely mentally ill and have no right to stay in power, until we restore Law and primacy of Oaths and Vows in telling the truth, then these people will continue to get away with what they are doing. 

I’m sorry I can’t speak this week on Q and A.  I want to thank those of you who find a way despite all the difficulties and restrictions that this world places on energy, for you to find a way to help and support and donate to Ucadia, and I ask for those of you who can please help donate, thank you. 

Thank you for your help in supporting Ucadia.  Until we speak next week, please be safe and be well. 

Ucadia Will and Testament Model (Updated): Why it is time to take a stand

_________________________________________________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here   (61 min 21 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________

Hello and thanks for listening.  This is Frank O’Collins doing an audio blog for Wednesday, 20th of November, 2013.  

The topic tonight that I would like to share with you is the Ucadia Will and Testament model and why it is time to take a stand.  The reason why I have chosen this topic tonight is that as we get into the audio blog tonight, I am very happy and proud to announce that we have an updated template for the Ucadia Will and Testament model which we call Voluntatem et Testamentum.  I’m sorry for the Latin, and there is a lot of Latin associated with Ucadia.  But, we have this updated model and I am really looking forward to going through that with you later in the blog tonight.

That is the reason why we have chosen this topic tonight.  Firstly, we have after many, many months been able to update the template or form which I hope you appreciate.  It is enormously powerful.  But, before we get into the template and before we even get into the background within Ucadia as to why we even focus on this issue of a Will and Testament template, I want to start with a topic and a subject that continues to be promoted across the Internet and it is a phrase that continues to be promoted on emails, at seminars, and between groups.  It is the phrase that needs to be addressed well before we even get into the detail.

It is the premise that you will hear about the reason that you have not found relief and you have not found remedy or the reason that your problems have not gone away, or the reason that you have not found peace, or the reason that your world is in turmoil and that reason is that, “You are just doing it wrong and that the system is somehow perfectly fine.”  And XYZ is there to promote with you, to you, or sell to you the magic silver bullet, the way to do it because “You are just doing it wrong.”  

The System is NOT all OK

Well, the truth is that that would have to be one of the most false, absurd, insulting, awful and, one might even say, deliberately evil phrases that still permeates the Internet.  Because the system is not fine and the system has not been fine for hundreds of years and some might even argue thousands of years.  The system is a prison system; the system is a slavery system.  The system is an occult system.  The system is an evil system.  The system abuses children.  The system takes your energy and sees you as already dead.  The system sees you as nothing but a battery from which energy is taken whether you like it or not.  That is not fine!  That is far from fine.

The system was designed for ‘no way out.’  The system has many, many layers to it and the system feeds off you.  You are the worker bees and other people take advantage of that. 

Now, I am not exaggerating and the evidence is overwhelming.  We have gone through statutes of law, documents that have been published as public law that state categorically and unequivocally that financial instruments are born out of your existence that are called annuities and these annuities are held secretly away from you based on the energy, the sweat equity that you will provide until you die and that the fruits of that energy are sucked up and absorbed by others for their benefit.  These are statutes that are on the public record from Westminster that apply right across the world and especially to those places that have been and continue to be dominions of the CROWN.  

We see black and white evidence across the world of the destruction of our rights and the removal of any illusion whatsoever that the government is there to help you.  We see again from statutes from 1848 onwards the creation of a concept of courts of summary jurisdiction.  What is summary jurisdiction?   Summary jurisdiction is the presumption that you are guilty before the case is even heard.  Guilty!  Before the case is even heard!  That is not justice or rule of law!  Anyone that thinks that is fine has got rocks in their heads.  Anyone that thinks that is fine needs to take a long hard look at the world.  

One part of my family, that part of the family from which I inherit my surname, O’Collins, comes from Ireland.  And as part of getting my house in order, I have been going through and making sure that all the genealogy and the history that I can find and piece together make sense.  So, I have gone back into the history of those parts of the family that emigrated from Ireland to Australia.  But, if we take Ireland as one example of the system being ‘fine’ or the system has been ‘fine,’ at the beginning of the 19th century when England was a hell-pit, abused, destroyed and polluted from the sheer greed and avarice of men with absolutely no morals, Ireland remained a relative paradise.

In fact Ireland produced so much food it was an exporter of food and the country was relatively peaceful.  And, people had prospered for several generations and had acquired quite a degree of wealth.  Well, the Bank of England and these greedy merchants saw Ireland for what they thought it was, as something to be raped and pillaged.  By the time of 1850 on a small island that held a population at the beginning of the 19th century of no more than 4 million souls, half a million, 500,000, militia had been hired as mercenaries from all over the world to be plunked into Ireland when there was no war.  There was no battle, there was nothing going on, other than the deliberate plan of the Bank of England and these mercenaries to start at one end of the island and go to the other and strip everything of value.  

You know the greatest value that they found?  Children.  The healthy children of Ireland. Because a white child slave was the most valuable commodity that these merchants and pirates could sell.  So, they killed hundreds of thousands of Irish.  They killed parents so they could take these children.  And, there are thousands of mass pit graves across Ireland today from the mass murder.  The mass murder was for profit that these people did.  And the population of Ireland went from something like 4 million to less than 2 million in 50 years.   How did they hide it?  You’ll laugh at this.  Very simple… They created the lie that the Irish didn’t eat anything else but potatoes and that they didn’t have dairy food and that they had no meat.  They had cows, sheep, pigs but for some reason the Irish with cows, pigs and sheep didn’t eat meat?  No, they only ate potatoes and they only ate one particular type of potato from one particular part of the country.

Somehow the Irish had all this land and yet they could only eat a certain type of potato that was grown in a certain area in the southern parts of Ireland.  That’s it.  They alleged that the whole of Ireland depended upon only one type of potato.  So when there was blight in this particular potato, that supposedly caused mass starvation across Ireland and millions of Irish died from starvation because they were too stupid to slaughter a cow and eat the meat.  They only ate potatoes (allegedly).  Now, you tell me how that lie continues today?  How can that lie continue today of the mass murder of millions of Irish? 

So, when I go back to my family history and I find that some of my relations died in workhouses by being worked to death because that was the only way they could survive, you tell me that the system is just fine and that “I am just doing it wrong.”  And what about today?  What about all those Americans living today in cars and boxes and shelters?  There are more Americans in poverty than all the other developed countries in the world.  There are more people in prison in America than in the entire world combined.  And, you think that the system is fine?  Are you going to believe the bullshit of these hucksters, liars, and remedy gurus that the only thing they have left to sell because of competence and they get challenged when people say, “That is not what the law says,” is their saying, “You are just doing it wrong.”  Are you going to believe the argument that you are, “Just doing it wrong?”  

If it was true and it’s not, but if it was true, then all the work that is in the Will and Testament in the Ucadia package wouldn’t be needed.   In fact the work of Ucadia as a model concerning law would not be needed because the system would follow Rule of Law, due process and justice.  You could go to court and you would not be going to a court of Summary Jurisdiction.  You would go to a court and the judge would be there to help you.  The judge would be there to have the matter resolved.   There would be no annuities, no slave bonds which there are today.  Everyone is a slave!  Everybody is a slave in their system.  None of that would exist.  

There would be no philosophy of original sin which is an absolute aberration.   None of that would exist and we could walk through and find remedy.  But, that is not the world we presently live in.  How much evidence do you need wake up and stop following the lies of people that say to you that you are “Just doing it wrong”?   Everything is fine, you are just doing it wrong.”  Because I assure you that those are people who are so desperate to sell their snake oil.  They will be the first to tell you that anything regarding Ucadia, anything regarding the Will and Testament is occult, or it’s bad, or it’s wrong or deluded or whatever lie they can throw at you.

Please, please, I ask of you what will it take for you to wake up?  What will it take for your friends to wake up and see the world for what it is?  

How do you find relief, remedy or answers in the world of slavery in a world of trickery and deceit and a world where all these people are out there lying and selling people down the river?   And, they lie on a daily basis by saying, “You are just doing it wrong.”  This is complete and total bullshit.  How do you get through?  

Well, some believe that the only way that when facing such tyranny is to man the barricades or to sit down peacefully and do what Mahatma Gandhi and others did in terms of passive resistance.  Passive resistance is fine and there is a time and a place for that.  But, the problem is that most people still believe that there is a system in place where there is some Rule of Law and there is some justice.  Why?  Because the media tells them (there is Rule of Law and justice) and that’s what they believe.  So, as long as the system has this veil and can hide itself as a system of justice, as a system of Rule of Law, then passive resistance or any kind of call to action in that form can be spun and misconstrued as anti-government and anti-social and a threat.  

The Ucadia Will and Testament Model

So, is there any alternative then?  Yes, there is and that is what the Ucadia Will and Testament package (see: Will and Testament and Notes) is all about.  Well, what is a Will and Testament?  As I said there will be a lot of white noise thrown about the Ucadia model.  You can go find the documents I am referring to on the website www.restorelaw.com.  When you get there go to the section on Education and there you will find the documents under Estate forms.  Under the Estate forms you will find we have listed the notes that go with the documents.  I urge and encourage you to read those documents first.  

Now I’m not going to repeat some of the material I’ve done a few times now in the past where you can go to the blogs and see the background on what the elements of the estate package are.  I am referring to the audio series that I did in March of 2013 which you can see on www.blog.ucadia.com.  You will find the three part series is there and I will walk you through the steps regarding what the estate is.  I am not going to cover that now because they are good audios and that is good material that is relevant today. 

If you want to look at some of the Maxims of law regarding Estates and Wills then you can actually go to the website www.one-heaven.org and go to the canons of positive law.  When you get to the canons of positive law, go look at the canons regarding Estates and Trusts and you will find that those canons provide you with the maxims and history in the context regarding Ucadia as to the Will and Testament.  All those things are there for you to have a look at.  

What I want to do now is go and actually look at the background of updated template and just to do a quick summary of what is a Will and Testament and why the template has been designed the way it has.  Then we will do a ‘wrap-up’ from that.  The concept of a Will and Testament has there are many definitions that you will hear, and I want to read a couple of points in the introduction to Wills and Testament that you will find under the notes at www.restorelaw.com under Education and Estate forms.  Let me read a couple of points as background.

As a way of trying to clarify the Will and Testament, it is a formal declaration, a memorial, a deed and a trust agreement by which a person testifies before witnesses as to his or her true intention and volition regarding the management of his or her cumulative Estate, the disposition of Rights and Property and the disposal of such Rights and Property upon his or her physical death.  If you hear people say such things as, “Your Will only matters when you die;” that is actually not what the statutes say.  That is not what the statute said that invented the concept of Will.  

The statute, the Wills Act of 1837, is the most significant Act in the definition of Will for the last hundred plus years.  It makes no mention of the need to be physically dead before elements of your Will and Testament or the elements of the management of the Estates are in place.  Why would they do that?  Why would there be this disconnect between the public opinion of Wills and the actual law itself?  Why would there be such confusion?  The answer is very simple.  The Bank of England, the bankers and the private Bar guilds realized as they were looking for more ways to rape and pillage you and me and our ancestors, that the best way for them to get their hands on the richest pot which is our property and our Estate is to trick us into declaring that everybody dies intestate.  Everybody since 1837 “dies intestate” in their (the existing) system.  That is, they die without a valid, recorded Will.  That is an absolute fact.   

They did that by changing the rules of what is a valid Will, and by changing the rules by depreciating the whole concept of Testament.  For thousands of years back to the time of Hammurabi and the Sumerians and right through the ancient Greeks and Romans, it was a well established custom that when one speaks a Testimony in front of witnesses, then not only is that the Testament of the Man or Woman, but that is clearly an expression of his or her Will and that the paper was only ever a memorial of that event.  It was never the effectual part of that event as all equity is spoken and law is written.  The speaking of the Testament is what made it effective.     

What they did in 1837 was they “flipped a switch.”  They said that paper, and paper alone is what determines the validity of the Will and even though they say Will and Testament, the nobles no longer did nobles spoke the Testament.  If you think about it, how many people do you know that have actually spoken what they considered to be their Will and there is a recording of that?  And more, how many had the recording witnessed and validated by witnesses who have made that witnessing known as part of the Will?  How many people have done that?   I suggest if any it would be remarkable and the answer would probably be none.  That is the trick of 1837 under the Wills Act.

By definition Will and Testament are at least two key concepts:  
1. the concept of the valid Testament from the Latin word “Testamentum,” being the Testimony and, 
2.  the concept of Will but as paper and in modern concepts being effectively the mind of the person or persons, the mind of the person or persons as the Will component.  

Why is the mind or the Will of the person so important to the present system, which is not fine and which is falling apart and breaking at the seams?  Why would that be significant for the last few hundred years?  

What is an employee?  What is an employer?  What is a driver?  What is a citizen?  What is a recipient?  What is a defendant?  They are all persons aren’t they?  If the system defines them in the legal statutes then they are legal persons aren’t they?  So, if persons are the automation of the system that we live under now then the mind of the person is critical isn’t it?  So, you see, if a court is dealing with a person and there is no clear indication as to the mind or the Will of the person and if you add to that court the power that the court is treating as the person as ‘dead’ then it is a probate court that is effectively proving a claim against the Estate, and these giant annuities that have been created in the background which those in the system can rape, pillage and suck out all this energy to make their own profit, then it’s a perfect storm for them.  It is perfect for them.  Because then they can argue that they determine the mind of the person and not you.  

What else about the Will?  It is the declaration of a memorial, a deed and a trust.  A declaration is really ultimately is an assertion of one or more Rights.  If you think about the image training of a Will and what people normally expect what the Will is, the Will lists the property you claim to own and it lists how you want to be buried and any kind of funeral arrangements and who gets what, and that’s it.  That is the image training of a Will. 

Technically we are not arguing against those elements.  Certainly a Will and Testament should refer in some way to the funeral arrangements.  It certainly needs to assert any Rights that we may have and it should indicate in some manner or form the Beneficiaries of the Will.  A key element of making the Will effective is the naming of the Beneficiaries and the naming of the Executor as the one that will administer that process.  

What you find when people create their Will with the aid of one or more members of the private Bar guild is that they list titles of property, such as “I own this house,” and investment properties and shares which are another form of title.  They list cars as another form of title.  So, all the property is listed as titles.  But what you don’t find is that there is any listing of the Rights to those titles.  And, by Rights I mean the Right of Possession or the Right of Ownership or the Right to Hold.  You find that these Rights are not normally listed in a Will.  They are presumed within a Will.  

The problem of the presumption of those Rights not being listed in a Will is that another party may claim that you do not have those Rights.  Another party may claim that you never had those Rights.  And once you start looking through the statutes, laws and procedures of the private Bar guilds, you discover, surprise, surprise, that they have developed hundreds and hundreds of their own Rights for which politicians and the world are largely oblivious. 

Their Rights, the way they have defined them, give them carte blanche to pretty much do whatever they want and to determine whatever they want.  If they determine that you have no Rights, then guess what?  You have absolutely no Rights.  

So, it turns out that when you look at the definition of real property, hereditaments and land and you dig into the legal meaning of those words, the only real property that there is, is Rights and nothing more.  If you don’t define your Rights within a Will, you have none.  You may go back and rest on those documents that you think give you Rights which would be the Magna Charta, or the Bible, or the Bill of Rights of 1689 in England, or the Petition of Rights of 1628, or The Declaration of Independence in 1776, or the Bill of Rights in the United States of 1791, or the UN Declaration of Rights in 1948.  You may think that those things give you Rights.  But if you don’t define that in your Will then you have not defined the real property and you may as well admit that you have no Rights.   

So there is the first argument when someone comes and says, “I don’t need to worry about this Ucadia Will and Testament thing.  It’s too large, it’s too bulky, it’s over the top, it’s a laundry list of things” and whatever people say.  You can say, “Fine.”  It’s time to take a stand, draw a line, and either be an agent for change or not.  But if you don’t define and declare your Rights, then you are pretty much admitting that you have nothing and that you remain a slave in their world.

What are the components of the Will and Testament?  We said it’s a declaration, a memorial, a deed and a trust agreement.  The memorial component is largely forgotten because people don’t speak their Will which makes it the Testament.  If people don’t speak their Will, if they don’t have a recording of their Will, then it is not a Testament.  It is only a Will.  A deed component is clear; anything dealing with the conveyance of a property needs to be a properly constructed deed.  A properly constructed deed requires an expression of the intent to convey, that it is done freely without duress, that there are terms regarding the conveyance and it is properly executed and witnessed. These are the elements that are needed for a valid deed.   

A trust agreement really relates to the appointment of someone being in the capacity of what we call a Fiduciary which is just a fancy way of saying a Trustee.  In the case of the Will and Testament that role is normally deferred until one is physically deceased.  But, there is no reason whatsoever that a Fiduciary cannot be appointed earlier in the administration of your affairs if that is what you choose to do in the management of your property.  Of course you can appoint a Fiduciary into such a capacity.  So, the very fact that a Will is recognized as being where we nominate the Executor, which is the appointment of Fiduciary and any terms or conditions that we give to that role, it means that one can appoint a Fiduciary into that role now, well before you physically die.  

So there is more of the deliberate disinformation that you will hear over and over again.  “No, you can’t have an Executor until you die.”  That is complete crap and a bare-faced lie.  If that is coming from someone who claims to be an expert in law, then they should bloody well go and read the Wills Act of 1837.  That is not what that Act says or implies.  There again you see the disinformation and the confusion to keep you a slave, to keep you in fear and to keep you buying the Kool-Aid from people that say, “You are just doing it wrong.  You don’t need to go to that extent.”    

What is the structure of this Will and Testament of Ucadia and why have we gone to the extent that we have?  In the time remaining I’d like to go through some of that without overstating what has already been listed in the attached notes.  So, there are two major components within the Ucadia Will and Testament model.  There is the expression of what is called the Ten Commandments.  Some people may chuckle when they hear the Ten Commandments, but in fact they are Ten Intentions that do match up to the Ten Commandments in the Bible and that is deliberate.  The Ten Commandments express clearly your intention of why you are doing this, who and what you are, that you are not claiming anything which is not yours, you are not impinging on others, you are doing no harm, you are honoring the principles of the Rule of Law, due process and justice, but you are NOT a slave.  You are NOT an idiot.  You are NOT a thing.  You are NOT a ward.  You are NOT a pauper.  You are NOT something to be discarded.  You are NOT worthless and you are NOT without value.  That is what the Ten Commandments of the Will express.  

If you are facing a nihilist, an idiot, someone riddled with mind virus, then let them disavow the Ten Commandments of your Will.  Let them disavow them, but not simply ignore it.  So, the explanations of those are listed within the notes and I won’t go through each and every one of them now.  This is a key moment.  

Within the Tenth Commandment, we break it down into what we call 33 Degrees.  I know the instant I say the word, “Degree,” alarm bells go off and warning signs on the magic number 33.   I can see it now.  People will say, “You know, Frank O’Collins is not a Jesuit because he must be a Mason!”  I can see that kind of disinformation flowing everywhere.  No, I am not a Mason, have never been a Mason, and I have no interest in any of those claims.

There is a reason why, a very key number of reasons, why we use the word, “Degree.”  So please turn off the warning lights and the alarm bells and let all the disinformation that people throw at that, let it calm down and let me explain to you why we describe these 33 Degrees, using the word, “Degree.”  Let’s cover this before we get into the substance and let’s cover the style component first.  The word, “Degree,” is a very important word in their system and in all systems.  The word, “Degree” comes from two Latin words: the word ‘de’ is a prefix and the word ‘gratis.’  “De gratis” comes together and means: “of or from the greatest, meaning step, stair, pace, stage, position, station, status, rank, ground, standing or ladder.”  That is the original Latin meaning.  

When you have a look at the meanings in terms of languages around the world, then you find it is a word of enormous importance.  It means emancipation, journey, achievement, status, and as we said, that you are not a pauper, you are not a slave and you are not worthless and a “thing.”  How do we demonstrate that you are not these elements if not in the use of language that makes it clear?  Degree means, in one of the legal definitions, “a level of property rights possessed by an entity.”   In other words if we have no Degrees we have no Rights and we have no property.  But, if we have Degrees, if we have achieved Degrees, then clearly we have Rights and clearly we have Property.  

The term, “Degree” was chosen not because it is esoteric but because of what it truly represents.  When one chooses to be competent one adopts the use of the Voluntatem and Testamentum model as your Will and Testament.  The fact that Degree is a word that is associated with their hiding of knowledge, their enclosure of knowledge, their occult treatment of knowledge… well fine.  If that causes them pause, good.  If it causes them to read that’s even better.  If it causes them to consider how broken and false their system is before the Divine Creator, great.  If it causes a few nihilists to wake up, then all the better.  

Hopefully we have overcome the disinformation that is going to fly around regarding the use of the word, “Degree.”  These are steps.  The first step we take, the FIRST DEGREE is to define our Rights and Obligations, the 99 Rights that we have spoken about some weeks ago.  

The SECOND DEGREE is then to define the status of Rights and what we mean by the difference of certain Rights having a greater or lesser status, and the fact that no Right can be higher than a Divine Right.  

The THIRD DEGREE we define is the transfer of Rights to make clear that nothing can be implied.  

The FOURTH DEGREE is the Assertion of Rights and how Rights are asserted and the exclusion of the use of force, fear, piracy, theft and seizure that they do every single day, claiming it lawful when it cannot be considered lawful. 

The FIFTH DEGREE is the Reservation of Rights in regards to the protection of our Rights.  

The SIXTH DEGREE is the Claim of Right.  Here we say, and I have said this before, “We are happy to accept a Claim providing that it adheres to these conditions.”  

The SEVENTH DEGREE defines the Dispute of Right and how again Disputes of Rights must be in the framework of Rule of Law, due process and justice.  The behaviors such as threat, intimidation, vexation, fear or force of any kind cannot be regarded as a legitimate action in the Dispute of any Right.  

The EIGHTH DEGREE is invalid and prohibited Rights.  

There, within the first eight Degrees you will find within our Will and Testament all the elements associated with Rights.  I’ll come back again to objections people will say.  They may say, “This sounds over the top; this sounds like you are laying claim or building an empire or you are making a mountain out of a molehill and going over the top.”  The reality is that they have written laws, their system is far from fine, and they have written laws and statutes and procedures that if you do not define these things, they give themselves a license to do whatever the hell they want.   That is how they operate and how they get away with it.  So you have to make it clear; if you don’t make it clear they jump all over you.  That is why this is a line in the sand.

Now, in terms of Creation and the Name, the NINTH DEGREE, again this is crucial.  I said this the other day, “There have been a lot of mistakes made to get to this point and I have been guilty of many mistakes.  One of the mistakes that I even got suckered into thinking about is the issue of the Claim of Right where people say that you have to Claim the Name.”  

I have audios and you have probably heard me say that you have to Claim the Name.  A Claim by definition is that you are not in possession of it.  If you are not in possession of the Name you are pretty much “dead in the water,” regarding the Estate.   The true way of viewing this is that you have ALWAYS owned, possessed and held the Name whether they like it or not.  It’s up to them to deny that.  Let them deny that in public.  Let them say that they claim your Name as a slave.  “We treat you as a thing and as a slave.”  Let them say this.  Let them bring that out of the shadows so that we are no longer under any illusion.  When you assert as a fact your Right of original possession, creation, ownership and use of the Name, then all they EVER have or had is equitable title.  All they have is the use of a Name as a Beneficiary and nothing else.    

In terms of the TENTH DEGREE, location, place and time, again people might say this is weird but it is not.  It is a statement of fact and for anyone to argue that you are sitting in a warehouse of their creation or you are living in their world is a lie.  You may visit their world but you certainly don’t exist in their world.  The proof of that is that we define location, place and time.  That is why I spent the time along with the tremendous help that was contributed from others in the development of Ucadia and in the development of the location, place and time model of Ucadia.  

In the ELEVENTH DEGREE we have actions, efforts and energy and again we make absolutely clear that no one can claim your energy.  

I won’t go through the rest of the Degrees and elements now as I think that the notes are self-evident and the detail itself is self-evident.  I hope you will take the time to read the notes and reflect upon them as well as the instruction on how to complete the Will and Testament and how to make it valid.   

Thank you to all who are willing to take a stand

What I want to do now is I want to wrap up as this is the introduction and just say a couple of things in closing.  I said to a few people over the last few weeks that I have been incredibly grateful to those of you who have stepped up to the mark to help and contribute and support and donate to Ucadia.  This period has been the most difficult period that I have faced in the development of Ucadia.  I have been more than happy over the period of twenty years now to have been able to personally fund and develop without any patron, sponsorship or support up until the last couple of years, and I got by.  As I have spent more and more time in getting this done, it has put enormous pressure on me.  For those of you who have been willing and courageous and prepared not to be a ‘passenger’ or a passive observer and who have actually supported, then I thank you and I know that people are doing that when they themselves do not have a lot of energy themselves.  So I thank you.

In doing that I am not seeing myself as a victim nor do I view this as some self-imposed pain and stress.  What I am doing is that I am trying to accelerate the promise that I made at the very beginning of this journey in making sure that the Ucadia model is self-executable and the material regarding campuses, provinces and universities and in this case, the Will and Testament model, is all available to you and it does not have to go through some central command and control to be validated.   And, that this is in your hands to be used and to be used wisely and with competence.  Because, if the Divine Creator trusts you, and the Divine Creator absolutely trusts and loves you, then who am I to go against such trust?  And, even though people breach trusts, and I have had trust breached with me constantly with people who said that they were here to help and then used the proximity and familiarity with me in the end as a weapon, and people actually promoted an attack by saying, “I know Frank O’Collins.”  That is how they open their attack and use that.  It is called perfidy and that is one of worst kinds of evil there is, to do that.  

That doesn’t and shouldn’t mean that we stop trusting.   It doesn’t mean that we should stop trusting people at any stage.  And so, I am sorry that I have not been able to get this finished until now.  And, I need to get this finished; that is what I am doing.  That is why I want to thank each and every one of you who are helping and contributing.  I need that help and I wouldn’t say that if I didn’t need it.  I need that help and I ask for your help please and not as an endless request, but because I am an confident that the Will and Testament package followed on with the completion of the documents in forming a campus, a province and a university and all the things that make Ucadia fully executable including the Rights associated with the ownership of Ucadia being vested in the charters and in the Covenant. This can be completed in the next few weeks.  I am absolutely confident of that. 

The thought I want to leave you with apart from that, and again thank you, is this thought about, “Time to make a stand.”  The system is not fine; the system is far from fine.  The reason you have not found relief or remedy is not because you are “just doing it wrong.”  That is a lie and the people who promote that are either doing it for their own selfish motives, acting in complete stupidity or something else.  It is not that you are just “doing it wrong.”  The system hides, seizes, lies, corrupts, and is a system of slavery.  This is not the intention and we are not living in the world that the founders of the United States intended through the Declaration of Independence.  We are not living in the world that my great-grandfather intended with all the other men at the time of the founding of the Constitution of Australia.  We are living in a system of corporations and the complete theft of our Rights and that is why that I call on each and everyone who has a chance to hear this audio, that it is time to make a stand.

What are you doing?  If you think you can make your own Will and ignore this template and think that this is irrelevant, then in the end you are disrespecting years and years of deep research and you may well end up making yourself worse and at the very least you are still acting as a slave.  You are acting as a ward and the incompetents that they claim us to be.  If you ignore all of this out of hand, then yes, sure, you are admitting that you are still a slave. You can argue until the cows come home that just because you ignore something from Ucadia doesn’t mean that you are a slave.   I’m sorry, but it’s coming to this point and the point is this:  not that if you do this your world will change for the better, not that if you do this you get some magic pot of gold.  That is not what I am saying.  

Make no mistake, I am in no way claiming that if you perfect your Will and Testament according to this model that your world will suddenly become peachy and rosy.  But what you will be doing is that you will be draining the swamp and pulling back the curtain so that everyone can see and there are no more lies that there is any Rule of Law, that there is justice, due process in a system of Summary Jurisdiction, in a system of secret annuities, in a system of slave bonds, in a system where the elite continue to steal and the poor are thrown in prison or allowed to starve to death.  That is not a system that is fine.  The quicker that we can expose the lie, the quicker we can pull back the veil, the quicker we can get on with the job that has been waiting not just for decades but for centuries to fix this bloody system and this bloody world which is a paradise and an incredibly beautiful, conscious world.  

We cannot fix things if we are still playing in the stance, “Oh, everything is fine, you just are doing it wrong.  They are well-meaning people.  It’s just bad luck that everything they try doesn’t work.”  That is crap, absolute crap.  Pull back the veil and be honest.  If they are nihilists and incompetent and stupid they should not be there.  Let’s start fixing things.  That is what I spent my time trying to do for the last 19 years with the Ucadia model that shows education, health, industrial relations, transport, and energy.  It’s all there to be rolled out and completed.  It’s a complete model of how to fix things.   I’m not the source of all knowledge but it’s a framework for us to start thinking about things differently and stop bashing our heads against the wall and thinking that if it doesn’t work now we can just keep trying because we are just doing it wrong.

Where do you sit in this?  Where do the people you know sit in this?  If all you get is, “Oh this is too hard, it’s too confusing, it’s occult,” then at the end of the day that is laziness and you know where those people stand.  This world will change not because there are a million people brave enough to stand up, because there aren’t a million brave enough to stand up or who are willing to step up and say they are not slaves.  I wish there were, but history tells us that is not going to be the number.  Nor is the number going to be 100,000 nor is it going to be 50,000.  It’s going to be a handful of people that change the world.   

History is not a spectator sport.  Where do you sit?  If you are a spectator, get out of the way.  If you are a passenger, get off the bus.  If you are here to kick the tires, stop wasting our time.  If you are here because you find this is entertainment, go and find something else to do because this is coming down to the wire.  You either take a stand knowing who you are, or you don’t.  There is no middle ground.  

I leave these thoughts with you and I want to say, “Thank you again, and I’m sorry tonight that I have a lot of passion in this subject.”  I hope there is passion for you as well, because I guarantee that anyone listening to this call except for a very, very small number of people on this planet,  have probably had aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents who were murdered, who died,  who were starved, or who were worked to death as slaves.  What are you doing for their memory?  For those that stand up and help, thank you.  There only needs to be a few who help and I hope you are one of them who does help.


Until we speak again next week, please be safe and please be well.  Thank you and good night.