The Truth Of The Law
4 posters
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Other Conspiracies, Hoaxes, Myths and Lies
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:19 pm
Eh? My government is a corporation? Who would've thunk?
Imagine your local pizza parlour asks you to pay for a pizza that you never ordered and do not want and then has you thrown you into jail if you do not pay. Hilarious! Isn't it? But that's what our governments do to us 24/7. Your government is a commercial outfit and it imposes its "services"on you.
Disclaimer!
I am not a lawyer/solicitor/barrister or any other kind of low-life. Therefore nothing in this article should be construed to be legal advice. This article is for purposes of information only! You are responsible for anything you do - if you choose to act on the information presented here. I am happy to answer general questions but please do not ask for advice. I will refuse - so spare yourself and me some embarrassment.
Bear in mind that the writer of this article lives in Australia which is a Common Law jurisdiction. Before you accept anything I say and act on it make sure your country is also a Common Law jurisdiction.
Lawyers would have you believe that they are the only ones that can safely navigate the mine-field that the law is; and in a sense they are right because they, in collusion with their politician buddies, are the ones who laid the mines! They know where they are. And you thought a lawyer's job is to guide you safely to the other side of the field, i.e. to justice? Wrong! His job is to ensure that you step on as many mines as possible! Because courts these days are nothing more than commercial outfits, designed to make money for their principal, the government. The longer your journey in "legal la-la-land" and the more mines you blow up the bigger the profit for the lawyers and the government! As simple as that!
So what qualifies me to write on such a weighty matter as the law? Well, I am a man who, one fine day, woke up to find himself in a prison euphemistically called society! I had been living in this prison from birth but it wasn't until I bumped into its invisible walls that I woke up! It hurt like hell, yes, but it turned out to be a blessing in disguise (like so many of the unpleasant things that happen to us!). The price I paid for this lesson was the loss of a car but what I gained was the knowledge of who I really am! Priceless! I am qualified because I am an intelligent, sane and self-respecting man who knows right from wrong and, of course, I know the law.
On my blog www.thechosenites.wordpress.com there is a page called LAW in which I describe some of my personal experiences with the Australian police and the court system. Links to two audio clips are provided which illustrate far better than mere word what sovereignty is about.
You can also find a more elaborate version of my post LAW on:
www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2014/06/the-united-states-inc.html
So let's jump right in. In this first part of my article let us look at the different kinds of law there are:
A) Nature's Laws
These would be self-explanatory. Jump off a high building without a parachute, jump into a river infested with crocodiles, stop eating and drinking, touch a high-voltage live wire and you are flouting Nature's laws and she will sort you out!
B) Common Law (also known as the Law of the Land)
Common Law is often described as based on God’s Law. It seems highly likely to me that God has indeed implanted moral laws into us which impel most of us to act ethically. Nevertheless, exactly like all other types of law these moral laws do require your consent.
Common Law is man-made and based on contracts.
All of us are sovereign men/women and as such we are making law all the time without even thinking of it as creating law. These laws are private laws. Let me give you a simple everyday example. In my house, for example, you cannot smoke because I say so; that is one of my laws. You must abide by it or leave when asked. If you do not leave when asked to do so I can throw you out - using force if necessary. If you were an honoured guest I might make an exception and allow you to smoke - but that is a privilege which I can revoke at any time without having to give an explanation. In your house, of course, you make the laws. If you were a nudist you might make it a law that everybody has to walk around naked. I have to abide by your law or leave.
But in the public arena neither you nor I nor anybody else can impose his/her laws on others. Here we need to get together, formally or informally, and work out solutions - i.e. compromises - that are acceptable to all. The result of this communal effort is Common Law. Not common as in: "vulgar", "unrefined", "inferior" but common as in: "shared", "belonging to a community". Common Law goes far back into history and each and every human community, from the most archaic to the most advanced civilization, has its own Common Law.
Common Law is a social contract, albeit unwritten, with our fellowman in which we pledge to act in such a way that each of us can enjoy maximum freedom while respecting the rights of others to do the same. We were born into the contract and raised in it. As we were not in a position to give our consent or understand anything our parents, for better or worse, stepped in, assumed resposibility and taught us the rules and guidelines of our society.
If that is not common sense then I really do not know what is. Under Common Law you are free to do anything you please, as long as you do not infringe on the life, liberty, property and rights of others. In other words: my rights end where yours begin.You may ask: what about the psychopaths amongst us who opt out of this unwritten contract? Yes, you can opt out! But if you do not honour the laws that are designed to protect all of us you can no longer claim the protection of the very same laws that you violate. Common Law is binding on all of us. Intentional violation of Common Law constitutes a breach of the peace, i.e. it is a CRIMINAL ACT, and is punishable in Common Law courts. If a Common Law court does not bring you to justice you are fair game for ... well, anybody, really! That is what outlaw means.
In conclusion: the right and the power to create law and to administer justice belongs to The People.
If there is a conflict or controversy the matter is adjudicated in Common Law courts (de jure courts) by juries, i.e. by us The People. The magistrate or judge is no more than an umpire. It is the jury that decides! No judge or magistrate can lawfully interfere with a jury and no government can interfere with Common Law, let alone abrogate it. Common Law, however, is not static; it can and does evolve and change with the times, yes, but only according to the will of the People!
Alas, the reality is that Common Law has been fraudulently supplanted by the following:
C) Equity Law - Commercial Law - Maritime Law - Admiralty Law aka The Law of the Sea
The types of law mentioned above, often used interchangeably, are "color of law", i.e. they are not laws but statutes, made to appear to be law. Never mind their high-falutin designations: statutory law is nothing more than the rules and guidelines of societies, organizations and commercial companies and thus lawfully binding only on members of that society/organization/company whether it is the boy scouts, the local orchid club, Rotary Club, McDonalds or, yes, the political entity that you think of as your country and your government!
McDonald's, for instance, cannot compel you to abide by their rule to wear their work uniform unless you are one of their employees. Right? Right! And your government cannot compel you to abide by its"company rules" to wear a seat belt, or pay taxes or vote or what have you - unless you are an employee! And here's the rub: that's exactly what you are!
Flout the government's corporate statutes and you will be taken to court and punished because you have been turned into a government "employee" without your consent and have become liable for breaches of a contract which you never knowingly and voluntarily signed! How's that for justice?
Regardless of where you live you will find, upon close examination, that our respective countries have far more in common than you might think: we are all living in a kind of concentration camp courtesy of the international banksters and their sock puppets, the governments of the world. The barbed wire of the camp is the law. The guards are known as police ....... well, you get the idea.
My own country, Australia, the land that Nature or God, if you will, created is a Common Law jurisdiction.Wherever the aboriginal owners of the land still have native title it is their traditional Common Law that prevails; elsewhere it is the Common Law that the British settlers brought with them.
The political entity known as the "Commonwealth of Australia" on the other hand is a commercial outfit, incorporated in the United States, which is yet another corporation.
This Dun & Bradstreet Credit Agency pdf proves it. Dun And Bradstreet.pdf (163.08 KB)
All Australian States and their myriad agencies are commercial outfits as is proved by the fact that all of them have ABNs, that is Australian Business Numbers. Don't just take my word for it. If you do some research you can easily verify this.
Google "ABN Lookup" and enter keywords such "Department of Justice and Attorney-General" and "Queensland" and you will come up with this:
Screenshots taken 27. Aug 2015
Which of the above sets of law are more important? None, really! True, Common Law trumps statutes but that does not mean that statutory law is irrelevant or unimportant. They all have their place, they all have their uses. Unless you live on a deserted island or as a hermit in a cave you cannot live without entering into contracts with your fellowman. All human interaction ultimately is contract.
Rent a flat or buy a house = contract.
Get a job or marry = contract.
Get a bank credit = contract.
Buy a chewing gum = contract.
Even on this forum there are rules and guidelines you need to observe; if you don't your posts or your account can be deleted.
Common Law is NOT a get-out-of-jail card, a green light to do as you please and to hell with the consequences.
To be continued.
Imagine your local pizza parlour asks you to pay for a pizza that you never ordered and do not want and then has you thrown you into jail if you do not pay. Hilarious! Isn't it? But that's what our governments do to us 24/7. Your government is a commercial outfit and it imposes its "services"on you.
Disclaimer!
I am not a lawyer/solicitor/barrister or any other kind of low-life. Therefore nothing in this article should be construed to be legal advice. This article is for purposes of information only! You are responsible for anything you do - if you choose to act on the information presented here. I am happy to answer general questions but please do not ask for advice. I will refuse - so spare yourself and me some embarrassment.
Bear in mind that the writer of this article lives in Australia which is a Common Law jurisdiction. Before you accept anything I say and act on it make sure your country is also a Common Law jurisdiction.
Lawyers would have you believe that they are the only ones that can safely navigate the mine-field that the law is; and in a sense they are right because they, in collusion with their politician buddies, are the ones who laid the mines! They know where they are. And you thought a lawyer's job is to guide you safely to the other side of the field, i.e. to justice? Wrong! His job is to ensure that you step on as many mines as possible! Because courts these days are nothing more than commercial outfits, designed to make money for their principal, the government. The longer your journey in "legal la-la-land" and the more mines you blow up the bigger the profit for the lawyers and the government! As simple as that!
So what qualifies me to write on such a weighty matter as the law? Well, I am a man who, one fine day, woke up to find himself in a prison euphemistically called society! I had been living in this prison from birth but it wasn't until I bumped into its invisible walls that I woke up! It hurt like hell, yes, but it turned out to be a blessing in disguise (like so many of the unpleasant things that happen to us!). The price I paid for this lesson was the loss of a car but what I gained was the knowledge of who I really am! Priceless! I am qualified because I am an intelligent, sane and self-respecting man who knows right from wrong and, of course, I know the law.
On my blog www.thechosenites.wordpress.com there is a page called LAW in which I describe some of my personal experiences with the Australian police and the court system. Links to two audio clips are provided which illustrate far better than mere word what sovereignty is about.
You can also find a more elaborate version of my post LAW on:
www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2014/06/the-united-states-inc.html
So let's jump right in. In this first part of my article let us look at the different kinds of law there are:
A) Nature's Laws
These would be self-explanatory. Jump off a high building without a parachute, jump into a river infested with crocodiles, stop eating and drinking, touch a high-voltage live wire and you are flouting Nature's laws and she will sort you out!
B) Common Law (also known as the Law of the Land)
Common Law is often described as based on God’s Law. It seems highly likely to me that God has indeed implanted moral laws into us which impel most of us to act ethically. Nevertheless, exactly like all other types of law these moral laws do require your consent.
Common Law is man-made and based on contracts.
All of us are sovereign men/women and as such we are making law all the time without even thinking of it as creating law. These laws are private laws. Let me give you a simple everyday example. In my house, for example, you cannot smoke because I say so; that is one of my laws. You must abide by it or leave when asked. If you do not leave when asked to do so I can throw you out - using force if necessary. If you were an honoured guest I might make an exception and allow you to smoke - but that is a privilege which I can revoke at any time without having to give an explanation. In your house, of course, you make the laws. If you were a nudist you might make it a law that everybody has to walk around naked. I have to abide by your law or leave.
But in the public arena neither you nor I nor anybody else can impose his/her laws on others. Here we need to get together, formally or informally, and work out solutions - i.e. compromises - that are acceptable to all. The result of this communal effort is Common Law. Not common as in: "vulgar", "unrefined", "inferior" but common as in: "shared", "belonging to a community". Common Law goes far back into history and each and every human community, from the most archaic to the most advanced civilization, has its own Common Law.
Common Law is a social contract, albeit unwritten, with our fellowman in which we pledge to act in such a way that each of us can enjoy maximum freedom while respecting the rights of others to do the same. We were born into the contract and raised in it. As we were not in a position to give our consent or understand anything our parents, for better or worse, stepped in, assumed resposibility and taught us the rules and guidelines of our society.
If that is not common sense then I really do not know what is. Under Common Law you are free to do anything you please, as long as you do not infringe on the life, liberty, property and rights of others. In other words: my rights end where yours begin.You may ask: what about the psychopaths amongst us who opt out of this unwritten contract? Yes, you can opt out! But if you do not honour the laws that are designed to protect all of us you can no longer claim the protection of the very same laws that you violate. Common Law is binding on all of us. Intentional violation of Common Law constitutes a breach of the peace, i.e. it is a CRIMINAL ACT, and is punishable in Common Law courts. If a Common Law court does not bring you to justice you are fair game for ... well, anybody, really! That is what outlaw means.
In conclusion: the right and the power to create law and to administer justice belongs to The People.
If there is a conflict or controversy the matter is adjudicated in Common Law courts (de jure courts) by juries, i.e. by us The People. The magistrate or judge is no more than an umpire. It is the jury that decides! No judge or magistrate can lawfully interfere with a jury and no government can interfere with Common Law, let alone abrogate it. Common Law, however, is not static; it can and does evolve and change with the times, yes, but only according to the will of the People!
Alas, the reality is that Common Law has been fraudulently supplanted by the following:
C) Equity Law - Commercial Law - Maritime Law - Admiralty Law aka The Law of the Sea
The types of law mentioned above, often used interchangeably, are "color of law", i.e. they are not laws but statutes, made to appear to be law. Never mind their high-falutin designations: statutory law is nothing more than the rules and guidelines of societies, organizations and commercial companies and thus lawfully binding only on members of that society/organization/company whether it is the boy scouts, the local orchid club, Rotary Club, McDonalds or, yes, the political entity that you think of as your country and your government!
McDonald's, for instance, cannot compel you to abide by their rule to wear their work uniform unless you are one of their employees. Right? Right! And your government cannot compel you to abide by its"company rules" to wear a seat belt, or pay taxes or vote or what have you - unless you are an employee! And here's the rub: that's exactly what you are!
Flout the government's corporate statutes and you will be taken to court and punished because you have been turned into a government "employee" without your consent and have become liable for breaches of a contract which you never knowingly and voluntarily signed! How's that for justice?
Regardless of where you live you will find, upon close examination, that our respective countries have far more in common than you might think: we are all living in a kind of concentration camp courtesy of the international banksters and their sock puppets, the governments of the world. The barbed wire of the camp is the law. The guards are known as police ....... well, you get the idea.
My own country, Australia, the land that Nature or God, if you will, created is a Common Law jurisdiction.Wherever the aboriginal owners of the land still have native title it is their traditional Common Law that prevails; elsewhere it is the Common Law that the British settlers brought with them.
The political entity known as the "Commonwealth of Australia" on the other hand is a commercial outfit, incorporated in the United States, which is yet another corporation.
This Dun & Bradstreet Credit Agency pdf proves it. Dun And Bradstreet.pdf (163.08 KB)
All Australian States and their myriad agencies are commercial outfits as is proved by the fact that all of them have ABNs, that is Australian Business Numbers. Don't just take my word for it. If you do some research you can easily verify this.
Google "ABN Lookup" and enter keywords such "Department of Justice and Attorney-General" and "Queensland" and you will come up with this:
Screenshots taken 27. Aug 2015
Which of the above sets of law are more important? None, really! True, Common Law trumps statutes but that does not mean that statutory law is irrelevant or unimportant. They all have their place, they all have their uses. Unless you live on a deserted island or as a hermit in a cave you cannot live without entering into contracts with your fellowman. All human interaction ultimately is contract.
Rent a flat or buy a house = contract.
Get a job or marry = contract.
Get a bank credit = contract.
Buy a chewing gum = contract.
Even on this forum there are rules and guidelines you need to observe; if you don't your posts or your account can be deleted.
Common Law is NOT a get-out-of-jail card, a green light to do as you please and to hell with the consequences.
To be continued.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:19 pm
Posted by thinkforyourself on 08/28/2015
Great comment! I am looking forward to your follow-up post. You have explained the situation very well and in a clear and simple manner, and you have highlighted the important and rarely understood fact that our 'Governments' are merely companies, owned by the NWO.
Good job.
Great comment! I am looking forward to your follow-up post. You have explained the situation very well and in a clear and simple manner, and you have highlighted the important and rarely understood fact that our 'Governments' are merely companies, owned by the NWO.
Good job.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:21 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/29/2015
Here is a list of questions that I am being asked frequently. There is not enough room to cover everything.
All I can do is skim across the surface and encourage you to do your own research.
Q. How did we become - literally! - slaves of the government?
A. Law is contract. He who makes the laws becomes the ruler of those who accept his laws.
The bag of dirty tricks at the disposal of the government - courtesy of Jewish and Freemasonic shysters - is bottomless. Come to think of it: "dirty" is not strong enough a word - "diabolical" is more fitting.
Living men and women are subject only to Nature's laws and Common Law. In order to legally interface with living men and women and to get a grip on them those sinister forces
that manipulate the government - a fiction - have to turn us into fictions, too.
[color:5af5=f00a38]"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."
S.C.R. 1795,
Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall.
54), Supreme Court of the United States 1795
Thus we have been made citizens, vessels, persons, corporations: in brief we have become dead things, mere resources. Having been transformed into fictions with some legalese hocus pocus the government can now interact with us via its corporate rules - aka statutory law.
This is how the fraud works:
When you were born your parents registered you with the authorities because that's what they were told to do. Don't blame them - they are victims of the system, too.
Your birth certificate is actually an unrevealed commercial instrument. This instrument is the property of the government which created it. The name on this instrument resembles yours with one crucial difference: it is in capital letters. John Average, the name of the living man thus becomes JOHN AVERAGE which is the designation for the commercial instrument.
JOHN AVERAGE is fictitious but it is the real John Average who is made to assume all commercial liabilities of the fictitious JOHN AVERAGE. The problem is that John Average doesn't know any of this.
How does that work in practice?
A simple example: as per statutory law of Australia smoking or possessing cannabis is prohibited. If John Average is caught with cannabis the police will charge JOHN AVERAGE with possession of a prohibited substance and the court will fine or jail JOHN AVERAGE but it is John Average who pays or goes to jail because he doesn't know the difference between the two.
It is JOHN AVERAGE who has been pledged by his government as collateral for the nation's debt to the banksters but it is John Average and his millions upon millions of
fellowmen who lead lives of slavery to pay off a debt that is intentionally designed to be unpayable so that the scam can be made to continue forever and ever.
Q. What is a statutory law?
A. "A set of rules created to regulate a society carrying the force of law by the consent of the governed". Please note the keywords ".....by the consent
of the governed".
Q. Does statutory law apply to me?
A. Ask yourself the following question: "Have I, one of the governed, knowingly and voluntarily consented to accept the statutes created by the government?" If
the answer is YES, then the statutes are law for you. If you never consented they are entirely irrelevant.
Q. What is a contract?
A) The simple definition of contract is: “A pledge or pledges exchanged between two or more parties that the law will enforce”. The contract can be written or verbal. To be
enforceable it must meet certain criteria; to wit:
1. Full Disclosure:
each party must specify exactly what the pledge comprises, and everything that pertains to it, incl. potential "escape" clauses. Nothing must be intentionally hidden.
2. Equal Consideration:
a contractual consideration is ‘something of value’. This could be money, an item or service of value. All parties must consider this exchange to be equal in value. Trading glass beads for a Rolls Royce is not equal value - unless you really treasure the beads more than a RR.
3. Lawful Terms/Conditions:
nothing which is unlawful can be a part of a lawful contract (murder, for instance, or robbery or fraud are unlawful and can therefore not be part of a lawful contract).
4. Consent:
all parties must consent to the terms/conditions of the contract; consent can be expressed by means of a signature, by a gesture such as a hand-shake or by conduct.
5. Competence:
all parties must be competent. For instance, under-age people cannot enter into contracts
If even one of the above criteria is missing or defective the entire contract is null and void from the start.
Do you have a contract with your government which meets the above criteria and in which you waive your unalienable as well as inalienable rights (they are not the same)?
You don't? I thought so! Further, are you a living man or woman? Or a commercial instrument? Well, there is your answer!
Q. Who is to blame for the way things are?
A. For the most part we only have ourselves to blame. Yes, you and me! The sovereign status you were born with is an unalienable right. It CANNOT be taken away from you
neither can you give it away. We have free will and can at any time withdraw our consent to any contract. And in as far as the government's contracts with us are defective ab initio it follows that there never was a lawfully binding contract in the first place.
The conclusion to be drawn from this is inescapable. No matter how unpalatable: he who fails to use his God-given intelligence and free will, he who fails to vigorously
assert and courageously defend his rights, be it from ignorance or fear, will lose his freedom to those who will take advantage of him. As they say: use it or lose it!
You know the saying: it takes two to tango! Nobody can ride on your back unless it is bent! So stand straight!
Here is a list of questions that I am being asked frequently. There is not enough room to cover everything.
All I can do is skim across the surface and encourage you to do your own research.
Q. How did we become - literally! - slaves of the government?
A. Law is contract. He who makes the laws becomes the ruler of those who accept his laws.
The bag of dirty tricks at the disposal of the government - courtesy of Jewish and Freemasonic shysters - is bottomless. Come to think of it: "dirty" is not strong enough a word - "diabolical" is more fitting.
Living men and women are subject only to Nature's laws and Common Law. In order to legally interface with living men and women and to get a grip on them those sinister forces
that manipulate the government - a fiction - have to turn us into fictions, too.
[color:5af5=f00a38]"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."
S.C.R. 1795,
Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall.
54), Supreme Court of the United States 1795
Thus we have been made citizens, vessels, persons, corporations: in brief we have become dead things, mere resources. Having been transformed into fictions with some legalese hocus pocus the government can now interact with us via its corporate rules - aka statutory law.
This is how the fraud works:
When you were born your parents registered you with the authorities because that's what they were told to do. Don't blame them - they are victims of the system, too.
Your birth certificate is actually an unrevealed commercial instrument. This instrument is the property of the government which created it. The name on this instrument resembles yours with one crucial difference: it is in capital letters. John Average, the name of the living man thus becomes JOHN AVERAGE which is the designation for the commercial instrument.
JOHN AVERAGE is fictitious but it is the real John Average who is made to assume all commercial liabilities of the fictitious JOHN AVERAGE. The problem is that John Average doesn't know any of this.
How does that work in practice?
A simple example: as per statutory law of Australia smoking or possessing cannabis is prohibited. If John Average is caught with cannabis the police will charge JOHN AVERAGE with possession of a prohibited substance and the court will fine or jail JOHN AVERAGE but it is John Average who pays or goes to jail because he doesn't know the difference between the two.
It is JOHN AVERAGE who has been pledged by his government as collateral for the nation's debt to the banksters but it is John Average and his millions upon millions of
fellowmen who lead lives of slavery to pay off a debt that is intentionally designed to be unpayable so that the scam can be made to continue forever and ever.
Q. What is a statutory law?
A. "A set of rules created to regulate a society carrying the force of law by the consent of the governed". Please note the keywords ".....by the consent
of the governed".
Q. Does statutory law apply to me?
A. Ask yourself the following question: "Have I, one of the governed, knowingly and voluntarily consented to accept the statutes created by the government?" If
the answer is YES, then the statutes are law for you. If you never consented they are entirely irrelevant.
Q. What is a contract?
A) The simple definition of contract is: “A pledge or pledges exchanged between two or more parties that the law will enforce”. The contract can be written or verbal. To be
enforceable it must meet certain criteria; to wit:
1. Full Disclosure:
each party must specify exactly what the pledge comprises, and everything that pertains to it, incl. potential "escape" clauses. Nothing must be intentionally hidden.
2. Equal Consideration:
a contractual consideration is ‘something of value’. This could be money, an item or service of value. All parties must consider this exchange to be equal in value. Trading glass beads for a Rolls Royce is not equal value - unless you really treasure the beads more than a RR.
3. Lawful Terms/Conditions:
nothing which is unlawful can be a part of a lawful contract (murder, for instance, or robbery or fraud are unlawful and can therefore not be part of a lawful contract).
4. Consent:
all parties must consent to the terms/conditions of the contract; consent can be expressed by means of a signature, by a gesture such as a hand-shake or by conduct.
5. Competence:
all parties must be competent. For instance, under-age people cannot enter into contracts
If even one of the above criteria is missing or defective the entire contract is null and void from the start.
Do you have a contract with your government which meets the above criteria and in which you waive your unalienable as well as inalienable rights (they are not the same)?
You don't? I thought so! Further, are you a living man or woman? Or a commercial instrument? Well, there is your answer!
Q. Who is to blame for the way things are?
A. For the most part we only have ourselves to blame. Yes, you and me! The sovereign status you were born with is an unalienable right. It CANNOT be taken away from you
neither can you give it away. We have free will and can at any time withdraw our consent to any contract. And in as far as the government's contracts with us are defective ab initio it follows that there never was a lawfully binding contract in the first place.
The conclusion to be drawn from this is inescapable. No matter how unpalatable: he who fails to use his God-given intelligence and free will, he who fails to vigorously
assert and courageously defend his rights, be it from ignorance or fear, will lose his freedom to those who will take advantage of him. As they say: use it or lose it!
You know the saying: it takes two to tango! Nobody can ride on your back unless it is bent! So stand straight!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:22 pm
Posted by micra on 08/29/2015
This work by Frederic Bastiat should by it's very nature be included here.
It is a masterpiece of libertarianism. And a concise expose of socialism and communism.
The Law.
by Frédéric Bastiat [1850]
PDF: fee.org/files/doclib/20121116_thelaw.pdf
Edit to post:
Extra info.
A delightful piece about Bastiat here by Jeff Riggenbach:
And following on from Bernards posts, What is contract?
Ludwig Von Mises has some pertinent observations on Free banking and Contract Law.
This work by Frederic Bastiat should by it's very nature be included here.
It is a masterpiece of libertarianism. And a concise expose of socialism and communism.
The Law.
by Frédéric Bastiat [1850]
PDF: fee.org/files/doclib/20121116_thelaw.pdf
Edit to post:
Extra info.
A delightful piece about Bastiat here by Jeff Riggenbach:
And following on from Bernards posts, What is contract?
Ludwig Von Mises has some pertinent observations on Free banking and Contract Law.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:24 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/30/2015
The 3.5 MB e-book mentioned below is an invaluable practical help for anybody who wants to reclaim his birthright. It is focused on the US but the philosophical underpinnings apply everywhere.
In any case, in as far as most of the world's governments are incorporated in the US they do come under the jurisdiction of the Universal Commercial Code (UCC) which is the commercial code of the "mother corporation" - the USA Inc.
The Global Sovereign's Handbook by Johnny Liberty
In any case, in as far as most of the world's governments are incorporated in the US they do come under the jurisdiction of the Universal Commercial Code (UCC) which is the commercial code of the "mother corporation" - the USA Inc.
The Global Sovereign's Handbook by Johnny Liberty
thechosenites.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/the-globalsovereigns-handbook.pdf
Q. Why do I consider English Common Law superior to Biblical Law?
A. If you wish to assert that the rules and guidelines found in the Bible (Old and/or New Testament) are superior ethics and ought to be the foundation of society you would first have to prove that they are indeed genuine, i.e given to Moses by God Himself.
Even if you were successful in proving them be of Divine origin I'd still deem them inferior to the Common Law of England. Mosaic laws - as all laws sourced from religion - are being interpreted and administered by self-appointed "experts" such as rabbis, priests, imams, prophets and what have you - people who generally view themselves as the sole authorities. I'd rather place my fate into the hands of a jury of my peers, relying on their innate sense of what is right and what is wrong, than into the hands of people with religious prejudices or delusions. Their administration of justice tends to end up as insufferable oppression. Remember the Biblical law: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"? Remember, too, how the Inquisition applied this law? Thanks, but "No, thanks!"
Q. What is a Common Law court?
A. A Common Law court is a court where a jury, i.e. a panel of twelve men/women administer justice and make laws and, wherever necessary, annul bad laws. This is the sanest and most balanced form of justice because it does not depend on the idiosyncracies, prejudices or agendas of single judges. Common Law courts are the only lawful courts. All others are merely legal. Yes, there is a difference between lawful and legal!
"It cannot be denied that the practice of submitting causes to the decision of twelve men was universal among all the northern tribes (of Europe) from the very remotest antiquity."
Crabbe’s History of the English Law, p. 32.
That was a time when the law was not yet polluted and perverted by Judeo-Christian ideas.
Until the word "juror" was adopted, jurors were actually called judges, for the role they played in Common Law jurisprudence. "...the judges, for so the jury were called."
Crabbe’s History of the English Law, p 55
We The People have the power. Juries are the sole authority in Common Law and that is the reason that those who have hijacked the courts (Jews and Freemasons) have, over the last few hundred years, replaced our Common Law surreptitiously and incrementally with their lesser laws. They understand very well that in a Common Law court they wouldn't last five minutes.
Q. What is a de-facto court?
A. De-facto courts, aka as courts of summary judgement, are courts which operate without a jury. Most courts these days are de-facto only. They operate exclusively on the basis of "color of law" - in other words: they are make-believe courts. In order to gain jurisdiction over you they need your clear and unequivocal consent and unless such consent is given, either expressed or implied, they have no authority. If they proceed without your consent, which is what they almost always do, they are acting unlawfully and are liable for their conduct.
Judges arrogantly presume to make law. Their judgements are legal but NOT lawful. And they sure as hell are not law! In the first post I stated that governments are corporations. The purpose of a corporation is to make money by selling goods or services. Courts and police are no exceptions. They, too, are registered businesses.
I googled ABN Lookup using the search words Toowoomba Magistrates Court. Here is a screenshot of what I found. The business names used do not really say Toowoomba Magistrates Court but that means nothing. Government agencies love to hide behind abbreviations and weird business names which offer no clue as to the true identity; they are smoke screens designed to throw you off the track.
Q. Why do I consider English Common Law superior to Biblical Law?
A. If you wish to assert that the rules and guidelines found in the Bible (Old and/or New Testament) are superior ethics and ought to be the foundation of society you would first have to prove that they are indeed genuine, i.e given to Moses by God Himself.
Even if you were successful in proving them be of Divine origin I'd still deem them inferior to the Common Law of England. Mosaic laws - as all laws sourced from religion - are being interpreted and administered by self-appointed "experts" such as rabbis, priests, imams, prophets and what have you - people who generally view themselves as the sole authorities. I'd rather place my fate into the hands of a jury of my peers, relying on their innate sense of what is right and what is wrong, than into the hands of people with religious prejudices or delusions. Their administration of justice tends to end up as insufferable oppression. Remember the Biblical law: "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"? Remember, too, how the Inquisition applied this law? Thanks, but "No, thanks!"
Q. What is a Common Law court?
A. A Common Law court is a court where a jury, i.e. a panel of twelve men/women administer justice and make laws and, wherever necessary, annul bad laws. This is the sanest and most balanced form of justice because it does not depend on the idiosyncracies, prejudices or agendas of single judges. Common Law courts are the only lawful courts. All others are merely legal. Yes, there is a difference between lawful and legal!
"It cannot be denied that the practice of submitting causes to the decision of twelve men was universal among all the northern tribes (of Europe) from the very remotest antiquity."
Crabbe’s History of the English Law, p. 32.
That was a time when the law was not yet polluted and perverted by Judeo-Christian ideas.
Until the word "juror" was adopted, jurors were actually called judges, for the role they played in Common Law jurisprudence. "...the judges, for so the jury were called."
Crabbe’s History of the English Law, p 55
We The People have the power. Juries are the sole authority in Common Law and that is the reason that those who have hijacked the courts (Jews and Freemasons) have, over the last few hundred years, replaced our Common Law surreptitiously and incrementally with their lesser laws. They understand very well that in a Common Law court they wouldn't last five minutes.
Q. What is a de-facto court?
A. De-facto courts, aka as courts of summary judgement, are courts which operate without a jury. Most courts these days are de-facto only. They operate exclusively on the basis of "color of law" - in other words: they are make-believe courts. In order to gain jurisdiction over you they need your clear and unequivocal consent and unless such consent is given, either expressed or implied, they have no authority. If they proceed without your consent, which is what they almost always do, they are acting unlawfully and are liable for their conduct.
Judges arrogantly presume to make law. Their judgements are legal but NOT lawful. And they sure as hell are not law! In the first post I stated that governments are corporations. The purpose of a corporation is to make money by selling goods or services. Courts and police are no exceptions. They, too, are registered businesses.
I googled ABN Lookup using the search words Toowoomba Magistrates Court. Here is a screenshot of what I found. The business names used do not really say Toowoomba Magistrates Court but that means nothing. Government agencies love to hide behind abbreviations and weird business names which offer no clue as to the true identity; they are smoke screens designed to throw you off the track.
And what do they sell? Courts offer for sale their services as arbitrators in legal controversies. If McDonalds offers to sell you some of its products do you have to accept? Of course not! Neither do you have to accept the invitation to do business with a de-facto court! But unlike McDonalds police and courts will force themselves and their services upon you using misinformation, manipulation, intimidation and outright lies and in many cases brute force, i.e. unlawful arrests and unlawful court proceedings!
In Common Law jurisdictions such as Australia, New Zealand, the UK, Canada, the USA and a few others you have the inalienable right to demand a trial by a jury of your peers. If the court does not grant you what you are entitled to you do not have to grant them what they desperately need and want to get jurisdiction: consent! You do not have to deal with a de-facto court, unless of course, you want to.
Q. What is legalese?
A. Lawyers use a special kind of language, "legalese", which they employ to make their utterances sound highly erudite and profound when, in fact, they are mostly obfuscation, crap and lies. This abstruse jargon is designed to confuse and ensnare you into agreeing with them on something by making it sound like English.
Let's have a look at an example: "Do you understand the charges?" sounds like a simple and straightforward question, doesn't it? To you and me "understand" has the same meaning as "comprehend" and so you may answer "Yes, I do!" But to the court the word has a far more sinister meaning - sinister for you, that is - because it means "to stand under, to submit to". Your YES has just signalled to the court that you accept the charges (yes, you have just pleaded guilty!) and you accept the court's jurisdiction. They did not tell you that, of course. That would give the crooked game away.
Or take this example: you receive a summons or notice to appear. You are led to believe this is a court order and you have to comply. It isn't and you don't have to. In their own legal dictionary, Black's Law Dictionary, a summons is defined as an "invitation" and the word "must" means "may". How's that for sneakiness?
Do you have to know legalese to avoid their traps? No. Due process of law requires that the defendant "comprehends" the charges against him. He cannot be expected to comprehend anything if it is expressed in a language which he does not speak.
And languages do not come any weirder than legalese. Take, for instance, the word "attorney". It comes from a Latin root which means "to twist". An attorney is quite literally nothing but a twister of words and facts. For once their description of themselves is honest.
In the Harry Potter books and movies you will come across the term "parsel mouth" - a speaker of snake language. That is exactly what lawyers are, parsel-mouths - they speak with forked-tongues. Be aware of their language but do not sink to their level by trying to speak it. Compel them to speak yours!
Q. What is the function of police?
A. The only lawful function of police is to act as peace officers. That means they are empowered to interact with you, i.e. apprehend and detain you, only if they observe you committing a crime, have reason to suspect that you have committed or are about to commit a crime. Should they enforce or attempt to enforce mere statutes they are acting ultra vires, i.e. outside the scope of their powers AND - very important to know - outside their immunity. They are now liable for their unlawful conduct and can be sued. Some police officers do indeed act as lawful peace officers; I have come across some. Alas, most are as clueless about the law as their hapless victims. So you must teach them the law and assert your rights.
I always carry a pen-shaped audio-video recorder with me and a written warning. It is designed for use in Queensland, Australia but could easily be modified for other countries. This is the latest version. I have not had to use it yet.
Warning.pdf (57.21 KB)
Q. When can I be arrested?
A. Principles of Arrest Warrants
To be valid a warrant MUST be signed with a wet signature (i.e. hand-signed) by a judge or magistrate who MUST have an oath of office which is on file; there MUST be certified proof of a valid bond to indemnify the party to be taken into custody. Administrative procedural warrants are null and void ! Warrants signed by a Justice of the Peace are null and void !
A warrant MUST specifically name the party in his or her proper given birth name and the capital crime alleged to have been committed.
A warrant MUST be based on an affidavit executed under oath by the accuser, who MUST be named, stating therein FIRST HAND knowledge or FACTS which constitute a capital crime causing loss or damage to a named party.
The warrant MUST name the party to be arrested, or describe him or her sufficiently to establish identity.
Warrant and affidavit MUST be offered for inspection upon request.
The arrested person MUST NOT be hand-cuffed unless he or she has attempted to escape or unless it be necessary in order to prevent his or her doing so.
The arrested party MUST be taken before a magistrate when demanded, and not be held for any other purpose (no photographs. no fingerprinting, no DNA samples!).
There is no immunity in a false arrest case. Good faith is not a defense to sustain false arrest under a defective warrant.
Should the warrant state as cause to issue, a mere civil/statutory infraction or “offense” which fails to rise to the level of a capital crime the arrest is unlawful, to wit: a violation of Common Law rights.
Unlawful arrest is a crime: ASSAULT, BATTERY & TRESSPASS and may be charged under the law.
Q. Is resisting arrest an offence?
A. If the arrest is unlawful, i.e. you have not committed a breach of the peace, the attempted arrest is assault and your resistance is legitimate self-defence.
Q. Should I get a lawyer?
A. This is a question only you can answer. But consider this: all members of the BAR association (lawyers/solicitors/barristers) owe their allegiance to their professional association and to the court.
By hiring a lawyer you declare yourself not competent to handle your own affairs and you give your lawyer power-of-attorney to act on your behalf (and that is almost always for his and the court's benefit and to your detriment)
No Attorney.pdf (156.51 KB)
In Common Law jurisdictions such as Australia, New Zealand, the UK, Canada, the USA and a few others you have the inalienable right to demand a trial by a jury of your peers. If the court does not grant you what you are entitled to you do not have to grant them what they desperately need and want to get jurisdiction: consent! You do not have to deal with a de-facto court, unless of course, you want to.
Q. What is legalese?
A. Lawyers use a special kind of language, "legalese", which they employ to make their utterances sound highly erudite and profound when, in fact, they are mostly obfuscation, crap and lies. This abstruse jargon is designed to confuse and ensnare you into agreeing with them on something by making it sound like English.
Let's have a look at an example: "Do you understand the charges?" sounds like a simple and straightforward question, doesn't it? To you and me "understand" has the same meaning as "comprehend" and so you may answer "Yes, I do!" But to the court the word has a far more sinister meaning - sinister for you, that is - because it means "to stand under, to submit to". Your YES has just signalled to the court that you accept the charges (yes, you have just pleaded guilty!) and you accept the court's jurisdiction. They did not tell you that, of course. That would give the crooked game away.
Or take this example: you receive a summons or notice to appear. You are led to believe this is a court order and you have to comply. It isn't and you don't have to. In their own legal dictionary, Black's Law Dictionary, a summons is defined as an "invitation" and the word "must" means "may". How's that for sneakiness?
Do you have to know legalese to avoid their traps? No. Due process of law requires that the defendant "comprehends" the charges against him. He cannot be expected to comprehend anything if it is expressed in a language which he does not speak.
And languages do not come any weirder than legalese. Take, for instance, the word "attorney". It comes from a Latin root which means "to twist". An attorney is quite literally nothing but a twister of words and facts. For once their description of themselves is honest.
In the Harry Potter books and movies you will come across the term "parsel mouth" - a speaker of snake language. That is exactly what lawyers are, parsel-mouths - they speak with forked-tongues. Be aware of their language but do not sink to their level by trying to speak it. Compel them to speak yours!
Q. What is the function of police?
A. The only lawful function of police is to act as peace officers. That means they are empowered to interact with you, i.e. apprehend and detain you, only if they observe you committing a crime, have reason to suspect that you have committed or are about to commit a crime. Should they enforce or attempt to enforce mere statutes they are acting ultra vires, i.e. outside the scope of their powers AND - very important to know - outside their immunity. They are now liable for their unlawful conduct and can be sued. Some police officers do indeed act as lawful peace officers; I have come across some. Alas, most are as clueless about the law as their hapless victims. So you must teach them the law and assert your rights.
I always carry a pen-shaped audio-video recorder with me and a written warning. It is designed for use in Queensland, Australia but could easily be modified for other countries. This is the latest version. I have not had to use it yet.
Warning.pdf (57.21 KB)
Q. When can I be arrested?
A. Principles of Arrest Warrants
To be valid a warrant MUST be signed with a wet signature (i.e. hand-signed) by a judge or magistrate who MUST have an oath of office which is on file; there MUST be certified proof of a valid bond to indemnify the party to be taken into custody. Administrative procedural warrants are null and void ! Warrants signed by a Justice of the Peace are null and void !
A warrant MUST specifically name the party in his or her proper given birth name and the capital crime alleged to have been committed.
A warrant MUST be based on an affidavit executed under oath by the accuser, who MUST be named, stating therein FIRST HAND knowledge or FACTS which constitute a capital crime causing loss or damage to a named party.
The warrant MUST name the party to be arrested, or describe him or her sufficiently to establish identity.
Warrant and affidavit MUST be offered for inspection upon request.
The arrested person MUST NOT be hand-cuffed unless he or she has attempted to escape or unless it be necessary in order to prevent his or her doing so.
The arrested party MUST be taken before a magistrate when demanded, and not be held for any other purpose (no photographs. no fingerprinting, no DNA samples!).
There is no immunity in a false arrest case. Good faith is not a defense to sustain false arrest under a defective warrant.
Should the warrant state as cause to issue, a mere civil/statutory infraction or “offense” which fails to rise to the level of a capital crime the arrest is unlawful, to wit: a violation of Common Law rights.
Unlawful arrest is a crime: ASSAULT, BATTERY & TRESSPASS and may be charged under the law.
Q. Is resisting arrest an offence?
A. If the arrest is unlawful, i.e. you have not committed a breach of the peace, the attempted arrest is assault and your resistance is legitimate self-defence.
Q. Should I get a lawyer?
A. This is a question only you can answer. But consider this: all members of the BAR association (lawyers/solicitors/barristers) owe their allegiance to their professional association and to the court.
By hiring a lawyer you declare yourself not competent to handle your own affairs and you give your lawyer power-of-attorney to act on your behalf (and that is almost always for his and the court's benefit and to your detriment)
No Attorney.pdf (156.51 KB)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:29 pm
Posted by lizardking on 08/30/2015
Former rock and roll promoter and manager - turned - political activist, Aaron Russo, sets out to discover the truth behind the Internal Revenue Service in an eye-opening documentary filmed to find out if there is any existing law that requires Americans to pay an income tax.
What Russo claims to uncover in his nonpartisan investigation is a systematic erosion of civil liberties implemented by wealthy bankers in the early 19th century and subsequently proliferated by a government more interested in ruling the people than serving them.
Former rock and roll promoter and manager - turned - political activist, Aaron Russo, sets out to discover the truth behind the Internal Revenue Service in an eye-opening documentary filmed to find out if there is any existing law that requires Americans to pay an income tax.
What Russo claims to uncover in his nonpartisan investigation is a systematic erosion of civil liberties implemented by wealthy bankers in the early 19th century and subsequently proliferated by a government more interested in ruling the people than serving them.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:29 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/31/2015
---------oooOOOooo---------
In a previous post I mentioned "unalienable" and "inalienable". These terms are often used interchangeably but they are not the same.
"Unalienable right": a right which is incapable of being alienated, that is, it cannot be taken away from you neither can it be sold , waived or transferred. (However, you can ignore it!)
Black´s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523.
"Inalienable right": a right which cannot be taken away from you but is capable of being sold, waived or transferred with your consent.
---------oooOOOooo---------
The Kol Nidre (meaning: all vows), usually called a “prayer” or “oath”, is recited on the eve of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), the holiest day in the Jewish year. It is based on the Talmud Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b which says:
“And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare “Every vow which I make in the future, shall be null” providing that he remembers this at the time of the vow.”
The setting of the Kol Nidre – in a place of worship and in a religious context – conveys the impression that this is a religious ceremony. This is emphatically NOT the case!
The Kol Nidre is neither a prayer nor an oath but a declaration – a legal formula in Aramaic designed to render null and void all vows, oaths, promises.
The Kol Nidre is a danger to society – as is any secret oath such as a Masonic oath. No society can survive, much less flourish, if men cannot trust their fellowman. Secret oaths undermine that trust! This is all the more dangerous if those who have participated in the Kol Nidre or have sworn any kind of secret oath are in a position of power over their fellowman.
For my full article on the Kol Nidre go to:thechosenites.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/the-kol-nidre
Here is a document I designed for future use. Affidavit Kol Nidre.pdf (68.44 KB) This will make the rats - Jews and Freemasons alike - run for cover.
Excerpt from PROTOCOL No. 5 of The Learned Elders Of Zion
"We shall regulate mechanically all the actions of the political life of our subjects by new laws. These laws will withdraw one by one all the indulgences and liberties which have been permitted by the goyim, and our kingdom will be distinguished by a despotism of such magnificent proportions as to be at any moment and in every place in a position to wipe out any goyim who oppose us by deed or word."
The current Supreme Court of the United States has one Catholic and 4 ( FOUR!!!) Jewish members. The agenda of this Talmudic court - and of the "jewdicial system in general - is pretty obvious and entirely in keeping with the protocols: anti our freedom and liberties and anti everything that is decent. www.realjewnews.com/?p=1041
---------oooOOOooo---------
In a previous post I mentioned "unalienable" and "inalienable". These terms are often used interchangeably but they are not the same.
"Unalienable right": a right which is incapable of being alienated, that is, it cannot be taken away from you neither can it be sold , waived or transferred. (However, you can ignore it!)
Black´s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1523.
"Inalienable right": a right which cannot be taken away from you but is capable of being sold, waived or transferred with your consent.
---------oooOOOooo---------
The Kol Nidre (meaning: all vows), usually called a “prayer” or “oath”, is recited on the eve of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), the holiest day in the Jewish year. It is based on the Talmud Book of Nedarim, 23a-23b which says:
“And he who desires that none of his vows made during the year shall be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare “Every vow which I make in the future, shall be null” providing that he remembers this at the time of the vow.”
The setting of the Kol Nidre – in a place of worship and in a religious context – conveys the impression that this is a religious ceremony. This is emphatically NOT the case!
The Kol Nidre is neither a prayer nor an oath but a declaration – a legal formula in Aramaic designed to render null and void all vows, oaths, promises.
The Kol Nidre is a danger to society – as is any secret oath such as a Masonic oath. No society can survive, much less flourish, if men cannot trust their fellowman. Secret oaths undermine that trust! This is all the more dangerous if those who have participated in the Kol Nidre or have sworn any kind of secret oath are in a position of power over their fellowman.
For my full article on the Kol Nidre go to:thechosenites.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/the-kol-nidre
Here is a document I designed for future use. Affidavit Kol Nidre.pdf (68.44 KB) This will make the rats - Jews and Freemasons alike - run for cover.
Excerpt from PROTOCOL No. 5 of The Learned Elders Of Zion
"We shall regulate mechanically all the actions of the political life of our subjects by new laws. These laws will withdraw one by one all the indulgences and liberties which have been permitted by the goyim, and our kingdom will be distinguished by a despotism of such magnificent proportions as to be at any moment and in every place in a position to wipe out any goyim who oppose us by deed or word."
The current Supreme Court of the United States has one Catholic and 4 ( FOUR!!!) Jewish members. The agenda of this Talmudic court - and of the "jewdicial system in general - is pretty obvious and entirely in keeping with the protocols: anti our freedom and liberties and anti everything that is decent. www.realjewnews.com/?p=1041
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:30 pm
Posted by seeker on 08/31/2015
Hey Bernard, this stuff is gold. Thanks for boiling it all down so succinctly. Indeed it is a treacherous minefield we citizens are born into and a whale to wrap one's mind around, but your explanations help a lot!
Hey Bernard, this stuff is gold. Thanks for boiling it all down so succinctly. Indeed it is a treacherous minefield we citizens are born into and a whale to wrap one's mind around, but your explanations help a lot!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:31 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/31/2015
Correction:
The UCC is the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE not the Universal Commercial Code
Sorry about that. Don't know what went through my head
Correction:
The UCC is the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE not the Universal Commercial Code
Sorry about that. Don't know what went through my head
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:31 pm
Posted by Bernard on 08/31/2015
As if the current legal system wasn't bad enough there is an even worse one in the making, courtesy of the Jew.
Have you heard of the Seven Noahide Laws? No? Then it behoves you to acquaint yourself with them for if the "New World Order" aka "Jew World Order" elite
has its way they will be the future law for everybody. In fact the government of the US has already taken first tentative steps in that direction.
Here is an excerpt from the 1991 Congressional declaration concerning the Noahide Laws:
Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was
founded;
Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;
Whereas the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world;
Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March
26, 1991;
Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, `the rebbe', this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of `education and giving', the year in which we turn to
education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws; and
Whereas this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That March 26, 1991, the start of the ninetieth year of
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, leader of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, is designated as `Education Day, U.S.A.'. The President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
US Congress, HR 104 Public Law 102-14
For more on the Noahide Laws go to:www.noahide.org/
"The Institute of Noahide Code" is a UN-accredited NGO dedicated to spreading awareness of the Seven Noahide Laws, which all peoples of the world are obligated to follow.
Really? Who says so?
Jews have great plans for us, it seems! Jews believe that the Torah (Pentateuch) of Moses applies to all humanity, whether Jewish or not. How's that for arrogance?
The above-mentioned seven laws are the "pillars of human civilization", and are named the "Seven Laws of Noah" since all humans are descended from Noah. (Prove it!)
Your first impression of the Noahide laws may be quite positive.
They are:
Do not murder.
Do not steal.
Do not worship false gods.
Do not be sexually immoral.
Do not eat a limb removed from a live animal.
Do not curse God.
Set up courts and bring offenders to justice.
But as always: the devil is in the detail. Who will administer the Noahide laws? Why, the rabbis, of course!!!
They will be the ones who interpret the laws
They will be the accusers
They will be the judges
They will be the ones who carry out the punishment.
In his book "America's Real War" , for instance, Rabbi Daniel Lapin promotes the Noahide Laws, but conveniently forgets to tell his Christian readers that the
Noahide laws demand the death penalty (decapitation!) for practicing Christians because they are deemed to be idolaters because Jesus is considered a false god.
I am not a Christian myself but I will defend a Christian's right to practise his religion as vigorously as I will assert and defend my own beliefs.
That's Jewish justice for you. I'll take Common Law and the judgment of a jury of my peers any time.
As if the current legal system wasn't bad enough there is an even worse one in the making, courtesy of the Jew.
Have you heard of the Seven Noahide Laws? No? Then it behoves you to acquaint yourself with them for if the "New World Order" aka "Jew World Order" elite
has its way they will be the future law for everybody. In fact the government of the US has already taken first tentative steps in that direction.
Here is an excerpt from the 1991 Congressional declaration concerning the Noahide Laws:
Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was
founded;
Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;
Whereas the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world;
Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March
26, 1991;
Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, `the rebbe', this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of `education and giving', the year in which we turn to
education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws; and
Whereas this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That March 26, 1991, the start of the ninetieth year of
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, leader of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, is designated as `Education Day, U.S.A.'. The President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
US Congress, HR 104 Public Law 102-14
For more on the Noahide Laws go to:www.noahide.org/
"The Institute of Noahide Code" is a UN-accredited NGO dedicated to spreading awareness of the Seven Noahide Laws, which all peoples of the world are obligated to follow.
Really? Who says so?
Jews have great plans for us, it seems! Jews believe that the Torah (Pentateuch) of Moses applies to all humanity, whether Jewish or not. How's that for arrogance?
The above-mentioned seven laws are the "pillars of human civilization", and are named the "Seven Laws of Noah" since all humans are descended from Noah. (Prove it!)
Your first impression of the Noahide laws may be quite positive.
They are:
Do not murder.
Do not steal.
Do not worship false gods.
Do not be sexually immoral.
Do not eat a limb removed from a live animal.
Do not curse God.
Set up courts and bring offenders to justice.
But as always: the devil is in the detail. Who will administer the Noahide laws? Why, the rabbis, of course!!!
They will be the ones who interpret the laws
They will be the accusers
They will be the judges
They will be the ones who carry out the punishment.
In his book "America's Real War" , for instance, Rabbi Daniel Lapin promotes the Noahide Laws, but conveniently forgets to tell his Christian readers that the
Noahide laws demand the death penalty (decapitation!) for practicing Christians because they are deemed to be idolaters because Jesus is considered a false god.
I am not a Christian myself but I will defend a Christian's right to practise his religion as vigorously as I will assert and defend my own beliefs.
That's Jewish justice for you. I'll take Common Law and the judgment of a jury of my peers any time.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:34 pm
Posted by csp on 08/31/2015
Thanks for posting all this Bernard, I believe it's a great addition to exposing another portion of the NWO thatmust most are completely unaware of (or at least unaware of how it's "legally" constructed).
Here are some other resources I've found, some video, some just audio, worth the listen if the subject interests you:
Thanks for posting all this Bernard, I believe it's a great addition to exposing another portion of the NWO that
Here are some other resources I've found, some video, some just audio, worth the listen if the subject interests you:
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:36 pm
Posted by seeker on 09/01/2015
Interesting videos CSP. I watched the first one in full, about the man trying to bring his Corvette car through customs. Didn't know Australia was in the same boat as the U.S., its government having been usurped by a corporation -- registered in the U.S. no less. I knew that the U.S. was being run by a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. I'm pretty sure the states within the U.S. have also been corporatized.
Watch out for those CAPITAL LETTER spellings, I guess, is one big byword of this thread!
Made me wonder how many countries have suffered illegitimate takeover in this way.
It stands to reason that all of these national corporate entities are connected in one vast network of power. Similar to how the big banks are connected (through their board memberships) into one megabank, in effect. And we know that other industries are interconnected by directorships and stock ownership.
And so here we see another pyramid of power now more clearly, the corporate national state structure. Thanks to the astute folks in these videos and those here posting -- and now those of us reading and learning -- the ugly truths can come out, and we can begin to TAKE BACK our world.
Interesting videos CSP. I watched the first one in full, about the man trying to bring his Corvette car through customs. Didn't know Australia was in the same boat as the U.S., its government having been usurped by a corporation -- registered in the U.S. no less. I knew that the U.S. was being run by a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. I'm pretty sure the states within the U.S. have also been corporatized.
Watch out for those CAPITAL LETTER spellings, I guess, is one big byword of this thread!
Made me wonder how many countries have suffered illegitimate takeover in this way.
It stands to reason that all of these national corporate entities are connected in one vast network of power. Similar to how the big banks are connected (through their board memberships) into one megabank, in effect. And we know that other industries are interconnected by directorships and stock ownership.
And so here we see another pyramid of power now more clearly, the corporate national state structure. Thanks to the astute folks in these videos and those here posting -- and now those of us reading and learning -- the ugly truths can come out, and we can begin to TAKE BACK our world.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:37 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/01/2015
Made me wonder how many countries have suffered illegitimate takeover in this way.
Almost all of them. I have checked the status of Germany, my country of birth. It may come as a surprise to most people but according to international law the Third Reich still exists because it was never lawfully dissolved/terminated! The modern Germany known as the Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany) is a corporation. A search on Dun & Bradstreet's register of companies proves it.
Made me wonder how many countries have suffered illegitimate takeover in this way.
Almost all of them. I have checked the status of Germany, my country of birth. It may come as a surprise to most people but according to international law the Third Reich still exists because it was never lawfully dissolved/terminated! The modern Germany known as the Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany) is a corporation. A search on Dun & Bradstreet's register of companies proves it.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:38 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/01/2015
On Signatures
As explained in an earlier post we the living men and women have been fraudulently turned into the surety for government-created commercial instruments. Your birth certificate - with your name in caps - is a major player in the commerce game but it is not the only such instrument.
Almost every time you put your signature on a piece of paper it becomes a commercial instrument. For instance, whenever a cop presents you with a summons for this, that or the other alleged offence he wants you to sign for it, of course. Most people believe that this is a confirmation that you received the summons. The cop himself may believe this.
Most cops are as clueless regarding the law as their victims. They, too, are pawns in a game they do not really understand and, if they do understand, cannot extricate themselves from.
In plain English: The only lawful function of a cop is that of a peace officer. But most of the time they act as enforcers of mere statutes which, essentially turns them into hookers, roaming the highways and byways soliciting business on behalf of the government.
The signature they compel you to supply is more than just a confirmation that you received the summons. With your signature you have accepted liability for the alleged offence and you have accepted the offer to enter into a contract with the government via its agencies such as police/courts etc. etc. That piece of paper has become a commercial instrument that can be monetized by the government (in the form of a court-issued fine). Money is really all the government is interested in!
The ideas presented in the attachment VI COACTUS is NOT to be used to get out of a liability you accepted knowingly and voluntarily! It is a remedy only if you signed under duress!
----------oooOOO----------
Vi Coactus.pdf (45.39 KB)
On Signatures
As explained in an earlier post we the living men and women have been fraudulently turned into the surety for government-created commercial instruments. Your birth certificate - with your name in caps - is a major player in the commerce game but it is not the only such instrument.
Almost every time you put your signature on a piece of paper it becomes a commercial instrument. For instance, whenever a cop presents you with a summons for this, that or the other alleged offence he wants you to sign for it, of course. Most people believe that this is a confirmation that you received the summons. The cop himself may believe this.
Most cops are as clueless regarding the law as their victims. They, too, are pawns in a game they do not really understand and, if they do understand, cannot extricate themselves from.
In plain English: The only lawful function of a cop is that of a peace officer. But most of the time they act as enforcers of mere statutes which, essentially turns them into hookers, roaming the highways and byways soliciting business on behalf of the government.
The signature they compel you to supply is more than just a confirmation that you received the summons. With your signature you have accepted liability for the alleged offence and you have accepted the offer to enter into a contract with the government via its agencies such as police/courts etc. etc. That piece of paper has become a commercial instrument that can be monetized by the government (in the form of a court-issued fine). Money is really all the government is interested in!
The ideas presented in the attachment VI COACTUS is NOT to be used to get out of a liability you accepted knowingly and voluntarily! It is a remedy only if you signed under duress!
----------oooOOO----------
Vi Coactus.pdf (45.39 KB)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:39 pm
Posted by csp on 09/04/2015
Australia related, but interesting none the less:
i.imgur.com/VlIDpeU.jpg
And this talk from a bloke from the UK:
Australia related, but interesting none the less:
i.imgur.com/VlIDpeU.jpg
And this talk from a bloke from the UK:
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:42 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/04/2015
The true story below illustrates just how important signatures are. Although this is from the USA it is relevant everywhere!!!
No signature = No consent
The text is from:
THE SECRET OF THE SPECIAL MARITIME JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES EXPOSED
REVEALING THE MOST REPUGNANT FRAUD EVER PERPETRATED ON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
by Valiant Liberty
-----oooOOOooo-----
CADET CUSTER’S COURT-MARTIAL
The story of George Armstrong Custer’s court-martial is a case on point. In 1861, as a young cadet in West Point, Mr. Custer struck an officer and knocked him to the
ground. He was immediately arrested, tried before a court martial and found guilty of the offense. Custer was about to be sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
Before sentencing, Custer addressed the court and asked why the sentence was so severe, it was only a friendly fist fight. The court explained to Custer that the
sentence imposed was mandated by the Articles of War, which provided at Article 9:
Any officer or soldier who shall strike his superior officer, or draw or lift up any weapon,
or offer any violence against him, being in the execution of his office, on any pretense
whatsoever, or shall disobey any lawful command of his superior officer, shall suffer
death, or such other punishment as shall, according to the nature of his offense, be
inflicted upon him by the sentence of a court-martial. (2 Statutes at Large 259).
The court went on to explain that Custer, as a cadet had signed the Articles of War when he was admitted to the academy and was bound to the punishment. The court
felt that the punishment was suitable to the nature of the offense and quite merciful under the circumstances. Custer expressed confusion and stated that he didn’t
know anything about these Articles of War and didn’t have any recollection of signing them. This statement put the officers of the court-martial in a frenzy. They
immediately adjourned thecourt to inspect the enrollment records. Sure enough, they found that Custer had not signed the Articles of War. When the court was
reconvened, the judge ruled that the case is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Custer was then ordered to sign the Articles of War or discontinue his
education at West Point. The fate of Custer was determined by the want of a signature.
In this trial, Custer was afforded the right of allocution. Allocution is the formality of a court’s inquiry of a defendant as to whether he has any legal cause to
show why judgment should not be pronounced against him on conviction (See: Black’s 6th). In this case, Custer was able to show cause as towhy he should not be
sentenced and save himself from being imprisoned and possibly hanged. When Custer denied having signed the contract, the burden of proof was shifted because of his
rebuttal of the presumption that the contract existed. Custer was freed because, without the contract, the court-martial did not have subject matter jurisdiction to
execute the sentence. Custer may have known what he was doing by demanding the right of allocution, which is alive and well today, but I doubt it. The authors
believe he was just lucky and stumbled and bumbled into the remedy. This story is a fact of history. It is also a fact of history that Custer did not learn much from
the court-martial because he later disobeyed orders by not waiting for reinforcements at a place called Little Big Horn, a place where his luck left him.
Special Maritime Exposed.pdf (202.46 KB)
The true story below illustrates just how important signatures are. Although this is from the USA it is relevant everywhere!!!
No signature = No consent
The text is from:
THE SECRET OF THE SPECIAL MARITIME JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES EXPOSED
REVEALING THE MOST REPUGNANT FRAUD EVER PERPETRATED ON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
by Valiant Liberty
-----oooOOOooo-----
CADET CUSTER’S COURT-MARTIAL
The story of George Armstrong Custer’s court-martial is a case on point. In 1861, as a young cadet in West Point, Mr. Custer struck an officer and knocked him to the
ground. He was immediately arrested, tried before a court martial and found guilty of the offense. Custer was about to be sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
Before sentencing, Custer addressed the court and asked why the sentence was so severe, it was only a friendly fist fight. The court explained to Custer that the
sentence imposed was mandated by the Articles of War, which provided at Article 9:
Any officer or soldier who shall strike his superior officer, or draw or lift up any weapon,
or offer any violence against him, being in the execution of his office, on any pretense
whatsoever, or shall disobey any lawful command of his superior officer, shall suffer
death, or such other punishment as shall, according to the nature of his offense, be
inflicted upon him by the sentence of a court-martial. (2 Statutes at Large 259).
The court went on to explain that Custer, as a cadet had signed the Articles of War when he was admitted to the academy and was bound to the punishment. The court
felt that the punishment was suitable to the nature of the offense and quite merciful under the circumstances. Custer expressed confusion and stated that he didn’t
know anything about these Articles of War and didn’t have any recollection of signing them. This statement put the officers of the court-martial in a frenzy. They
immediately adjourned thecourt to inspect the enrollment records. Sure enough, they found that Custer had not signed the Articles of War. When the court was
reconvened, the judge ruled that the case is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Custer was then ordered to sign the Articles of War or discontinue his
education at West Point. The fate of Custer was determined by the want of a signature.
In this trial, Custer was afforded the right of allocution. Allocution is the formality of a court’s inquiry of a defendant as to whether he has any legal cause to
show why judgment should not be pronounced against him on conviction (See: Black’s 6th). In this case, Custer was able to show cause as towhy he should not be
sentenced and save himself from being imprisoned and possibly hanged. When Custer denied having signed the contract, the burden of proof was shifted because of his
rebuttal of the presumption that the contract existed. Custer was freed because, without the contract, the court-martial did not have subject matter jurisdiction to
execute the sentence. Custer may have known what he was doing by demanding the right of allocution, which is alive and well today, but I doubt it. The authors
believe he was just lucky and stumbled and bumbled into the remedy. This story is a fact of history. It is also a fact of history that Custer did not learn much from
the court-martial because he later disobeyed orders by not waiting for reinforcements at a place called Little Big Horn, a place where his luck left him.
Special Maritime Exposed.pdf (202.46 KB)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:43 pm
Posted by PaulNZ on 09/04/2015
I have seen many articles on maritime laws, uppercase letters, UCT, biblical and constitutional theories about courts but the best explanation for it all, in my opinion is given by Marc Stevens. Just ask for evidence and don't accept anything else...
Sept 4, 2015 6:19:57 GMT Bernard said:
The true story below illustrates just how important signatures are. Although this is from the USA it is relevant everywhere!!!
No signature = No consent
The text is from:
THE SECRET OF THE SPECIAL MARITIME JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES EXPOSED
REVEALING THE MOST REPUGNANT FRAUD EVER PERPETRATED ON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
by Valiant Liberty
-----oooOOOooo-----
CADET CUSTER’S COURT-MARTIAL
The story of George Armstrong Custer’s court-martial is a case on point. In 1861, as a young cadet in West Point, Mr. Custer struck an officer and knocked him to the
ground. He was immediately arrested, tried before a court martial and found guilty of the offense. Custer was about to be sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
Before
I have seen many articles on maritime laws, uppercase letters, UCT, biblical and constitutional theories about courts but the best explanation for it all, in my opinion is given by Marc Stevens. Just ask for evidence and don't accept anything else...
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:46 pm
Posted by csp on 09/04/2015
Thanks PaulNZ
This video of him talking to a NSW government information line is great:
And this one is very telling too:
Thanks PaulNZ
This video of him talking to a NSW government information line is great:
And this one is very telling too:
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:48 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/05/2015
Thanks paulnz.
Marc's mantra seems to be: "Show me the evidence that your statutes, laws, and codes apply to me....." There is more than one way to skin a cat and Marc's approach is one of those that will definitely work
Thanks paulnz.
Marc's mantra seems to be: "Show me the evidence that your statutes, laws, and codes apply to me....." There is more than one way to skin a cat and Marc's approach is one of those that will definitely work
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:53 pm
Posted by PaulNZ on 09/05/2015
peace brothers.
I find that people react similarly to jurisdiction at first to questioning globe earth. At least there are CGI's for globe arguments... statists have zero.Sept 4, 2015 23:43:45 GMT Bernard said:
Thanks paulnz
Marc's mantra seems to be: "Show me the evidence that your statutes, laws, and codes apply to me....." There is more than one way to skin a cat and Marc's approach is one of those that will definitely work
peace brothers. _________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:55 pm
Posted by csp on 09/05/2015
Brainwashed folks do it at every turn, for example my boss and veganism - he sits there are touts he knows what he's talking about and when I ask him to show me some facts to back up his opinion, he gets all defensive and dismissive and cites "common knowledge".
Yet, if I raise something and he disagrees, he tries to call me out on it, I show him the facts (usually a scientific study, or many studies) and he goes back to being defensive and dismissive on the grounds that if that were the case it WOULD BE common knowledge.
I believe the main problem is people are brainwashed into thinking they know everything (or the mainstream knows everything) and what they don't know is a known unknown (e.g. space, it's out there, we'll get there one day, they wouldn't be lying about that... would they).
To bring it back onto the subject of law though, I find this passage from Luke, 11:46 to be quite telling (and again, I'm in no way shape or form religious, I just firmly believe the allegories and parables in the bible can be deciphered and applied to our modern society):
"And he said, Woe unto you lawyers also! for ye load men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers."
The entire brainwashed legal concept and fictitious nature of government is deeply rooted in religion.
Sept 5, 2015 0:05:05 GMT PaulNZ said:
I find that people react similarly to jurisdiction at first to questioning globe earth. At least there are CGI's for globe arguments... statists have zero.
Brainwashed folks do it at every turn, for example my boss and veganism - he sits there are touts he knows what he's talking about and when I ask him to show me some facts to back up his opinion, he gets all defensive and dismissive and cites "common knowledge".
Yet, if I raise something and he disagrees, he tries to call me out on it, I show him the facts (usually a scientific study, or many studies) and he goes back to being defensive and dismissive on the grounds that if that were the case it WOULD BE common knowledge.
I believe the main problem is people are brainwashed into thinking they know everything (or the mainstream knows everything) and what they don't know is a known unknown (e.g. space, it's out there, we'll get there one day, they wouldn't be lying about that... would they).
To bring it back onto the subject of law though, I find this passage from Luke, 11:46 to be quite telling (and again, I'm in no way shape or form religious, I just firmly believe the allegories and parables in the bible can be deciphered and applied to our modern society):
"And he said, Woe unto you lawyers also! for ye load men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers."
The entire brainwashed legal concept and fictitious nature of government is deeply rooted in religion.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:56 pm
Posted by vamsi108 on 09/06/2015
Having watched many of these strawmen vs the sovereign human expose's and subsequently researching there validity you find there is some instance of success concerning the establishment of an identity and jurisdiction in legal cases, by which they effectively dismiss the claims to have no validity (or just to get rid of annoying people who don't recognize them lol), especially where there is overwhelming public support. Nevertheless alot of people get fined regardless and may eventually face warrants for there arrest to serve a punishment of jail time . Ofc It has to get to a certain point of excess to reach that stage but it does happen. Sometimes its easier just to capitulate to the pressure and save yourself the harassment .
I am not a fan of the bureaucracy that govt and corporations represent nowadays, especially because it gives unscrupulous secret societies, methods of manipulating the fabric of our existence, for there hidden agendas . One commonly overlooked theme I find as a thread through the counter oppression sovereign movement, is the allegiance to the queen as the representative of our common inalienable natural rights ? Nowadays we find a common theme of violence and killing perpetuated by nationalism and idolatry of different rulers and gods or political schisms and the queen is no stranger to the vicious violence and inhumane acts perpetrated in the name of her sovereignty. So how does she represent our inalienable sovereign rights ? Common laws in her name may reflect the common sense natural sovereignty of people yet by association with such a hypocritical regime perpetrated in her name, they actually become a farce. Which is exactly the reason why the world is susceptible to the machinations of ruthless evil men, who weave wicked webs from the shadows due to the fact of the queens authority or even the catholic churches papal bulls(hit) declarations underlying the world power structure . Will the real Leaders of humanity please stand up because this common law of the queen is just a joke to me, if it is by the authority of the so called queen.
When presented with a an unconquerable force it is better to adopt the reeds example in the face of a flood and bend to temporarily accomodate that force until it passes and then stand up after it has passed.In the Srimad Bhagavatam the current age we live in, according to the chronology of time presented therein , is the age of kali or quarrel and hypocrisy . The symptoms of this age are described as follows .
SB 12.2.1 — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Then, O King, religion, truthfulness, cleanliness, tolerance, mercy, duration of life, physical strength and memory will all diminish day by day because of the powerful influence of the Age of Kali.
SB 12.2.2 — In Kali-yuga, wealth alone will be considered the sign of a man’s good birth, proper behavior and fine qualities. And law and justice will be applied only on the basis of one’s power.
If that is statement is true and there is no justice in this age then our self empowerment doesn't lie in material prosperity but by working around the shortcomings of this age.If we can somehow transcend it by means of spiritual enlightenment or in other words by realizing that we are not these bodies but in actual fact spirit souls who can evolve our consciousness out of the quagmire this particular birth has landed us in, then that is substantially better then wasting our whole life trying to create an incorruptible system thru a completely corrupt one lol. I don't know maybe I am just a bewildered soul who cannot see the good in this age but if you think it seems to reflect quarrelsome times and daily duplicity on a world scale, maybe there is an iota of truth to the above scriptural reference . Seeking change within seems a much more intelligent proposition to me, given the particular circumstances this age presents us with . Relying on the world to change by boldly addressing it through proper lawful channels seems like a waste of time, because Common Natural law doesn't exist overall anymore, sorry to say it seems to me justice is metered out according to who can afford the lawyers or bribe the right officials or even control the judges passing judgement !. Our constitutional rights can only be established in truth when we realize the truth of our own constitutional nature as divine parts and parcels of god and since we can't seem to agree on who is god or whether he exists then that is another problem . If god doesn't exist then it is every man for himself if he does then until we work out who he is then we are still going to quarrel .If we are all god and any duality or quality is a permutation of illusion and ultimately nirvana is achieved thru the dissolution of ego, then destroying everything is just a valid method as living in harmony until death.Eventually we will all go back to the great void in the sky according to that notion no matter what. Hell according to that whatever I am typing doesnt really exist either lol.Its simply a legal fiction lol maybe if I TYPE LIKE THIS IT WILL BECOME REAL.
In summary I think understanding the system that is oppressing us is a good step in the right direction and with knowledge comes enlightenment liberation and ultimately material emancipation leading to true salvation . Keep up the good work and don't let the strawman keep you down find your own identity and fight for the cause you believe in .A good place or platform to start is understanding what we are standing on, its not illusory its not a spinning ball its a plane of existence where we can begin to connect with the universe and realize who we are, welcome to the flat earth lol.
Having watched many of these strawmen vs the sovereign human expose's and subsequently researching there validity you find there is some instance of success concerning the establishment of an identity and jurisdiction in legal cases, by which they effectively dismiss the claims to have no validity (or just to get rid of annoying people who don't recognize them lol), especially where there is overwhelming public support. Nevertheless alot of people get fined regardless and may eventually face warrants for there arrest to serve a punishment of jail time . Ofc It has to get to a certain point of excess to reach that stage but it does happen. Sometimes its easier just to capitulate to the pressure and save yourself the harassment .
I am not a fan of the bureaucracy that govt and corporations represent nowadays, especially because it gives unscrupulous secret societies, methods of manipulating the fabric of our existence, for there hidden agendas . One commonly overlooked theme I find as a thread through the counter oppression sovereign movement, is the allegiance to the queen as the representative of our common inalienable natural rights ? Nowadays we find a common theme of violence and killing perpetuated by nationalism and idolatry of different rulers and gods or political schisms and the queen is no stranger to the vicious violence and inhumane acts perpetrated in the name of her sovereignty. So how does she represent our inalienable sovereign rights ? Common laws in her name may reflect the common sense natural sovereignty of people yet by association with such a hypocritical regime perpetrated in her name, they actually become a farce. Which is exactly the reason why the world is susceptible to the machinations of ruthless evil men, who weave wicked webs from the shadows due to the fact of the queens authority or even the catholic churches papal bulls(hit) declarations underlying the world power structure . Will the real Leaders of humanity please stand up because this common law of the queen is just a joke to me, if it is by the authority of the so called queen.
When presented with a an unconquerable force it is better to adopt the reeds example in the face of a flood and bend to temporarily accomodate that force until it passes and then stand up after it has passed.In the Srimad Bhagavatam the current age we live in, according to the chronology of time presented therein , is the age of kali or quarrel and hypocrisy . The symptoms of this age are described as follows .
SB 12.2.1 — Śukadeva Gosvāmī said: Then, O King, religion, truthfulness, cleanliness, tolerance, mercy, duration of life, physical strength and memory will all diminish day by day because of the powerful influence of the Age of Kali.
SB 12.2.2 — In Kali-yuga, wealth alone will be considered the sign of a man’s good birth, proper behavior and fine qualities. And law and justice will be applied only on the basis of one’s power.
If that is statement is true and there is no justice in this age then our self empowerment doesn't lie in material prosperity but by working around the shortcomings of this age.If we can somehow transcend it by means of spiritual enlightenment or in other words by realizing that we are not these bodies but in actual fact spirit souls who can evolve our consciousness out of the quagmire this particular birth has landed us in, then that is substantially better then wasting our whole life trying to create an incorruptible system thru a completely corrupt one lol. I don't know maybe I am just a bewildered soul who cannot see the good in this age but if you think it seems to reflect quarrelsome times and daily duplicity on a world scale, maybe there is an iota of truth to the above scriptural reference . Seeking change within seems a much more intelligent proposition to me, given the particular circumstances this age presents us with . Relying on the world to change by boldly addressing it through proper lawful channels seems like a waste of time, because Common Natural law doesn't exist overall anymore, sorry to say it seems to me justice is metered out according to who can afford the lawyers or bribe the right officials or even control the judges passing judgement !. Our constitutional rights can only be established in truth when we realize the truth of our own constitutional nature as divine parts and parcels of god and since we can't seem to agree on who is god or whether he exists then that is another problem . If god doesn't exist then it is every man for himself if he does then until we work out who he is then we are still going to quarrel .If we are all god and any duality or quality is a permutation of illusion and ultimately nirvana is achieved thru the dissolution of ego, then destroying everything is just a valid method as living in harmony until death.Eventually we will all go back to the great void in the sky according to that notion no matter what. Hell according to that whatever I am typing doesnt really exist either lol.Its simply a legal fiction lol maybe if I TYPE LIKE THIS IT WILL BECOME REAL.
In summary I think understanding the system that is oppressing us is a good step in the right direction and with knowledge comes enlightenment liberation and ultimately material emancipation leading to true salvation . Keep up the good work and don't let the strawman keep you down find your own identity and fight for the cause you believe in .A good place or platform to start is understanding what we are standing on, its not illusory its not a spinning ball its a plane of existence where we can begin to connect with the universe and realize who we are, welcome to the flat earth lol.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:57 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/06/2015
I like the philosophical underpinnings of your thinking. But, with all respect, it seems to me to be a tad pessimistic and defeatist. We are ruled by psychopaths and exposing your throat to them or your underbelly is not going to help you - quite the contrary. It will increase their bloodlust. Animals have an inbuilt instinct to yield to the stronger and the stronger has an inbuilt brake on his aggression. Not our rulers, though. We need a spiritual approach, no doubt, but there is no reason why that cannot be combined with intelligently used healthy aggression. If you ever find yourself in a real struggle with a psychopath, I am sorry to say, he will eat you alive with that kind of pacifist attitude - or perhaps you will change your mind and respond in kind.
I like the philosophical underpinnings of your thinking. But, with all respect, it seems to me to be a tad pessimistic and defeatist. We are ruled by psychopaths and exposing your throat to them or your underbelly is not going to help you - quite the contrary. It will increase their bloodlust. Animals have an inbuilt instinct to yield to the stronger and the stronger has an inbuilt brake on his aggression. Not our rulers, though. We need a spiritual approach, no doubt, but there is no reason why that cannot be combined with intelligently used healthy aggression. If you ever find yourself in a real struggle with a psychopath, I am sorry to say, he will eat you alive with that kind of pacifist attitude - or perhaps you will change your mind and respond in kind.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 2:59 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/07/2015
From: COMMERCIAL LIENS: A MOST POTENT WEAPON
"Because legal and de facto immunities shield government personnel from being sued for committing crimes against the People, the public is legally disarmed, unable to aggressively sue the government or its agents and compel them to obey the Law. As a result, the public’s legal posture is fundamentally defensive: we try to duck, dodge, and hide in legal loopholes to defend ourselves against the government and the courts. We try to escape, evade, and avoid, but we seldom counterattack against our antagonists, largely because we think there are no lawful weapons to do so. However, it appears that a powerful offensive legal weapon may now have been discovered, tested, and proven for common Citizens — the commercial lien. We don’t try to sue a government official for failing to perform his lawful duties. Instead, we simply file a lien that encumbers the official’s personal property and credit rating like a ton of bricks until he voluntarily satisfies our demand to perform his lawful duty, and we, in turn, voluntarily agree to excise the lien."
---oooOOOooo---
I have personally placed Commercial Liens on two cops, one magistrate, two ex-ministers and the ex-premier of my home state of Queensland and reported them to to the Dun&Bradstreet Credit Rating Agency. While monetizing such high-profile liens is unlikely to succeed for a number of reasons liens sure as hell frighten the bastards and will lead to all kinds of highly unwelcome consequences for them.
OK! That's it! This will be my last post in this thread. I think I have said everything I wanted to say.
Commercial Liens.pdf (375.88 KB)
From: COMMERCIAL LIENS: A MOST POTENT WEAPON
"Because legal and de facto immunities shield government personnel from being sued for committing crimes against the People, the public is legally disarmed, unable to aggressively sue the government or its agents and compel them to obey the Law. As a result, the public’s legal posture is fundamentally defensive: we try to duck, dodge, and hide in legal loopholes to defend ourselves against the government and the courts. We try to escape, evade, and avoid, but we seldom counterattack against our antagonists, largely because we think there are no lawful weapons to do so. However, it appears that a powerful offensive legal weapon may now have been discovered, tested, and proven for common Citizens — the commercial lien. We don’t try to sue a government official for failing to perform his lawful duties. Instead, we simply file a lien that encumbers the official’s personal property and credit rating like a ton of bricks until he voluntarily satisfies our demand to perform his lawful duty, and we, in turn, voluntarily agree to excise the lien."
---oooOOOooo---
I have personally placed Commercial Liens on two cops, one magistrate, two ex-ministers and the ex-premier of my home state of Queensland and reported them to to the Dun&Bradstreet Credit Rating Agency. While monetizing such high-profile liens is unlikely to succeed for a number of reasons liens sure as hell frighten the bastards and will lead to all kinds of highly unwelcome consequences for them.
OK! That's it! This will be my last post in this thread. I think I have said everything I wanted to say.
Commercial Liens.pdf (375.88 KB)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Re: The Truth Of The Law
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 pm
Posted by Bernard on 09/08/2015
Allow me to clarify my remark that the previous post would be my last. What I meant to say is this: It's the last one I volunteer. However, if somebody were to ask a question I know the answer to I will respond.
It was csp who suggested to start this thread. After some initial misgivings I decided that it might be worthwhile to provide some info on matters of the law, info that comes from someone who actually walks the walk instead of talking the talk. If you check the net you will find no end of "experts" who have an answer to everything but cannot back it up. And, of course, there are also any number of disinformation agents on some forums that distract and lead astray and misinform intentionally to get you into trouble.
Without disrespect to vamsi108 who used the expression "unconquerable force" and seems to think that yielding is better than to resist I must say it is precisely this kind of passive pacifist attitude that got us into the mess we are in and keeps us there. I thought that perhaps the example of myself and my wife might be an encouragement for some. It was Solshenitsyn who said:
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.”
The Psychopaths That Be are sick, yes, but they are men and women like you and me, they are not unconquerable. They are really weak, scared and cowardly critters - which is the reason they operate in the dark employing stealth and cunning. (false-flag events are a case in point) They exist and thrive because we let them. And unless we draw a line nothing will change. There is no Jesus, there are no "space brothers", there are no saviours to help us.
What the world needs, in the words of John Lamb Lash is a warrior class. And everybody can be a warrior in his own way. The alternative is simply: slavery!
Allow me to clarify my remark that the previous post would be my last. What I meant to say is this: It's the last one I volunteer. However, if somebody were to ask a question I know the answer to I will respond.
It was csp who suggested to start this thread. After some initial misgivings I decided that it might be worthwhile to provide some info on matters of the law, info that comes from someone who actually walks the walk instead of talking the talk. If you check the net you will find no end of "experts" who have an answer to everything but cannot back it up. And, of course, there are also any number of disinformation agents on some forums that distract and lead astray and misinform intentionally to get you into trouble.
Without disrespect to vamsi108 who used the expression "unconquerable force" and seems to think that yielding is better than to resist I must say it is precisely this kind of passive pacifist attitude that got us into the mess we are in and keeps us there. I thought that perhaps the example of myself and my wife might be an encouragement for some. It was Solshenitsyn who said:
"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? After all, you knew ahead of time that those bluecaps were out at night for no good purpose. And you could be sure ahead of time that you’d be cracking the skull of a cutthroat.”
The Psychopaths That Be are sick, yes, but they are men and women like you and me, they are not unconquerable. They are really weak, scared and cowardly critters - which is the reason they operate in the dark employing stealth and cunning. (false-flag events are a case in point) They exist and thrive because we let them. And unless we draw a line nothing will change. There is no Jesus, there are no "space brothers", there are no saviours to help us.
What the world needs, in the words of John Lamb Lash is a warrior class. And everybody can be a warrior in his own way. The alternative is simply: slavery!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8347
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 36
Location : United Kingdom
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics» Flat Earth Shill Wall of Shame
» Adolf Hitler - The Truth
» 9-11 Truth
» Henry Makow Claims "Flat Earth Psy Op is the Real Conspiracy"
» Live Hangouts, Street Interviews, Natural Science and more
» Adolf Hitler - The Truth
» 9-11 Truth
» Henry Makow Claims "Flat Earth Psy Op is the Real Conspiracy"
» Live Hangouts, Street Interviews, Natural Science and more
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Other Conspiracies, Hoaxes, Myths and Lies
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum