argh! my head!!

The tri-partite power sharing consists of the house of commons, house of lords and the Crown.

Parliament & government are for ever breaking the law…

and it is raised that the handing over power to Europe is the head of state breaking the Oath to the people and subsequently an act of treason?

So that madness means that Freeman’s pledging an oath to sovereignty would be calling for the head of state to abdicate as well as dismissing the role of government?

odd, Law is a very strange thing full of misdirection and misinterpretation…

The Magna Carta was originally a common law document and this was an agreement between the king the and people. (but was his hand forced, does that make it void?)

The Magna Cater was then copied to statute.

Later the statute was repealed. But this did not affect the Common Law(?), only the Statute was repealed as Parliament could not repeal Common Law.

So am I right in thinking that the above shenanigans had no affect on Common Law rather it was just parliamentary jiggery pokery? odd.

thegreatape, I did briefly earlier in the thread, essentially it seems to go:

de facto court with a view to determine liability for the payment of council tax
no one rises to afford the court power
a layman represents the defendant, producing the defendants birth cert as “the fiction known as”
he then requests that the court produce their oath, which they fail to after three occasions
the magistrates then leave as they are unable to form a court due to not presenting their oath or the gallery rising to affirm power of the court
the laymen ends up dismissing the court and charges as he is the highest authority left in court
everyone leaves with no obvious conclusion except that the liability order was signed & dated before the hearing which didn’t even take place.

That stinks of complicit behavior & corruption to me. As for their claims I still can’t see how it stands up.

for example there’s a post on the UKPoliceOnline forum which says:

Aston, Sergeant: Honest Chap, I’ll have to disagree with you there. Parliament has the power to repeal whatever it likes, so long as the correct process is followed. That’s the whole point in a democratic system and as Pete explains is the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty.

Now from what I have read, the Freeman concept is based on law enshrined in Clause 61 Magna Carta 1215. It is certain that there is a common law concept that if this has not been expressly repealed, then it still stands today. If the freemen were to argue this point (that it has not been expressly repealed), then surely there would be a question as to the original legality of the document. Let’s not forget that the Freemen argue that the Magna Carta is a contract, between the people and the crown. The problem here is that it is a historical fact that the document was signed by King John under duress and is therefore void. The Magna Carta was re-written by Edward, his successor, and this is the document which stands in statute today. Unfortunately Article 61 had been removed from this document.

I guess the point I’m trying to make is that I’m tending to think that the Freeman concept might have less argument in law as I first thought it might have. Interesting nonetheless!

It is strange, the more I read of it the more skeptic I become, I’m not a fan of tin foil hats and conspiracies but as a concept it may just hold water?

IanMunro, have you seen this: UKPoliceOnline[/url]

you’re right, it is interesting!

there’s a big old thread over on Urban75 where a poster known as taffboy gwyrdd says:

As usual there can be a baby/bathwater thing here when entirely dismissing what some people are saying.

The stuff about your name in block capitals being a different legal entity and police officers being in the realm of contract law once they know your name and address is all pretty true is it not?

The “Freeman of the Land” concept at least invites us to examine what our laws are and what legitimacy they do and dont have.

which is a point I’m trying to make, I wonder if he’s ever been to Chester of an evening? 😀

Neither, they are both full of holes.

The more I read about this Freeman movement though the more I’m inclined to think its closer to a scam designed to sell seminars than a genuine reality.

All the evidence I can find seems to fall apart under closer examination, from what I’ve read it could end up dropping less astute people into some very hot water!

Still like I said, its interesting.

oh dear, it appears that its lawful to kill a Welshman within Chester’s city walls during the hours of darkness.

Jugglers, unicyclers and such fine, but I’m afraid I have to draw the line at killing Welshmen in Chester!

Ernie you know full well that I despise Jugglers, unicyclers and other folkland fools! witches the lot of em!

so in essence:

that we are all the property of the state (from registration of birth) and subject to ‘Admiralty’ law, but can declare ourselves free from state interference (or assistance) and be subject only to ‘Common’ law.

hmmm, its odd that this actually does happen, people do this.

I’m interested not for any tax or debt avoidance or any other form of monetary gain.

Rather because I feel that our oligarchy “elect”, and those who have learnt to play the system to their gain, Appear to be hell bent on eroding natural liberties and turning this country into some god awful privatized company structure where your life is determined by your corporate agency credit report and laws are drawn up behind closed doors, voted on by representatives who have no legal obligation to represent their electorate once in power, etc etc etc

Just look at this sham of a government we’ve had for the past few years, hell Gordon was in power, unelected and unwanted for how long?

haha, so far I’ve found David Ike, Gypsies, Freemasons and all manner of tin foilists involved in this, it really is one of the strangest things I’ve read about.

It does seem though that amongst the crazies there could actually be something of merit, something that could be used to defend civil liberty and call this government to task.

I’m a great believer in Thomas Jeffersons statement:

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”

Well, DvergarAccident appears to have boldly missed the point entirely, preoccupying himself with an ill conceived belief that a common law had been breached by the recording of proceedings within what was essentially a community hall with magistrates unable to call a court.

It appears to me that as the de-facto court was not afforded any authority, given that none of the public gallery arose to recognize the authority and the magistrates failed repeatedly to present their oath, hence the authority of the court was deferred to Layman and the case dismissed.

Consider the point that this is not about the (arguably) trivial matter of recording video within a public building, rather its interesting to learn that there is:

a) A Constitution that defends the freedom of English men and women.

b) The “Law of the Sea” is what is commonly perceived as “the law” when in actual fact its a manipulation of rights based upon subterfuge, propaganda and common ignorance of Common Law and its freedoms as afforded as birth right.

c) Elfin thinks I have floppy hair.

I’m not advocating the renouncement of the perceived judicial system, nor the avoidance of taxation or the requirement to hold a license to drive a motor vehicle/watch television. Hell I even think that the E.U. actually does a good job sometimes!

I’m just bringing this to the forum because its an interesting point; that laid down in the English constitution, the Magna Carta (and other sources) protects the birth right & liberty of subjects of the crown. I think that is at least worthy of a little understanding.

Even if it is just that it means that you can ride on byways with no fear of the law of the sea being used against you! (its a free country after all!)

As I understand it being a Freeman on the land also doesn’t mean that you reject society or contributing to the up keep of public services, there is no reason why one wouldn’t donate to the emergency services or such like, no reason at all.

and as for the floppy hair jibe…

Not so, you little hair fascist!

Entertaining none the less, what was that thing Elf? something about losing when stooping to insulting someone? Did I once say I wasn’t intending to pay my council tax? simply offering a topic for discussion.

Perhaps you should try bran flakes for breakfast? Thats not intended as an insult, its purely a dietary suggestion.

😀

edit: I’m off to bed now, work in the mornin’

pure or innocent probably wouldn’t be the first words to describe me,

as I’m sure anyone that knows me would no doubt confirm!

but I’ve always had a TV License, and my council tax is paid up to date! (I’ve been royally screwed over by those c**ts in the past)

careful with that bit of rope there Elif 😀

are you on crack?

watch it gimp, its good for your crazy little brain!

From what I loosely gather; a Freeman renounces the statue of a de-facto court, only recognizing a de jeur court, the magistrates will not produce their Oath as they are purely there to issue a summary judgement for profit, for the Council (a company) and themselves the commercial court. For heavens sake watch the bloody video Elfin!

all aboard the good ship Albion!

Zulu is 100% correct, But why wasn’t the court in session? why did the magistrates leave?

Tropicana orange & mango.

That is a court de-facto, its a corporate court (the corporation referred to is The Ministry of Justice Ltd.)

The “Law” in an arse, I’m on page 5 of this, Elfin you’re gonna love this!!

edited: down load the Bailiff pack and read document: 4A_CTAX_BAILIFPACK_NOUICOR_Fee_Schedule.doc

thats available for download on the front page that linked to above, there is a LOT more.

This isn’t a prank or a troll, this is the constitutional right of any English man or woman.

Looks like the Crown does have a place after all!

right!

THATS IT!

/flounceon

yer

Translation: you, you are, your’s

wiked

being of the “now”, exciting, stimulating, new, “cool”

get

Get (animal), the offspring of an animal
Get (conflict), legal issues around the Jewish divorce procedure
Get (divorce document), the Jewish divorce procedure

um

uncertainty, them, those or used to convey confusion or thought

off?

remove, finish, leave,

lol

laugh out loud

x

minimum affection

make of that what you will…

oh god, its worse than I’d imagined possible.

call the cops.

It could be some kids face next time.

looks dangerous, wear a helmet.

120 miles a day commute. **** that for a game of soldiers x2!!!

Bus chase!

I’d like to give that a go, I’ve a great aunt buried at its feet.

I think you’ll find that “they” look upon “us” with pity, paternal love, benevolence, distrust and a little envy.

Syria & Iran are making hay…

pack it all in and go to live on a farm with a religious sect?

I was particularly impressed with Stainsberrys kiddies clothes a t-shirt from which said “I hate school”

what Ambrose says is true, I was there.

heh heh

Inspired! 😀

I like it. I saw them at Hammersmith Apollo, they were astonishingly good.

I knew I should have gone with the animal porn idea.

ok, thats the categories tidied up a bit, any better?

I’m going to go through the categories and tidy them up so that the menus work a bit better, that should help things 🙂

cheers Molgrips 😉