a strawman for your strawman?

[FreeManAndHisDog]

...

Then the answer to "a [corporation] for your [corporation]?" would be "of course". But that doesn't mean you can escape your duty and obligations.

...

You (the real you) are held accountable for your actions of the Artificial Person (a.k.a. corporate Trust / "Strawman") just as anyone is held accountable in any corporation or corporate body - because you establish a fiduciary duty as a Trustee to that 'corporation'.

If you don't want to be held accountable for it, then settle its accounts and stop using it. - If it doesn't accrue charges to its accounts, then it doesn't need to pay "Income Tax", as the accounts remain zero and unused. Stand sovereign as a people (a real human being) and use lawful money (gold, silver etc.) or notes drawn thereof and are redeemable (and so have real worth at common law) to do business with your fellow man directly.

... Though you have to be conversant in the commercial codes and the nature of the instruments used when operating your corporate Trust in commerce. If you do not operate it to such commercial codes, you - the real human being - can still be held to your fiduciary duty.

...

It all nonsense which has got nowhere and is going nowhere however you need intelligence to see that.

It is all nonsense? Then why do you think you cannot be held responsible?

I can assure you, the courts will hold you responsible as the fiduciary for your actions as the Trustee operating your Artificial Person in commerce.

The court rulings continually show this. This is from which your obligation to pay the "Income Tax" of the corporate Trust arises.

[freeman2009]

When you say "strawman", what are you talking about? This is a vaguely defined term and is used in many situations to describe many things.

If you are talking about the 'corporation' / corporate Trust / corporate-entity and its public account that is created for us at birth and its related private accounts that you created on-demand when doing business with other 'corporations' in the fiat currency system accruing charges to its accounts, then this is just like any other 'corporation' in many ways.

It is this 'corporation' that is called the Artificial Person, and that Winston Shrout calls the "Strawman" [1] [2]...
o http://www.tpuc.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1279

Then the answer to "a [corporation] for your [corporation]?" would be "of course". But that doesn't mean you can escape your duty and obligations.

Many corporations buy other corporations and account for them on its books. This is all now done in commerce in their accrual closed accounting system under the commercial codes.

Still, for every corporation that you give consciousness to, you also take on a fiduciary duty as the Trustee. A 'corporation' cannot do anything without the living soul and actions of the human being that becomes its Trustee.

It is at this time that you become obligated for its actions, whether it is your own Artificial Person as an agent thereof, or any other corporation that you direct as an agent thereof (such as 'President', 'CEO', 'CTO', etc.).


You (the real you) are held accountable for your actions of the Artificial Person (a.k.a. corporate Trust / "Strawman") just as anyone is held accountable in any corporation or corporate body - because you establish a fiduciary duty as a Trustee to that 'corporation'.

If you don't want to be held accountable for it, then settle its accounts and stop using it. - If it doesn't accrue charges to its accounts, then it doesn't need to pay "Income Tax", as the accounts remain zero and unused. Stand sovereign as a people (a real human being) and use lawful money (gold, silver etc.) or notes drawn thereof and are redeemable (and so have real worth at common law) to do business with your fellow man directly.

Or, as Winston Shrout does, give a Notice & Claim to establish a Security Agreement, establish a Security Agreement (lien), give public notice of the Security Agreement with a Financing Statement, then "set off" unsecured charges against the future credit of the public by using the public account associated with that corporate Trust / Artificial Person (or "Strawman" as Winston Shrout calls it). Though you have to be conversant in the commercial codes and the nature of the instruments used when operating your corporate Trust in commerce. If you do not operate it to such commercial codes, you - the real human being - can still be held to your fiduciary duty.


Further information...
o Model of Laws - Superior to Inferior
o Re: Creation of the 'PERSON'
o Regarding Trusts and fiduciary duties in society

Yes I am using 'strawman' as a reference to the state created corporate entity. I use the term only for brevity and clarity so the reader can fully distiguish between the Natural human and the entity which it has fiduciary duty to.

As you state, the secondary entity (created by you) would still give you fiduciary duty to it, however my assertion is that this duty would only be there when you are in uniform as laid out by the laws of the entity. In the same way that when you are buying your groceries, you are not acting as fiduciary for any company which you may be the CEO.
You are only acting and responsible for your actions of CEO, when clearly acting in that capacity. You are not responsible for or accountable to the company for your actions when not acting as CEO unless there is a comercial law which covers these actions. Such as a clause in the comapany handbook covering such activities outside your company role. An example of this would be drug usage outside work, where you can be tested inside work and duly fired.

My idea is simply to put a third party (the second corporate entity) between you the natural human and the state created coporate entity.
Also to ensure that Joinder between the natural human and the second corporate entity only exists when you are knowingly acting as fiduciary. If you try to put this safegaurd in place with your state created entity, the state has an interest and could intervein.

The whole point of this is not to remove fiduciary duty. It is to ensure that no other corporate entity of any form can bind you or dupe you into contract without you knowingly placing yourself in a commercial state by wearing the uniform.

As such, you will always be acting as Human being with no comercial rights, abilities or responsibility unless you are in uniform.

[FreeManAndHisDog]

Yes I am using 'strawman' as a reference to the state created corporate entity. I use the term only for brevity and clarity so the reader can fully distiguish between the Natural human and the entity which it has fiduciary duty to.

Okay.

As a basis, there is...
1. The human being (one of the people - a sovereign) and his natural person with which he/she stands and interacts at common law.
...and there is...
2. The created corporate Trust (a.k.a. Artificial Person - an artificial juristic entity / corporate-entity) that has public and private accounts for operating in commerce (using the fiat currency / legal tender / internal accounting system of a society) and that Winston Shrout calls the "Strawman", and that a real natural person must stand in assuming the duty of a Trustee to give it consciousness.

(Neither of these to be confused with some other delusional perceptions of a "Strawman" that are clearly wrong.)

As you state, the secondary entity (created by you) would still give you fiduciary duty to it, however my assertion is that this duty would only be there when you are in uniform as laid out by the laws of the entity. In the same way that when you are buying your groceries, you are not acting as fiduciary for any company which you may be the CEO.

Are you buying those groceries with their fiat currency / legal tender? Then you are using their commercial instruments which they created and that they hold all IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) to. You are therefore not doing business directly with the grocer, but are employing the use of a third party's services - the fiat currency / legal tender - and the use of such an offered service comes with terms and conditions attached. Those terms and conditions are that all private accounts generated on-demand (such as buying something from a grocer with the fiat currency) must be settled according to their respective Codes, Rules and Regulations, and that you surrender any dispute that arises to be settled in their commercial courts.

You are only acting and responsible for your actions of CEO, when clearly acting in that capacity. You are not responsible for or accountable to the company for your actions when not acting as CEO unless there is a comercial law which covers these actions. Such as a clause in the comapany handbook covering such activities outside your company role. An example of this would be drug usage outside work, where you can be tested inside work and duly fired.

Yup. Their jurisdiction extends to as far as you agree and contract to let it extend to.

( George Mercier's "Invisible Contracts" )

But also see above to realise when you are acting with fiduciary duty to your corporate Trust / artificial juristic person / corporate-entity. You are acting with duty more times than your think, even though it is invisible (we have gotten used to it).

My idea is simply to put a third party (the second corporate entity) between you the natural human and the state created coporate entity.

I've been studying all possibilities and I don't think this will work. Thanks for the good challenge

If you create multiple corporate-entities, then when you give it consciousness (when you are operating it) you are directly taking on the role as a Trustee.

Note. The fiduciary duty as Trustee is separate from its creation by a Trustor. <-- Important.

If you create corporate-entity AAA, then standing as Trustee to AAA you get AAA to make BBB, then standing as Trustee to BBB you make CCC, then still even though AAA made BBB made CCC, you still stand as the Trustee directly when operating in the capacity of each.

You cannot act as a Trustee to AAA and then AAA acts as a Trustee to BBB, then BBB acts as Trustee to CCC. As far as I can see, the Trustee is always the through the real human being's natural person, and so cannot be a cascade of corporate-entities.

It is always a real human being that must give consciousness to a corporate-entity.

You stand as Trustee directly to AAA when operating it, you stand as Trustee directly to BBB when operating it on behalf of the beneficiary of BBB, and you stand as Trustee directly to CCC when operating it on behalf of the beneficiary of CCC.

The beneficiary of each could very well be its creator or some other entitity if so defined by its Trust document / Charter / Founding document.

However, by doing such a thing, you can avoid being held as surety more easily.

Don't forget though, if a Trust is created, its accounts must be registered in order to use the fiat currency / legal tender / internal accounting system and so will also have to be operated according to the respective commercial Codes, Rules and Regulations, lest that created entity be trespassing upon the IPR associated with that currency / accounting system.