Hello and thanks for reading this weeks Ucadia blog for Wednesday 28th August 2013 entitled: Proof that governments continue war against their own people and If you are not a government agent then you are a terrorist. My apology there is no audio this week, but because of limited time it was impossible to record.
If you have been listening to the last few Ucadia blogs then you will know that for the past four weeks beginning on Wednesday the 31st of July (2013), I have been trying to distill what appears an intimidating and voluminous amount of information associated with the Ucadia model and websites into a distinct and clear set of concepts, beginning with the recent legal pronouncement by Pope Francis called a Motu Priorio and why Rule of Law means no one is above the law.
I will come back to the series of articles a little later in this chat, but the reason I raise it now is that with all my abilities, thought, skill and effort, I have tried to give anyone and everyone who takes the time to read these blogs or listen to these audios a clear step by step overview of why real law is never occult, why if judges or magistrates or politicians deny fair hearing, or due process then there is no justice and above all if the laws are secretive, if they are selective, if certain people claim immunity but everyone else is fair game, then there is no evidence of the golden rule in place and no one can honesty and sensibly argue there is any kind of rule of law in that community, or state or nation.
There is so much disinformation, so much white noise, so many false and half false claims, that I realize for many that just getting your bearings on what is versus what is not – before you even begin to consider historical information on law, or anything else can be a massive undertaking. That is not even taking into consideration that the vast majority of people who know something is wrong, who know what they are told through the media doesn’t add up still choose to sit on the sidelines, or bury their head in the sand, hoping that like some bad dream it will all go away.
In any event, three things happened today and in the past week since we last spoke, which is why I chose the topic Proof that governments continues war against their own people and If you are not a government agent then you are a terrorist. (1) The first is that extraordinary inspirational speech by Dr Martin Luther King Jr in front of 200,000 people spoken from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC on 28th August 1963; (2) The second was the horrendous evidence telegraphed around the world the murdering innocent women and children through the use of chemical weapons midst the awful civil war in Syria; and (3) The third is a concerted campaign by the infamous anti Semitic and civil hate promoters known as Anti-Defamation League through sympathetic media in the United States and Canada against the Sovereign Citizen movement and trying to use extreme one off cases as the argument that anyone who seeks to restore rule of law or justice are considered by the government to be terrorists.
So how did I come to frame the topic this week concerning these three events? Simply because these events, two well known around the world and historic and the third also significant in terms of its long term historic consequences calls us all to question where we stand in the face of oppression and barbarity? No one can claim merely to be a spectator in history any more. Either you are a willing participant, a supporter of the status quo and a government agent as the line says in the film trilogy The Matrix, or you are standing for change, for restoration of law, for justice, and so along the way may be branded a great many things including but not limited to be accused of being a terrorist, or a lunatic, or a liar, or a criminal or any manner of falsities by the system.
The three events I mentioned and the topic this weeks calls to question each and every one of us, and everyone who listens to these blogs and everyone with whom you speak – are you prepared to take a stand against the barbarity and cruelty we continue to see at the hands of global banks out of control and of political leaders and officials acting with seeming impunity or are you so cowardly, so fearful, to run away and choose then to be a silent supporter of evil?
There is no middle ground anymore, there is no more excuse like I didn’t know, or I couldn’t. or I was only following orders or for the sake of my family, or I was scared, or any other pathetic argument. Nor do the excuses that I did not have time, or I found it too hard or complicate wash up as excuses for not reading, for not being discerning and abandoning those innate skills each of us possess in order to function and survive.
As I said last week, what are you going to do now? It is your choice. The time for being passive and running away is over.
So lets start then with the first event and its relevance to the topic tonight.
I have a Dream
If you haven’t read or listened to the full speech of Dr Martin Luther King Jr. from 50 years ago, I urge people on this 50th anniversary of this historic moment to re-read the speech. In truth, the first two thirds of the speech is largely pedestrian, predictable, the same message, highlighting negatives and a few facts a few references and the classic imagery of emancipation and the long suffering history towards equality.
People that day were also aware the speech was pedestrian and not firing to the crowd. You can hear the Martin Luther King Jr actually losing the crowd by the noticeable increase in background murmur as some of the 200,000 people presumably started to chat among themselves than listen to a whole bunch of rhetoric. Then suddenly, inspirationally, and I might suggested by divine intervention, the Famous gospel singer Mahalia Jackson shouted over a crowd of 200,000 to Martin Luther King Jr “Tell them about the dream, Martin!”
She must have been a formidable woman. I mean, you can hear her voice clear as day on the audio and old television footage of the event. To the credit of Martin Luther King Jr, his heart instantly got the message his head was fighting against. He trusted in his faith in divine inspiration, he trusted if he just opened his mouth and spoke honestly then the words that needed to be said would be said. So he did and this is the portion that we all remember. The last 1/3rd of the speech.
And in honor of that man who had the courage to trust in the Divine and his calling, I would like to read out the four phrases he spoke just after that fateful intervention by Mahalia Jackson to him to speak of the dream.
"I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.”
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Apart from the passion, the spontaneous inspiration through the message, what did Dr King also transmit that we have been discussing as so fundamental? The first thing he did was announce the fundamental position of the golden rule- that all men and women are equal under the law. Here, he was quoting from that great and historic work the United States Declaration of Independence.
Dr King then went on to describe examples of men and women being treated equally under the golden rule and rule of law, the application of Justice. These three follow up phrases are about Justice under the Rule of Law.
How incredible is that? One of the most inspirational speeches of the 20th Century, celebrated 50 years ago today reinforces exactly the points concerning what is Rule of Law and what is true Justice in language that most people can comprehend.
Of course at the time, the United States was witnessing openly corrupt examples of tyranny and injustice in many states. While Dr King mentioned earlier in his speech the Declaration of Independence and the Emancipation Proclamation by President Abraham Lincoln on 1st January 1863, in hindsight he should have considered reciting the whole paragraph from which he spontaneously quoted as a testament to the challenge good men and women must face if evil is to be defeated. For this reason and again in honor of the speech of Dr Martin Luther King, I ask for your indulgence while I recite some of the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence to which Dr King referred and the document to which all public officials including the President of the United States, all members of Cabinet, all Justices of the Supreme Court, all generals, all department heads, all members of the armed services and all police and law enforcement officials claim in public they both subscribe and protect:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."
Fifty years ago in the face of criminal politicians, brutal sheriffs and police commissioners and insufferable torment against one group of society, Dr King did not then seek to call upon people to riot, or take up arms or change the form of government. To Dr King, as for many tens if not hundreds of millions of Americans, the United States Constitution originally formed by a confederation of thirteen states and enacted by 1787 is both a sacred instrument and one that remains perfectly suited to the needs of the modern world, if only those entrusted to protected it, actually follow its articles.
So instead, Dr King called people to take a stand, to imagine a dream of a new world in honor of rule of law and real justice. To use one’s own knowledge and character as the catalyst for change much like many of the greatest teachers of history have shown against seemingly impossible odds.
At the end of the day, people remember the speech of Dr Martin Luther King Jr. They They feel it and it resonates truth that one man, who stands for the law in honor and humility can make a difference even against seemingly insurmountable odds.
Syria and the abandonment of any pretense of law
This brings me to the second even that took place since we spoke last week regarding Syria and the harrowing and traumatic pictures of innocent women and children dying from neurotoxin poisoning.
In Syria, we see what happens when there is a complete break down in law and order during a Civil War and a government that completely abandons any pretense or fake attempt for rule of law and those instruments upon which it claims authority from the people.
All governments, no matter how autocratic and tyrannical reply upon key instruments to claim their authority with the most important being a constitution. The term constitution comes from two ancient Latin terms con+statuo which means literally “with (consent) I establish/erect” or reference to a founding instruments formed by an assembly of founders through mutual consent and agreement to be bound by it. Depending upon its formation and formality, a Constitution may be as formal as a Deed creating a Testamentary Trust and Estate or less formally as an agreement by which certain parties agree to perform and help found a city, or state or country.
Similar to any deed or agreement, Constitutions can be suspended, altered and even dissolved, depending upon the position of the party undertaking the action and the nature of the instrument. In the case of Syria, there have been three different constitutions since 1950 with the second in 1973 and the third as recent as 2012. However, the 1973 version of the Constitution did not provide for free or fair elections and centered all power with the Ba’ath Party. The 2012 Constitution was hastily written and seeks to imply elections and limitation of terms, but without clear and definitive mechanisms.
The most serious is when the founders of a Constitution fail to continue to obey and follow the rules of the Constitution causing a catastrophic breach of trust and the collapse of the Constitution. This is precisely what has happened in Syria where the Assad family and its supporters founded the latest Constitution and then proceeded not to follow the law in respecting the rights of its own people.
In Syria we see what happens when a regime that is obsessed in power for nothing else but power itself is exposed, finding itself cornered and then uses everything within its means, including chemical weapons to either defend what little it has less, or destroy everything as a final act of evil.
The problem for this case of mass murder by chemical weapons is that it happened when UN Inspectors were in Damascus and within 15 minutes drive of their hotel. So, legitimately there are many people questioning whether the attack was by the Assad regime or a deliberate attempt by the rebels to invoke international attacks against the Assad regime. What is certain is that both sides are capable of attrocities in the name of their cause and the Assad regime have plenty of mentally insane people on their side capable of doing such an act. The public disclosure by the US Defense Department of intercepted and desperate calls within the Syrian military to chemical bases does more to indicate a false flag attack more than a deliberate act by the regime. In any event, we may never properly know.
Sadly this is not the first time, nor may it possibly be the last when ruthless dictators and their supporters are willing to kill any man, woman or child or destroy anything and everything to keep power. Yet in a world that claims international law exists and that there are basic principles of justice, such behaviour must be considered utterly unacceptable and so the international community must act.
Like the break up of Yugoslavia, like the internal struggles in post war Iraq, Syria is a potent and brutal reminder of what happens when constitutional law collapses and any resemblance of the rule of law and justice is completely abandoned.
Of course, the United States itself suffered a terrible, bloody, horrific and costly Civil War from 1861 to 1865 followed by a prolonged period of punitive and inhumane actions from 1865 to well into the 1870s that saw the losing states lose any resemblance of suffrage, rights, materials, food or basic civilized behaviour.
More than 600,000 people died during the fighting of the United States Civil War yet more than double that number died in south in the ten years that followed from starvation, disease and maltreatment by the Washington government.
In any event, the United States Constitution as enacted from 1787 ceased to exist as a lawful, legal, enforceable or in effect instrument from March 11th 1861 upon the signatures of the states of Georgia and South Carolina along with five other states to the Constitution of the Confederate States of America. Just in case this immutable and undeniable fact didn’t register, let me say it a different way- the original United States Constitution ceased to exist, one two of the original thirteen colonies that founded it, abjured it and then pledged themselves to form a new government and Constitution under the confederacy.
In historic legal terms, that is about as severe a breach as is possible. To claim then that the United States Constitution did not cease to have any legal and lawful effect after the 11 March 1861 then becomes a bit like the Monty Python “dead parrot” joke sketch – ultimately futile. The constitution has no legal enforcement other than as a wonderful historic document and the fact that successive regimes choose to pretend it still works. This of course is the source of confusion and I will explain the anomaly of why it served the regime that assumed power to pretend the Constitution could carry on as if nothing happened, even after such a fatal catastrophe as the Confederate Constitution.
In the meantime, so it is as clear as clear can be, let me put the argument of the US Constitution another way. Let say you get married and exchange vows. Then you divorce, similar to abjure as the states of Georgia and South Carolina did in 1861 along with other states. Then you get re-married. So providing you follow the steps, please tell me how on earth you could argue the divorce never happened, the second marriage never happened and the first marriage is still operating? That’s the analogy for the US Constitution. It wasn’t just a misunderstanding, or a separation, the states got divorced and re-married. So the original marriage of 1787 is dead, dead, dead and has been dead for well over 100 years.
Now, in case you think this is an isolated example of members of the Inner and Middle Temple of London and the Bank of London and the former Bank of Amsterdam which became the Bank of New York and later the Federal Reserve Bank of New York being involved in some kinds of far out conspiracy, there is a much older example in the form of the United Kingdom itself.
Look at any site referring to law and you see the claim that the United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy. OK, so which instrument specifically is the constitution? This is where the road starts to get rocky. First, you will be directed to the argument that there is no single defining document called a constitution but that the great bulk of statutes and laws of the realm beginning with the Magna Carta of 1214 then the Bill of Rights of 1688 and so on represent collectively the constitution. I have read the collective statutes from 1216 to the 1970s and I can tell you that in my life there are few more farcical and absurd and blatant lies.
First off on the question of the Magna Chartas ceased to be followed from the time of Henry VIII onwards. Secondly, England had a civil war in the 17th Century rendering all law prior to such date, null and void. Third, the Secession Act of 1701 and 1707 made the privy council as the government a perpetual and immortal body above the monarch. There is no constitution in the United Kingdom, other than a corporate franchise granted to the Bank of England to pretend to be the Crown as the Crown Corporation from 1801 onwards. There is your template and model for what then happened in the United States through the Bank of New York funding the north.
So why the charade? Well it is easy. Use the illusion there is rule of law and justice by demanding all officers of the military regime follow the constitution as "due process" or the "appearance of justice" - but if ever threatened by real law, simply act as the tyrants you really are. Brilliant! And why power has been so successful for the past 150+ years for these few banking families of Wall Street and London.
Sovereign Citizens as enemies of the Government
The third event since last week was the launch of a new dedicated campaign across newspapers, television programs, blogs and syndicated online new sites that a handful of con artists, criminals and mentally unstable people represent the vast majority of people who believe something is not right when the government ignores the will of the people such as the United Kingdom, Canada and especially the United States and that anyone who seeks to expand their knowledge of the truth is to be labeled a sovereign citizen and a terrorist.
The campaign seems to have been started around August 22nd by the writer Ken Ritter who has worked for the Times of Israel and the Associated Press. He published a hit piece about two anti-government extremists arrested in Las Vegas on the allegations that they planned to kidnap and execute police officers. A Las Vegas lieutenant is quoted as making the connection to what is called the “sovereign citizen philosophy” and that these people watched and/or read some material, of which it is not clear what it was and who wrote it.
In any event, the tenuous connection made by the spin piece was to imply that these people in Las Vegas by merely reading and viewing material from as yet unnamed sources magically became somehow the representatives of the truth movement and therefore anyone who studies history and the law is a terrorist and a criminal.
Now, should dangerous people be arrested, yes. Should people obey fundamental rules of law and order- absolutely yes as we stated clearly last week as these are the fundamental laws that have stood as the pillars of civilized decency for every city, state and empire for thousands of years. But should people be allowed to be labeled by logical fallacy, and straight out lies simply through guilt by association? No. It is like saying anyone found to have a Bible in their home who has committed a crime is a dangerous Bible Believer and all Bible Believers are terrorists, or that anyone who has an American flag in their home is as Flag Enthusiast and all Flag Enthusiasts are bad.
Let me put the concept of sovereign citizen even clearer: If the golden rule is honored by a government, then all are equal under the law, therefore ALL PEOPLE ARE SOVEREIGN AND ALL PEOPLE ARE SOVEREIGN CITIZENS. So the only group that can logically be threatened by the golden rule and the Rule of Law and Sovereign Citizens are tyrants and moneylenders!
How stupid is the Anti-Defamation League and the banks? How utterly facile and insane is such pathetic attempts to use the term Sovereign Citizen and make it bad ? Unfortunately, the government spokesperson network doesn’t think, doesn’t have a conscience and has duly published it far and wide, so now the words sovereign citizen are back in the public mind.
Yet the Anti-Defamation league didn’t stop there, a follow up piece to Ken Ritter was then published by ADL sympathizer Erica Goode a couple of days later on painting the behaviour of a few con artists and government agents themselves as a general reflection of the broader truth movement and those who choose to identify themselves as sovereign, or Sovereign citizens.
Now the label Sovereign Citizens, which itself is the ultimate oxymoron, is the brainchild of the Wall Street Funded mouthpiece known as the Anti Defamation League which seeks (in part) to hunt down and repudiate any attempt to expose those people who have wrecked the economy and the world, most recently in 2009 to account. I am referring to all those Wall Street Bankers responsible for the Global Financial Crash which destroyed the lives of billions of innocent people of which none, I repeat none of these bankers have been charged or gone to prison.
Before we get to the specifics of the hit piece by Erica Goode on August 23 (2013) and the New York Times, lets just recap something pretty fundamental regarding sovereignty in the United States. Article 1, Section 9 (Limits on Congress) of the defunct United States Constitution
“No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.”
To put this plainly, by the constitution, there is forbidden to be any class structure and no one may claim a title of nobility such as Your Honor, full stop. Why? Because all citizens are sovereign. Or to put it using the term invented by the Anti Defamation league, all the people of the United States of America are effectively sovereign citizens.
Now the importance of citizens being considered sovereign or “sovereign citizens” was so important not only to the founding fathers but those that followed that after the attack against Washington funded by the Bank of England in 1812, the Congress and all the states passed a 13th Amendment to make clear no one could function as a foreign agent and hold a position or office.
The Original Thirteenth Article of Amendment To The Constitution For The United States as ratified by all states prior to 1819:
"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."
In other words, this double reinforcement of Article 1, Section 9 made it crystal clear no one could work for a foreign power or corporation and obtain any position of authority as all citizens of the United States are to be considered sovereign, or simply sovereign citizens. It makes the importance of recognizing all the people of the United States as truly sovereign citizens absolutely fundamental and one of the most important historic elements to the founding of the United States.
It also meant that if any foreign power was to take control of the United States then it would have to architect the conditions whereby the original 13 colonies would find themselves at war with each other and destroy the original Constitution. The task wasn’t easy for them. But after 50 years and unlimited funds, the banking families of Wall Street finally succeeded through the Civil War.
Now before we go on, and before people think this is far fetched, despite the best attempts by the US government to seize and destroy every last copy in reference to the 13th Amendment, there exists today still some several thousand original books verifiable as being in print prior to 1876 containing the true and original 13th amendment and verifiable scans, copies of original books in the hundreds of thousands of the true 13th amendment, So anyone who acts as a government spokesperson and says it is all a conspiracy, should at least declare they are a government agent or at least a mindless lunatic for ignoring the overwhelming evidence.
Why would the Anti-Defamation League be so stupid to continue to use a label that so clearly draws attention to the United States Constitution? Why not paint people as something like Freedom Fanatics or Paper Terrorists? I mean either of these labels are far better for propaganda in the long term than sovereign citizens and they don’t risk encouraging people to dig into history. It doesn’t make sense. It is almost like, some lazy group of people sat around and came up with a label and they simply won’t update or change their positioning.
But people are waking up, they are learning and they are seeing the truth for themselves. That the government has no authority but the use of propaganda, fear and force. That the government has openly and clearly declared war on the people and that the people are indeed are deciding to take a stand.
Where are you? Are you someone prepared to stand peacefully, competently for rule of law and true justice, or are you just another government agent in the matrix?
To all who choose wisely, who choose to help and support, Thank you.
Until next week, please be safe, be well. Cheers Frank
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Thursday, August 22, 2013
True Law is never Occult – Ending the deliberate distractions, confusions and frauds
_________________________________________________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here (61 min 21 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________
Law is necessarily complex, right? I mean television, movies, private bar guild members and some remedy gurus are insistent that a man or woman of reasonable intelligence has no way of absorbing the complexities and secrets of the law that is supposed to run our society without their help. But is that really true?
Is true law always so complex, so secretive, so esoteric and difficult to comprehend that a man or woman of reasonable intelligence has no hope of grasping it? For example, do you find the Golden Rule – the highest law that is found in almost every society throughout every period of civilization difficult to comprehend? What is so complex with the idea that no one is above the law? Why then the lie that such key law is complex?
As we said three weeks ago on the Ucadia blog, if the Golden Rule does not exist then the law is not equal for all people and there is no rule of law. Full stop. Period. No ifs or buts. In other words, where there is no equality of law, you live under the rule of tyrants, where might is right, and rule by force and fear. So why the unrelenting campaign then by the private bar guilds and certain “remedy gurus” to maintain the claim that the law is too complex for people of average intelligence to comprehend?
Or what about the truth that if the Golden Rule does not exist, then there is no Rule of Law? Is that a complex idea? Or how about the concept that Justice does not exist nor can ever exist within a community, a city, a state or any association of people unless the Rule of Law is applied strictly according to the Golden Rule? Do you find this concept impossible to perceive?
Two weeks ago we said clearly that if in the adjudication of law there is no fairness, no equal rights, no good faith, no clean hands at arms length and no presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, then there is no justice. None, zero and you are living under tyranny and injustice.
Acting in good faith, not having a vested interest in the matter so there is no prejudice and enabling fairness of due process according to the rules of judging a matter – these are not difficult concepts, so why the obsessive insistence by both private bar guild members and their “truth guru” associates that the law is so complex that you have no hope of learning it without paying them and having them guide you?
Yes, the private bar guilds and their corporate friends are trying to run the United States via something like 60 million laws, the United Kingdom by half that figure and countries like Australia, France, Germany and the rest of the world by some millions of laws. But are these true laws? Or an enormous and complex fraud? Why the never ending insistence to dive down yet another “rabbit hole” on a quest to find the “magic key” or the “secret formula” that will unlock everything?
Tonight, we will be discussing the fact that True Law is never, ever occult. That it is high time the deliberate distractions, disinfo, confusion and frauds are ended once and for all. I will be proving that you can and should be able to comprehend all the key elements of true law. That true law is logical, sensible, historical, ethical and moral.
In fact, when we talk a bit more about the history of law, then you will see that for literally thousands of years, even up to just 500 years ago, the fundamental framework of law was not only simple, it was comprehended by virtually everyone in a community. It was not only published, it was easily accessible in public forums whether it be the center of a city and the Codes of Hammurabi and subsequent leaders of society, or the 12 Tablets of Rome within the Forum or the sacred Instatuti of Carolingian Sacre Loi or (Sacred Law) which was printed and present at the front of every church and public venue. Until 500 years ago, law was accessible, law was known by the people, protected by the people and was definitely not occult, confusing or prohibitively complex. That was until the invention of the private law guilds that came to England from Italy.
In fact, we will discuss the overwhelming evidence that not only are the private bar guilds directly responsible for the ridiculous and absurd explosion of claimed laws to the point there are not just thousands but millions of them; the system they set up was not simply to hijack the law but to create a giant false flag operation whereby people would become trapped in discussing and arguing the irrelevant while conceding jurisdiction and major points of law.
Tonight, I want to share with you some practical applications of this knowledge and the information shared in past blogs and audios in the hope that some of this, most of this cuts through the blizzard and screams of people falsely claiming “the system is not broken, you are just doing it wrong” or “click your heals this way, fill in the form that way and make sure you twirl and say the magic phrase” and other equivalent absurdities littering the internet and causing people immense hardship by following deliberate and clearly false claims.
That is why we are going to talk about dealing with matters and the paperwork when summonsed to court, the truth about cestui que vie trusts and all other claimed hidden trusts and the power of proper paperwork when going to court.
Tonight, above all I hope and pray that at least some semblance of the essence of law can be restored. That a line can be drawn so that if anyone has an issue, a problem or a matter that finally, there can be some clarity in moving forward; and that this insanity will stop that allows serial criminals and murderers to be let out into the community to kill, or rape or torture again, while good and honest people have their lives destroyed by private commercial courts on one mistake. That those few good judges and magistrates and politicians and attorneys have the courage to stand up against their sociopathic colleagues and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
So before we get to some practical applications, lets review three key facts that prove without a shadow of any doubt that True Law is never Occult or complex or confusing.
Fact #1 – Laws have remained relatively stable for thousands of years until the last 500 years
A few weeks ago, when discussing the Rule of Law, I quoted a passage of ancient law from Yapa, the law of the indigenous first peoples of Australia being Book 5, the First Law and First Law of Truth. I would like to recite this again as an excellent summation of the most common features of law over the past few thousand years until the unfortunate emergence of the private law guilds in the Italian cities of Florence, Pisa and Venice and then onto London and the rest of the world. Let me recite these verses of Yapa again:
1 This be the First Law of Truth:
2 There is, there was, there has only ever been One Law;
3 All law is equal that no one is above it;
4 All law is measured that all may learn and know it;
5 All law is standard that it may always be applied the same.
6 A law be a rule given by divine instruction;
7 This being the highest law.
8 No lesser law may contradict it.
9 A law be an edict, given by a great council of wise elders and agreed by all tribes;
10 This being the second highest law.
11 No lesser law may contradict it.
12 A law be custom and ceremony over time.
13 This being the third highest law.
14 A rule that is secret cannot be a law;
15 A rule that is unclear in meaning cannot be a law.
16 A rule that cannot be applied cannot be a law.
17 A rule may be written by sign or symbol,
18 But only when spoken at a place of law is it law.
19 A law may be spoken,
20 But only when it is comprehended and agreed is it justice.
21 All people of the same community,
22 Are subject to the same rule of law.
23 All men and women of a community,
24 Are bound to live by the rule of law of the community.
25 No one may be accused except by rule of law.
26 No one may be punished except by rule of law.
27 Where there is no justice, there is no law.
28 Where there is no honor, there is no law.
29 A man or woman who are not taught how to comprehend a law,
30 Cannot be bound by it.
31 Any law that is against such truth cannot be law.
How simple and concise is that? It expresses clearly what a law is, what a law is not, the essence of the golden rule and what constitutes justice or injustice.
Before we go much further, let us also be clear by what we mean with the word occult? The word occult comes from the Latin word occulto meaning “to hide, to obscure or to keep secret”. So when we say “true law is never occult” we mean “true law is never hidden, secret or deliberately confusing”.
Funnily enough, the clarity and simplicity of law is precisely what we see in virtually all ancient texts of law until the emergence of the secretive law guilds in Florence and Pisa at the start of the 13th Century called the Arte dei Guidici e Notai or in English The Art of Judges and Notaries that later evolved into the private bar guilds of today that still hold the courts and society hostage. It is also why most law schools do not teach the history of law because it raises too many questions to young mind before they are indoctrinated into being obedient servants of the private bar guilds.
For example, the Code of Ur-Nammu from around 2100 BCE is claimed to be one of the oldest known examples of law codes still surviving. Promulgated by King Ur-Nammu across a federation of Sumerian cities of Mesopotamia at the time, the reconstructed tablets indicate a system of some 60 laws base around the logical cause and effect formula of IF (this transgression) THEN (this punishment). For example, Rule No #1 “If a man commits a murder, that man must be killed”; or Rule No # 6 “If a man violates the right of another and deflowers the virgin wife of a young man, they shall kill that male”.
Far from being a system of law that exploded into thousands of laws, the clarity, simplicity and certainty of such law appears to have stood the test of time and been in existence right up to the time of the Babylonian empire some 400 years later.
The Code of Hammurabi written in 1772 BCE listing 282 detailed laws all on the surface of one stone, placed at the centre of major cities of the Babylonian empire, so all could see the laws. It was public notice. But in case you think such laws were simple, the Code of Hammurabi in [facts] reflects many of the laws we consider essential to modern society today such as contract law, justice, property law, household and family relationships inheritance, divorce and even rules against deviant sexual behaviour. The most famous of these laws being Rule No #196 “If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out”.
Yet, the Code of Hammurabi is very clear on the importance of protecting the golden rule and justice against fraud and false witness. In fact Rule No #3 “If a man has borne false witness in a trial, or has not established the statement that he has made, if that case be a capital trial, that man shall be put to death”. And Rule No #4 “If he has borne false witness in a civil law case, he shall pay the damages in that suit”. And Rule No #5 “If a judge has given a verdict, rendered a decision, granted a written judgment, and afterward has altered his judgment, that judge shall be prosecuted for altering the judgment he gave and shall pay twelvefold the penalty laid down in that judgment. Further, he shall be publicly expelled from his judgment-seat and shall not return nor take his seat with the judges at a trial”.
In the legal codes of the great Hittite Empire through the Code of Nesilim around 1650 BCE, we see a mirror of the Code of Hammurabi in addressing complex legal and social issues, yet with a minimum number of relatively stable laws. We see the same with the fragments of codes of Gortyn on the walls of the public theatre from this ancient city in Crete from the 5th Century BCE.
Again, across societies and time, we see the Rule of Law and Code of Law remaining fairly stable, even in the most brutal of times. For example, under Canaanite Laws of around 1075 BCE, there is a remarkable similarity to the Code of Hammurabi, except some fairly strict laws against adultery such as Law #1:16 “If a man catch a man with his wife, both of them shall they put to death” and even against violence against sex workers such as Rule #1:51 “If a man strike a prostitute and cause her to drop that which is in her, blows for blows they shall lay upon him; he shall make restitution for a life”. Or Rule #II.8 “If a man meddle with the field of his neighbor, they shall convict him. Threefold shall he restore. One of his fingers they shall cut off, a hundred blows they shall inflict upon him, one month of days he shall do the king's work”.
Similarly the Twelve Tables of Roman Law from around 451 BCE share the same traits found in much older laws, with particular emphasis in ensuring the law is not hijacked, manipulated through fraud, false witness and judicial corruption.
Well, lets have a look at another example of stable, simple and clear laws consistent with the notion of rule of law and justice in the form of the ten commandments in the Old Testament. Actually, there are approximately 612 laws claimed to have been given to the Yahudi by the Divine through Moses, not just ten. It is just that the first ten get all the press.
In any event, lets have a look at a couple of key commandments that are fundamental elements of virtually every system, even the Western-Roman System founded via England since the 16th Century. For example, Commandment no #3 “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”. This is not simply about curses or profanities, it is fundamentally about not swearing false oaths – given oaths are an essential element of creating valid trusts since time immemorial of civilizations. How about another? Commandment no #9 “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” – yet another absolutely critical pillar of law throughout every single civilization – that people are not permitted to perjure in matters of law or give false testimony. As an aside, in no ancient law do you see a precedent to permit judges or legal officials to be immune for their decisions or even permitted to take false oaths such as 18th Century abomination called the Kol Nidre Recitation on Yom Kippur invented by the Hasidic Rabbi effectively nullifying any and all vows, oaths or promises they make for the year to come.
Even at the time of Charles Martel and the Franks in the 8th Century and the re-establishment of consistent laws or Sacred Law across Western Europe, we see an emphasis on rule of law, on simple and minimal laws.
There is a mirror in the reestablishment of sacred law by the Carolingians and the introduction of the Magna Cartas, beginning with King John in the 13th Century. What many people don’t realize is that every Monarch from the time of King John of England at the commencement of their reign issued a Great Charter or “Magna Charta” until the reign of King Henry the VIII in the 16th Century.
But something strange happens under King Henry VIII and his deep connections with the Venetians. Suddenly through the private law guilds and with Venetian money, the laws start to change and starts to contradict thousands of years of established ethics, morality, rights and reason. We see the absurd notion created from 1540 that a trust can be established called a cestui que vie trust for someone assumed to be dead or lost when clearly they are neither. We see the government claiming to be the sole authority and grantor of rights, not the church or the local community and the government starting to claim control of all forms of property.
Fast forward to the coup de tat in England when the Bank of England took control of the Empire from 1801 by effectively being granted control over general revenues and the right for its own private paper to be treated as currency of the realm rather than exchequer bills. Now we see the introduction of a whole raft of corruptions against the law including the notion of immunity for the bank and politicians and then the members of the private bar guilds. We see the introduction of secret laws and secret rules, that can be withheld from the public, much like what is argued in the United States and elsewhere today.
So in summary to the first fact, the history of law demonstrates clearly and categorically that:
(1) Laws established thousands of years ago were honored by different empires and civilizations right up until the private bar guilds with bankers and other greedy people who sought to use corruption of laws [as] a weapon took total control from the 19th Century; and
(2) The most radical departure from Rule of Law and Justice began under the reign of King Henry VIII and accelerated under King George III when the abhorrent corruption of immunity emerged in full swing, culminating in the 20th Century and the age of claiming secret laws and secret courts are justifiable.
As to the argument that the laws introduced by these people were to adopt a more humane world and free us of ancient brutality within law, I say what utter rubbish and bare face falsities. We have never had more people enslaved to so few for so little than we have today in the banker controlled world; Now corporations are claiming the right to kill people, so killing hasn’t stopped, its just been privatized; and as for improving the law, the abominations surrounding judicial, banking and political immunity, secret laws, secret courts, secret deals, secret accounts expose those who peddle such pathetic counter arguments as nothing more than cowardly agents to a system that has lost track of its own reality and is out of control.
Fact #2 – The number of laws has been relatively small for thousands of years until the last 300 years
At the introduction to the article and audio tonight, I made mention of the claim that in the United States between the three levels of government and alphabet agencies creating their own regulations and claiming them as laws, there is something like 60 million laws at present. To put that into perspective, if you printed 100 of these laws to a page and read 100 pages a day, it would still take you over 16 years just to read every law once.
Clearly this highlights the absurdity of the present system and in truth, no one really knows exactly how many laws are in operation in places like the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia – because they keep changing its constantly.
Yet as we also mentioned, a key fact to remember in dispelling any notion of true law being occult is the fact that for thousands of years the number of laws has been relatively small, until the last 300 years.
The Code of Ur-Nammu we mentioned from around 2100 BCE was a system of some 60 laws based around the logical cause and effect. The Code of Hammurabi written in 1772 BCE listing 282 detailed laws. The Hittite Code of Nesilim of around 1650 BCE was estimated to be a similar number to Babylon and the fragments of Codes of Gortyn in Crete from the 5th Century BCE indicate a system of only a few hundred laws.
The 12 Tablets of Rome we mentioned from around 451 BCE constituted approximately 144 laws of the citizens or plebians of Rome. Now, if you’ve studied anything about ancient Rome, then I am sure you realize we are not speaking about a backward or simple culture but a highly complex, multi-layered multinational federation addressing virtually the same complexity of social issues today, minus certain technologies only. Apart from the obvious differences in terms of these technologies, it can reasonably be argued that the Roman Empire was every bit as complex in its affairs as in managing a contemporary modern society today.
The same can even be argued at the founding of England since the 13th Century and the fact that each monarch would introduce his reign by adopting his own version of the Magna Charta, beginning with King John and ending after the reign of King Henry VII at the end of the 15th Century. While we are victims of gross frauds entered into the history of statutes within England, easily exposed by the application of terms, phrases and concepts that simply did not exist for hundreds of years later, what can be said with confidence is that the average English Monarch until the time of Henry VII promulgated approximately 10 to 20 statutes on average per year of their reign, or roughly 30 to 60 new public laws each year. Remember, this is with the private law guilds in place in London.
Then suddenly, we get to 1540 under Henry VIII and fifty new public statutes are promulgated in one year with hundreds of new public laws never before seen, and quite alien to the history of law of any civilization of the past. The next year, we see 40 more statutes, then 30 more statutes the year after. From this point on, the average number of statutes jumps for monarchs to approximately 20 to 30 statutes per year and roughly 100 to 150 new laws created each year of their reign, until around the 5th year of the reign of King George III in 1765. Now, suddenly the number of statutes per year explodes again to an average of 50 to 70 with approximately 250 to 500 new laws created every year of his reign.
But it gets worse. Fast forward to 1798 and 83 statutes are issued and then in 1799 an unprecedented 128 statutes are issued with many hundreds of new laws. The average number of new statutes per year under the control of the Bank of England jumps to around 120 to 140 with approximately 600 to 1200 new laws created each year. By the time of Queen Victoria and the 1860’s the average statutes per year jumps to between 140 and 160.
So in summary and to put it into perspective as to the number of laws and their radical departure from rule of law and justice:
(1) If you were to add up all the laws ever promulgated by cities and societies and empires and civilizations prior to the Venetian controlled King Henry VIII, the total number of laws would be no more than 500,000 of which more than 90% were variations of the same basic template of 1,000 to 2,000 laws that have stood since the beginning of time; and
(2) From approximately 1540 to 1798 roughly the same number of laws (500,000) combined for all cities, societies, empires and civilizations that ever existed prior to this period in history were promulgated via the work of the private bar guilds, with more than 50% of these laws issued by Westminster and less than 40% of these laws having any basis of true historic law since the beginning of time; and
(3) From approximately 1799 when the bankers finally took control of the planet, beginning with the Bank of England, then later the Bank of Amsterdam in the United States through the repurchase of Manhattan Island to the present day, there has been an astounding 100,000,000 to 120,000,000 laws created across the planet by the bankers and their private bar guild enforcers or 99% of all the laws ever written being less than 250 years old. Yet of this vast number of laws, less than 20% of them have any connection whatsoever to any form or basis of true law, rule of law or justice. To put it as bluntly as possible – More than 80% of the laws that the system claims you live under today are a complete fraud, a sham and are neither laws nor have any resemblance whatsoever to any concept of law. The Patriot Act in the United States being an excellent example of a complete and utter fraud of law.
Now Similar to the argument by apologists for the private bar guilds that laws started to be radically changed a few hundred years ago “for the common good”, a regular argument to explain the explosion in law making is to argue that it wasn’t an intervention but a “reaction” to changing circumstance as the rise of the industrial revolution and more and more people became employed in manufacturing and living in cities not communes.
Let me say this, to those apologists and spin doctors that try to pull these kinds of arguments – have you ever read the enclosure acts or poor laws? Do you know why there was such a massive influx of people into cheap manufacturing labor? Because the politicians of Westminster colluded with the banks and their business friends and seized peoples homes and lands, destroyed villages and “lawfully killed” anyone who stood in their way until there were tens of thousands of refugees seeking food not to starve. That is your glorious industrial revolution ladies and gentlemen.
The truth is, and I have read the statutes since the 13th Century to the 20th Century, is that 90% of the new statutes issued under George 3 onwards were about creating private privileges to business friends and commercial interests of the empire – or to put it more bluntly, how the elite could screw the people more and make more money. Duties, taxes, roads, post, hiring more militia into Ireland in order to steal children to be sold as “settlers” or “white slaves” instead of “black slaves”.
You want another truth which is written in the black and white of public statutes under George 3, George 4 and Victoria concerning slavery? They didn’t abolish slavery; they just repackaged it and abolished unlawful competition. In other words they monopolized it. Don’t believe me? There are more than forty separate statutes between George III and George IV and then Victoria dealing with increasing militia into Ireland to numbers incredibly near 400,000+ by 1840. How did the Bank of England pay for such an expense and what were they doing? Simply, they were stripping a whole country like they did to English farmers under the enclosure acts and poor laws. Everything of value was stolen from Ireland, including the children, to be sold as white slaves under the acronym of “settlers” off to Canada, off to America, off to Australia or off to the Caribbean. Sounds impossible? Then keep believing the official story that the reason the population of Ireland dropped by 5 million from 1801 to 1850 is because the Irish were stupid and only ate potatoes, nothing else. No cheese, no dairy, no meat and that when their rotten potatoes rotted in only a part of Ireland infected by Potato blight, it affected a whole country incapable of growing anything else or eating anything else? For goodness sake when will people wake up to the ridiculous lies these people have told us over and over again?
The bottom line is that the reason we have so many laws is that the current system of control over the world rests in ensuring everyone who is part of keeping the system running feels they are getting their cut, their percentage or privilege. In other word, it is a global organized crime model – or global banking model as another name and the most successful criminal scam ever conceived in civilized history.
Fact #3- The Processes concerning law still remain fundamentally the same today
Here is one of the most incredible facts that blasts the argument the law is occult to smithereens: The essential processes concerning the due process of law remain fundamentally the same as they have for thousands of years.
Why? Because if they change, if there is no appearance of justice then there is no hiding the fact there is no justice, there is no rule of law, only tyranny.
The most obvious example is the appearance of justice when one goes to a private court. The judge or magistrate is supposed to be impartial, to follow due process right? This is not because they want this to be the case but the fact since the concept of judges and laws were invented tens of thousands of years ago, a judge can only be a judge if he sits without prejudice, with clean hands and follows due process.
That is why the simple question we raised “will you be hearing this matter today in good faith and without prejudice your honor?” is so powerful. It blows the lid on the organized criminal system of the private bar guilds. There is no hiding it. No appearance of justice, no law and any order is a complete fraud and sham and they know it and everyone watching, no matter how passive can see it clearly as well.
Of course, there are other fundamental processes the system cannot ignore that have existed since ancient times such as the fact that no action can commence in law without first there being three elements (1) a cause of action; and (2) a request for action and finally (3) a form of action. These three elements have been present as the core elements needed before any matter of law was adjudicated from before the time of Hammurabi, to Rome, to the Carolingian Empire to the present day. It is yet another example of the essential framework of due process of law, the existing system cannot dump.
So let’s start with what do we mean by cause of action? Simply, the cause of action is the reason, the will and motive for an action in law. What form does it take? Well under the Carolingians under the 8th Century the cause of action that commenced all matters of law was called the Memorandum being a written document that listed the noteworthy and meritorious facts of a case, sworn under oath from the one making the complaint. Under English law, it began in the 13th Century with the affidavit from the Latin phrase “ad fido vidi” meaning “I swear I saw/know” as written testimony sworn under oath. Then in the 19th Century it was diminished to the concept of a statutory declaration being a claimed statement of facts without oath, being the standard form under the banking world today.
So what then do we mean by request of action? Simply, that the one making a complaint makes the appropriate formal request for an action to commence in some form depending upon their claim of right. Under the most ancient of law and due process, this has always been in the form of a formal direction or from Roman times what was called a Praecipe or Praecipio meaning “I enjoin, direct, advise, inform, order or command action”. Under the Carolingians this was modified to what was called a Petitio or Petition as a sacred prayer for relief or remedy based on a claim of right upon the truth of one’s own Memorandum. The concept of petitions as the format for request of action continued right up until the late 19th Century when the courts became fully privatized and no longer had the power to issue writs. Instead a new request of action was created called the Complaint, being having no prayer component or historical context.
What then do we mean by the third element as to the form of action? This is the element issued by a valid court of law once they receive the first two parts to then commence the action by proving there is a case to answer in the first point and that the court claims jurisdiction to hear the matter. In Roman times, it was the written summons or Ius Vocare issued by the magistrate. However, by the time of the Carolingians it was the Sacred Writ or Original Writ that was the first action of the court, which itself was both proof of the matter and the summons for those who were required to attend. Under English Law, the Original Writ continued until the complete destruction of common law by the Bank of England in collusion with Westminster and the Summary Jurisdiction acts from the mid 19th Century. In the United States, the equivalent was the Original Bill, or True Bill, which was phased out by the late 19th Century after the Bank of Amsterdam funded the coup de tat under the cover of Civil War. Today, the private corporate courts, issue warrants, subpoenas and court attendance notices all claiming to have authority when none do.
So think about the power of this knowledge – knowing that the present system where we know there is no rule of law and we know there is no justice is forced to pretend there is by appearing to follow these ancient processes of law. What happens then where there is no affidavit? No verifiable complaint? It means any subsequent complaint and summons is a fraud, because there is no original cause of action? Do you see the importance that once you know these essential facts of due process how powerful this knowledge becomes?
Of course, those paid to confuse by the private bar guilds want to tie you up in knots, want to keep you confused and believing the law is occult. The truth is that once the system stops even pretending there is justice then the sham is over – everyone will see it. It may then take years to overcome the oppression of the people and those who choose to be cowards and enslave their own families, but the system has reached its end point. But people will finally know the truth about law.
True Law is never Occult
True law is never ever occult. As one final example, let me now share some insights concerning trusts, especially cestui que vie trusts. There has been a huge amount of bank and private bar guild coordinated white noise about collapsing cestui que vie trusts and grand claims about obscure individuals having some kind of super power to do this, using the private laws of the pirates against them, even though it is illogical and clearly impossible. Still despite all the warnings of false flag operations keeping people forever in a state of confusion, not one ounce of truth concerning all the claimed trusts of the system and the fact that they are not real and valid trusts, but simply implied contracts, nothing more has been revealed.
Did your mother put her hand on the bible and swear an oath when she delivered you? Or did your father swear an oath and create a trust at the time? Or the doctor, or the nurse or midwife, or the registrar, or anyone else in their system. The answer is No. No one swore an oath, nor did anyone other than your parents have the right to swear an oath of grant any property into trust.
So what then is the complex system of cestui que vie trusts and estates, and annuities and bonds and accounts and transactions? A giant, complex illusion and fraud of epic proportions, having absolutely no force or effect in any form of law even the laws of Great Britain prior to the bankers and pirates taking over in the 19th Century.
The key, the desperate key for the system is to keep you believing you have to stay in their matrix of 100 million to 120 million laws even though more than 80% of them are worthless, useless, self referencing garbage as far as any reasonable form of law is applied.
So what are you going to do now? Keep listening to all the voices trying to keep you in the matrix? Trying to keep you asleep and confused? Or are you going to wake up and help others as well?
It is your choice.
Thanks
Frank
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here (61 min 21 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________
Law is necessarily complex, right? I mean television, movies, private bar guild members and some remedy gurus are insistent that a man or woman of reasonable intelligence has no way of absorbing the complexities and secrets of the law that is supposed to run our society without their help. But is that really true?
Is true law always so complex, so secretive, so esoteric and difficult to comprehend that a man or woman of reasonable intelligence has no hope of grasping it? For example, do you find the Golden Rule – the highest law that is found in almost every society throughout every period of civilization difficult to comprehend? What is so complex with the idea that no one is above the law? Why then the lie that such key law is complex?
As we said three weeks ago on the Ucadia blog, if the Golden Rule does not exist then the law is not equal for all people and there is no rule of law. Full stop. Period. No ifs or buts. In other words, where there is no equality of law, you live under the rule of tyrants, where might is right, and rule by force and fear. So why the unrelenting campaign then by the private bar guilds and certain “remedy gurus” to maintain the claim that the law is too complex for people of average intelligence to comprehend?
Or what about the truth that if the Golden Rule does not exist, then there is no Rule of Law? Is that a complex idea? Or how about the concept that Justice does not exist nor can ever exist within a community, a city, a state or any association of people unless the Rule of Law is applied strictly according to the Golden Rule? Do you find this concept impossible to perceive?
Two weeks ago we said clearly that if in the adjudication of law there is no fairness, no equal rights, no good faith, no clean hands at arms length and no presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, then there is no justice. None, zero and you are living under tyranny and injustice.
Acting in good faith, not having a vested interest in the matter so there is no prejudice and enabling fairness of due process according to the rules of judging a matter – these are not difficult concepts, so why the obsessive insistence by both private bar guild members and their “truth guru” associates that the law is so complex that you have no hope of learning it without paying them and having them guide you?
Yes, the private bar guilds and their corporate friends are trying to run the United States via something like 60 million laws, the United Kingdom by half that figure and countries like Australia, France, Germany and the rest of the world by some millions of laws. But are these true laws? Or an enormous and complex fraud? Why the never ending insistence to dive down yet another “rabbit hole” on a quest to find the “magic key” or the “secret formula” that will unlock everything?
Tonight, we will be discussing the fact that True Law is never, ever occult. That it is high time the deliberate distractions, disinfo, confusion and frauds are ended once and for all. I will be proving that you can and should be able to comprehend all the key elements of true law. That true law is logical, sensible, historical, ethical and moral.
In fact, when we talk a bit more about the history of law, then you will see that for literally thousands of years, even up to just 500 years ago, the fundamental framework of law was not only simple, it was comprehended by virtually everyone in a community. It was not only published, it was easily accessible in public forums whether it be the center of a city and the Codes of Hammurabi and subsequent leaders of society, or the 12 Tablets of Rome within the Forum or the sacred Instatuti of Carolingian Sacre Loi or (Sacred Law) which was printed and present at the front of every church and public venue. Until 500 years ago, law was accessible, law was known by the people, protected by the people and was definitely not occult, confusing or prohibitively complex. That was until the invention of the private law guilds that came to England from Italy.
In fact, we will discuss the overwhelming evidence that not only are the private bar guilds directly responsible for the ridiculous and absurd explosion of claimed laws to the point there are not just thousands but millions of them; the system they set up was not simply to hijack the law but to create a giant false flag operation whereby people would become trapped in discussing and arguing the irrelevant while conceding jurisdiction and major points of law.
Tonight, I want to share with you some practical applications of this knowledge and the information shared in past blogs and audios in the hope that some of this, most of this cuts through the blizzard and screams of people falsely claiming “the system is not broken, you are just doing it wrong” or “click your heals this way, fill in the form that way and make sure you twirl and say the magic phrase” and other equivalent absurdities littering the internet and causing people immense hardship by following deliberate and clearly false claims.
That is why we are going to talk about dealing with matters and the paperwork when summonsed to court, the truth about cestui que vie trusts and all other claimed hidden trusts and the power of proper paperwork when going to court.
Tonight, above all I hope and pray that at least some semblance of the essence of law can be restored. That a line can be drawn so that if anyone has an issue, a problem or a matter that finally, there can be some clarity in moving forward; and that this insanity will stop that allows serial criminals and murderers to be let out into the community to kill, or rape or torture again, while good and honest people have their lives destroyed by private commercial courts on one mistake. That those few good judges and magistrates and politicians and attorneys have the courage to stand up against their sociopathic colleagues and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
So before we get to some practical applications, lets review three key facts that prove without a shadow of any doubt that True Law is never Occult or complex or confusing.
Fact #1 – Laws have remained relatively stable for thousands of years until the last 500 years
A few weeks ago, when discussing the Rule of Law, I quoted a passage of ancient law from Yapa, the law of the indigenous first peoples of Australia being Book 5, the First Law and First Law of Truth. I would like to recite this again as an excellent summation of the most common features of law over the past few thousand years until the unfortunate emergence of the private law guilds in the Italian cities of Florence, Pisa and Venice and then onto London and the rest of the world. Let me recite these verses of Yapa again:
1 This be the First Law of Truth:
2 There is, there was, there has only ever been One Law;
3 All law is equal that no one is above it;
4 All law is measured that all may learn and know it;
5 All law is standard that it may always be applied the same.
6 A law be a rule given by divine instruction;
7 This being the highest law.
8 No lesser law may contradict it.
9 A law be an edict, given by a great council of wise elders and agreed by all tribes;
10 This being the second highest law.
11 No lesser law may contradict it.
12 A law be custom and ceremony over time.
13 This being the third highest law.
14 A rule that is secret cannot be a law;
15 A rule that is unclear in meaning cannot be a law.
16 A rule that cannot be applied cannot be a law.
17 A rule may be written by sign or symbol,
18 But only when spoken at a place of law is it law.
19 A law may be spoken,
20 But only when it is comprehended and agreed is it justice.
21 All people of the same community,
22 Are subject to the same rule of law.
23 All men and women of a community,
24 Are bound to live by the rule of law of the community.
25 No one may be accused except by rule of law.
26 No one may be punished except by rule of law.
27 Where there is no justice, there is no law.
28 Where there is no honor, there is no law.
29 A man or woman who are not taught how to comprehend a law,
30 Cannot be bound by it.
31 Any law that is against such truth cannot be law.
How simple and concise is that? It expresses clearly what a law is, what a law is not, the essence of the golden rule and what constitutes justice or injustice.
Before we go much further, let us also be clear by what we mean with the word occult? The word occult comes from the Latin word occulto meaning “to hide, to obscure or to keep secret”. So when we say “true law is never occult” we mean “true law is never hidden, secret or deliberately confusing”.
Funnily enough, the clarity and simplicity of law is precisely what we see in virtually all ancient texts of law until the emergence of the secretive law guilds in Florence and Pisa at the start of the 13th Century called the Arte dei Guidici e Notai or in English The Art of Judges and Notaries that later evolved into the private bar guilds of today that still hold the courts and society hostage. It is also why most law schools do not teach the history of law because it raises too many questions to young mind before they are indoctrinated into being obedient servants of the private bar guilds.
For example, the Code of Ur-Nammu from around 2100 BCE is claimed to be one of the oldest known examples of law codes still surviving. Promulgated by King Ur-Nammu across a federation of Sumerian cities of Mesopotamia at the time, the reconstructed tablets indicate a system of some 60 laws base around the logical cause and effect formula of IF (this transgression) THEN (this punishment). For example, Rule No #1 “If a man commits a murder, that man must be killed”; or Rule No # 6 “If a man violates the right of another and deflowers the virgin wife of a young man, they shall kill that male”.
Far from being a system of law that exploded into thousands of laws, the clarity, simplicity and certainty of such law appears to have stood the test of time and been in existence right up to the time of the Babylonian empire some 400 years later.
The Code of Hammurabi written in 1772 BCE listing 282 detailed laws all on the surface of one stone, placed at the centre of major cities of the Babylonian empire, so all could see the laws. It was public notice. But in case you think such laws were simple, the Code of Hammurabi in [facts] reflects many of the laws we consider essential to modern society today such as contract law, justice, property law, household and family relationships inheritance, divorce and even rules against deviant sexual behaviour. The most famous of these laws being Rule No #196 “If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out”.
Yet, the Code of Hammurabi is very clear on the importance of protecting the golden rule and justice against fraud and false witness. In fact Rule No #3 “If a man has borne false witness in a trial, or has not established the statement that he has made, if that case be a capital trial, that man shall be put to death”. And Rule No #4 “If he has borne false witness in a civil law case, he shall pay the damages in that suit”. And Rule No #5 “If a judge has given a verdict, rendered a decision, granted a written judgment, and afterward has altered his judgment, that judge shall be prosecuted for altering the judgment he gave and shall pay twelvefold the penalty laid down in that judgment. Further, he shall be publicly expelled from his judgment-seat and shall not return nor take his seat with the judges at a trial”.
In the legal codes of the great Hittite Empire through the Code of Nesilim around 1650 BCE, we see a mirror of the Code of Hammurabi in addressing complex legal and social issues, yet with a minimum number of relatively stable laws. We see the same with the fragments of codes of Gortyn on the walls of the public theatre from this ancient city in Crete from the 5th Century BCE.
Again, across societies and time, we see the Rule of Law and Code of Law remaining fairly stable, even in the most brutal of times. For example, under Canaanite Laws of around 1075 BCE, there is a remarkable similarity to the Code of Hammurabi, except some fairly strict laws against adultery such as Law #1:16 “If a man catch a man with his wife, both of them shall they put to death” and even against violence against sex workers such as Rule #1:51 “If a man strike a prostitute and cause her to drop that which is in her, blows for blows they shall lay upon him; he shall make restitution for a life”. Or Rule #II.8 “If a man meddle with the field of his neighbor, they shall convict him. Threefold shall he restore. One of his fingers they shall cut off, a hundred blows they shall inflict upon him, one month of days he shall do the king's work”.
Similarly the Twelve Tables of Roman Law from around 451 BCE share the same traits found in much older laws, with particular emphasis in ensuring the law is not hijacked, manipulated through fraud, false witness and judicial corruption.
Well, lets have a look at another example of stable, simple and clear laws consistent with the notion of rule of law and justice in the form of the ten commandments in the Old Testament. Actually, there are approximately 612 laws claimed to have been given to the Yahudi by the Divine through Moses, not just ten. It is just that the first ten get all the press.
In any event, lets have a look at a couple of key commandments that are fundamental elements of virtually every system, even the Western-Roman System founded via England since the 16th Century. For example, Commandment no #3 “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain”. This is not simply about curses or profanities, it is fundamentally about not swearing false oaths – given oaths are an essential element of creating valid trusts since time immemorial of civilizations. How about another? Commandment no #9 “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” – yet another absolutely critical pillar of law throughout every single civilization – that people are not permitted to perjure in matters of law or give false testimony. As an aside, in no ancient law do you see a precedent to permit judges or legal officials to be immune for their decisions or even permitted to take false oaths such as 18th Century abomination called the Kol Nidre Recitation on Yom Kippur invented by the Hasidic Rabbi effectively nullifying any and all vows, oaths or promises they make for the year to come.
Even at the time of Charles Martel and the Franks in the 8th Century and the re-establishment of consistent laws or Sacred Law across Western Europe, we see an emphasis on rule of law, on simple and minimal laws.
There is a mirror in the reestablishment of sacred law by the Carolingians and the introduction of the Magna Cartas, beginning with King John in the 13th Century. What many people don’t realize is that every Monarch from the time of King John of England at the commencement of their reign issued a Great Charter or “Magna Charta” until the reign of King Henry the VIII in the 16th Century.
But something strange happens under King Henry VIII and his deep connections with the Venetians. Suddenly through the private law guilds and with Venetian money, the laws start to change and starts to contradict thousands of years of established ethics, morality, rights and reason. We see the absurd notion created from 1540 that a trust can be established called a cestui que vie trust for someone assumed to be dead or lost when clearly they are neither. We see the government claiming to be the sole authority and grantor of rights, not the church or the local community and the government starting to claim control of all forms of property.
Fast forward to the coup de tat in England when the Bank of England took control of the Empire from 1801 by effectively being granted control over general revenues and the right for its own private paper to be treated as currency of the realm rather than exchequer bills. Now we see the introduction of a whole raft of corruptions against the law including the notion of immunity for the bank and politicians and then the members of the private bar guilds. We see the introduction of secret laws and secret rules, that can be withheld from the public, much like what is argued in the United States and elsewhere today.
So in summary to the first fact, the history of law demonstrates clearly and categorically that:
(1) Laws established thousands of years ago were honored by different empires and civilizations right up until the private bar guilds with bankers and other greedy people who sought to use corruption of laws [as] a weapon took total control from the 19th Century; and
(2) The most radical departure from Rule of Law and Justice began under the reign of King Henry VIII and accelerated under King George III when the abhorrent corruption of immunity emerged in full swing, culminating in the 20th Century and the age of claiming secret laws and secret courts are justifiable.
As to the argument that the laws introduced by these people were to adopt a more humane world and free us of ancient brutality within law, I say what utter rubbish and bare face falsities. We have never had more people enslaved to so few for so little than we have today in the banker controlled world; Now corporations are claiming the right to kill people, so killing hasn’t stopped, its just been privatized; and as for improving the law, the abominations surrounding judicial, banking and political immunity, secret laws, secret courts, secret deals, secret accounts expose those who peddle such pathetic counter arguments as nothing more than cowardly agents to a system that has lost track of its own reality and is out of control.
Fact #2 – The number of laws has been relatively small for thousands of years until the last 300 years
At the introduction to the article and audio tonight, I made mention of the claim that in the United States between the three levels of government and alphabet agencies creating their own regulations and claiming them as laws, there is something like 60 million laws at present. To put that into perspective, if you printed 100 of these laws to a page and read 100 pages a day, it would still take you over 16 years just to read every law once.
Clearly this highlights the absurdity of the present system and in truth, no one really knows exactly how many laws are in operation in places like the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia – because they keep changing its constantly.
Yet as we also mentioned, a key fact to remember in dispelling any notion of true law being occult is the fact that for thousands of years the number of laws has been relatively small, until the last 300 years.
The Code of Ur-Nammu we mentioned from around 2100 BCE was a system of some 60 laws based around the logical cause and effect. The Code of Hammurabi written in 1772 BCE listing 282 detailed laws. The Hittite Code of Nesilim of around 1650 BCE was estimated to be a similar number to Babylon and the fragments of Codes of Gortyn in Crete from the 5th Century BCE indicate a system of only a few hundred laws.
The 12 Tablets of Rome we mentioned from around 451 BCE constituted approximately 144 laws of the citizens or plebians of Rome. Now, if you’ve studied anything about ancient Rome, then I am sure you realize we are not speaking about a backward or simple culture but a highly complex, multi-layered multinational federation addressing virtually the same complexity of social issues today, minus certain technologies only. Apart from the obvious differences in terms of these technologies, it can reasonably be argued that the Roman Empire was every bit as complex in its affairs as in managing a contemporary modern society today.
The same can even be argued at the founding of England since the 13th Century and the fact that each monarch would introduce his reign by adopting his own version of the Magna Charta, beginning with King John and ending after the reign of King Henry VII at the end of the 15th Century. While we are victims of gross frauds entered into the history of statutes within England, easily exposed by the application of terms, phrases and concepts that simply did not exist for hundreds of years later, what can be said with confidence is that the average English Monarch until the time of Henry VII promulgated approximately 10 to 20 statutes on average per year of their reign, or roughly 30 to 60 new public laws each year. Remember, this is with the private law guilds in place in London.
Then suddenly, we get to 1540 under Henry VIII and fifty new public statutes are promulgated in one year with hundreds of new public laws never before seen, and quite alien to the history of law of any civilization of the past. The next year, we see 40 more statutes, then 30 more statutes the year after. From this point on, the average number of statutes jumps for monarchs to approximately 20 to 30 statutes per year and roughly 100 to 150 new laws created each year of their reign, until around the 5th year of the reign of King George III in 1765. Now, suddenly the number of statutes per year explodes again to an average of 50 to 70 with approximately 250 to 500 new laws created every year of his reign.
But it gets worse. Fast forward to 1798 and 83 statutes are issued and then in 1799 an unprecedented 128 statutes are issued with many hundreds of new laws. The average number of new statutes per year under the control of the Bank of England jumps to around 120 to 140 with approximately 600 to 1200 new laws created each year. By the time of Queen Victoria and the 1860’s the average statutes per year jumps to between 140 and 160.
So in summary and to put it into perspective as to the number of laws and their radical departure from rule of law and justice:
(1) If you were to add up all the laws ever promulgated by cities and societies and empires and civilizations prior to the Venetian controlled King Henry VIII, the total number of laws would be no more than 500,000 of which more than 90% were variations of the same basic template of 1,000 to 2,000 laws that have stood since the beginning of time; and
(2) From approximately 1540 to 1798 roughly the same number of laws (500,000) combined for all cities, societies, empires and civilizations that ever existed prior to this period in history were promulgated via the work of the private bar guilds, with more than 50% of these laws issued by Westminster and less than 40% of these laws having any basis of true historic law since the beginning of time; and
(3) From approximately 1799 when the bankers finally took control of the planet, beginning with the Bank of England, then later the Bank of Amsterdam in the United States through the repurchase of Manhattan Island to the present day, there has been an astounding 100,000,000 to 120,000,000 laws created across the planet by the bankers and their private bar guild enforcers or 99% of all the laws ever written being less than 250 years old. Yet of this vast number of laws, less than 20% of them have any connection whatsoever to any form or basis of true law, rule of law or justice. To put it as bluntly as possible – More than 80% of the laws that the system claims you live under today are a complete fraud, a sham and are neither laws nor have any resemblance whatsoever to any concept of law. The Patriot Act in the United States being an excellent example of a complete and utter fraud of law.
Now Similar to the argument by apologists for the private bar guilds that laws started to be radically changed a few hundred years ago “for the common good”, a regular argument to explain the explosion in law making is to argue that it wasn’t an intervention but a “reaction” to changing circumstance as the rise of the industrial revolution and more and more people became employed in manufacturing and living in cities not communes.
Let me say this, to those apologists and spin doctors that try to pull these kinds of arguments – have you ever read the enclosure acts or poor laws? Do you know why there was such a massive influx of people into cheap manufacturing labor? Because the politicians of Westminster colluded with the banks and their business friends and seized peoples homes and lands, destroyed villages and “lawfully killed” anyone who stood in their way until there were tens of thousands of refugees seeking food not to starve. That is your glorious industrial revolution ladies and gentlemen.
The truth is, and I have read the statutes since the 13th Century to the 20th Century, is that 90% of the new statutes issued under George 3 onwards were about creating private privileges to business friends and commercial interests of the empire – or to put it more bluntly, how the elite could screw the people more and make more money. Duties, taxes, roads, post, hiring more militia into Ireland in order to steal children to be sold as “settlers” or “white slaves” instead of “black slaves”.
You want another truth which is written in the black and white of public statutes under George 3, George 4 and Victoria concerning slavery? They didn’t abolish slavery; they just repackaged it and abolished unlawful competition. In other words they monopolized it. Don’t believe me? There are more than forty separate statutes between George III and George IV and then Victoria dealing with increasing militia into Ireland to numbers incredibly near 400,000+ by 1840. How did the Bank of England pay for such an expense and what were they doing? Simply, they were stripping a whole country like they did to English farmers under the enclosure acts and poor laws. Everything of value was stolen from Ireland, including the children, to be sold as white slaves under the acronym of “settlers” off to Canada, off to America, off to Australia or off to the Caribbean. Sounds impossible? Then keep believing the official story that the reason the population of Ireland dropped by 5 million from 1801 to 1850 is because the Irish were stupid and only ate potatoes, nothing else. No cheese, no dairy, no meat and that when their rotten potatoes rotted in only a part of Ireland infected by Potato blight, it affected a whole country incapable of growing anything else or eating anything else? For goodness sake when will people wake up to the ridiculous lies these people have told us over and over again?
The bottom line is that the reason we have so many laws is that the current system of control over the world rests in ensuring everyone who is part of keeping the system running feels they are getting their cut, their percentage or privilege. In other word, it is a global organized crime model – or global banking model as another name and the most successful criminal scam ever conceived in civilized history.
Fact #3- The Processes concerning law still remain fundamentally the same today
Here is one of the most incredible facts that blasts the argument the law is occult to smithereens: The essential processes concerning the due process of law remain fundamentally the same as they have for thousands of years.
Why? Because if they change, if there is no appearance of justice then there is no hiding the fact there is no justice, there is no rule of law, only tyranny.
The most obvious example is the appearance of justice when one goes to a private court. The judge or magistrate is supposed to be impartial, to follow due process right? This is not because they want this to be the case but the fact since the concept of judges and laws were invented tens of thousands of years ago, a judge can only be a judge if he sits without prejudice, with clean hands and follows due process.
That is why the simple question we raised “will you be hearing this matter today in good faith and without prejudice your honor?” is so powerful. It blows the lid on the organized criminal system of the private bar guilds. There is no hiding it. No appearance of justice, no law and any order is a complete fraud and sham and they know it and everyone watching, no matter how passive can see it clearly as well.
Of course, there are other fundamental processes the system cannot ignore that have existed since ancient times such as the fact that no action can commence in law without first there being three elements (1) a cause of action; and (2) a request for action and finally (3) a form of action. These three elements have been present as the core elements needed before any matter of law was adjudicated from before the time of Hammurabi, to Rome, to the Carolingian Empire to the present day. It is yet another example of the essential framework of due process of law, the existing system cannot dump.
So let’s start with what do we mean by cause of action? Simply, the cause of action is the reason, the will and motive for an action in law. What form does it take? Well under the Carolingians under the 8th Century the cause of action that commenced all matters of law was called the Memorandum being a written document that listed the noteworthy and meritorious facts of a case, sworn under oath from the one making the complaint. Under English law, it began in the 13th Century with the affidavit from the Latin phrase “ad fido vidi” meaning “I swear I saw/know” as written testimony sworn under oath. Then in the 19th Century it was diminished to the concept of a statutory declaration being a claimed statement of facts without oath, being the standard form under the banking world today.
So what then do we mean by request of action? Simply, that the one making a complaint makes the appropriate formal request for an action to commence in some form depending upon their claim of right. Under the most ancient of law and due process, this has always been in the form of a formal direction or from Roman times what was called a Praecipe or Praecipio meaning “I enjoin, direct, advise, inform, order or command action”. Under the Carolingians this was modified to what was called a Petitio or Petition as a sacred prayer for relief or remedy based on a claim of right upon the truth of one’s own Memorandum. The concept of petitions as the format for request of action continued right up until the late 19th Century when the courts became fully privatized and no longer had the power to issue writs. Instead a new request of action was created called the Complaint, being having no prayer component or historical context.
What then do we mean by the third element as to the form of action? This is the element issued by a valid court of law once they receive the first two parts to then commence the action by proving there is a case to answer in the first point and that the court claims jurisdiction to hear the matter. In Roman times, it was the written summons or Ius Vocare issued by the magistrate. However, by the time of the Carolingians it was the Sacred Writ or Original Writ that was the first action of the court, which itself was both proof of the matter and the summons for those who were required to attend. Under English Law, the Original Writ continued until the complete destruction of common law by the Bank of England in collusion with Westminster and the Summary Jurisdiction acts from the mid 19th Century. In the United States, the equivalent was the Original Bill, or True Bill, which was phased out by the late 19th Century after the Bank of Amsterdam funded the coup de tat under the cover of Civil War. Today, the private corporate courts, issue warrants, subpoenas and court attendance notices all claiming to have authority when none do.
So think about the power of this knowledge – knowing that the present system where we know there is no rule of law and we know there is no justice is forced to pretend there is by appearing to follow these ancient processes of law. What happens then where there is no affidavit? No verifiable complaint? It means any subsequent complaint and summons is a fraud, because there is no original cause of action? Do you see the importance that once you know these essential facts of due process how powerful this knowledge becomes?
Of course, those paid to confuse by the private bar guilds want to tie you up in knots, want to keep you confused and believing the law is occult. The truth is that once the system stops even pretending there is justice then the sham is over – everyone will see it. It may then take years to overcome the oppression of the people and those who choose to be cowards and enslave their own families, but the system has reached its end point. But people will finally know the truth about law.
True Law is never Occult
True law is never ever occult. As one final example, let me now share some insights concerning trusts, especially cestui que vie trusts. There has been a huge amount of bank and private bar guild coordinated white noise about collapsing cestui que vie trusts and grand claims about obscure individuals having some kind of super power to do this, using the private laws of the pirates against them, even though it is illogical and clearly impossible. Still despite all the warnings of false flag operations keeping people forever in a state of confusion, not one ounce of truth concerning all the claimed trusts of the system and the fact that they are not real and valid trusts, but simply implied contracts, nothing more has been revealed.
Did your mother put her hand on the bible and swear an oath when she delivered you? Or did your father swear an oath and create a trust at the time? Or the doctor, or the nurse or midwife, or the registrar, or anyone else in their system. The answer is No. No one swore an oath, nor did anyone other than your parents have the right to swear an oath of grant any property into trust.
So what then is the complex system of cestui que vie trusts and estates, and annuities and bonds and accounts and transactions? A giant, complex illusion and fraud of epic proportions, having absolutely no force or effect in any form of law even the laws of Great Britain prior to the bankers and pirates taking over in the 19th Century.
The key, the desperate key for the system is to keep you believing you have to stay in their matrix of 100 million to 120 million laws even though more than 80% of them are worthless, useless, self referencing garbage as far as any reasonable form of law is applied.
So what are you going to do now? Keep listening to all the voices trying to keep you in the matrix? Trying to keep you asleep and confused? Or are you going to wake up and help others as well?
It is your choice.
Thanks
Frank
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Sorry, we won’t accept your forms – One of the most false and corrupt tricks of the private bar guilds
_________________________________________________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here (37 min 13 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________
Hello and thanks for reading and listening to this weeks blog and audio on One of the most false and corrupt tricks of the private bar guilds regarding how they argue they won’t accept your forms, even when they appear to perfectly comply to the guidelines and rulings they set forth.
In other words, you have a legal matter before a particular court, such as a magistrates court, or county court, or district court or even supreme court and you follow to the letter their instructions on how certain forms need to be completed and when it comes to the day, the judge or magistrate simply ignores your forms without any fair consideration and it seems they are running their own race. So how do they get away with it?
Well, if you have been listening to the past two weeks of Ucadia blogs and audios you will know that I have been trying to get back to the most basic and fundamental of perceptions when dealing with the private bar guilds, the current political and rulings classes of society in making plain that if the law is not equal for all people, then there is no rule of law. Full stop. Period. No if’s or buts.
In other words, where there is no equality of law, you live under the rule of tyrants, where might is right, and rule by force and fear. So any claimed law that is issued under such a system is not a law, it is what is called a dictat or dictate – a proclamation without valid authority enforced by force, threat or fear that something must be obeyed.
For example in the case of almost 99% of council regulations are dictat or dictates of a dictator that have absolutely no mandate, lawful basis of authority and are simply enforced by blatant and unequal threat in the absence of any rule of law.
Then last week we made the point that if the adjudication of law means there is no fairness, no equal rights, no good faith, no clean hands at arms length and no presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, then there is no justice. None, zero.
In other words, any sentence, order or edict by the court has absolutely no moral, lawful or legal basis whatsoever, other than as a dictat or dictate by a dictator to be enforced by militia and privateers who are employed by such illegal and unlawful claims to enforce injustice.
As we demonstrated in the pyramid of rights or “jus” where the private bar guilds have granted themselves extraordinary, unprecedented rights and powers above all other parts of society thus removing any possible rational, reasonable and logical claim there is any form of justice, in such countries as the United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom.
Of course, this is in complete contradiction to the claims of the private bar guilds running for profit businesses as courts when they speak through the media. They say justice exists, the rule of law exists and that the people are in control through the democratic election of leaders. Yet, despite such spin, despite such George Orwellian double-speak, the evidence exposes such falsities.
One hundred and thirty rights created out of thin air by the private bar guilds in the past two hundred plus years through their dictionaries and case laws. Yet the most powerful of these rights, such as Jus Immunitatis – the right to absolute immunity or Jus Dicere – the right to decide whatever the law is are reserved purely for the private bar guild. The evidence doesn’t lie and some day in the future, more and more people are going to wake up and look past the constant fog of disinfo at the overwhelming evidence to realize without the golden rule in effect, there is no rule of law, without equal rights under equal rule of law, there is no justice.
So is there any hope? Is there any way to overcome when the tyrannical system masquerading as democracy demands you front up to one of their business offices masquerading as courts? Well, yes there is some hope. It is the fact that if the people ever woke up out of their sugar-salt-hormone and preservative haze they might demand a restoration of law; that as has been shown when social media seizes on an overwhelming example of miscarriage of justice, the system is exposed – so there is sensitivity to maintaining the appearance of justice.
That is why I have repeated over and over in recent weeks that one of the simplest yet most powerful things you can ask with respect when going to any court is whether the judge or magistrate will be hearing the matter in good faith and without prejudice? As many of you have shared, some judges and magistrates openly welcome the honest question and answer, yet some judges demonstrate their inappropriateness for claiming such a position by obfuscating and refusing to answer.
So there are signs of possible relief and the internet continues to grow with real, not mythical stories of people finding relief when judges and magistrates choose to honor, what little law exists in court rooms, instead of being pirates. To those judges and magistrates that honor the spirit of law and the ancient ways of law, before the banks seized control and condemned our societies to the matrix of insanity that encloses it today, is say “thank you”. Thank you to all of you who continue to prove there are good people in all positions of society and all walks of life. Thank you for keeping the hope alive that one day we will see a restoration of law and justice that reflects the intentions of the founders of so many great nations.
In the mean time, let no one trick you, confuse you, tell you the kind of falsities that we described last week that the only reason you do not achieve relief is because you are somehow doing it wrong, or that terms such as person, or trust are beyond your comprehension or are dangerous or even that people are getting big financial remedies from the system following certain gurus. Let the lies stop. Let the disinfo stop. The problem is simple – most people live in societies where there is no rule of law, there is no justice, only the fake appearance of justice if you obey without question the demands of the intelligentsia, the illuminati class. That is why innocent people are going to prison. That is why honest people are having their homes and possessions seized. Not because they didn’t follow the yellow brick road – but because they dared to question and the system decided to step on them with both feet, so set an example- the old chestnut of fear and threat.
Next week, I want to focus on possible answers when facing openly corrupt, incompetence and dangerous magistrates and judges who do not care they are exposing their own system. But this week, I want to focus on one possible point of relief in reviewing a point of forms- what are forms when we go to court? And how do the private bar guilds trick us into creating defective forms, even if we have followed their instructions to the letter?
Why is this important? And how might this help? Well for one, if it turns out that we can dramatically improve the strength of our forms that then forces the private bar guilds to openly break their own rules then that is better than the automated steam roller. And for some, it might actually mean that those judges and magistrates and clerks who have any remnant of decency and honor and respect of law might actually dispense justice in their own courts.
What is a form?
Lets begin by reviewing again what we mean by form.
The essential elements of a form
Lets begin by reviewing again what is meant by form within the Western Roman system.
The word form comes from the Latin word forma meaning “shape, appearance, mould, stamp, idea, kind and nature (of an object)”.
The Universal Etymological English Dictionary by N. Bailey of 1675 refined Form into more specific definitions being (generally) “fashion, figure, shape or manner”; (in printing) “one side of a sheet (of paper)”; (in philosophy according to Descartes and Newton) “the second principle, which joined to man, makes up all natural bodies, or the essential, specific, or distinguishing Modification of the Matter of any natural Body”.
By the time of the Dictionary Britannicum of 1736 however, we see a growing sophistication in the various meanings of form to several dozen different meanings spanning wide variety of subjects including (but not limited to):
(In Philosophy) “is the manner of being peculiar to each body, or that which constitutes it such a particular body, and distinguishes it form every other body”;
(In Logic) “the just disposition both of the terms in respect both of predicate and subject, and of the proposition in respect to quantity and quality”;
(In Nature) “are those (forms) which are inherent in bodies, without anything contributed thereto on the part of man, as the form of marble”;
(In Artificial) “are those (forms) which arise from human industry, as a statute (of marble)”;
(In moral sense) “a manner of being or doing a thing according to rule”;
(In Law) “Certain established rules to be observed in processes or judiciary proceedings”.
By 1893, the Andersons Dictionary of Law further distinguishes the legal definition of form into two primary meanings:
(1) Established method of expression or practice; a fixed way of proceeding; and
(2) The model of an instrument or legal proceedings, a formula;
So now we see by the 19th century a definition which reflects a feature beginning with the coup de tat against the crown of Great Britain in the takeover of the British Empire and colonies by the Bank of England and subsequent pseudo statutes such as the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act of 1836 which began to list what are called as Schedules or actual instructions on how information was to be prepared and presented as legal form.
Prior to this, the way information was presented in form was either by way of variations of indulgences prepared by the Company of Worshipful Scrivener Notaries of London and then copies made thereafter. Now, by the 19th century, the corporation pretending to be the Crown of England was dispensing with ecclesiastical form and making up its own forms. In other words, the invention of style over substance.
By 1910, The Blacks Law Dictionary defines Form also in two essential definitions being:
1. A model or skeleton of an instrument to be used in a judicial proceeding, containing the principal necessary matters, the proper technical terms or phrases, and whatever else is necessary to make it formally correct, arranged in proper and methodical order, and capable of being adapted to the circumstances of the specific case. [we start to see a few twists in this definition.]
2. As distinguished from substance," form" means the legal or technical manner or order to be observed in legal instruments or juridical proceedings, or in the construction of legal documents or processes.
Again, these definitions reinforce the change from substance to style that forms that are valid are effectively defined as schedules or extensions to statutes – being elements of legal style that must necessarily be arranged in certain order for a Form to be recognized.
Incredibly, when we get to 2009 and Blacks 9th edition – guess what the definition of Form is? There is none. That’s right, there is no formal definition of form other than a direct reference to see definition S-1. Now what is S-1, let me read it. According to Blacks 9th, Form is now S-1 and S-1 means “an SEC form that a company use and must file before listing and trading its securities on a national exchange”.
In other words, by 2009, the only legal and valid forms in the United States used by the private commercial courts on the private side are SEC forms. Everything else is fair game. Incredible right?
So should people start using commercial forms like UCC, IRS and other forms? Hold on a second and be very, very careful. Before we even answer that question, lets have a look at the essential elements of a legal form first and what makes a form private or public or foreign?
The essential elements of a form
As we mentioned earlier, the earliest forms created for courts and law were variations of indulgences – yep the same thing that Martin Luther was said to have fought against and succeeded in abolishing, especially in protestant countries.
Actually, that turns out to be the fairy tale version of history. Indulgences have been alive and well ever since and arguably used more in countries that are supposed to be protestant such as England and its colonies than all Catholic countries combined.
For example, Deeds by their nature are forms of indulgences. That is, they are ecclesiastical instruments of solemn form and design. So are Will and Testaments as are Charters.
For example, such instruments contain the memorialization of sacred oaths, absence of numbers and the expression of all items as long handed words, the presence of key Latin Phrases, the clear demonstration of a prayer. Why? Because such instruments formally create trusts according to the sacred law of the Carolingians who founded the Catholic Church and later the Roman Cult.
But in the case of the Bank of England and the system since the 19th Century, a less formal set of rules emerged according to valid “public” form, being:
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
2. Identity of the authorized form
3. Valid body of the form
The first element of a valid form and its upper most heading under the streamlined non-indulgence system of the bank internal paperwork was the identity of the statute and code which authorized the form.
This usually included the particular body politic involved. For example, the original operating law defining the creation of affidavits in the State of New South Wales in Australia is the Oaths Act of 1900, written as OATHS ACT 1900 (NSW).
The second element of a valid form is the identity of the authorized form, to distinguish between different types of valid form or schedules. In the case of the Oaths Act it might be the word “affidavit” written in capitals AFFIDAVIT to make clear.
Now, if the form to be used is specified as a schedule, then the form should also include identify to itself as the appropriate schedule such as (example only) as to the 1836 Act of Births, Deaths and Marriages, you would list SCHEDULE (C.) MARRIAGES SOLEMNINZED AT THE PARISH CHURCH… (of the 1836 act).
Then the form should contain the valid content as prescribed by the statute. So lets repeat those three essential elements of valid forms since the 19th Century under the bank controlled world pretending to be the crown:
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
2. Identity of the authorized form
3. Valid body of the form
So how come the forms we prepare are rejected by clerks, magistrates and judges? How come the private bar guilds are getting away with ignoring our paperwork.
How the private bar tricks us into creating private forms
In an ideal world, if clerks, magistrates and judges followed their own rules, then instruments created as valid indulgences would be honored as the foundation stone of Western Roman Law. Yet as we demonstrated several years ago now with the Ecclesiastical Deed Poll borne out of Leviticus of the Holy Bible, there is no rule of law, there is no justice and the private courts certainly do not recognize God, the Bible or any of their foundation law openly and without a fight.
Similarly, you would think that courts would not be so arrogant as to dismiss the forms defined by statue of the body politic the Congress, or House of Representatives or Senate of the people. Well, actually, courts are all to willing to repudiate all authority except unto themselves, demonstrating they are wholly out of control, without any respect for even the appearance of law, unless forced to be held to account.
But to make their commercial actions easier, the private bar guilds running private courts have used recent technologies and growing awareness to their advantage by tricking us into lodging private documents even when we think we are following public documents.
One way the private bar guilds get away with organized crime and corruption is to sponsor and promote disinformation campaigns on the Internet and amongst people within the truth movement, to distract, to diffuse, to confuse and beguile. This is what has been happening for years, especially now with the absolute insanity of people promoting UCC – what utter madness in the promotion private forms and other diversions that have no possible impact. Still, despite all the warnings, people take to copying and pasting forms which have absolutely no logic, no sense, no historic precedence, no meaning.
Why? Why would people be so gullible? Why would people choose fantasy and magic fairy dust over the reality of the situation we face? In any event, people lap it up and continue to send in nonsensical forms such as courtesy notices and other made up and ludicrous forms. The end result is, just as many people are allowing themselves to be tricked into serious trouble as ever before.
But for those even with discernment, the trickiness of the private bar guilds is extremely high. Instead of hiding how forms should look, almost every jurisdiction of private courts masquerading as public courts put their forms up on the internet to download? Why? And what is different about these forms compared to public forms?
Remember the first point about forms since the 19th century?
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
What do the private bar guilds trick us into doing on all the forms we send? Yes, they convince us that unless it says right at the top US DISTRICT COURT or HIGH COURT or SUPREME COURT or some other name, then the form is invalid.
What does that then do? Under what jurisdiction is that form ultimately and what can a judge or magistrate do? That’s right, if it says the US DISTRICT COURT or HIGH COURT or whatever cout that it is, then those judges and magistrates have complete jurisdiction and they can completely ignore the form and refuse to accept it without any consequences.
Wow. How tricky is that? You follow their forms exactly as they state and yet they ultimately have the power to decide whether they will accept your form or not. This is not isolated, this is happening all around the world.
Using public forms to the public court
So what can you do? Well for one you can return to the original public forms defined by statute and never ever mention the court at the heading- never give them the change to claim jurisdiction above parliament.
What will the court try and do if your form lists the statute that the public form is given life? They will simply deny the form because it doesn’t fit their own private rules and tell you it does not comply.
Fine, that is on the private side. What about the public side? – the side that defines the role of clerk by public statute, that defines the court by constitution or public statute and the form by public statute.
Let the private bar courts openly denounce public statute- denounce the public laws- repudiate any last vestige of illusion that there is any justice. Let them openly admit to corruption by repudiating they are public courts that honor public statutes and public forms. Maybe, just maybe they will start to change or ultimately the private Bar guilds will face extinction.
Remember again the three elements that constitute a “public” form.
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction that give it form. Never including the private Bar court to then give it jurisdiction.
2. Identity of the authorized form if it is a schedule or if it is derived from a schedule.
3. Valid body of the form.
And do not be distracted by gurus that come and cut and paste forms together and tell you that you can create a unique form by merging two statutes or that they have come up with a better form.
Please do not be beguiled by the disinformation promoted by the private Bar guilds.
Let the people see
As to relief, not being tricked into giving away jurisdiction and using properly constructed public forms we might just find relief. Either way, we step closer to reforming the law and ending tyranny.
That is all that I am covering with you tonight. I hope that you find this useful and a reminder of how easily they try to trick us with everything.
Thank you for all those who continue to read, help and support Ucadia. Until be speak again next week, be well and be safe. Good Night.
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here (37 min 13 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________
Hello and thanks for reading and listening to this weeks blog and audio on One of the most false and corrupt tricks of the private bar guilds regarding how they argue they won’t accept your forms, even when they appear to perfectly comply to the guidelines and rulings they set forth.
In other words, you have a legal matter before a particular court, such as a magistrates court, or county court, or district court or even supreme court and you follow to the letter their instructions on how certain forms need to be completed and when it comes to the day, the judge or magistrate simply ignores your forms without any fair consideration and it seems they are running their own race. So how do they get away with it?
Well, if you have been listening to the past two weeks of Ucadia blogs and audios you will know that I have been trying to get back to the most basic and fundamental of perceptions when dealing with the private bar guilds, the current political and rulings classes of society in making plain that if the law is not equal for all people, then there is no rule of law. Full stop. Period. No if’s or buts.
In other words, where there is no equality of law, you live under the rule of tyrants, where might is right, and rule by force and fear. So any claimed law that is issued under such a system is not a law, it is what is called a dictat or dictate – a proclamation without valid authority enforced by force, threat or fear that something must be obeyed.
For example in the case of almost 99% of council regulations are dictat or dictates of a dictator that have absolutely no mandate, lawful basis of authority and are simply enforced by blatant and unequal threat in the absence of any rule of law.
Then last week we made the point that if the adjudication of law means there is no fairness, no equal rights, no good faith, no clean hands at arms length and no presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, then there is no justice. None, zero.
In other words, any sentence, order or edict by the court has absolutely no moral, lawful or legal basis whatsoever, other than as a dictat or dictate by a dictator to be enforced by militia and privateers who are employed by such illegal and unlawful claims to enforce injustice.
As we demonstrated in the pyramid of rights or “jus” where the private bar guilds have granted themselves extraordinary, unprecedented rights and powers above all other parts of society thus removing any possible rational, reasonable and logical claim there is any form of justice, in such countries as the United States, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom.
Of course, this is in complete contradiction to the claims of the private bar guilds running for profit businesses as courts when they speak through the media. They say justice exists, the rule of law exists and that the people are in control through the democratic election of leaders. Yet, despite such spin, despite such George Orwellian double-speak, the evidence exposes such falsities.
One hundred and thirty rights created out of thin air by the private bar guilds in the past two hundred plus years through their dictionaries and case laws. Yet the most powerful of these rights, such as Jus Immunitatis – the right to absolute immunity or Jus Dicere – the right to decide whatever the law is are reserved purely for the private bar guild. The evidence doesn’t lie and some day in the future, more and more people are going to wake up and look past the constant fog of disinfo at the overwhelming evidence to realize without the golden rule in effect, there is no rule of law, without equal rights under equal rule of law, there is no justice.
So is there any hope? Is there any way to overcome when the tyrannical system masquerading as democracy demands you front up to one of their business offices masquerading as courts? Well, yes there is some hope. It is the fact that if the people ever woke up out of their sugar-salt-hormone and preservative haze they might demand a restoration of law; that as has been shown when social media seizes on an overwhelming example of miscarriage of justice, the system is exposed – so there is sensitivity to maintaining the appearance of justice.
That is why I have repeated over and over in recent weeks that one of the simplest yet most powerful things you can ask with respect when going to any court is whether the judge or magistrate will be hearing the matter in good faith and without prejudice? As many of you have shared, some judges and magistrates openly welcome the honest question and answer, yet some judges demonstrate their inappropriateness for claiming such a position by obfuscating and refusing to answer.
So there are signs of possible relief and the internet continues to grow with real, not mythical stories of people finding relief when judges and magistrates choose to honor, what little law exists in court rooms, instead of being pirates. To those judges and magistrates that honor the spirit of law and the ancient ways of law, before the banks seized control and condemned our societies to the matrix of insanity that encloses it today, is say “thank you”. Thank you to all of you who continue to prove there are good people in all positions of society and all walks of life. Thank you for keeping the hope alive that one day we will see a restoration of law and justice that reflects the intentions of the founders of so many great nations.
In the mean time, let no one trick you, confuse you, tell you the kind of falsities that we described last week that the only reason you do not achieve relief is because you are somehow doing it wrong, or that terms such as person, or trust are beyond your comprehension or are dangerous or even that people are getting big financial remedies from the system following certain gurus. Let the lies stop. Let the disinfo stop. The problem is simple – most people live in societies where there is no rule of law, there is no justice, only the fake appearance of justice if you obey without question the demands of the intelligentsia, the illuminati class. That is why innocent people are going to prison. That is why honest people are having their homes and possessions seized. Not because they didn’t follow the yellow brick road – but because they dared to question and the system decided to step on them with both feet, so set an example- the old chestnut of fear and threat.
Next week, I want to focus on possible answers when facing openly corrupt, incompetence and dangerous magistrates and judges who do not care they are exposing their own system. But this week, I want to focus on one possible point of relief in reviewing a point of forms- what are forms when we go to court? And how do the private bar guilds trick us into creating defective forms, even if we have followed their instructions to the letter?
Why is this important? And how might this help? Well for one, if it turns out that we can dramatically improve the strength of our forms that then forces the private bar guilds to openly break their own rules then that is better than the automated steam roller. And for some, it might actually mean that those judges and magistrates and clerks who have any remnant of decency and honor and respect of law might actually dispense justice in their own courts.
What is a form?
Lets begin by reviewing again what we mean by form.
The essential elements of a form
Lets begin by reviewing again what is meant by form within the Western Roman system.
The word form comes from the Latin word forma meaning “shape, appearance, mould, stamp, idea, kind and nature (of an object)”.
The Universal Etymological English Dictionary by N. Bailey of 1675 refined Form into more specific definitions being (generally) “fashion, figure, shape or manner”; (in printing) “one side of a sheet (of paper)”; (in philosophy according to Descartes and Newton) “the second principle, which joined to man, makes up all natural bodies, or the essential, specific, or distinguishing Modification of the Matter of any natural Body”.
By the time of the Dictionary Britannicum of 1736 however, we see a growing sophistication in the various meanings of form to several dozen different meanings spanning wide variety of subjects including (but not limited to):
(In Philosophy) “is the manner of being peculiar to each body, or that which constitutes it such a particular body, and distinguishes it form every other body”;
(In Logic) “the just disposition both of the terms in respect both of predicate and subject, and of the proposition in respect to quantity and quality”;
(In Nature) “are those (forms) which are inherent in bodies, without anything contributed thereto on the part of man, as the form of marble”;
(In Artificial) “are those (forms) which arise from human industry, as a statute (of marble)”;
(In moral sense) “a manner of being or doing a thing according to rule”;
(In Law) “Certain established rules to be observed in processes or judiciary proceedings”.
By 1893, the Andersons Dictionary of Law further distinguishes the legal definition of form into two primary meanings:
(1) Established method of expression or practice; a fixed way of proceeding; and
(2) The model of an instrument or legal proceedings, a formula;
So now we see by the 19th century a definition which reflects a feature beginning with the coup de tat against the crown of Great Britain in the takeover of the British Empire and colonies by the Bank of England and subsequent pseudo statutes such as the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act of 1836 which began to list what are called as Schedules or actual instructions on how information was to be prepared and presented as legal form.
Prior to this, the way information was presented in form was either by way of variations of indulgences prepared by the Company of Worshipful Scrivener Notaries of London and then copies made thereafter. Now, by the 19th century, the corporation pretending to be the Crown of England was dispensing with ecclesiastical form and making up its own forms. In other words, the invention of style over substance.
By 1910, The Blacks Law Dictionary defines Form also in two essential definitions being:
1. A model or skeleton of an instrument to be used in a judicial proceeding, containing the principal necessary matters, the proper technical terms or phrases, and whatever else is necessary to make it formally correct, arranged in proper and methodical order, and capable of being adapted to the circumstances of the specific case. [we start to see a few twists in this definition.]
2. As distinguished from substance," form" means the legal or technical manner or order to be observed in legal instruments or juridical proceedings, or in the construction of legal documents or processes.
Again, these definitions reinforce the change from substance to style that forms that are valid are effectively defined as schedules or extensions to statutes – being elements of legal style that must necessarily be arranged in certain order for a Form to be recognized.
Incredibly, when we get to 2009 and Blacks 9th edition – guess what the definition of Form is? There is none. That’s right, there is no formal definition of form other than a direct reference to see definition S-1. Now what is S-1, let me read it. According to Blacks 9th, Form is now S-1 and S-1 means “an SEC form that a company use and must file before listing and trading its securities on a national exchange”.
In other words, by 2009, the only legal and valid forms in the United States used by the private commercial courts on the private side are SEC forms. Everything else is fair game. Incredible right?
So should people start using commercial forms like UCC, IRS and other forms? Hold on a second and be very, very careful. Before we even answer that question, lets have a look at the essential elements of a legal form first and what makes a form private or public or foreign?
The essential elements of a form
As we mentioned earlier, the earliest forms created for courts and law were variations of indulgences – yep the same thing that Martin Luther was said to have fought against and succeeded in abolishing, especially in protestant countries.
Actually, that turns out to be the fairy tale version of history. Indulgences have been alive and well ever since and arguably used more in countries that are supposed to be protestant such as England and its colonies than all Catholic countries combined.
For example, Deeds by their nature are forms of indulgences. That is, they are ecclesiastical instruments of solemn form and design. So are Will and Testaments as are Charters.
For example, such instruments contain the memorialization of sacred oaths, absence of numbers and the expression of all items as long handed words, the presence of key Latin Phrases, the clear demonstration of a prayer. Why? Because such instruments formally create trusts according to the sacred law of the Carolingians who founded the Catholic Church and later the Roman Cult.
But in the case of the Bank of England and the system since the 19th Century, a less formal set of rules emerged according to valid “public” form, being:
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
2. Identity of the authorized form
3. Valid body of the form
The first element of a valid form and its upper most heading under the streamlined non-indulgence system of the bank internal paperwork was the identity of the statute and code which authorized the form.
This usually included the particular body politic involved. For example, the original operating law defining the creation of affidavits in the State of New South Wales in Australia is the Oaths Act of 1900, written as OATHS ACT 1900 (NSW).
The second element of a valid form is the identity of the authorized form, to distinguish between different types of valid form or schedules. In the case of the Oaths Act it might be the word “affidavit” written in capitals AFFIDAVIT to make clear.
Now, if the form to be used is specified as a schedule, then the form should also include identify to itself as the appropriate schedule such as (example only) as to the 1836 Act of Births, Deaths and Marriages, you would list SCHEDULE (C.) MARRIAGES SOLEMNINZED AT THE PARISH CHURCH… (of the 1836 act).
Then the form should contain the valid content as prescribed by the statute. So lets repeat those three essential elements of valid forms since the 19th Century under the bank controlled world pretending to be the crown:
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
2. Identity of the authorized form
3. Valid body of the form
So how come the forms we prepare are rejected by clerks, magistrates and judges? How come the private bar guilds are getting away with ignoring our paperwork.
How the private bar tricks us into creating private forms
In an ideal world, if clerks, magistrates and judges followed their own rules, then instruments created as valid indulgences would be honored as the foundation stone of Western Roman Law. Yet as we demonstrated several years ago now with the Ecclesiastical Deed Poll borne out of Leviticus of the Holy Bible, there is no rule of law, there is no justice and the private courts certainly do not recognize God, the Bible or any of their foundation law openly and without a fight.
Similarly, you would think that courts would not be so arrogant as to dismiss the forms defined by statue of the body politic the Congress, or House of Representatives or Senate of the people. Well, actually, courts are all to willing to repudiate all authority except unto themselves, demonstrating they are wholly out of control, without any respect for even the appearance of law, unless forced to be held to account.
But to make their commercial actions easier, the private bar guilds running private courts have used recent technologies and growing awareness to their advantage by tricking us into lodging private documents even when we think we are following public documents.
One way the private bar guilds get away with organized crime and corruption is to sponsor and promote disinformation campaigns on the Internet and amongst people within the truth movement, to distract, to diffuse, to confuse and beguile. This is what has been happening for years, especially now with the absolute insanity of people promoting UCC – what utter madness in the promotion private forms and other diversions that have no possible impact. Still, despite all the warnings, people take to copying and pasting forms which have absolutely no logic, no sense, no historic precedence, no meaning.
Why? Why would people be so gullible? Why would people choose fantasy and magic fairy dust over the reality of the situation we face? In any event, people lap it up and continue to send in nonsensical forms such as courtesy notices and other made up and ludicrous forms. The end result is, just as many people are allowing themselves to be tricked into serious trouble as ever before.
But for those even with discernment, the trickiness of the private bar guilds is extremely high. Instead of hiding how forms should look, almost every jurisdiction of private courts masquerading as public courts put their forms up on the internet to download? Why? And what is different about these forms compared to public forms?
Remember the first point about forms since the 19th century?
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction
What do the private bar guilds trick us into doing on all the forms we send? Yes, they convince us that unless it says right at the top US DISTRICT COURT or HIGH COURT or SUPREME COURT or some other name, then the form is invalid.
What does that then do? Under what jurisdiction is that form ultimately and what can a judge or magistrate do? That’s right, if it says the US DISTRICT COURT or HIGH COURT or whatever cout that it is, then those judges and magistrates have complete jurisdiction and they can completely ignore the form and refuse to accept it without any consequences.
Wow. How tricky is that? You follow their forms exactly as they state and yet they ultimately have the power to decide whether they will accept your form or not. This is not isolated, this is happening all around the world.
Using public forms to the public court
So what can you do? Well for one you can return to the original public forms defined by statute and never ever mention the court at the heading- never give them the change to claim jurisdiction above parliament.
What will the court try and do if your form lists the statute that the public form is given life? They will simply deny the form because it doesn’t fit their own private rules and tell you it does not comply.
Fine, that is on the private side. What about the public side? – the side that defines the role of clerk by public statute, that defines the court by constitution or public statute and the form by public statute.
Let the private bar courts openly denounce public statute- denounce the public laws- repudiate any last vestige of illusion that there is any justice. Let them openly admit to corruption by repudiating they are public courts that honor public statutes and public forms. Maybe, just maybe they will start to change or ultimately the private Bar guilds will face extinction.
Remember again the three elements that constitute a “public” form.
1. Identity of the statute and code and jurisdiction that give it form. Never including the private Bar court to then give it jurisdiction.
2. Identity of the authorized form if it is a schedule or if it is derived from a schedule.
3. Valid body of the form.
And do not be distracted by gurus that come and cut and paste forms together and tell you that you can create a unique form by merging two statutes or that they have come up with a better form.
Please do not be beguiled by the disinformation promoted by the private Bar guilds.
Let the people see
As to relief, not being tricked into giving away jurisdiction and using properly constructed public forms we might just find relief. Either way, we step closer to reforming the law and ending tyranny.
That is all that I am covering with you tonight. I hope that you find this useful and a reminder of how easily they try to trick us with everything.
Thank you for all those who continue to read, help and support Ucadia. Until be speak again next week, be well and be safe. Good Night.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)