Some ideas on what to do next, a little bit of choreography, and some sums
#7 ~ The lurking being, that is the persona, facilitates, Upside - Down World, as They entrust ALL your Money
In the interest of sustaining the volunteerism, that it takes for you, dear reader, to continue to bash on, to read and shine light on these painful realities, it’s time for some of the 30%.
I had started writing on another post that will likely appear after this one, when in the early hours of Sunday morning, as the Roosters started their daily chores, the title for this post struck me. And when speaking with a friend across the pond yesterday about all things important ;-), I decided to bump what I had written and present this. The lurking being, that is the persona, facilitates, Upside - Down World, as They entrust, all your money. For those who not only have read all of my previous posts but possess a steel trap memory, may recognize that elements of the titles of each of those posts, in order, form the sentence that truly expresses what I have been on about. I wish I could claim that I was so clever that it was my grand scheme to pre-plan this, to display my superior intellect and saucy sense of humour. Alas, it was not I. The title for each post usually comes about as I sit down to write with an idea of what the content will be, such that the title is born out of the body (I think there might be some gold in that little phrase). So when the inspiration from: Holy Spirit, Universe, collective consciousness, . . . re - presented to me what had happened with these first six titles, I thought it prudent to bring it to you.
From each post title as follows. (Please visit or revisit the posts for the details, I highlight here as it pertains to this title and composition.)
First, LURKING:
defined as; be(ing) or remain(ing) hidden so as to wait in ambush for someone or something
This definition nails the issue of the hiding and the ambushing that comes from this manipulation. When One is signing at the bank or walking out of Court wondering how and why it all went down the way that it did.
Second, The Art of BE - ING:
In my post on this, I primarily use this as a verb. In this title it is more like a Frankenstein creation, a thing, used as a noun, something that has been created un-naturally, that is, the NAME, REGISTERED CORPORATION.
It seems strange that a fictional construct could be described as a “being”, this created NAME can sue or be sued, it is considered a legal entity.
Third, PERSONA non grata:
The PERSON, REGISTERED CORPORATION, the NAME, which gets the whole ball of wax rolling.
One is not informed or told about this, so it remains cloaked.
The hidden thing that is the entity/NAME, that One volunteers to act as or for, enlivening it; the PERSON(A).
Fourth, UPSIDE - DOWN WORLD:
By this act of volunteering, They bring One into the CORPORATE un-natural world of the walking dead: finance, law, governance, etc. “voluntary slavery”, where it is always assumed that One is surety for and acting as NAME, bonding them to the world of the CORP(se) .
This comes back to inversion by and through CON-version. Conversion of the name at the individual level, government at the group level, and statute code at the law level. This is fractal, They convert all aspects of life into Their inverted reality, where dead things walk, and living things are not acknowledged.
Fifth, THEY en-TRUST:
entrust, defined as; put (something) into someone's care or protection: you persuade people to entrust their savings to you.
Again, this nails the point exactly. What One generates, creates, produces, what One gets paid for; has value; which we understand we get money for, a paycheque or what have you. As soon as this is DE - posited into the CORPORATE Bank, the money and value have been “entrusted” to THE CORPORATION. It is no longer actually money, as it has been converted into currency, which is the movement of debt-instruments, sounds like dead instruments doesn’t it.
Sixth, ALL YOUR MONEY:
Money: if you have dollars, and savings accounts, or investments; you aint got none! Your wealth, financially speaking, that is in the Bank or on paper, is not only not real, it also belongs, legally, to Them. It is held by Their NAME, your converted and inverted NAME, which: One does not own and then volunteers to act as and for. All Corporations are registered to and held by THE CORPORATION. Voluntary slavery, remember, 30%.
~ 30%
For those not familiar with my most recent post, “ALL your MONEY?” and my comparison of the rat study, to people and volunteerism, suffice it to say: if One doesn’t perceive that they receive 30% of their production and efforts, to disperse and enjoy with self directed intention, One will no longer be willing to volunteer to act. For clarity on this, please visit my post “ALL your MONEY?” for more detail.
Here are some ideas to increase One’s share and ownership of One’s production and efforts. Practice in the mirror, I’m not kidding, at saying “no”. Out loud and with varying inflections. Then imagine whilst practicing that you are saying it to somebody, say, an official, like a County Councillor, an Alderman, a “Karen” telling you to put on a mask, or Province or company official telling you to get a jab! When you wish to say no, then say no. When you wish to say yes, then say yes. Your voice, and the energetic expression that you create and direct is a powerful thing. They say that One man can’t change the world, that is a lie. It is only One man that changes the world. If it were not for the voice and action of such an One, nothing would ever happen, for better or worse. Put your voice to energetically express what you wish. To be clear, a letter or email is symbolically your voice, so do that too. However, if One is speaking to an official, political or legal, I suggest that One knows upon what ground One is standing. What I am talking about is: living Man, or Corporate NAME. As I said, They will always assume that One is acting as and for the NAME. I will speak more in future on reaching private agreement with the man or woman acting as the official. This gives opportunity to engage with another at the level of man to man, even in Corporate matters; ie: agreement between One as man and another man acting in the capacity of: politician, public official, officer of a Court or other Corporation. Wherein, the man or woman is held personally liable, not protected under the umbrella of title or position. Without that protection they tend to act a little bit differently ;-).
Clarity on “Assumption”
Another wordplay: Presume vs. Assume
Pre-sume is to have a position that is “previous” to the summing. That is to say, that One did not wait for all the points or evidence or elements to be revealed before One comes to the sum, the total of the information, to form the position. Hence, “pre”- sume or presumption. The presumption is intended to accurately reflect the information and the “sum”.
A-(s)sume, the extra s is added for word structure grammar stuff. An “a” at the front of the word denotes an opposite or reversal of the meaning of the word. A-ssume means that the position taken, is opposite to whatever the sum of the points or evidence or elements that are revealed, and the sum total would describe. So if you stand in the Court saying and doing everything you can to determine that you appear as a man, outside the jurisdiction of the statute/code/CORPORATE, and in fact “present” as a live breathing being, the Judge will Assume, that you are there acting as and for the NAME. Which is opposite to the sum total of the points, evidence, or any other elements to describe who or what you are. In the “Court” situation, if One allows the assumption to prevail, then One has submitted to the Court and will be heard as NAME/PERSON.
Clarity on “Such an One” and “You”
Who is, “Such an One” ?
I use this archaic turn of phrase for a very specific reason. I became most familiar with it in reading Pearl S. Buck’s book, “The Good Earth” and also find it intermittently in the King James Bible. I find it to be the best way to denote that I am referring to only one thing, one man or woman. The “an” instead of “a”, sounds better and proper to me, the argument being that “One” starts with a vowel. The rule being held that it should be “an” instead of “a”. As the pronunciation of One starts with a “w” sound and it is a consonant, the rule might be to use “a”. I’m sticking with “an”.
“You People!”
“You”, is problematic as it is both singular as well as plural. When the Judge or Policeman asks One a question or addresses One as “you”, he can be referring to all of the entities that you may be assumed to re-present, ie: the NAME/CORPORATION. In Court, One then pre-sumes that the Judge is speaking to Oneself, the man, and answers, thus volunteering and acting in agreement with the Judges “A”-ssumption. The Judge is happy that you are acting as and for the NAME, and thus all of “you”, the man, the surety for NAME, the parent, the plumber (or whatever One’s job/title may be) go off to jail or pay the fine. “You”, can define the group of identities or capacities in which One can act, hence plural, and still only BE - such an One. The distinction being, acting as or in the capacity of (title/office/CORP . . .), vs. BE -ing a living breathing spirit endowed man. This can be a tricky one to get One’s head around.
~ more 30%
When little, Mother calls your name when she wants your attention. If One does not respond, — well — let’s leave that one alone, mothers find their ways to persuade the little One’s to pay attention, and so they should. One is conditioned to sit up, ears pricked, when One hears their name. We then assume, that name or NAME, is the presentation in words of Oneself. And, it can be. One goes out with some buddies to play pool and have a beer, when they shout your name across the room whilst, you are picking the next song on the Juke Box (do they still have Juke Boxes?), you spin on your heel and come and pick up a cue. You are attached to name. However, now you get a bill in the mail or open a bank account, the converted NAME appears on all documents. That is not you! It is not your name! It DOES NOT BELONG to you! If you are confused by this, go back to post “The Art of BE - ing”. One volunteers to act as or for the registered CORPORATION that is One’s NAME .
I am finding it difficult to clearly communicate the distinction of name vs. NAME. That NAME is a “semblance” of name, it is not the same thing! Check out the photo at the bottom. How many trees are in the photo? The answer is, none. We have a name, One does not have a NAME. It is the heart of the sleight of hand, to take something so specific and turn it upside down without anybody noticing. I say again, NAME is NOT yours, NOT your property. One can state a claim, legally, to attempt to capture the NAME, to re-possess it, that is another matter for future.
There are times that it is appropriate to volunteer as such, NAME, at this time in the world. I need to use a bank account and even de-posit cheques. So choose with intent when to volunteer. In the interest of that ability, to separate One’s conscious self from NAME, you can practice this as well. It took me a long time to truly believe and understand that my name, as NAME, was not me. That it was a separate entity. It would be as if, you met someone at a party that had the exact same name as you. “Hi, I’m John Smith” - “NO - WAY, that’s my name too! John Smith!” This is pretty easy to conjure and bring into conscious thought, two John Smiths may be pretty easy to get into the same room. It is just that consciousness of two separate entities, the two Johns, that you carry with you in your purse or back pocket appearing on a Driver’s License or Credit Card. That NAME is the other JOHN. So work on that concept and attempt to over-ride and reprogram your subconscious awareness of who you are vis a vis who you can volunteer to act as: name vs. NAME, John vs. JOHN, man vs. CORPORATE ENTITY.
~ The big one — Sovereignty
Just yesterday when breaking down the front end of my truck to repair the steering components, as I am suffering from a rather severe case of “DEATH WOBBLE”, I listened to an interview with a Canadian working towards adding seven words to the Constitution. The significance here is the concept of sovereignty: who has it, who recognizes it, and who authorizes it? The short answers, in my mind and heart, are as follows:
Who has it?
I do ;-) . And so does each and every such an One, should they choose to act as and for themselves and their “self interested action”. This is quite easy to say, and yet a whole other operation to execute. From KJV Genesis 1: 26 - 28 26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
sidebar on “Adam”:
A - dam = NOT - damned
Back to the Sovereignty question: who recognizes it?
This goes back to previous discussions where I have presented the idea of the “Maxims of Law”. I have not called it this before, but I reference in order of significance, how one agrees/contracts: by saying you agree —speaking it —, by writing down and signing/autographing your agreement —writing it —, and with the most weight - action - what One does — performance —. So with sovereignty, it is the same: One speaks, says that they are sovereign, that is a good start. One creates by writing some kind of document that clearly positions Oneself at the top of the heap, as sovereign. That too, can be useful. And, most significantly, One acts with the authority, as the author of One’s life, and acts as sovereign. Now that last one in particular can get Oneself in prison, or even dead, ask Calgary Pastor Artur Pawlowski or Robert the Bruce. — Here is some new information to me, I need to look deeper into this, apparently the Canadian Constitution does not recognize the sovereignty of the individual man and holds that Parliament and the King hold that position, over the people. I call bullshit!! If it does say that, it is an “impossible union”, we’ll get into that more in future. — When in all things Court and Legal, One’s sovereignty is assumed (there’s that word again) to have been sublimated, to act as and for and as surety to: NAME. In all legal documents, NAME/person does not have sovereignty but must submit to all regulation and statue code. You will find in reading the ICCPR, the Bible, Constitutions and Bills of Rights, that the words: people, men, women, person, everyone, etc. are actually not interchanged. Each is used to speak to what is meant, and they do NOT all mean the same thing.
Who authorizes it? “sovereignty”
It all depends on the venue. What jurisdiction is One standing in? Different jurisdictions assume, or presume, who or what is at the top of the heap, and who or what understands, stands - under, those assumptions or presumptions. If in a typical Court room, it is presumed that the Judge is the “author” of that venue, it is actually, however, the Clerk. The venue, in this case is a private registered CORPORATION and all players “on the court” are playing by the agreed rules (see Upside - Down World). If the venue is brought into real men and women, the Court can recognize that One is sovereign and will quickly bounce you outta there, in my case, not to jail. One that presents as sovereign has no place in Their game/Court.
One authorizes the venue all the time. In a classroom, One authorizes the teacher as sovereign of the classroom. In Church, it is usually the Pastor that One authorizes to be sovereign. It is always up to the individual, authority is given, if it is taken then it is slavery or worse.
The exercise and execution of One’s sovereignty is not optional. It is the state of conscious awareness given by the creator. Each such an One IS sovereign by nature.Freedom is experienced when the sovereign is self directing, not restrained and restricted by an external force. This usually presents in the form of another claiming sovereign status over and above Oneself, ie: rulers.
~ Early steps in choreographing the dance - Babylon is Fallen
Once One learns to say NO, when appropriate, and sees the truth, that One is not NAME, then One can start to authorize the venue as One sees fit. Taking responsibility is only possible when One lifts the veil of assumptions and begins to act with clear knowledge of who One is, and isn’t, and thus expresses with authorized intention. If One wishes to dance out of Babylon, which I do and am working on (it is an ongoing operation at this point in history), One can practice a few of the steps at the barre and in front of the mirror. Just remember dear reader who you are, the real man or woman with a hand on the barre, not, the reflection.
Have it good,
Arlen