We in the UK have several options available to redress the UK loss of sovereignty and resisting the New World Order:
- Freeman On The Land (FOTL)
- Peaceful Lawful Rebellion (Magna Carta article 61)
- Commercial Redemption
- Civil disobedience, strikes and withholding tax
- Escrow Account
No sane person can seriously advocate violence of any kind, as they say “violence begets violence”
Freeman On The Land (Denizen)
Most extreme and life changing approach. Biggest benefit is that absolutely no statute or Act of Parliament applies to you whatsoever; you are subject to common law and nothing else. Anyone can in theory become FMOTL. You effectively give up all formal links with the current society we live in, so for instance:
Surrender your NI number
Obtain Birth Certificate original
Surrender Medical Card
Surrender Driving License
Surrender vehicle ownership documents
Obviously this can have very far reaching effects, but is not as extreme as it may at first seem. Without an NI number it may be difficult to get a job, but not impossible. You would have no entitlement to state benefits, state pension or NHS Healthcare, but you are free to willingly enter into private contracts for these.
Surprisingly, without a driving license or ownership document you can still operate a car (without road tax, mot or insurance) as long as you state you will be completely responsible for your vehicle.
Bank accounts and insurance policies could be an issue, but you are not “lawfully” required to have any of these.
Travel abroad is still possible, but you must make your own arrangements with the Country you were visiting. You would have no consular or embassy entitlement. FMOTL people are probably not people to whom foreign travel is a major concern.
Another way these issues can be addressed is to “dismantle” all the contractual links to your “straw man” and then rebuild them but on your terms.
Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 allows for all people of the land to engage in “lawful rebellion” if it is believed that the monarchy has failed in their duty (Coronation oath) to uphold the constitution of the land. The people are the sovereign, who empower sovereignty to the monarch to protect the constitution. The monarch is empowered by the process of Royal Assent, whereby the assent is refused if the monarch believes an act of parliament to be unconstitutional. As mentioned earlier, due to the 1911 Parliament Act, our Queen may have been stripped (unlawfully) of the power of withholding assent. Our membership of the EU and signing of all treaties is undeniably unconstitutional as this was not authorised by the people of the UK in a referendum. The fact we are in the EU and the treaties have been signed is irrelevant, it may have been have been done legally, but it has not been done lawfully. It has been done through sedition, treason, misprision of treason and compounding of treason all extremely serious crimes. Treason has been a crime since 1351 and despite what we are told it cannot be removed as a crime, to do so is compounding treason. Ask yourself this “why do politicians say treason is no longer a crime?” Why would they want it repealing? Is it because they are knowingly engaging in treason?
Lawful rebellion is somewhat akin to FMOTL but those entering into rebellion do so as a group, and removal from society is gradual. The current lawful rebellion movement in the UK (www.bcgroup.org.uk) plan to get 1 million people signed up, at which point they would start implementing alternative banking, employment, healthcare etc. The plan is not to bring the current government down, but to create a parallel alternative society, which would not be a corporate based dictatorship (fascism according to Mussolini). People involved in lawful rebellion are obviously still subject to common law jurisdiction, but as the system develops they would become immune to all statutes and acts of parliament, they no longer exist in the society controlled by parliament. Once enacted, no-one in lawful rebellion would pay any taxes whatsoever to the current system, nor pay any fines, nor attend court and using commercial redemption (see later) could get out of all credit agreements, including mortgages, annulled at no cost. The reason why these credit agreements are ultimately unenforceable will be explained later.
If the Country were to be given a referendum on continued membership of the EU, then technically lawful rebellion would no longer be required, as it is only being enacted to correct a constitutional wrong. However, it could be argued that there are many others problems facing this Country, which could be considered constitutional issues, certainly many things have been enacted in the last 40 to 50 years which were not with the approval of the people, nor for the benefit of the people
The initial aim of lawful rebellion is to compel the monarch to exercise her constitutional duty, as per her coronation oath, to correct that which is wrong. If the queen cannot, or will not fulfil that obligation, then article 61 of Magna Carta allows the removal or replacement of the queen, she would have her sovereignty removed by the sovereigns (people).
Since the time of Queen Ann this has happened six times, the most recent being King Edward VIII, who was forced to abdicate, supposedly because of his marriage to Mrs Simpson, but quite possibly because he was a supporter of Hitler’s Nazi’s.
The intent of lawful rebellion is not that it would create a new political party, the whole idea of parties is being seen as part of the problem, based on the principle that power corrupts. Politicians the World over come to power to represent the people, but almost everywhere they end up controlling the people, whether it be a socialist, communist, fascist or Capitalist government. Clearly, something new is required, a system where power is not given to a few based on cronyism, or membership of a family (think Bush or Clinton in USA). A meritocratic system is more desirable, people placed in positions of power based on merit and ability, those leading must be accountable at all times, their dealings must be utterly transparent and above all the will of the people must be known and obeyed at all times.
Commercial redemption is the process of cancelling and nullifying all existing credit agreements at no additional cost to yourself, the reason this is possible is because all credit agreements are non-binding unilateral contracts.
The four requirements for a binding bilateral legal contract are:
- Full Disclosure
- Equal Consideration
- Lawful terms and conditions
- Signatures of both parties
Credit agreements fail on all four accounts because:
- The credit company does not disclose the fact that your signature creates the value of the loan, effectively out of nothing, at absolutely no cost to them
- Because of the above, they bring nothing to the agreement and have nothing to lose
- Because they do not make full disclosure, they are committing the common law offence of fraud, they are undertaking their dealing with deceit
- Corporations can’t sign because they have no Right, or Mind, to contract, because they are soulless legal fictions
However, the concept of commercial redemption is still being investigated and no-one should attempt this on their own until all legal/lawful ramifications are fully understood. When this does happen the floodgates will open. See the later section on money/finance for a fuller explanation of the issues raised. No-one should pity credit companies if this should happen, they will not actually be losing any money.
An affidavit is a very powerful document, unrebutted (unchallenged) it stands in law as a truth, known as a maxim.
An unrebutted affidavit confirms your status in law as the highest authority in the land, meaning that no person or organisation has authority over you.
Using a standard template document, you would submit an affidavit to the PM and to HM the Queen stating your authority in law, such as confirming you are a living sentient being, and not a legal corporate entity. In the document you offer the opportunity for your claims to be refuted (rebutted). Unless every single claim you make can be “lawfully” (not legally) refuted, the terms and conditions of the affidavit come into being (after your stated time frame for rebuttal) and from that point cannot be questioned or rebutted. You become the highest authority in the land lawfully, and no court or official holds any authority over you. This does not infer any authority to you over another, but just confirms no-one at all holds authority over you.
The wording used in an affidavit is extremely important, ideally (not essential) it will be signed by a notary and printed on high quality paper, either hand delivered or at very least using recorded delivery. Failure to respond in your stipulated timeframe is equivalent to confirmation of all your assertions, and would mean the affidavit stands unrebutted.
The final point is worth noting, as failure to respond to a legal document, within the stipulated timeframe is legally equivalent to full agreement and compliance, so very important not to ignore them or put them off.
Very importantly, an affidavit should be your truth, it is okay to use a template, but the words must express your truth, not someone else’s. Also, obviously, you are still subject to common law; no-one ever is above that law.
Civil Disobedience Etc.
These are actions we can all take at any time, but need to be done collectively, in very large numbers. Individually, we can be easily picked off, a large group wields great power. Whatever you do, ensure it is done with good grace, with civility and above all without violence. Anyone in a group suggesting violence should be passed to the police; they may be an agitator or agent provocateur. Avoid riots.
- Peaceful protests – sometimes they work (poll tax), sometimes they don’t (anti Iraq war). They certainly attract attention, but if they become violent it will be the wrong type of media attention
- General strikes – can rapidly bring companies and the country to its knee’s, if done over a long period of time, or frequently, cannot be ignored
- Blockades – French are particularly good at this, blockading ports and roads can cause massive disruption. Fuel blockades and motorway go-slows had limited effect in this Country
- Withholding tax – definitely one for group action – cut off the governments and/or council’s revenue and they cannot ignore you
All the previous methods if carried out properly can have a massive impact, either on your own life (FMOTL, commercial redemption, affidavit) or on the ruling class or government. Almost any combination of the above can be undertaken.
If you at all times remain within (common) law, a statute is only granted the “force of law” by your consent. The force of law is not the same as (common) law, we are just expected to believe they are the same.
An escrow account is a method of withholding certain payments until an alleged grievance has been addressed and resolved to the satisfaction of the account owner.
In the context we are discussing here, the escrow account could contain payment of tax and/or fines to the authorities based on a charge that the government is guilty of treason, is bankrupt, or due to illegal invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan is guilty of engaging in an illegal war, genocide and murder.
Any money owed in taxation and/or fines would be paid into the escrow account and the authorities would be advised that payment will not be made from the escrow account until the charges are answered in a court of law with a guilty or not guilty verdict against all charges.
Formal charges would have to be made to the police, who are duty bound to record those charges and provide a crime number.