Monday, October 31, 2011
Genocide, real name Jusuf, was born in Bosnia (former Yugoslavia) in 1984. In 1992 as a young child he was trapped in a brutal conflict that overtook his country. His home town of Zvornik was one of the first places to fall under attack and resulted in the murder and ethnic cleansing of the entire Muslim population. Jusef watched from the hills as tanks shelled the city and paramilitary forces moved in to cleanse the once beautiful and multicultural city.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Thanks to Michelle for sending me these excellent videos outlining the real reasons NATO and the Western powers have invaded Libya and killed Gaddafi. Please do our brothers and sisters in Libya a favor by spreading this post far and wide. Peace.
Sunday, October 23, 2011
“Once again the elite claimed that only global governance could save humanity from certain destruction and this time the elite would succeed in setting up their world body. In April 1945 … the United Nations was founded by the victors of World War II. The United Nations complex was then built in
“World War II facilitated the American acceptance of a global ‘peacekeeping" institution - the United Nations. After the U.S. had rejected the first attempt to create such an institution in the League of Nations, the Illuminati decided to create an arm of the Rothschild funded Round Table groups which could help influence western society towards the embracement of globalism.” -Fritz Springmeier, “Bloodlines of the Illuminati”
In 1948 George Orwell wrote 1984, another quasi-fiction novel about the big brother control-grid surveillance societies to come. Orwell said, “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever.” On February 7th, 1950 FDR’s financial advisor, international banker James Paul Warburg stated before the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” Two days later the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 66 stating that the United Nations Charter “should be changed to provide a true world government constitution.” In 1952, globalist and Committee of 300 member Bertrand Russell wrote “The Impact of Science on Society.” Russell, like Wells, wrote extensively about world government and the scientific dictatorships of the future:
“There is, it must be confessed, a psychological difficulty about a single world government. The chief source of social cohesion in the past, I repeat, has been war: the passions that inspire a feeling of unity are hate and fear. These depend upon the existence of an enemy, actual or potential. It seems to me that a world government could only be kept in being by force, not by the spontaneous loyalty that now inspires a nation at war.” -Bertrand Russell, “The Impact of Science on Society” (36)
“It is possible nowadays for a government to be very much more oppressive than any government could be before there was scientific technique. Propaganda makes persuasion easier for the government; public ownership of halls and paper makes counter-propaganda more difficult; and the effectiveness of modern armaments makes popular risings impossible. No revolution can succeed in a modern country unless it has the support of at least a considerable section of the armed forces. But the armed forces can be kept loyal by being given a higher standard of life than that of the average worker, and this is made easier by every step in the degradation of ordinary labour. Thus the very evils of the system help to give it stability. Apart from external pressure, there is no reason why such a regime should not last for a very long time." -Bertrand Russell, “The Impact of Science on Society” (61)
"A scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world government ... unless there is a world government which secures universal birth control, there must from time to time be great wars, in which the penalty of defeat is widespread death by starvation ... Unless, at some stage, one power or group of powers emerges victorious and proceeds to establish a single government of the world with a monopoly of armed forces, it is clear that the level of civilization must decline until scientific warfare becomes impossible - that is until science is extinct." -Bertrand Russell, “The Impact of Science on Society” (117)
Shortly after Russell’s book, fellow Committee of 300 member Aldous Huxley wrote “Brave New World” about a future pharmacological scientific dictatorship in which the drugged citizens are described as “smiling depressives that love their servitude.” Aldous Huxley’s grandfather T.H. Huxley was another Committee of 300 member known as “
“The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles, and mysteries. Under a scientific dictatorship, education will really work…most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.” -Aldous Huxley, “Brave
In his 1962 publication, “The Future of Federalism” bloodline governor of New York and CFR member, Nelson Rockefeller, promoted the New World order: “The nation-state is becoming less and less competent to perform its international political tasks … These are some of the reasons pressing us to lead vigorously toward the true building of a new world order … Sooner perhaps than we may realize … there will evolve the bases for a federal structure of the free world.” Years later on July 26, 1968 campaigning for the presidency, Nelson Rockefeller told the Associated Press that “as president, he would work toward the creation of a new world order.”
Bloodline president and CFR member Richard Nixon was quoted in the October 1967 Foreign Affairs stating: "The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a new world order.”
In 1969 the first black Congressman from
Zbigneiw Brzezinski is a former
“Brzezinski is the author of a book that should have been read by every American interested in the future of this country. Entitled ‘The Technotronic Era,’ it was commissioned by the Club of
In the April 1974 issue of the (CFR) Council on Foreign Relations’ journal, “Foreign Affairs,” member Richard N. Gardner wrote: “The
In October 1975 during an address before the United Nations General Assembly, Henry Kissinger said, "My country's history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity, that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us fashion together a new world order.”
Later in October, the 24th, 1975, the World Affairs Council of
Also in 1975 Richard A. Falk wrote a book called “On the Creation of a Just World Order.” In one section of the book called “Toward the New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions,” Falk wrote, "The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a new world order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture. We believe a new order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species."
Another whistle-blowing Congressman was Larry P. McDonald, who was then killed onboard a plane suspiciously shot down by soviets. In 1976 he said, “The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."
"There exists a shadowy Government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” -Senator, Daniel K. Inouye, 1977
"Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a new world order." -Mikhail Gorbachev, United Nations address, December, 1988
"We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the
“The crisis in the
"If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging
"But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush's mind the New World Order was founded on a convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council."-A. M. Rosenthal, New York Times, January, 1991
"I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: ... At the end of the war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive
“What is at stake is more than one small country. It is a big idea, a New World Order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve universal aspirations of mankind— peace and security, freedom and the rule of law. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective, a new world order, can emerge. Now we can see a new world coming into being, a world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order.” -President George Bush, State of the Union Address, September 11, 1991
"George Bush has been surrounding himself with people who believe in one-world government. They believe that the Soviet system and the American system are converging. The vehicle to bring this about is the United Nations, the majority of whose 166 member states are socialist, atheist, and anti-American." -
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all.” -Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, Time Magazine, July 20th, 1992
"The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth - in Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund." -part of full-page advertisement by the government of
"[The New World Order] cannot happen without
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the
"To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification." -Brock Chisholm, while director of UN (WHO) World Health Organization
In 1998, Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote another book called “The Grand Chessboard,” in which he compared the elite control of the world to a game of chess and accurately “predicted” Afghani terror attacks and the rise of the
Just three days after the 9/11 attacks on the Pentagon and
In his 2002 Memoirs, David Rockefeller openly admitted conspiring with other globalists toward a one-world order: "Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the
Pope John Paul II stated at the World Day of Peace Homily on Jan. 1st, 2004 that, "People are becoming more and more aware of the need for a new international order.”
With the success of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” movie (which should be called “Convenient Half-Truths”) and a U.N. panel’s worth of poor science from the IPCC, the globalists are hoping to convince us that a world carbon-tax will save us from global warming. In 2007 British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said, “A
Buy The Atlantean Conspiracy Now
Friday, October 21, 2011
Thanks to Lino for sending me this absolutely fascinating discussion between polar opposites Pastor James Wickstrom and Rabbi Abe Finkelstein about Jewish control of the world. Pastor Wickstrom asks some excellent questions and Rabbi Finkelstein amazingly gives honest answers about world Jewry's control of banking, media and governments, their creation of communism, their founding of the Jesuits, their holocaust hoax, their human sacrifice rituals and many more jaw-dropping subjects. I find the only things more shocking than Rabbi Finkelstein's blunt admissions are his complete callous disregard and playful disdain for us lowly "goyim." What do you guys think of this?
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
After WWI, the Treaty of Versailles created the League of Nations which was exoterically promoted as a vehicle for world peace, but esoterically the globalists’ first attempt at world governance. The League of Nations failed in both uniting world governments and promoting world peace. The Treaty of Versailles also failed and was denounced for imposing impossible reparations payments on the German people - payments which created the economic hardships that led to the rise of National Socialism and Hitler. At the time, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson said regarding the Treaty: “If I were a German, I think I should never sign it.”
“We have written a document that guarantees war in 20 years … When you place conditions on a people [Germany] that it cannot possibly keep, you force it to either breech the agreement or to war. Either we modify that agreement, and make it tolerable to the German people, or when the new generation comes along they will try again.” -British Prime Minister David Lloyd George
“At the end of the war in 1919, the Treaty of Versailles meetings were attended by Rothschild connected men like Paul and Max Warburg, John Foster Dulles (of Kuhn-Loeb), Colonel House, Thomas Lamont (of Morgans) and Allen Dulles (of Kuhn-Loeb). The harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles totally set the stage for World War II. Said one delegate: ‘This is no peace; this is only a truce for twenty years.’ Sure enough, in 1939 the Second World War started. Another product of the Versailles meetings was the elite’s Charter for the League of Nations - the Illuminati’s first attempt at creating a global institution. The League of Nations failed. This called for the need to create a think tank/special Interest organization that could promote the new world order. Thus the creation of the Foreign Relations Institutions - the CFR., RIIA, etc.” -Fritz Springmeier, Bloodlines of the Illuminati
Around the same time as the Treaty of Versailles, higher-ups in the conspiratorial pyramid met in secret at the Hotel Majestic in Paris. Out of these meetings was created the American Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the British Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), with funding from Cecil Rhodes, the Rockefellers and Rothschilds among others. The stated mission of the CFR is to erode America’s national sovereignty into a One-World government. This will be explained in detail later.
"The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon these decisions will rest the stability of the new world order and the future peace of the world." -M. C. Alexander, Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation (1919)
“The League convened in Paris in 1919 but many nations recognized it as a threat to their sovereignty and refused to join. Frustrated by the U.S. Congress blocking the League of Nations, British Intelligence with the help of the Rockefeller family, set up the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City in 1921. The Council recruited the best and brightest of American life to support the growth of the Anglo-American Empire. The CFR’s stated mission is to abolish all nation-states in favor of an all powerful world government administered by a tiny elite.” -Alex Jones, “Endgame DVD”
Having established the League of Nations, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the globalists had successfully began the transition from old world national independence to new world international interdependence.
"If there are those who think we are to jump immediately into a new world order … they are doomed to disappointment. If we are ever to approach that time, it will be after patient and persistent effort of long duration. The present international situation of mistrust and fear can only be corrected by a formula of equal status, continuously applied, to every phase of international contacts, until the cobwebs of the old order are brushed out of the minds of the people of all lands." -Dr. Augustus O. Thomas, president of the World Federation of Education Associations (August 1927), quoted in the book "International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World" (1931)
H.G. Wells, the famous author of Time Machine, War of the Worlds, and The Invisible Man, was secretly a member British Intelligence, Committee of 300, a Mason, and a Fabian. He was very familiar with the globalists’ One-World agenda and wrote many books outlining it with titles like: The Open Conspiracy, The Shape of Things to Come, World Brain, A Modern Utopia, and The New World Order.
“The political world of the … Open Conspiracy must weaken, efface, incorporate and supersede existing governments … The Open Conspiracy is the natural inheritor of socialist and communist enthusiasms; it may be in control of Moscow before it is in control of New York … The character of the Open Conspiracy will now be plainly displayed … It will be a world religion …The Open Conspiracy will appear first, I believe as a conscious organization of intelligent, and in some cases wealthy men, as a movement having distinct social and political aims, confessedly ignoring most of the existing apparatus of political control, or using it only as an incidental implement in the stages, a mere movement of a number of people in a certain direction, who will presently discover, with a sort of a surprise, the common object toward which they are all moving. In all sorts of ways, they will be influencing and controlling the ostensible government." -H.G. Wells, “The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution” 1928
Writing books like “The Open Conspiracy” and explaining outright the nature of their plans for scientific dictatorships – the conspirators hide out in the open. By reading about our ever encroached upon freedom, we accept it as inevitable. It is called “predictive programming” and continues being used today in books, magazines, movies, and other forms of mass media. The ideas are propagated into the public mind as hypotheticals or science-fiction. This desensitizes and pre-conditions populations to accept the incremental implementation of these supposedly fictitious scientific dictatorships. As the global technocracy creeps up around us, we have already been subconsciously programmed to accept such a future.
“Fabians like H.G. Wells who wrote so eloquently on the New World Order with such books as The New World Order, A Modern Utopia, The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints For A World Revolution was a wolf in sheep clothing. H.G. Well’s made the New World Order something that sounded advantageous to everyone, a Utopia of sorts. That is not what it will be.” -Fritz Springmeier, Bloodlines of the Illuminati
In 1933 H.G. Wells published “The Shape of Things to Come” which was supposedly a science-fiction work about a world state ruled by a benevolent dictatorship. However, this book accurately predicted the Second World War to start around 1940 originating from a German/Polish dispute. It went on to predict that the agenda for world government would succeed on its third attempt around 1980 following some event(s) that would occur in Iraq. Though 1980 was slightly early, Wells’ prophecy certainly seems to be coming to fruition now.
“Although world government had been plainly coming for some years, although it had been endlessly feared and murmured against, it found no opposition prepared anywhere.” -H.G. Wells, “The Shape of Things to Come”
The Fabian Society to which H.G. Wells belonged has also been instrumental in bringing about the New World Order. Their stated mission is to advance the socialist cause by gradualist and reformist, not revolutionary means. Their logo is a wolf wearing a sheep suit. A Wolf in Sheep’s clothing. Here is a sampling of Fabian thought:
“To play those millions of minds, to watch them slowly respond to an unseen stimulus, to guide their aspirations without their knowledge – all this whether in high capacities or in humble, is a big and endless game of chess, of ever extraordinary excitement.” -Sidney Webb, founder of the Fabian Society
“Behind the division of humanity stand those Enlightened Ones whose right and privilege it is to watch over human evolution and to guide the destinies of men…This they do through the implanting of ideas in the minds of the world thinkers, so that these ideas in due time receive recognition and eventually become controlling factors in human life. They train the members of the New Group of World Servers in the task of changing these ideas into ideals. These in turn become the desired objectives of the thinkers and are then taught to the powerful middle class and worked up into world forms of governments or religion, thus forming the basis of the New World Order.” -Alice Bailey, Occultist, Fabian and Head of the Lucis Trust
In 1933, 33rd degree Mason and President FDR introduced the Great Seal on the back of the dollar bill, which still includes the Latin “Novus Ordo Seclorum” translating “New Secular Order” or “New World Order.” The term was next used by Thule secret society member Adolf Hitler when he claimed “National Socialism (Nazism) will use its own revolution for the establishing of a New World Order.” Shortly thereafter in 1939, H.G. Wells wrote his book entitled “The New World Order” in which he advocates a One-World centralized government.
"When the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people - will hate the new world order - and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people." -H. G. Wells, "The New World Order" 1939
Buy The Atlantean Conspiracy Now
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
The Rugged Man and Vinnie Paz of the hip-hop group Jedi Mind Tricks have some excellent conscious tracks. The first video called "Uncommon Valor: A Vietnam Story" is the true life story of Rugged Man's father, Staff Sgt. John A. Thorburn, a vietnam veteran affected by Agent Orange. Rugged Man's brother Maxx was born handicapped and blind, eventually dying at age 10. His sister Dee Ann was born without the ability to walk or speak and died in 2007 at age 27. The other videos are from Vinnie Paz who has some hard-hitting lyrics and beats both rap fans and conspiracy theorists will appreciate.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Before 9/11 and 7/7 there were clues in card games, comics, films and TV programs of the events that would later take place. Similarly, the BBC has broadcasted a series imagining a nuclear explosion at the London Olympics. Combining the information in this video with Rik Clay's research, I'd say there is a very high probability of some sort of false-flag event being planned for the 2012 London Olympics. Thanks so much to NotIlluminati for making and sending along this important video.
Monday, October 10, 2011
This important documentary Forks Over Knives examines the claim that most, if not all, chronic and degenerative diseases that afflict us can be controlled and reversed by rejecting our present menu of animal-based and processed foods. Combining scientific evidence with medical experience, covering the China Study, longevity research, and clinical trials, Forks Over Knives shows how meat, dairy, and processed foods are slowly killing you. If all these testimonials, raw data, and miraculous recoveries aren't enough to convince you to go vegan today, you'll likely enjoy and more readily identify with the video below. Peace
I just watched this excellent recent video podcast of Joe Rogan interviewing Graham Hancock and highly recommend it. Graham Hancock is a long time researcher, author, and truth-seeker who has written about many diverse subjects ranging from Atlantis and the Pyramids, to Magic Mushrooms and Astrotheology. In this fascinating 2 hour interview they cover all of the above and more.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
I just put together this video of chemtrail and chemcloud pictures sent to me from Uhland, Texas, featuring the chemically-aware music of Trillion, Luca, and Sick Since. Special thanks to Grandma JJ for the great pictures. I hope you all enjoy the video and help spread the word by sharing it with everyone you can. Peace
Monday, October 3, 2011
In ages past rulers were not only makers of law but interpreters of law and dispensers of justice as well. Subjects would journey to the place where the ruler was domiciled, i.e. the “court”, in order to present petitions, to settle disputes and to seek his decision on a variety of matters brought before him. A court was thus a) the dwelling of a sovereign ruler and his retinue and b) the place where justice is administered.
Later, as civilization became more complex, the authority to determine controversies and to dispense justice was delegated to an organized body, with defined powers, meeting at certain times and places for the hearing and decision of cases and other matters brought before it. We still refer to both these organized bodies and the places where they meet as courts. Now as then, however, a court’s power to adjudicate is NOT inherent but derived – from the sovereign!
Who then is the sovereign? You are! You were born free and unless you have KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY and VOLUNTARILY signed away your sovereignty and your inalienable rights and agreed to be the subject/slave of another man or group of men, you are still a Sovereign, although, most likely, you are completely unaware of it because this fact is intentionally hidden from you!
The authority of a court is derived from sovereign men and women – people like you and me! A Court needs standing in order to act on a matter. For the court to have standing to take up a matter one party must make an accusation against another. The accusation must be backed up by an affidavit, i.e. a statement sworn under oath, otherwise it lacks validity to engage the court.
So the first point about courts to note is that it is people who actually create the court! Even when a person has created the court by filing a writ, complaint or claim the court is not able to do as it pleases in taking the case forward. More people power is needed first. In order to become the arbiter in the dispute/controversy both parties must agree to accept the court’s ruling. If one of the parties refuses to authorize the court’s action then it is disempowered. The court CANNOT lawfully proceed!
The second point to note about courts is: THEY ARE NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF. We, the people, have the power! The very fact that the judiciary feels the need to employ intimidation and manipulation, misinformation, lies and subterfuge, denial of due process and other criminal practices, ought to tell anyone that they are well aware of the fact that they are essentially powerless.
Most people have been indoctrinated to see themselves as subject to the demands of the court and government officials, and therefore unable to resist the impositions, judgements and demands made by a court or government official.
Because agreement to the authority of the court is essential for the court to exercise authority over people a series of apparently authoritative processes has been put in place to intimidate and manipulate people into accepting the role of the court in their affairs. Such things as a summons, court order, judgement, penalty and fine carry the impression of authority but they are rarely worth the paper they are printed on. Did you know that a summons, for instance, is nothing more than an invitation/offer to enter into a contract with the court in order to do business? Invitations can be lawfully declined, can’t they? You bet!
Courtroom architecture and processes give people the impression that individuals have no real standing and that the court has all the authority. This really stands out when one views the Victorian Magistrates Court Virtual Courtroom on their website.
The images and video clips show the magistrate sitting high and above all, presiding over the whole realm of the court. The witness box appears like a small prison cell and it is seen as a tough place to be. The lawyers have the right to stand before the magistrate, but the real people, with the real issue to be resolved, are slumped in chairs in the background, as powerless ones, watching other people deliberate about their lives.
Court rooms are divided into two sections: a) the public gallery (where the audience sits and where the defendant waits until his case is called) and b) the area where the proceedings take place. The boundaries are always clearly marked by some sort of barrier. The two sections are connected either by a simple opening as shown below or an actual gate. Unfortunately, too few people are aware of the significance of this architecture. A look at the illustration below will show you what the legal fraternity is hiding from you:
The public gallery represents dry land. Here you are under the jurisdiction and protection of Common Law, also known as the Law of the Land. Under Common Law you are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty and furthermore, you have the inalienable right to trial by jury. The other part of the court room represents a sea-going vessel. Here you are under the jurisdiction of admiralty law, also known as the Law of the Sea. Things are topsy-turvy here: you are considered guilty unless you can prove your innocence and the right to trial by jury has been abolished.
Step from the the public gallery into the other part of the court room and you are considered to have boarded a ship; you now come under the jurisdiction of admiralty law, administered by the captain of the imaginary vessel, the magistrate/judge. This ship, however, is flying false colors, i.e. it is making itself out to be a lawful court when in reality it is nothing more than a commercial outfit operating for profit/plunder. To put it bluntly: you have fallen amongst pirates!
If you, from the safety of the public gallery and the protection of Common Law, unequivocally tell the magistrate/judge of a court of summary judgement that you do not consent to his/her jurisdiction – guess what? – s/he does not have jurisdiction! They will almost certainly attempt to manipulate you into thinking that you are misinformed. They may also threaten to have you arrested. That is nothing but more of their bluff and bluster. Stand your ground! You ARE free to walk out! If they touch you after you have denied consent in order to drag you into their jurisdiction they are committing a crime, i.e. ASSAULT, unless there is probable cause, i.e. you have committed a breach of the peace!
Another of the traps they might set for you is to threaten you with contempt of court. Do not fall for that! Contempt of court is an invention of the judiciary designed by them to remove themselves even further from the law than they already are. It allows them to do pretty much anything they fancy without fear of consequences – this device serves two purposes a) to gain control over anyone who challenges them and b) to weasel out of accepting liability for any unlawful conduct! Should that happen ask them: “Is this criminal or civil?”
A criminal offense needs to be based on an affidavit of probable cause (who was harmed? what is the harm done? what is the remedy sought?) A civil offense needs to be based on a contract. Needless to say they will not be able to produce either an affidavit or a contract to back up an offense that does not exist.
If you do not want to fall prey to pirates:
Never walk into a court room without witnesses.
Do not enter their jurisdiction by stepping from the public gallery onto their pirate ship.
Clearly and unequivocally deny them your consent to proceed.
Do not ever carry out ANY order or instruction (that will give them jurisdiction).
Do not allow them to touch you.
Do not fall for their “Contempt of Court” lie.
There are two types of courts: Common Law courts (de-jure courts) and Courts of Summary Judgement (de-facto courts). Courts of Summary Judgement require your CONSENT to have jurisdiction over you. The judiciary knows this, of course, but keeps it well hidden from you; they will often brazenly lie to you in order to prevent you from finding out this simple truth. In most cases, though, they employ manipulation to get jurisdiction. That is easy for them because you have been kept in the dark about your rights and you will walk right into their traps:
Here are a few examples of the traps they use:
“What is…/State your full name?”
“How do you plead? Guilty or not guilty?”
“Do you understand the charges against you?”
These questions or instructions sound innocuous, don’t they? But beware! State your name or move from the public gallery or answer YES to the question about charges and you are considered to have granted the court jurisdiction. Enter a plea, regardless of whether you plead GUILTY or NOT GUILTY – and you grant them jurisdiction! In fact, carry out any of their instructions and they acquire jurisdiction! Common Law courts operate with a jury; they are the only true courts – everything else is FRAUD (unless you have consented to be without a jury). Regardless of the nature of the offence you are charged with it is your inalienable right to be tried by a jury. Denying you this right is a crime!
There is NO way in the world I would ever entertain the idea of hiring a lawyer. Lawyers are officers of the court; their loyalty is to the court, NOT, I repeat NOT, to their clients. To put it crudely: your lawyer will hold your hand and console you while the court is raping you! Hire a lawyer and you are deemed to be a “ward” of the court, i.e. somebody not competent to manage his/her own affairs, such as a minor or a mentally disabled person. As a result of this diminished legal status the court will handle your affairs and woe to you, then!
The most important consideration for my wife and myself is this: we do not want to waste our precious time on fools and thugs. Our strategy is therefore quite simple: rather than enter a court in order to argue with the judiciary about the law and the merits of a case we deny them jurisdiction right from the start! This is the only strategy that we use and it works!
We have learnt from numerous dealings with courts and police, both in writing and in personal confrontations, that it is entirely useless to employ courtesy. True, you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar but this approach will not work – these guys are not regular flies but dung beetles! Here is the skeleton of our approach:
We tell them in an affidavit well before the scheduled appearance in court, submitted in the form of registered mail with delivery confirmation, that they do NOT have nor will they get in personam jurisdiction. It is almost certain that they will ignore the affidavit. We are therefore prepared for the fact that they will go ahead with their kangaroo court proceedings.
If they know that they do not have jurisdiction, and if they know that we know why would they still continue? First of all, the lower levels of the judiciary do not necessarily know the law. Strange, but true! Furthermore, used to having their way they simply won’t accept that they are up against somebody who not only knows his rights but is also ready to assert them. They always assume that they can intimidate you into submission or manipulate you into granting jurisdiction unwittingly.
When our names are called we rise and remain standing! Some people make a show of not rising, arguing that the court will not show the same courtesy to them. We rise, not out of respect for the court, but for a far more practical reason: psychologically speaking, you enhance your presence and your impact by standing. Quite literally, we stand up for ourselves and our rights! We are also more visible to everybody in the room and at the same time we are now more or less level with the magistrate or judge who usually is placed a bit higher than everybody else. Last but not least it is also easier to be assertive in a standing position.
We do NOT shy away from interupting – rudely if it must be
We raise our voice – if necessary to shout the magistrate / judge down
Just think of the impression this makes on the audience: they see and hear somebody who fearlessly faces a court, denies jurisdiction, humiliates and embarrasses the court and walks away! In fact, I once had one man come up to me after I had walked out of the court room giving me the thumbs up and saying, with a broad smile: “Good show!” He may or may not be ready to do the same but this is one man who now knows that these scoundrels in fancy dress and fancy wigs are essentially nothing but powerless pathetic clowns and he is likely to talk to his friends about what he witnessed and they in turn....
We do NOT EVER cross the bar that separates the public gallery from the actual court; if we did we would be stepping from the jurisdiction and protection of Common Law, also known as the Law of the Land, into admiralty jurisdiction, or the Law of the Sea.
In the fantasy world of the legal fraternity you are considered to have boarded a ship if you cross the bar. Having crossed the bar you have lost the protection of Common Law and the captain (the magistrate or judge) of the imaginary vessel (a pirate ship), will deal with you according to the Law of the Sea. This captain, however, is nothing like the roguish but likeable and ultimately decent Pirate Captain Jack Sparrow; this captain will lie and steal and rape and cut your throat!
We deal with the court from the public gallery, i.e. from dry land, and always from the last row! They cannot physically force us to cross the bar! If they did they would be committing a breach of the peace, i.e. assault, a criminal offence. Neither can they arrest us to get us into their jurisdiction; without probable cause such an arrest is likewise a breach of the peace, a criminal offence.
After rising we announce that we are NOT the name that has just been called; our names are Bernard or Edith. We are agents for the legal fiction! We refuse instructions to come forward: they are really nothing more than invitations to board their ship and enter into their admiralty jurisdiction. We do not respond to being addressed as Mr or Mrs... We tell the magistrate/judge that we claim protection of Common Law and that we do not consent to his or her jurisdiction! Furthermore, we NEVER carry out any orders they may give; doing so would grant them jurisdiction.
We address the audience in the court room, asking this simple question: Does anybody here have a claim against me?
Note: Claims MUST be backed up by an affidavit of probable cause or sworn statement showing amongst other things: the breach of the peace for which you have been summonsed, the name of the plaintiff who must be a human being (not a legal fiction such as a government agency or police) and the nature and extent of the harm done to the plaintiff. Alternatively, the plaintiff needs to produce a lawful CONTRACT which you entered into knowingly and intentionally and which was subsequently not honored by you, thus causing the plaintiff harm.
Obviously, few cases meet those criteria. If you are up for driving without a license, for instance, ask yourself: What is the harm done? No harm was done to anyone! Is the plaintiff a human being or a legal fiction? The police officer who booked you is a human being but he has not been personally harmed, has he? He therefore has no case against you! The police, however, is a legal fiction and can neither make a claim nor sign an affidavit! Do you have a contract with police that obliges you to take out a drivers license? I don’t and neither do you!
To sum it up: without an AFFIDAVIT there is NO criminal case and without a CONTRACT there is NO civil case! We allow a few moments of silence to let anyone come forward who might have a genuine claim against us. If nobody comes forward (and there is, of course, never anybody with a valid claim) we wrap everything up with the following statement: “There is nobody here in this room who has a claim against me! My business here is finished!” We warn the court of the serious consequences of trying to arrest us when leaving. THEN WE WALK OUT !!! That’s it! That’s all! We do not look back and do not respond to anything more coming from the court.
I have posted Edith’s case of “obstructing police” on the loveforlife website: the link will get you there. You can read about the background of the case and you can listen to the audio recording which we made with our mobile . This recording will show you how our approach of denying them jurisdiction works in practice. Enjoy!