Google+ Followers

Friday, 28 June 2013

Not a 'Claim of Right' but a 'Claim of Duty'

I have been researching the duties of a trustee, in order that I might best undertaker the endowment which the Creator has entrusted to me. Other commentators have extolled the virtues of a 'Claim of Right', I however have decided that rather making such grandiose claims for things which are not within the gift of man, have decided to make a 'Claim of Duty'.

The whole ethos of government is contrary to the obligations which have traditionally been assumed to lie with each natural person. And it has been suggested that reliance on government which is the mud which clogs the lotus blossom of the soul and prevents it from opening.

Government is little more than a bunch of nine year old children seeking to assert their authority on the playground. As time progresses they become ever more inventive in the means they employ to dupe the gullible into descending to their level of behaviour. Power by its very nature exists only as long as one does not try to use it. And as Power slips from the grasp of governments, they become more desperate in their attempts to assert their authority and thereby hasten their own demise.

There is no getting around that government in its current form is immoral. But how does one deal with the playground bullies?
I am a trustee of our Creator, born free and subject only to the terms of the trust endowed to me by God. Those terms are embodied within ‘the Royal Law’, also known as ‘the Common Law’, affirmed by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, as those contained within the King James Edition of the Holy Bible. 
Having looked through ‘the Royal Law’ there is no indication of any legal requirement other than those of the Creator, as Settlor of the Sacred Trust. 
I therefore do have certain lawful duties which include the duty to: 
·         Carry out the expressed terms of the trust instrument
·         Defend the trust
·         Prudently invest trust assets
·         Account for actions
·         Be loyal
·         Not delegate
·         Not profit
·         Not be in a conflict of interest position
·         Administer in the best interest of the beneficiary ('the glory of God')
Therefore, to accept any artificial limit to the endowment of our Creator, including, but not limited to, 'statutory laws', is to fail to perform the duties imposed upon me under the Trust and would constitute a 'Breach of Trust'.
I am a God fearing man, and any injustice that I might unfairly be subjected to in this life, is of no consequence when compared to ensuring that His final judgement of my performance, as His trustee, is favourable.

Similarly, to delegate any of my responsibilities to ‘the States of Jersey’ is also a 'Breach of Trust', which means I cannot allow anyone, including government, to remove any of my responsibilities from me. 
As a result, ‘the States of Jersey’ and ‘the Island of Jersey and it’s Dependencies’, have been advised through various of its agents (and notice to one, is notice to all) that I am not a member of the society ‘the Island of Jersey and its Dependencies’, nor do I recognise the authority of ‘the States of Jersey’ to limit, in any way, shape or form, the endowment given to me by my Creator. Indeed it is a matter of public record in the Royal Court of the Island of Jersey.  Nor do I wish to delegate or abrogate any of the responsibilities which our Creator has entrusted me with to ‘the States of Jersey’, its agents, representatives or employees. 
Therefore I am unable to subject myself to any of the rules of that 'legal person' unless I so wish to enter into a Common Law contract with that 'legal person'. I may from time to time enter into contracts with the States of Jersey, as I may enter into contracts with any person, however in the absence of a written contract signed by my own hand, no contract may be presumed by the States of Jersey. This truth is self-evident given that ‘the States of Jersey’ is a legal fiction and not a natural person and is thus not capable of entering into verbal contracts. 
It appears that what you claim as ‘legal requirements’ are in fact your acceptance of an offer you have presumed that I have made under the ‘invitation to treat’, based upon some statutory 'law'. I, of course, have made no such offer and there is no intention to create legal relations in this regard. 
We are not contracted and I am not therefore legally obliged to do anything save carry out the lawful duties of a trustee as listed above.