Common Law.

Topical debate
User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Mon Aug 27, 2012 5:50 am

It's no use attacking 'The System' until you've built up something to put in it's place. Apart from anything else millions of ordinary people depend on the system in all sorts of ways. To give just one example, if you don't like the banks then you need to create somewhere else where folks can safely deposit their savings and where those funds will be used prudently for the common good. What alternatives do you have?

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Mon Aug 27, 2012 3:55 pm


User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Wed Aug 29, 2012 11:02 pm

I'd never heard of this "Freeman" movement (if it deserves that designation) until I came to this thread, and my responses were based on my previous knowledge of the law plus a little research on MC etc. I now find that they have been around for a few years and there is quite a lot of reaction and commentary on line from knowledgeable folk, all which pretty well confirm my own conclusions. They are not just harmless loonies like flat-earthers etc. but actually mislead people with their batty ideas of the law. It seems they infiltrated the London occupation (was that how they came to your notice Graham?) and may have damaged the legal campaign against eviction of the camp, essentially by wasting time and confusing people. As I said if you want to use the law you must accept and understand it as it really is, no wishful thinking. Obviously there's a parallel here with a lot of the Cornish constitutional stuff, how much is 'real', how much open to question and how much plain fantasy?

Anyway you should find this link of interest. Please read the attached judgement at the end, it shows you how the English common law based on president actually works and how judges strive to balance conflicting interests (regardless of whether or not you think they came to the right conclusion). But as the guy explains, the campers rather shot themselves in the foot legally.

http://blog.scrapperduncan.com/2012/02/ ... -judgment/

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Thu Aug 30, 2012 1:34 am

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, Factotum. Common Law supersedes all other types of law in this land.
Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of assembly) of the European Convention of Human Rights may be engaged by protest activity.
How kind of this Corporation to tell us where and when. No thanks. I prefer my own critical thinking. I want what's right for me; that is to be free of injury or loss. I know how to do that and have faith in my fellow man, so why would I want anyone else to tell me otherwise ? Why would they want to have power over me. To collect money perhaps ?

As for the Occupy movement, well they should have listened and they could have created a bombshell, because CL is the only law of the land. They argued their case based on Civil law, which in itself is acting fraudulently, because a civil court is a CORPORATION. And we all know what corporations do. They answer to their shareholders!!! Therefore they should have demanded to stand only under CL jurisdiction. THAT IS THEIR RIGHT. If they did, they would have won. Instead, they consented to a corrupt court and lost! So I suggest that the only infiltrators out there were agents of another corporation, namely, the Government. At the end of the day, it's "the proof of the pudding"etc." There are many success stories out there from 'Freeman' should you choose to search.

BTW, the worldwide "Occupy" movement is still going strong and millions are protesting the fascist NWO elite across the globe on many fronts. Their days are numbered. And they know it...

I became what is known as a "Truther" at the turning of this year. I've followed all sorts of subjects since then and been utterly blown away by what I've discovered to be true. I stumbled across common law only six weeks ago. Knowing it empowers you not to be stood on and to stand your ground. All men are born equal. If you wish to be a slave to legislation and statutes, that's your choice but truth is the new fashion.

One question for you factotum: How do you think the world is doing under the present system ?

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:58 am

Oh dear, I thought better of you Graham. Firstly you only need to scratch the surface of the Freeman sites to see that they're just BNP in sharp suits. Really they're more like a crank religion (well all religions are crank religions IMO but let that pass) but instead of using biblical language they use their own totally weird interpretation of legal terminology. The legal profession find them mildly amusing, when they're not sending them down for contempt. This isn't a proper reply to your latest above, I'll come to that tomorrow maybe, but I see you refer to the "Fascist NWO". Yet your Freemen mates are outright fascists, racists, 'little-britain' nationalists and quite probably many other unsavoury things as well.

Anyway I did look at their 'bank' website which once I'd screened out all the butcher's aprons and loony rhetoric was potentially interesting. However, firstly there already are ethical banks and similar institutions with an existing track record, so they're doing nothing new. Also I can't find any hard information on how they intend to operate. Not even a company reg. number, no like to rules or legal frameworks or a prospectus ... Nothing in fact to inspire confidence. They bang on about lending money but don't explain where it's supposed to come from. Are they planning on taking deposits? If so they need at least £1M in paid up shares (risk capital) before they'll be given a banking license (probably more these days). Likewise if they want to sell insurance or give financial advice they'll need to have properly qualified staff in order to be licensed, this is in fact to protect the public from dodgy operators. How will they pay these people? It they try to do any of these things without official approval the FSA and the BoT will close them down PDQ. Maybe it's just another ploy to make them look martyrs in the eyes of their followers? There are other ways of legally doing 'banking' without taking deposits, using withdrawable shares or loanstock, although lending to private individuals is still fairly tightly regulated (Consumer Credit Act, etc.) But in any case you need to know who you're lending too to avoid bad debts.

Generally an organisation that appeals for investments in socially useful projects etc. is probably OK, but one that seems to be aimed at potential borrowers, especially when it says "you don't need to pay anything now", looks decidedly dodgy. Quite frankly it smells like a pyramid scheme. Also the FSA have a warning out against them already.

Just as an example, don't you think this sounds a little more credible ...

A fair profit, a strong capital base and a stable funding base from savers’ deposits are integral parts of our approach. As such we have no need to engage in the wholesale markets and will never lend out more than we have on deposit. Nor do we make use of derivatives and other complex financial instruments that can put savers’ money at risk. Our shares are not listed on any stock exchange to ensure we don’t become diverted from our sustainable banking mission in the drive for a fast profit or negatively impacted by the vagaries of market sentiment. ‘At the core of our banking, we are directly connected to the real economy, only financing sustainable businesses delivering clear social, environmental and cultural benefits with a lasting positive impact.

http://www.triodos.co.uk/en/about-triod ... s-05-07-12

One way to raise a loan fund without taking deposits (see the conditions on p2) :

http://www.rootstock.org.uk/images/appl ... areapp.pdf

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:41 am

OK, read your last post now. The court case was about balancing the rights of the protesters to protest against those of the general public, local residents, traders, St. Pauls etc. to pass along the public highway, go about their business, worship freely etc. Whether you wish to see this in terms of statute law and the European human rights legislation (as the judges did) or in terms of your idea of 'common law' or simply in terms of basic human decency, you will I hope have to admit that a balancing act was involved, (even if you think the court should have leaned over a little further in favour of the protest). How would you have reached a compromise? Or do you somehow believe that you were 100% right and everyone else in the world 100% wrong? Like the man said, "If you live outside the law you've gotta be honest".

Read your history. When people feel insecure they look for a "strong leader". Look at how Hitler came to power and review the nature of your new 'friends'.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Fri Aug 31, 2012 5:20 am

Yeah, nice try de-factotum. Ignore everything and change direction. No thanks. Other readers of this thread, should, by now, be more alert to the links I have posted. They are extremely important if you want freedom. I stand by everything I have written.
One last time. Common Law supercedes legislation and statute law. Period. Empower yourself by learning the subtle languages of the corporate lawyers[Legalese]. Start here: http://www.yourstrawman.com/ It doesn't take that long either!
Read your history. When people feel insecure they look for a "strong leader". Look at how Hitler came to power and review the nature of your new 'friends'.
Read my history ? I am feeling and living the result of my history. And we do not seek a strong leader either. We seek only the truth. That's the difference between us.

Am I aware of how Hitler came to power ? Yes. And I'm watching fascism unfold as I type; and have been for far to long now.
Now THAT!...makes me feel insecure.

User avatar
Marhak
Posts: 11075
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 7:46 am

Re: Common Law.

Post by Marhak » Fri Aug 31, 2012 7:19 pm

And not only here. I saw the clip of the Republican rally where Romney's votes were announced but few delegates would say how many votes Ron Paul pulled in, or even mention his name. Then the "Ayes" for Romney were given the nod over the shattering roars of "Nay!" These are the people who set out to force "democracy" upon countries that don't really want it while, at home, killing democracy stone dead, even within their own Party!

I was chillingly realised how reminscent this is to the rise of Hitler's National Socialist Party. All it lacked were brown shirts, a silly salute and "Sieg Heils".

User avatar
P_Trembath
Posts: 2161
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:55 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by P_Trembath » Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:44 pm

As I see it, it does not matter what type of law, statute, or whatever there is, none of them are worth a damn unless the majority of the population accept them, and if they do accept them, then they stand.

Laws are, basically, just rules that humans use to enable groups of humans to live together in reasonable harmony. They are necessary to prevent the strong taking what they want, and the weak getting nothing. Originally laws were made by the head of the group/tribe, who only held this position because he had the agreement of the rest of the group/tribe to hold it. He may well have taken the position through force, and he may well have held the position through force, but he was only able to exercise such force because he had enough backing from enough individuals of the group/tribe to make the rest of the group/tribe accept his rule, even if it was only through fear. If there were enough individuals in the tribe who were able to resist his force, then he would be thrown out, and a new head was chosen, or imposed.

To cut through all the BS, this is very much the way that we are governed today. Instead of one man using force to take control, we have elections, where we can choose from a group of people which ones we want to "rule" us. But, the final result is the same. the "rulers" make their laws, statutes, whatever, and expect the rest of us to live by them. And live by them we do, for as a group, we have accepted that these people "rule" us, and as a group, we accept their laws. Where it is exactly the same as in the past, is where one person decides that they do not wish to accept a particular law, then our "rulers", with the acceptance of the rest of us can force that person in to obedience, if necessary, by violence, even death.
It is "our" acceptance of these rules/laws,that make them binding.

There may well be "bad" laws, even "bad" groups of law, there may even be laws that, as individuals, we think are illegal, wrong, contrary to our human rights. But unless we can get enough other people to, not only agree with us, but who are prepared to stand by us and fight, either through words, or if necessary physically, then we have zero chance of changing, removing, or ignoring for any length of time, those laws we disagree with.

These people who advocate, promote this "Common Law", seem to me to be the sort of person who wants others to do their "fighting" for them. They seem to be big on writing copious pages of information on the Internet, issuing pamphlets, and occasionally giving speeches, but I have not heard of any of them driving their cars for years with no tax, no MOT, no insurance. I have not heard of any of them continually not paying their council tax, income tax, I have not heard of them standing in court and claiming that the"crime" they are being charged with is not a crime under Common Law, so the court has no jurisdiction over them, and then walking from the court free men. Why, because the rest of "us" agree with the laws, agree with the courts sentencing transgressors, agree with incarceration for those who continually or drastically transgress, agree with the use of force to ensure that any sentencing or incarceration is carried out, the rest of "us" even agree that if the force used to ensure the transgressor received his punishment, when the transgressor was resisting, resulted in the transgressors death, then that would be acceptable.

Whether "we" like them it not, "our" legal system exists, the only way to change it, or even part of it, is from within. If you want change, then you have to convince enough of "us" to agree with you to be able to force the change through. This is true for everything, whether it's laws, or the constitutional status of Cornwall. Intelligent argument, and education is the only way, refusal and disobedience are only ever a last resort, and not guaranteed to achieve anything more than suffering and grief.
Everyone, Cornish or otherwise, has their own particular part to play. No part is too great or too small; no one is too old or too young to do something.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Sat Sep 01, 2012 5:19 am

As I see it, it does not matter what type of law, statute, or whatever there is, none of them are worth a damn unless the majority of the population accept them, and if they do accept them, then they stand.
Well I'm pleased to tell you, that is not the case Paddy. There have been many successes.
Laws are, basically, just rules that humans use to enable groups of humans to live together in reasonable harmony.
Seven weeks ago, I would have said the same thing. Seven weeks later, I know that is so not true. I repeat for the last time; Common Law = You must not cause INJURY or LOSS. That's all there is to it, and when you think about it, what else do you need ? All the rest of the crap is LEGISLATION or STATUTE, which you have to CONSENT TO!
The difference between LAWFUL and LEGAL is MASSIVE ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Common Law is your Sovereign right
Originally laws were made by the head of the group/tribe, who only held this position because he had the agreement of the rest of the group/tribe to hold it. He may well have taken the position through force, and he may well have held the position through force, but he was only able to exercise such force because he had enough backing from enough individuals of the group/tribe to make the rest of the group/tribe accept his rule, even if it was only through fear. If there were enough individuals in the tribe who were able to resist his force, then he would be thrown out, and a new head was chosen, or imposed.
Correct. Until Magna Carta 1215. Also, it became the template for virtually the whole of the western world and beyond.
To cut through all the BS, this is very much the way that we are governed today. Instead of one man using force to take control, we have elections, where we can choose from a group of people which ones we want to "rule" us.
One of the great illusions. That we actually "Choose" who to rule us. Did you know that 32 of the last 41 Presidents of the USA are linked to the same bloodline ?
But, the final result is the same. the "rulers" make their laws, statutes, whatever, and expect the rest of us to live by them. And live by them we do, for as a group, we have accepted that these people "rule" us, and as a group, we accept their laws. Where it is exactly the same as in the past, is where one person decides that they do not wish to accept a particular law, then our "rulers", with the acceptance of the rest of us can force that person in to obedience, if necessary, by violence, even death. It is "our" acceptance of these rules/laws,that make them binding.
I can't argue with a word of that.
There may well be "bad" laws, even "bad" groups of law, there may even be laws that, as individuals, we think are illegal, wrong, contrary to our human rights. But unless we can get enough other people to, not only agree with us, but who are prepared to stand by us and fight, either through words, or if necessary physically, then we have zero chance of changing, removing, or ignoring for any length of time, those laws we disagree with.
But that is where Common Law is different Paddy. Yes we need a critical mass to completely overthrow the system, but you can singularly take on these people and win if you know the language of the law; and it's fascinating and fun to learn.
These people who advocate, promote this "Common Law", seem to me to be the sort of person who wants others to do their "fighting" for them. They seem to be big on writing copious pages of information on the Internet, issuing pamphlets, and occasionally giving speeches, but I have not heard of any of them driving their cars for years with no tax, no MOT, no insurance. I have not heard of any of them continually not paying their council tax, income tax, I have not heard of them standing in court and claiming that the"crime" they are being charged with is not a crime under Common Law, so the court has no jurisdiction over them, and then walking from the court free men.

That's because you have not looked, or not know who to look for my friend. Check out Roger Hayes, Guy Taylor, Veronica Chapman, Ray St Clair and the brilliant and Cornish born[on St Michael's Mount!] John Harris. Here's his website: http://www.tpuc.org/. There are many others. The more I research, the more I find.
Whether "we" like them it not, "our" legal system exists, the only way to change it, or even part of it, is from within. If you want change, then you have to convince enough of "us" to agree with you to be able to force the change through. This is true for everything, whether it's laws, or the constitutional status of Cornwall. Intelligent argument, and education is the only way, refusal and disobedience are only ever a last resort, and not guaranteed to achieve anything more than suffering and grief.
I'm not here to 'convince' anyone Paddy. I'm only the messenger. It's up to each individual to research it and act upon that knowledge. Because all of us and all our ancestors have been screwed by the greatest SCAM of all time!!!! It's up to each individual to empower themselves with this knowledge. But there will be no suffering given by Freemen. Violence is an offence. In fact I would go further. Take the police for example. It is for us to compassionately inform them to honour their Oath and let them know they are the servants of the people, and not the other way round. It's not their fault they've become thugs. That's how they've been trained! Inform them otherwise and they will see. As you get into this, you find that many ex policemen and policewomen are on board.

I'll finish on a fun part of exercising your Common Law rights. After all, we all need a laugh sometimes. BTW, Darren knew virtually nothing about CL when this happened to him by chance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dLf57DrAsk

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Sat Sep 01, 2012 6:02 am

"But that is where Common Law is different Paddy. Yes we need a critical mass to completely overthrow the system, but you can singularly take on these people and win if you know the language of the law; and it's fascinating and fun to learn."

So are astrology and homeopathy and like them your so-called "common law" is completely bogus. You've been had big time. Conned. These people are conmen preying on the vulnerable, ignorant and frustrated. They bring any genuine 'resistance movement' into public disrepute, sow confusion and misinformation, and basically are nothing but trouble. But clearly we've got a True Believer here. The rest of you, please do some research and draw your own conclusions.

User avatar
GrahamHart
Posts: 2084
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by GrahamHart » Sat Sep 01, 2012 4:38 pm

The rest of you, please do some research and draw your own conclusions.
Quite.

Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air !Hot air ! Hot air ! Hot air !
NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS ! NO FACTS !

YOU ARE A MEGA TROLL de-factotum.Everyone here now knows it...and you're foolin no one :mrgreen:

User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Sun Sep 02, 2012 1:22 am

The only 'successes' your friends appear to have had is where they've caught the police or other petty officials, traffic wardens and suchlike acting ultra vires, bullying people etc. That's hardly a world-wide conspiracy to enslave humanity, simply the unfortunate fact that the world is full little hitlers and "just obeying orders" types, and probably always will be. Unfortunately this sort of scum thrive in any bureaucratic system (but will no doubt be first up against the wall after any revolution). However that's all beside the point. Can you refer me to a single case where a court of law has bowed to their crazy ideas of "Common Law?". It's kind of ironic btw that they all seem to be rabid anti-europeans, yet the Occupy people relied on European human rights laws to argue their case.


User avatar
factotum
Posts: 1320
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:15 pm

Re: Common Law.

Post by factotum » Sun Sep 02, 2012 6:17 am

The accused did not make his presence in the court known to the bench. He might have defended himself but 'hid' behind a spokesman who talked nonsense leaving the court perplexed. In the end nothing happened, no hearing could be held and the guy was in effect found guilty in his absence and an order issued against him. Hardly a victory. Hardly even an effective protest. To the average person here was some deluded person wasting court time, at the public expense. You'll have to do much better than that.

I find this all a bit sad, since I think that at heart we're probably on the same side. Just that I've seen quite a few groups and organisations and projects attempting to create their own reality or save the world or whatever, and I've seen them mostly fail or become co-opted or perverted in some way. And the rot usually comes from inside. Sad but true. Show me some realistic alternatives and you'll likely have my support.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest