Category Archives: Judicial activism

WE THE PEOPLE PARTY; time to vote for real change; time to vote for ourselves

There is much activity around elections and voting in many countries; the herein is an idea that can bring the much-needed change for we, the people of each and every country; we invite you as one of we, the people of your country to seriously consider taking action; we are inviting the people of Southern Africa to join us in our launch of the we, the people party;

Is the current system of governance based on the will of we, the people?

Is your answer “No!!!”? [we have not had a single “yes!!!”]

Then why are things only getting worse? Why does voting not change anything?

Now, ask yourself:

Does the political party system serve we, the people? The 99%? Or, only the 1%?

Does it serve religious people? Churches and religious communities? Or, even recognise divine law?

Does it promote placing the power of banking back into the hands of we, the people where it properly belongs? Such as community banks and alternative systems of barter, trade and exchange?

Does it serve first nations and indigenous peoples?

Does it serve communities that want to govern themselves?

Is the purpose of government not to serve we, the people? To protect our rights as enshrined in the Bill of Rights? The supreme law of the land? To protect our freedoms, our peace, our prosperity, our private property and our sovereignty? To provide us with services? Do they?

THEN WHAT GIVES? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

We spent years down this rabbit hole so you don’t have to; it would take you months to read all our research; every topic and page is briefly outlined at https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/faqs/

The entire system is rigged; in almost every country; banks, courts and government are in collusion; and, they work for a global oligarchy; the 1%;

Paul Craig Roberts should know what he is talking about; see https://1earthunite.wordpress.com/2016/08/02/everything-is-rigged-medicine-science-elections-the-media-money-education-search-engines-social-media-you-are-living-in-a-fabricated-fairy-tale/

 

COKE - we are ignorant

 

Every bar and law society member are in collusion with the same 1%; private corporations; a secret societies; elite families; the law and justice is now so far removed from its origins, it is now the undoing of natural law and natural justice;

We are in fact living in an occult society wherein everything is hidden; this is not a new world order, but an Old World Order; Vestus Ordo Seclorum…

VESTUS ORDO SECLORUM

 

The ancestors of the nations of the compass turned the world into ‘citizens’; their descendants are still in control; the 1% designed the political party system to divide, conquer and rule we, the people; the 99%; their sole aim is to steal our lands and natural resources; it is as simple as that;

We say “Power to the People;”

 

VOTING IS HOW WE GIVE OUR POWER AWAY!

How do they maintain power? And, where does the 1% get their authority from? FROM VOTING!!! Even if we only ‘register’ to vote, we have in fact waivered our natural rights; we have waivered our Bill of Rights, our benefits; and, instead taken on ‘duties’ and ‘obligations’; turned from living creditors into legal fiction debtors; we have granted sovereignty to corporations [which we mistakenly think is government]; ‘state sovereignty’ [a cabalistic term] as opposed to ‘people sovereignty’;

This is also known as ‘representative democracy’ when, in fact, only ‘direct democracy’ serves the people; word magick is used to keep fomenting this plot against we, the people;

Now, consider that in the words of Albert Einstein: “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”  

In the same fashion, we cannot keep using the same system of voting and expect change!!!

We have been educating the people of Southern Africa on VOTER DEREGISTRATION; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/voter-deregistration/

 

The only way we can possibly use the voting system for change is to vote in a NEW SYSTEM; a system wherein people rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness trump supreme! A system of EQUITY! Wherein ALL PEOPLE ARE EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW; wherein governance ONLY concerns itself with those behaviours; a system that Bastiat, Locke, Jefferson and Napolitano would approve of;

A system wherein natural law and natural justice can be used as a restraint against tyranny:

 

JUDGE NAPOLITANO - on the darkness

A government of ALL the people, by ALL the people, for ALL the people;

 POWER TO THE PEOPLE COLLAGE 4

 

Truth & Reconciliation Commissions: Investigation into the fraudulent financial system; people restored as creditors; nationalisation of corporations into lawful we, the people trust; anti-trust laws; overturn unjust laws; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/banking/

Moratorium on evictions & foreclosures; repossessions restored; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/foreclosures/

Debt jubilee; forgiveness and set-off of debts; return to prudent banking;

 

Community banks: the power of banking back in the hands of we, the people where it properly belongs; develop alternative models of barter, trade & exchange; https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/community-banks/

 

Community Courts: scrap the divided bar; pierce the corporate veil; all are equal before the law; hold accountable those working for harmful corporations; trial by jury/forum/public hearing/; the people judge; revolving juries – all get a turn; true justice is seeking reconciliation and not retribution; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/uza/

 

 POWER TO THE PEACEFUL COLLAGE 1

 

Self-determination: Local community municipal governance; revolving committees – all get a turn; direct access and admin over per capita share of national gdp;

 

Poverty: End man-made poverty; zero un-employment; basic income for all; un-employed work on social or environmental rehab projects;

 

Environment: Predatory capitalism is destroying ALL societies AND the earth; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/capitalism/ Social & environmental rehab projects proposed by we, the people reviewed & implemented;

 

Natural Health: develop, educate, implement, promote, review natural health & projects

 

Tax: Zero tax on we, the people; only corporate tax; only customs & excise duty;

 

Development: No shortage of capital to develop the above; Tackling of illicit capital flows for development of the above; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/reports/

Free: Free education on ALL levels; 30 minutes talktime & 25 SMS DAILY FREE;

 

POWER TO THE PEOPLE COLLAGE 5

 

Now, why would you want to vote for anyone else?

Vote for yourself as one of we, the people; see https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/we-the-people-party/

JAIL THE BANKSTERS? Is True Justice Seeking Retribution? Really?…

We are beginning to see a time when some bankers will get thrown under the bus, so to speak, by their very own brothers-in-arms, the banking fraternity; while some may cheer, it is in fact a sad state of affairs;

Banksters gene pool

Now, we know that there is honour, even among thieves; and, scapegoats and fall guys will be chosen from within their ranks to fall on their swords so as to appease the pitchfork-wielding people; the ‘retributionists’ as we call them: the eye-for-an-eye folks; while the real masterminds will get away…. Yet, again while the people squabble between themselves on how the banksters should be punished; here are some recent reports:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-07/ex-barclays-traders-jailed-more-than-6-years-over-libor-rigging

https://sentinelblog.com/2016/07/30/first-senior-bankers-on-the-planet-responsible-for-2008-economic-collapse-finally-jailed/

BAR: Maybe 3 years ago we would have cheered, but not today; not after comprehending what natural law and natural justice is; what the law truly is; and, how we are still blindly following a retributive colonial slave bar legal system; the same legal system that has its occult roots in the papacy: http://one-evil.org/content/texts_papal_bull.html

By now, we have all lost an eye [or two] in this retributive system; and, in the world of the blind the one-eyed is king, they say; and, it was Gandhi who is attributed with saying:

Ghandi an eye for an eye

After a number of years of research on the true nature and concepts of law; and, what the law really means; and is; we can tell you this:

It’s all about subject-matter-jurisdiction as well as jurisdiction; the BAR system is a foreign jurisdiction operating under law-of-the-sea jurisdiction; it is a LIMITED jurisdiction; inferior to and in a lower jurisdiction to the law-of-the-land; law-of-the-sea ONLY has jurisdictions over legal fictions written in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS such as your ‘PERSON’, COPORATIONS, HUMAN BEINGS, CITIZENS, INDUVIDUALS; these are only IMAGINARY AND HAVE NO PARITY WITH THE TANGIBLE; law-of-the-sea is merely for commercial transactions between legal fictions; in this system the ‘STATE’ [a legal fiction] is ‘sovereign;

SUPREME COURT RULING – NO CORPORATE JURISDICTION OVER THE NATURAL MAN: Supreme Court of the United States 1795,

“Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.” S.C.R. 1795, (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54)

Government is  merely a legal fiction which was created solely to protect peoples’ antecedent rights, property and natural resources; and, to provide the people with services, not to lord over them. A piece of paper cannot rule over a people. It has no jurisdiction over the tangible as affirmed by the above ruling.

A ‘sovereign state’ is a cabalistic term and is contrary and opposed to ‘people sovereignty’:

“The words “sovereign state” are cabalistic words, not understood by the disciple of liberty, who has been instructed in our constitutional schools. It is our appropriate phrase when applied to an absolute despotism. The idea of sovereign power in the government of a republic is incompatible with the existence and foundation of civil liberty and the rights of property.” Gaines v. Buford, 31 Ky. (1 Dana) 481, 501.

The real problem is the legal system, the banking system and political system; in order to be truly free we, the people must create new and alternative models of law, banking and without politics; 

Law of the Land: The law-of-the-land is your Bill of Rights, your tangible property and natural resources; people are equal before the law and have the right to a fair trial by jury, in a TRC or public hearing or forum; and, sovereign states and peoples honour the “law of nations”; in this system the people are sovereign;

Law of Nations: Now, as no people or community will ever acknowledge the superiority of one people over another, the only law that binds us is the “law of nations” which depends entirely on the rules of natural law and to which each people is equally subject; on this subject Sir William Blackstone wrote the following:

“However, as it is impossible for the whole race of mankind to be united in one great society, they must necessarily divide into many, and form separate states, commonwealths, and nations, entirely independent of each other, and yet liable to a mutual intercourse. Hence arises a third kind of law to regulate this mutual intercourse, called “the law of nations,” which, as none of these states will acknowledge a superiority in the other, cannot be dictated by any, but depends entirely upon the rules of natural law, or upon mutual compacts, treaties, leagues, and agreements between these several communities: in the construction also of which compacts we have no other rule to resort to, but the law of nature; being the only one to which all the communities are equally subject; and therefore the civil law(c) very justly observes, that quod naturalis ratio inter omnes homines constituit, vocatur jus gentium.” [Sir William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Law of England in Four Books, Vol. 1[1753] INTRODUCTION: OF THE STUDY OF NATURE AND EXTENT OF THE LAWS OF ENGLAND, SECTION 1: ON THE STUDY OF THE LAW] [extract]

QUOD NATURALIS RATIO INTER OMNES HOMINES CONSTITUIT, VOCATUR JUS GENTIUM. That which natural reason has established among all men is called the “law of nations.” 1 Bl.Comm. 43; Dig. 1, 1, 9; Inst. 1, 2, 1.

The bar system uses semantic deceit [in a language called “legalese” which sounds like English, but is deceptively different]; and, used to garner semblances of consent under the colour of law; what passes for law is not law; these are rules that only apply to government employees and members of bar associations and law societies; admirals, esquires, bachelors, privateers, pirates etc. are all ranking knights of a secret Temple society collaborating with monarchies and oligarchies under foreign and secret jurisdictions; hidden behind smoke and mirrors… switch and bait… divide, conquer and rule…

The 1893 Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, and general literature / The R. S. Peale 9th Encyclopaedia Britannica defines the word “LEGAL” as: “THE UNDOING OF GOD’S LAW.”

In a more fair and just system wherein people are sovereign; and, the law-of-the-land prevails; and, the protection of people freedoms [such as the right to not go to jail] people rights, peoples property is paramount; and, wherein governments provide equitable services as public servants and ONLY concern themselves with these behaviours; and, wherein people can be lifted out from behind the corporate veil and be held accountable before the people as peers; and wherein the people are the judges such as trial by jury;

And, wherein every people [even a banker] has the right to a fair trial by the law-of-the-land; wherein the people hear facts; and, after diligent deliberation, judge with equity; and, ought to make unanimous rulings according to principles of natural law and natural justice and restorative justice; and, ought to be reconciliatory;

Bankers are people too and NOT ‘persons’; they have the right not to incriminate themselves; they have the right to the presumption of liberty; they have the right not to give up their natural right to liberty, too; if you want those rights you need to give them to banksters too; be aware to not become the tyrants that we are opposing in the first place;

Albie Sachs - True Justice

What passes for justice in the fraudulent bar legal system is not justice; it’s a system of barratry and piracy and racketeering;

Are you telling us that you would have acted honourably if you were a banker? That you would NOT have put your hand in the cookie jar? Codswollop, we say;

Bastiat stated in his writings The Law that: “The STATE is that great legal fiction where everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else”;

The fraudulent system thrived because we were all clamouring to engage in usury against each other; to compete in a winner-takes-all system instead of co-operation and equity and sharing, equally; the system only existed because we remained party to the fraud; we are all guilty; not even one people will be found to be honourable and pure enough to open the seals…

Judge not harshly, lest ye be judged harshly, we say; punishment and imprisonment is archaic and cabalistic, people; it does not rehabilitate; it breaks down and burdens society; come on!!! Let’s not blindly copy the very same obsolete system that we are building new models for so as to make this one obsolete; let’s truly build new models based on principles of restorative justice; if, you wish to know more feel free to read our Restorative Justice page;

Sadly, our focus is on jailing the bankers; instead, it should be to hold Truth & Reconciliation Commissions to ensure that the harm ceases on the victims; who are the victims? The people! And, to ensure that the rights of the victims namely we, the people are addressed; to place moratoriums on evictions and foreclosures and repossessions; so that the harm ceases; to give the bankers the opportunity to repent in TRCs AND THEN TO FORGIVE THEM!!! THAT IS THE GOLDEN RULE! LOVE THY NEIGHBOUR [even bankers!!!] AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF;

DO YOU WANT TO SIT IN A JAIL? NO!!! NO-ONE WANTS TO SIT IN A JAIL!!!

Let’s forgive, but NOT forget; so that this never happens again; In the words of the ONLY Great Dictator: “We all want to help one another. Human beings [people] are like that. We want to live by each other’s happiness-not by each other’s misery. We don’t want to hate and despise one another. In this world there is room for everyone. And the good earth is rich and can provide for everyone. The way of life can be free and beautiful, but we have lost the way. Greed has poisoned men’s souls-has barricaded the world with hate-has goose-stepped us into misery and bloodshed. We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity. More than cleverness we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities life will be violent and all will be lost. . . .”

Yet, let’s rather focus our energy on the remedies; such as DEBT JUBILEEs; the set-off and settlement of ALL fraudulent debts!!! Fraud vitiates everything; fraud nullifies contracts; restitution to those who were de-frauded; equity and true equality before real law and real people courts wherein the people are the judges; yet, judge according to principles of restorative justice;

Let’s rather build new models of banking; of people community courts wherein true justice is seeking reconciliation and not retribution; and, wherein people are truly sovereign and recognise that life is sacred; and, we are embodiment of the sacred and that the divine dwells within us all, equally; and, where your rights end, mine begins;

And, finally, let’s all remember what that Great Soul Mahatma said:

Gandhi Peace is the way

Sincerely, without prejudice, under onerous title, in peace, brother-thomas

 

Today, it is 3 Years since Vatican Radio announced Pope Franscis’ Motu Proprio issued against corrupt corporations, courts and governments! And, giving them 3 years in which to clean up their act!

Today is a very, very special day! Why? Because exactly 3 years ago on the 11th of July 2013 Pope Francis made a declaration giving corporations, courts, governments and public officials exactly 3 years to clean up their act! And, to start being Moral and Ethical [ME] and honourable! And, to not overreach their boundaries, jurisdictions and limitations! And, to stop profiting off we, the people! And, to stop infringing on the rights of we, the people

Vatican Radio made the following on their radiovaticana.va site: [our comments are in blue]

Pope Francis issues Motu Proprio on criminal law matters in Vatican

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis has issued a Motu Proprio on criminal law matters and administrative sanctions within Vatican City State and the Holy See. In a statement by the Holy See’s Press Office, it was announced that on this same date, the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State has adopted the following laws:

Law No. VIII containing Supplementary Norms on Criminal Law Matters; Law No. IX containing Amendments to the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code; Law No. X containing General Provisions on Administrative Sanctions.

The note from the Holy See Press Office goes on to clarify the following points:

The Motu proprio makes the criminal laws adopted by the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State applicable also within the Holy See.

Now, we are all well-educated already, but if this is new to you, Judge Anna educates us in her book called “You Know Something Is Wrong When… An American Affidavit of Probable Cause” [paperback – https://www.amazon.co.uk/You-Know-Something-Wrong-When/dp/1491279184?tag=duc08-21]

ANNA VONREITZ - YOU KNOW SOMETHING IS WRONG

A cartoon illustrated blockbuster that blows the lid off the 1302 papal bulls [unam sanctum] and the global estate trust, managed by Westminster, Washington D.C., U.N, IMF, BIS etc. It gives us an overview of corrupt corporate entities calling itself ‘government’; and, shows the entire history of Fraud, Deception, Threat, Duress, Coercion, and intimidation the perpeTRAITORS have used to steal our entire heritage and prosperity. Read more about her work at: http://annavonreitz.com/

Read the full post as well as the English translation of Pope Francis’ Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio on the jurisdiction of Judicial Authorities of Vatican City State in criminal matters (Full Text) at: http://en.radiovaticana.va/storico/2013/07/11/pope_francis_issues_motu_proprio_on_criminal_law_matters_in_vatican/en1-709480

What does this all mean? In simple language it means that the whole world is under the Holy See. All banks, corporations, governments and all laws are under the Holy See. It also means that ALL people who have birth certificates are in fact Catholics and bonded slaves and servants to the [un]holy see; as Santos Bonacci so poignantly puts it in his message to Pope Francis:

Message to Pope Francis to end World Slavery!

Published on Jan 30, 2015

The world is more than ready now to embrace a new way of peace, humanity is now hungering for this basic need to be realised. Wars are causing all to suffer, no one is immune, Religions do not have answers, and politicians are Liars and so are Lawyers, it’s time to be more responsible and try self-determination since there is no such thing as external authority.

Get out of Babylon the Great, the great harlot of commerce and bloodshed and slavery and the military industrial complex. People turn off your TVs off, say no to taxes and artificial Government, stop voting, go back to the land and out of the cities, cultivate the earth and turn it into a paradise, love your brothers and sisters, don’t kill them, put down your arms.

Paradise is already here on earth, heaven is a condition, it’s not a location, it’s here on earth, so why are we making it a hell on earth. The answer is peace and love and truth, this is what our heart desire! Omnia Vincit Veritas! Carpe Diem! Feel free to send to Popey pooh! Let him know we are all watching and judgement is nigh! Mene Mene Tekel Parsin!

Definition of the word “legal”: “Legal: the undoing of God’s law.” 1893 Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, and general literature / The R. S. Peale 9th Encyclopedia Britannica.

Please see links below!!!

https://freedomriver.wordpress.com/what-is-a-birth-certificate/

https://freedomriver.wordpress.com/letter-to-a-public-servant/

 

Has corrupt government changed yet, since 2013?

No…

Why?

Because, it is up to we, the people to take action;

Judicial Activism is the primary remedy for a corrupt society;

 

Judicial Activism – the remedy lies in the law of the land: 

We, the people have the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness;  and, wherein the legal fiction called government only derives it’s powers from the consent of the governed;  

So, what do we do when courts and corporations work hand-in-hand to plunder the people and governments trample on their rights? We, the people have slumbered on our rights. People rights have been abandoned. We are all acting as legal fictions in commerce only. “Human rights” are not “people” rights and in fact only apply to legal fictions, and NOT to ‘people’. The only law for people is their Bill of Rights.

The remedies to preventing the infringement of people rights lie in the following:

  • The decree of the sovereign makes the law. Declare and restore the inalienable rights of we, the people;
  • Communities and peoples declare their autonomy and right to self-determination and to expatriate:  own community courts, land records, local governance, resource-based economy, community banks, barter, trade & exchanges;  without interference from international corporations, national governments, bar members, or the like; 
  • Restore land jurisdiction with people courts and jural societies wherein the judges are merely arbitrators and people are the judges as juries and wherein rulings are constitutionally valid and enforceable and set precedent; after all, who better to write the laws that govern them, but the people themselves?

 

Piercing the corporate veil:

Bar members and their sea courts do not work for we, the people; they work for foreign entities under law-of-the-sea and, can only “see”  ‘people’ as ‘persons’; in fact, they do not have jurisdiction over we, the people. People rights are in their Bill of Rights. Only constitutional courts or people  courts can hear disputes regarding rights infringements. Yet, people courts are absent.

UN-INCORPORATED community courts give people the right to pierce the corporate veil and to hold any other people, no matter their status, accountable for doing harm or causing loss before a jury or hearing of peers by, for and of the people;

Taking into consideration that true justice is seeking reconciliation and NOT retribution.

As Gandhi rightfully said:

GANDHI - an eye for an eye

Support your local grand jury or jural society; search the internet for one in your state. 

In the U.S.:

Michigan Jural Society has excellent and easy to read material: http://1stmichiganassembly.info/

National Liberty Alliance has great common-law lectures: http://nationallibertyalliance.org/

Southern Africa: The Unified Common Law Grand Jury of Southern Africa [UZA] is taking action on behalf of we, the people of Southern Africa; see: http://giftoftruth.info/

see our resource material which is applicable to most countries as well as Southern Africa; we suggest starting on the FAQs page: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/faqs/

Towards government by the people, for the people, of the people.
Sincerely,  in peace, brother-thomas

 

The Nazarenes and Apostles were an unruly bunch of free men and judicial activists that challenged the courts, judges, lawyers, government, mosaic laws and the hierarchal system as a whole… not much different to the free-wo/men-on-the-land of today…

Generations later and only now are judicial activists beginning to re-discover The Bible from a lawful perspective; as well as realise that the legal problems of society were not much different than as they are now.

The highest law is divine being a rule given by divine instruction as nothing may contradict such a rule. The second highest law be the reason of mind, being an edict given by a great council of wise elders or jurists, as nothing absurd and without good reason may be considered law. The third highest law be the law of the people, as the consent and will of the people is the source of true authority. Every law has it’s boundaries called jurisdiction.

Even today, for the believers in the teachings of Iesus (there was no ‘J’, only ‘I’, in English during the time the 1611 King James Version was written) the Nazarene and the Apostles The Bible is a source of divine law. Much to the concern of the Jewish and Roman scribes of that hierarchical era, the revolutionary teachings of the Nazarenes of the New Testament brought redemption to humanity and created a new natural law which literally superseded the old hierarchical mosaic laws. To many the Nazarenes were regarded as apostate and most of the Apostles met a tragic end. Gnostic Christians went into hiding or continued in other countries. Today the law of liberty is being revived as it was then.

The Nazarenes were well schooled and versed in different aspects of law:

The Gospel according to Matthew, Chapter IX,

Verse 9 And as Iesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.  

This begs the question: What did Iesus and Matthew (a tax official) talk about which convinced Matthew to leave his job? Was it maybe in connection with the herein verses? Here is Levi, another tax official…

To Mark, Chapter II,

Verse 13 and he went forth again by the sea side, and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them. 14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alpheus sitting at the receipt of Custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him.

Remember, the Levites became the treasurers and the bankers; some even today…

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter V,

Verse 27 And after these things he went forth, and saw a Publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. 28 And he left all, rose up, and followed him.

Sounds like the makings of a conspiracy already…

The Acts of the Apostles, Chapter VI,

Verse 9 Then there arose certaine of the Synagogue, which is called the Synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia, and of Asia, disputing with Steven. 10 And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke. 11 Then they suborned men which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. 12 And they stirred up the people, and the Elders, and the Scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the Council, 13 and set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceases not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the Law. 14 For we have heard him say, that this Iesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, & shall change the Customs which Moses delivered us. 15 And all that sate in the Council, looking steadfastly on him, saw his face as it had bene the face of an Angel. 

Is this not what judicial activists of today are doing? Speaking blasphemy against the law of the sea? Seeking to change the status quo/customs? Are the courts not using false witness against you? The opposing attorney is not a witness, they are a representative… where is the witness? The corpus delict? Absent a body there can be no dispute… the truth is, in a corporation versus a ‘citizen’ there is never a witness…

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XVII,

Verse 24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money, came to Peter, and said, Does not your master pay tribute? 25 He said, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Iesus prevented him, saying, What thinks thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? Of their own children, or of strangers? 26 Peter said unto him, Of strangers. Iesus said unto him, Then are the children free. 27 Notwithstanding, least we should offend them, go thou to the Sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first comes up: and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me, and thee. 

A very telling verse showing Iesus’ disdain for authority and for money as when he overturned the tables of the moneylenders…

The Gospel according to John, Chapter VIII,

Verse 32 And you shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free. 36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, you shall be free indeed. 

Very telling words… The mission of the Nazarenes was to set humanity free. There are only two places where the words ‘free man’ is used:

The First Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, Chapter VII,

Verse 22 For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant is the Lord’s free man: likewise also he that is called being free, is Christ’s servant. 23 You are bought with a price, be not you the servants of men.

Revelations, Chapter VI,

Verse 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens, and in the rocks of the mountains,

The Bible, 1611 King James Version 1611 as a source of divine law for Christians has the following to say on the jurisdiction of your body and spirit:

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Chapter III

Verse 16 Know you not that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If any man defiles the Temple of God, him shall God destroy: for the Temple of God is holy, which Temple ye are. 18 Let no man deceive himself: If any man among you seems to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God: for it is written, He takes the wise in their own craftiness 20 and again, The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. 21 Therefore let no man glory in men, for all things are yours.

This begs the question as to how courts of today then gain jurisdiction over our body.

Chapter VI Verse 19: “What, know you not that your body is the Temple of the holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? 20 For you are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are Gods.

Our bodies cannot be lawfully incarcerated by the state or anyone else. It belongs to your Creator and is under divine jurisdiction. And, we were redeemed with a price long time ago and which also means that under divine law we cannot be debtors.

The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Çorinthians, Chapter VI,

Verse 16 and what agreement hath the Temple of God with idols? For ye are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them], and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Here again, the divine law dwells within us. Then how can for example THE STATE or any agency for that matter have jurisdiction over the people? 

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians, Chapter II,

Verse 18 for through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. 19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners; but fellow citizens with the Saints, and of the household of God, 20 And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, le-sus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together, grows unto a holy Temple in the Lord: 22 In whom you also are built together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Here we find that our lawful citizenship of body and spirit is with the saints while today our ‘legal person’ aka strawman is REGISTERED as a ‘citizen’ of THE STATE which are all legal fiction terms as substantiated by the following Supreme Court ruling – No corporate jurisdiction over the natural man: Supreme Court of the United States 1795, “Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.” S.C.R. 1795, (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54)

The key is in the word ‘person’. The remedy lies in what is called the subject-matter-jurisdiction or jurisdiction. The ‘artificial person’ aka THE STATE or any other man-made legal fiction agency clothed as an ‘artificial person’ only have jurisdiction over the legal fiction aka ‘natural person’ which is a cabalistic term; Black’s Law 4th Edition, 1968 defines ‘natural’ as follows:

NATURAL. The juristic meaning of this term does not differ from the vernacular, except in the cases where it is used in opposition to the term “legal;” and then it means proceeding from or determined by physical causes or conditions, as distinguished from positive enactments of law, or attributable to the nature of man rather than to the commands of law, or based upon moral rather than legal considerations or sanctions.

The above describes the contra-distinct jurisdictions between ‘natural’ (also similar to ‘lawful’) and ‘legal’ and like oil and water the two cannot mix. A ‘natural person’ is a legal term even though it is not lawful.

The Bible is full of verses written by the Apostles regarding the word ‘person’… “…let those who have ears hear…and those who have eyes see…”

Regarding the ‘person’: 

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy, Chapter I,

5 Now the end of the commandment is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned. 6 From which some having swerved, have turned aside unto vain jangling, 7 desiring to be teachers of the Law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.  

Do today’s law-givers know what they are saying with all these man-made rules they use in today’s courts?

8 But we know that the Law is good, if a man use it lawfully. 9 Knowing this, that the Law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for unholy, and profane, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,

The key word is ‘lawful’ as opposed to ‘legal’; lawful refers to the un-enacted divine law, natural law or law of the land; and, today in contradistinction ‘legal’ is the commercial enacted law of the sea.

The General Epistle of the Apostle James, Chapter II,

Verse 1 My brothers, have not the faith our Lord Iesus Christ the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. 2 For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold-ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man, in vile raiment: 3 And ye have respect to him that wears the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place: and say to the poor. Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: 4 Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?

From the above we can deduct that a ‘person’ is someone who masks themselves with a certain status.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XXII,

Verse 15 then went the Pharisees, and took counsel, how they might entangle him in his talk. 16 And they sent out unto him their disciples, with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teaches the way of God in trueth, neither cares thou for any man; for thou regards not the person of men. 

Here the Pharisees and Herodians were schooled in Roman legalese, trying to trap Iesus by the law regarding the ‘person’.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter XV,

1 Then drew near unto him all the Publicans and sinners, for to hear him. 2 And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured, murmured, saying, This man receives sinners, and eats with them. 3 And he spoke this parable unto them, saying, 4 What man of you having a hundred sheep, if he loose one of them, does not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and goes after that which is lost, until he find it? 5 And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. 6 And when he comes home, he calls together his friends, and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost. 7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repents, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

He has a great comeback for them in the form of a parable.

The Gospel according to the Apostle Luke, Chapter XX,

Verse 20 and they watched him, and sent forth spies, who should feign themselves just men that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor. 21 And they asked him, saying, Master, we know that thou says and teaches rightly, neither accepts thou the person of any, but teaches the way of God truly.

What is being implied here again is that the lawyers of that time tried to gain jurisdiction over Iesus by employing semantic deceit nowadays called LEGALESE, not much different to what the courts are doing today…

The Gospel According to Matthew Chapter XXVII,

Verse 23 And the Governor said, Why, what evil has he done? But they cried out, yes more, saying, Let him be crucified. 24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see you to it.

Even Pilatus used semantic deceit by referring to the ‘person’ of Iesus because in truth he had no divine jurisdiction over the natural man, only his ‘person’ and this was his ‘legal’, but not lawful, justification for plausible deniability.

The Acts of the Apostles, Chapter X,

Verse 34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a trueth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: 35 But in every nation, he that fears him, and works righteousness, is accepted with him.

Paul was highly schooled in Roman law as Saul before his conversion, but when he realised the nature of divine law, he could probably see the jurisdictional shortcomings of the Roman ‘legal’ hierarchal man-made laws. 

The Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans, Chapter II,

Verse 11 for there is no respect of persons with God. 12 For as many as have sinned without Law, shall also perish without Law: and as many as have sinned in the Law, shall be judged by the Law. 13 ( For not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law shall be justified; 14 For when the Gentiles which have not the Law, do by nature the things contained in the Law: these having not the Law , are a Law unto themselves, 15 Which show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one another: 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by le-sus Christ, according to my Gospel.

Natural law is written in our hearts. It is our moral and ethical compass. We call it our ‘heart’, or ‘conscience’, or ‘gut feeling’.

The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, Chapter II,

Verse 4 And that because of false brothers unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Iesus that they might bring us into bondage. 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel might continue with you. 6 But of these, who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it makes no matter to me, God accepts no man’s person,) for they who seemed to be somewhat, in conference added nothing to me. 

The Creator accepts no man’s ‘person’ or status. We are all equal under divine law.

The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Colossians, Chapter III,

24 Knowing, that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. 25 But he that does wrong shall receive for the wrong which he has done: and there is no respect of persons.

Again no respect for ‘persons’…

5 Hearken, my beloved brothers, has God not chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to them that love him? 6 But you have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the Judgement seats? 7 Do they not blaspheme that worthy Name, by that which you are called? 8 If you fulfil the royal Law, according to the Scripture, you shall love your neighbour as yourself, you do well. 9 But if you have respect to persons, you commit sin, and are convinced of the Law, as transgressors. 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole Law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For he that said, do not commit adultery; said also, do not kill. Now if you commit no adultery, yet if you kill, you have become a transgressor of the Law. 12 So speak you, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the Law of liberty. 13 For he shall have judgement without mercy, that has shown no mercy, & mercy rejoices against Judgement.

Are the courts and judges of today showing the people mercy?

The Fist Epistle of the Apostle Peter, Chapter I,

Verse 16 Because it is written, “Be ye holy, for I am holy”. 17 And if you call on the Father, without respect of persons judges according to every man’s work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear: 18 For as much as you know that you are not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot, 20 who verily was fore-ordained before the foundation of the world, but is manifest in these last times for you: 21 Who by him do believe in God that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory, that your faith and hope might be in God.

We were redeemed!!!

The Second General Epistle of Peter, Chapter II,

Verse 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of: 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words, make merchandise of you, whose judgement now of a long time lingers not , and their damnation slumbers not

Does this not sound like what lawgivers today are doing to the people?

 The General Epistle of Jude,

Verse 16 these are murmurers and complainers, walking after their own lusts, and their mouth speaks great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.

 The following verses we believe allude to this ‘advantage’ mentioned:

The Gospel according to the Apostle Matthew, Chapter XXIII,

Verse 12 And whosoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased: and he that shall humble himself, shall be exalted. 13 But wo unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: For you neither go in your selves, neither suffer you them that are entering, to go in. 14 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you devour widows houses, and for a pretence make long prayer; therefore you shall receive the greater damnation.

Sound like today’s global foreclosure pandemic? The rebuke continues…

15 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you compass Sea and land to make one Proselyte, and when he is made, you make him two fold more the child of hell than yourselves.

The judicial activists will recognise that commercial law is the law of the sea and is swallowing up the law of the land by greying areas of jurisdiction; for example, how did the law of the sea such as admiralty law get onto the land?

16 Woe unto you, you blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the Temple, it is nothing: but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the Temple, he is a debtor.

Today all BAR members belong to a secret society known as The Temple in the City of London… they still make long ‘prayers’ in court documents… and they make one swear by the gold of baal’s unholy temple… hence the Jewish people traditionally only traded silver amongst themselves…

To add to this regarding oaths and solemn affirmations in a court:

Verse 34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all, neither by heaven, for it is Gods throne: 35 Nor by the earth, for it is his footstool: neither by Hierusalem, for it is the city of the great king. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou cannot make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be Yes, yes: No, No: For whatsoever is more than these, comes of evil.

The rebuke continues… 

Verse 23 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites; for you pay tithe of mint, and aniseed, and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the Law, judgement, mercy and faith: these ought you to have done, and not to leave the other undone. 24 You blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. 

You blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. Imagine saying the above in a court of today? He, he;

Verse 27 Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. 28 Even so, you also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

Sounds like even then they powdered their faces into a mask? Does this bring to mind what judges or lawyers still do today with their wigs and bat-capes?

The Book of the Prophet Isaiah, Chapter III,

Verse 8 Woe unto them that join house to house, that lay field to field, till there be no place, that they may be placed alone in the midst of the earth.

Sound like any corporation or oligarch you may know of in today’s world?

Chapter X,

Verse 1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed: 2 to turn aside the needy from judgement, and to take away the right from the poor of my people, that widows may be their pray, and that they may rob the fatherless.

Sound like a social welfare court near you? Or, much the same as courts of today are doing?

To conclude, this brings to mind the following enigmatic verse:

Ecclesiastes, Chapter I,

Verse 8 the thing that has been, it is that which shall be: and that which is done, is that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the sun. 9 Is there anything, whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It has been already of old time, which was before us. 10 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come, with those that shall come after.

To Be or Not To Be a ‘Human Being’?

The following is yet again another example of semantic deceit by employment of a language called LEGALESE which is the jargon used by BAR members and LAW SOCIETY.

From Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 1948 Edition. ‘Human Being’ is defined as follows: ‘See monster’ . From the same dictionary, ‘monster’ is defined: ‘A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal.’
      This is an unusual definition, but like all Law Dictionaries on this subject, a non-definition. It only states that a ‘human being’ is a higher animal. It is not found anywhere in Scripture that a Christian Man or Woman is an animal or part of the animal kingdom. This being the case, then what exactly is a ‘human being.’
      From the Oxford New English Dictionary of 1901, ‘human’ is defined as, ‘3. Belonging or relative to man as distinguished from God or superhuman beings; pertaining to the sphere or faculties of man (with implication of limitation or inferiority); mundane; secular. (Often opposed to divine.)’
      ‘Secular’ being the important word here, we look to the multi-difinitions in the 1992 Random House Webster’s College Dictionary: “Secular’ adj. 1. of or pertaining to worldly things or to things not regarded as sacred: temporal. 2. not relating to or concerned with religion (opposed to sacred). 3. concerned with non-religious subjects. 4. not belonging to a religious order: not bound by monastic vows.”
      Could it be that ‘human’ means un-Godly. From the same dictionary, a look at a combination of the two: ‘Secular humanism’ n. any set of beliefs that promotes human values without specific allusion to religious doctrines.” And, “‘ secularism’ n. 1. secular spirit or tendency, esp. a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith or worship. 2. the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the influence of religious beliefs.”
      In conjunction with this, from Collier’s New Dictionary of the *English Language, 1928. ‘humanitarian’ is defined: n. ‘a philanthropist: an anti Trinitarian who rejects the doctrine of Christ’s divinity; a perfectionist.: From the above Random House Dictionary, “humanitarianism’ is defined: n. ‘the doctrine that humankind may become perfect without divine aid.’
With no definition of ‘human being’ in Law, Mellinkoff’s Dictionary of American Legal Usage, 1992, defines ‘Person’ as, 1.”a human being–without regard to sex, legitimacy, or competence. This person is the central figure in law, as elsewhere, characterized by personal attributes of mind, intention, feelings, weaknesses, morality common to human beings; with rights and duties under the law. This is the person, sometimes called an individual, and often referred to in the law as a natural person, as distinguished from an artificial person (sense 3).”
      Of course, ‘morality common to human beings’ is not explained, because that would reveal to much. Again, in Shawmut Bank, N.A. vs. Valley Farms, (610A.2d652,654) it states, “For purpose of statute protecting certain property from post-judgment remedies, and therefore from prejudgment attachment, ‘natural person’ means ‘human being’, not artificial or juristic person”.
      So, if natural person and human being are considered the same in the law, let’s take a closer look at what a ‘natural person’ is. As you may know, all government codes, rules and regulations only attach to corporations, partnerships and natural persons. In American law, it seems that a definition of ‘natural person’ does not exist. To get any idea of what a natural person is, we have to go to English law. In the 17th Century, Lord Coke differentiated between ‘natural persons’ and ‘moral persons in a community’ in the following statement from his Institututes:… “we must observe, that estate is defined by the civilians, the capacity of moral persons; for, as natural persons have a certain space in which their natural existence is placed, and in which they perform their natural actions, so have persons in a community a certain state or capacity, in which they are supposed to exist, to perform their moral acts, and exercise all civil relations,”… (2 Inst. 669).
      With ‘natural man’ being the same as ‘natural person’, we find further evidence of exactly what a ‘human being’ is. From the above Random House Dictionary, page 901, ” ‘Natural’ adj. 17. natural man: unenlightened or unregenerate.” From the same Dictionary, page 1461, ” ‘unregenerate’ 1. not regenerate; unrepentant. 2. unconvinced by or unconverted to a particular religion, sect, or movement. 4. wicked; sinful; dissolute. 5. an unregenerate person.”
      In conjunction with this, from The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 1933, ‘naturalism’ is defined as: ‘a system of morality or religion having a purely natural basis; a view of the world, and of man’s relationship to it, in which only the operation of natural, as opposed to supernatural or spiritual, laws and forces is assumed.’ and ‘naturalist’ is defined as: ‘One who follows the light of nature, as contrasted with revelation.’
      And, of course, the Scriptures being the final authority, confirms all of the above, at
1 Corinthians 3:14, “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
      Therefore, when a Christian calls him or herself a ‘human being’, they are saying, “I’m an animal; I’m non-religious; I’m unrepentant: I’m wicked, sinful and dissolute; I’m able to do all things and be perfect without Jesus Christ; I’m subject to man’s law, rather than God’s Law.”

Source: http://www.hisholychurch.net/sermon/human.htm

This is sufficient logical proof why ‘human rights’ are NOT enforceable. Think about it; your Constitution talks about ‘we, the people’ and NOT ‘we, the human beings’…

Therefore, it is ludicrous to fight for human rights. We may as well scrap or re-write ‘human rights’ charters and amend to people’s charters. In peace 

 

Robert Emmet, the 1803 Irish Proclamation of Independence and his defiant speech prior to his death sentence.

Robert Emmet, architect of the 1803 rebellion. In 1803 in Dublin, Robert Emmet and a small band of republican revolutionaries proclaimed the independence of Ireland. After a haphazard rebellion, that turned out to be little more than a calamitous, bloody riot on Dublin’s Thomas Street, his hopes lay in ruins. Emmet, after fleeing to a safe house in the Wicklow mountains, was subsequently arrested, tried for treason and put to death along with 15 of his followers.

Robert Emmet 1

The Speech from the Dock
Robert Emmet’s speech on the eve of his execution.

My Lords:

What have I to say why sentence of death should not be pronounced on me according to law?  I have nothing to say that can alter your predetermination, nor that it will become me to say with any view to the mitigation of that sentence which you are here to pronounce, and I must abide by.  But I have that to say which interests me more than life, and which you have labored (as was necessarily your office in the present circumstances of this oppressed country) to destroy.  I have much to say why my reputation should be rescued from the load of false accusation and calumny which has been heaped upon it.  I do not imagine that, seated where you are, your minds can be so free from impurity as to receive the least impression from what I am going to utter–I have no hopes that I can anchor my character in the breast of a court constituted and trammeled as this is–I only wish, and it is the utmost I expect, that your lordships may suffer it to float down your memories untainted by the foul breath of prejudice, until it finds some more hospitable harbor to shelter it from the storm by which it is at present buffeted.

Coat of arms of Ireland 13th century

coat of arms of Ireland 13th century

Was I only to suffer death after being adjudged guilty by your tribunal, I should bow in silence and meet the fate that awaits me without a murmur; but the sentence of law which delivers my body to the executioner will, through the ministry of that law, labor in its own vindication to consign my character to obloquy–for there must be guilt somewhere: whether in the sentence of the court in the catastrophe, posterity must determine. A man in my situation, my lords, has not only to encounter the difficulties of fortune. and the force of power over minds which it has corrupted or subjugated. but the difficulties of established prejudice: the man dies, but his memory lives. That mine may not perish, that it may live in the respect of my countrymen, I seize upon this opportunity to vindicate myself from some of the charges alleged against me. When my spirit shall be wafted to a more friendly port; when my shade shall have joined the bands of those martyred heroes who have shed their blood on the scaffold and in the field, in defense of their country and of virtue. this is my hope: I wish that my memory and name may animate those who survive me, while I look down with complacency on the destruction of that perfidious government which upholds its domination by blasphemy of the Most High-which displays its power over man as over the beasts of the forest-which sets man upon his brother, and lifts his hand in the name of God against the throat of his fellow who believes or doubts a little more or a little less than the government standard–a government which is steeled to barbarity by the cries of the orphans and the tears of the widows which it has made.

Un-official green ensign of Ireland from Bowle's Universal Display

un-official green ensign of Ireland

[Interruption by the court.]

I appeal to the immaculate God–I swear by the throne of heaven, before which I must shortly appear–by the blood of the murdered patriots who have gone before me that my conduct has been through all this peril and all my purposes governed only by the convictions which I have uttered, and by no other view than that of their cure, and the emancipation of my country from the superinhuman oppression under which she has so long and too patiently travailed; and that I confidently and assuredly hope that, wild and chimerical as it may appear, there is still union and strength in Ireland to accomplish this noble enterprise. of this I speak with the confidence of intimate knowledge, and with the consolation that appertains to that confidence. Think not, my lords, I say this for the petty gratification of giving you a transitory uneasiness; a man who never yet raised his voice to assert a lie will not hazard his character with posterity by asserting a falsehood on a subject so important to his country, and on an occasion like this. Yes. my lords. a man who does not wish to have his epitaph written until his country is liberated will not leave a weapon in the power of envy, nor a pretense to impeach the probity which he means to preserve even in the grave to which tyranny consigns him.

[Interruption by the court.]

Again I say, that what I have spoken was not intended for your lordship, whose situation I commiserate rather than envy-my expressions were for my countrymen; if there is a true Irishman present. let my last words cheer him in the hour of his affliction.

[Interruption by the court.]

I have always understood it to be the duty of a judge. when a prisoner has been convicted, to pronounce the sentence of the law; I have also understood that judges sometimes think it their duty to hear with patience and to speak with humanity. to exhort the victim of the laws. and to offer with tender benignity his opinions of the motives by which he was actuated in the crime, of which he had been adjudged guilty: that a judge has thought it his duty so to have done. I have no doubt–but where is the boasted freedom of your institutions. where is the vaunted impartiality, clemency. and mildness of your courts of justice, if an unfortunate prisoner, whom your policy, and not pure justice. is about to deliver into the hands of the executioner. is not suffered to explain his motives sincerely and truly. and to vindicate the principles by which he was actuated?

My lords, it may be a part of the system of angry justice, to bow a man’s mind by humiliation to the purposed ignominy of the scaffold; but worse to me than the purposed shame, or the scaffold’s terrors, would be the shame of such unfounded imputations as have been laid against me in this court: you, my lord [Lord Norbury], are a judge.

Lord Norbury.jpg

I am the supposed culprit; I am a man, you are a man also; by a revolution of power, we might change places, though we never could change characters; if I stand at the bar of this court and dare not vindicate my character, what a farce is your justice? If I stand at this bar and dare not vindicate my character. flow dare you calumniate it? Does the sentence of death which your unhallowed policy inflicts on my body also condemn my tongue to silence and my reputation to reproach? Your executioner may abridge the period of my existence. but while I exist I shall not forbear to vindicate my character and motives from your aspersions: and as a man to whom fame is dearer than life, I will make the last use of that life in doing justice to that reputation which is to live after me, and which is the only legacy I can leave to those I honor and love, and for whom I am proud to perish. As men, my lord, we must appear at the great day at one common tribunal. and it will then remain for the searcher of all hearts to show a collective universe who was engaged in the most virtuous actions. or actuated by the purest motives-my country’s oppressors or–

[Interruption by the court.]

Earl of Norbury coat of arms

My lord, will a dying man be denied the legal privilege of exculpating himself, in the eyes of the community, of an undeserved reproach thrown upon him during his trial, by charging him with ambition and attempting to cast away, for a paltry consideration. the liberties of his country? Why did your lordship insult me? or rather why insult justice. in demanding of me why sentence of death should not be pronounced? I know, my lord, that form prescribes that you should ask the question; the form also presumes a right of answering. This no doubt may be dispensed with–and so might the whole ceremony of trial, since sentence was already pronounced at the castle, before your jury was impaneled; your lordships are but the priests of the oracle, and I submit; but I insist on the whole of the forms.

I am charged with being an emissary of France An emissary of France? And for what end? It is alleged that I wished to sell the independence of my country? And for what end? Was this the object of my ambition? And is this the mode by which a tribunal of justice reconciles contradictions? No, I am no emissary; and my ambition was to hold a place among the deliverers of my country–not in power, nor in profit, but in the glory of the achievement!…

Connection with Prance was indeed intended, but only as far as mutual interest would sanction or require. Were they to assume any authority inconsistent with the purest independence. it would be the signal for their destruction: we sought aid, and we sought it, as we had assurances we should obtain it–as auxiliaries in war and allies in peace…

I wished to procure for my country the guarantee which Washington procured for America. To procure an aid, which, by its example, would be as important as its valor, disciplined. gallant, pregnant with science and experience; which would perceive the good and polish the rough points of our character. They would come to us as strangers and leave us as friends, after sharing in our perils and elevating our destiny. These were my objects–not to receive new taskmasters hilt to expel old tyrants: these were my views. and these only became Irishmen. It was for these ends I sought aid from France; because France, even as an enemy. could not he more implacable than the enemy already in the bosom of my country.

[Interruption by the court.]

I have been charged with that importance in the efforts to emancipate my country. as to be considered the keystone of the combination of Irishmen; or, as Your Lordship expressed it, “the life and blood of conspiracy.” You do me honor overmuch. You have given to the subaltern all the credit of a superior. There are men engaged in this conspiracy, who are not only superior to me but even to your own conceptions of yourself, my lord; men, before the splendor of whose genius and virtues, I should bow with respectful deference, and who would think themselves dishonored to be called your friend–who would not disgrace themselves by shaking your bloodstained hand–

[Interruption by the court]

What, my lord, shall you tell me, on the passage to that scaffold. Which that tyranny. of which you are only the intermediary executioner. Has erected for my murder. that I am accountable for all the blood that has and will be shed in this struggle of the oppressed against the oppressor?–shall you tell me this–and must I be so very a slave as not to repel it?

I do not fear to approach the omnipotent Judge, to answer for the conduct of my whole life; and am I to be appalled and falsified by a mere remnant of mortality here? By you. too. who, if it were possible to collect all the innocent blood that you have shed in your unhallowed ministry, in one great reservoir. Your Lordship might swim in it.

[Interruption by the court.]

Let no man dare, when I am dead. to charge me with dishonor; let no man attaint my memory by believing that I could have engaged in any cause but that of my country’s liberty and independence, or that I could have become the pliant minion of power in the oppression or the miseries of my countrymen. The proclamation of the provisional government speaks for our views; no inference can he tortured from it to countenance barbarity or debasement at home, or subjection. humiliation. or treachery from abroad; I would not have submitted to a foreign oppressor for the same reason that I would resist the foreign and domestic oppressor: in the dignity of freedom I would have fought upon the threshold of my country, and its enemy should enter only by passing over my lifeless corpse. Am I, who lived but for my country, and who have subjected myself to the dangers of the jealous and watchful oppressor, and the bondage of the grave, only to give my countrymen their rights, and my country her independence, and am I to be loaded with calumny and not suffered to resent or repel it–no, God forbid!

If the spirits of the illustrious dead participate in the concerns and cares of those who are dear to them in this transitory life–oh, ever dear and venerated shade of my departed father. look down with scrutiny upon the conduct of your suffering son; and see if I have even for a moment deviated from those principles of morality and patriotism which it was your care to instill into my youthful mind, and for which I am now to offer up my life!

My lords, you are impatient for the sacrifice-the blood which you seek is not congealed by the artificial terrors which surround your victim; it circulates warmly and unruffled, through the channels which God created for noble purposes. but which you are bent to destroy. for purposes so grievous. that they cry to heaven. Be yet patient! I have but a few words more to say. I am going to my cold and silent grave: my lamp of life is nearly e4inguished: my race is run: the grave opens to receive me, and I sink into its bosom! I have but one request to ask at my departure from this world–it is the charity of its silence! Let no man write my epitaph: for as no man who knows my motives dare now vindicate them. let not prejudice or ignorance asperse them. Let them and me repose in obscurity and peace, and my tomb remain uninscribed, until other times, and other men, can do justice to my character; when my country takes her place among the nations of the earth, then, and not till then, let my epitaph be written. I have done.

Coat of arms of Ireland 17th century

coat of arms of Ireland 17th century

http://www.robertemmet.org/speech.htm

The first case before the International Tribunal for Natural Justice is “We, the People” v. REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA INC. – PART 2

The Mother of all African trials will commence in Johannesburg, South Africa on the 28th of January, 2016 because this is truly the first case “by the people, for the people, of the people” by the UN-ENACTED law of the land, natural law and universal jurisdiction; in the trial the OPPT foreclosures will be presented for verification; we will be inviting Caleb Skinner, Heather Tucci-Jarraf and Randall Hiller to testify; those who have been following SWISSINDO TRUST and global black screen off-ledger accounts will not be disappointed; the case will be livestreamed by New Earth Nation and ITNJ committee; other issues which will be raised is the Federal Reserve swindle: how RSA has been “federalized”, the role of the NWO in the history of RSA, the truth about central banking, revenue services fraud; corporate government franchise fraud, banking fraud, electoral fraud, the whole nine yards; we will have expert witnesses, central banking experts, community members with evidence of fraud on ALL levels; rest assured, there will not be a dull moment;

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, IF THE ITNJ RULE IN OUR FAVOUR THEN IT WILL SET PRECEDENT FOR MANY COUNTRIES!!!

UZA ITNJ Document banner

We will be flying the ITNJ Chief Justice Dr. John Walsh of Brannagh to Johannesburg, South Africa to arbitrate the trial; this will be the first trial by jury since it was abolished in 1969; however, in terms of jurisdiction, the first of its kind as ALL current COURTS are ADMIRALTY jurisdiction courts and this is one of the key issues in this very complex trial;

The case has been filed by Unified Common-law Grand Jury of Southern Africa (UZA) against Chief Justice Moegeng Moegeng and others of the Constitutional Court of South Africa by representative action of we, the people; we are holding them accountable for all our woes; after all, they are the “kingmakers” and, the only remedy is for them to re-oath themselves to we, the people to re-establish the proper hierarchy: we at the top; public servants below us; that is only if our case succeeds, of course;

28 JANUARY 2016 UDF

 UZA now represent a loose affiliation of about 6 million people on the land of Southern Africa who do not consent to the current anglo-saxon hegemony and who see no difference between the apartheid-era of the pre-1994 regime and the current economic apartheid enforced by an oligarchy ruled by a global minority elite; UZA is also now recognized as the Southern Africa Chapter of the committee in support of the International Tribunal for Natural Justice. There are many countries already affiliated; if this interests you or you have skills then do get involved; its open doors; the troublemakers work themselves out quickly as there are no ego trips; we are all awake and aware of what we are up against;

2015.10.12 ITNJ Press Release

The Tribunal will function similarly to the Nuremberg Tribunal, where government officials in Germany were tried for crimes against humanity. The primary difference is that the ITNJ is founded on principles of Natural Law, and has universal jurisdiction, recognizing no borders against justice. The ITNJ therefore stands positioned to set legal precedents that restore common dignity, truth, and reason to the delivery of justice in the world.

ITNJ is reaching out to planetary leaders whose works toward disclosure, natural justice and the elevation of consciousness impact our times. Please have a look at the Proclamation, Mission, and Treaty of the International Tribunal for Natural Justice (www.itnj.org) and consider aligning with this noble endeavor. We would be greatly honoured to count your name and voice among those people now advocating a planetary renewal in law and governance. The International Tribunal for Natural Justice was officially established on February 14th of this year – and the world is responding.

Thousands of constitutional scholars, law researchers, human rights groups and activists are joining hands across a wide spectrum of issues to support the ITNJ as a beacon of light to lead us out of the darkness of corruption. The Tribunal’s ceremonial seating was broadcast around the world via secure live-stream:

The establishment of the ITNJ means that it is no longer out of reach to bring to trial the decision-makers at the top of corporate and government structures such as the central banks, and even those working for corporations masquerading as our governments and our court systems. No longer will corporate agents be able to hide behind a corporate veil claiming immunity from prosecution. We sincerely hope you will join us as an esteemed member and supporter. This is truly for the People, by the People.

ARIKI TE WAIREMANA ZLAMALA:

 te wairemana 1

Our battles are not of the flesh and blood, it is of the “spirit”; the scales of justice are determined by the “Spirit of the Law” in the one scale and the “Letter of the Law” in the other; that’s why the scales of justice are currently all hanging skew; ours are level and we are changing “All shall be equal before the Law” to “All ARE NOW equal before the Law”;

Therefore, it is with humble gratitude that we announce that Ariki Te Wairemana Zlamala, Paramount Chief of Aotearoa (New Zealand) and, who’s people are also re-claiming their country from their colonial slave-masters’ tentacles; we feel Ariki Te represents the embodiment of the “Spirit of the Law”; he will be in Southern Africa for a month doing peace and healing ceremonies around the country;

Also, as part of the brand new World Hereditary Council, will be meeting with Hereditary Chiefs and Kings;

Also, will open the court ceremony on the 28th of January, 2016 on Constitutional Hill, Hillbrow, Johannesburg, South Africa; very historical in that the old fort prison is where both Mandela and Gandhi were jailed;

A Rangatira (chief) and Tohunga from New Zealand – Te Wairemana is a respected, Spiritual Leader and Healer. His noble whakapapa {lineage} stretches back to the time before Maori made New Zealand their new home Aotearoa, many centuries ago.

Te Wairemana was born gifted with the ability to communicate with the Wairua (Spirit World of both the old ways and the new) and the Ancient Ones. The Ancient Ones in Maoritanga are the Ancestors of Te Wairemana’s people, and the Spirits of the land (Papatuanuku) and the majestic mountain sacred to his iwi (tribe). Every iwi has their own mountain which they honor as a living being and part of their ancestry. Maoritanga holds that every mountain around the world can communicate with each other and that they carry the Spirit and Knowledge of the land to teach those who will listen.

Te Wairemana is a powerful healer. Listening to his own Wairua and those of the people who come to him, he works with the Ancient Ones and all elements of the Land and Life. He calls upon his Spiritual connections to guide people to their healing, opening doors to the path they are searching for.

Te Wairemana’s belief is in Oneness, the Oneness of All. His desire is to bring the Spirit and Being of all people regardless of race or religion, together in harmony with themselves, each other and the Earth we live upon. He works powerfully and with deep compassion for those who come to him for guidance, healing and his sacred teachings.

http://www.wairua.at/en/team/te-wairemana-english.html

http://wairua-te.com/

http://itnjcommittee.org/about-us/chapters/aotearoa/

Te Wairemana Zlamala: facebook

Te Wairemana Zlamala: Te Puna Wairua Healing Aotearoa Ltd

Te Wairemana Zlamala: closed group

Te Wairemana Zlamala: Te Puna Wairua Healing Retreat

2015.10.20 UZA Report: “We, the People” v. RSA INC.

ZA – Southern Africa people’s courts, tribunals, oversight committees;

Without any prejudice to the living,

FIRST OFF: THIS IS NOT A WITCH HUNT; IT’S ABOUT TRUTH & RECONCILIATION;

 Albie Sachs - Just as nature abhors a vacuum

It’s the foundations of this society that are corrupt… and we all turned a blind eye… most still do… not for long… we are the ‘trimtabs’; time to return to some good ole fashion morals and ethics; and, hold our public servants accountable; thus far, not a single soul of the thousands we have spoken to have ANY confidence in the current system; we DO NOT TRUST our Judges, Attorneys, Public Officials, Police, Military or any AGENTS of RSA INC. PERIOD! Trust must be earned, so they can start the first steps to re-conciliation, so a re-oath is in order:

This brings to mind a relevant point made by Albie Sachs, now retired CONcourt Judge and one of few worth two salts, just before this ‘democratic’ era came into being:

‘The Constitution is Natural Justice Writ Large’

‘It is no accident that constitutions usually come into being as a result of bad rather than good experiences. Their text, or sub-text, is almost invariably: “never again”. In the case of South Africa, the new constitution arises out of the need to escape from the profound humiliations and oppression created by apartheid. Through the constitution, we affirm that we learn something from our dolorous history. It is worth repeating: all constitutions are based on mistrust. If we could trust our rulers, our parties, ourselves, we would not need constitutions. Power not only corrupts, it intoxicates, it confuses. Like Nature, it abhors a vacuum. Like Water, it follows the path of least resistance. Oppression is oppression, but in some ways, oppression in the name of the good is worse than oppression in defence of the bad, since it tarnishes the very ideas it seeks to protect and deprives people even of the image or hope of a better society.’

[‘The Constitution is Natural Justice Writ Large’ in Corder and McLennan (eds) Controlling Public Power: Administrative Justice Through Law Cape Town, Department of Public Law, University of Cape Town: 1995, 51, 51.

Albie Sachs - Never Again

We, the People” v. RSA INC

  1. Finally, a criminal complaint has been filed with the South African Police Services in the case of We, the Peoplev. RSA INC.; as our criminal complaint is unusual, they referred the matter to their superior and could not provide us with a case number; we told them to contact us to set up a meeting; our experience is they usually disappear… very quickly make commercial arrests, but run from the truth… eish; document posted at: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/annexures/
  2.  Finally, the case is being served on the Justices of the Constitutional Court of South Africa (CONcourt), The Judicial Services Committee, The Public Prosecutor, The Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Deputy Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development; (interesting that Correctional Services is ABOVE Constitutional Development now… more slavery planned?)
  3.  We, the people are applying to an International Tribunal By Friday 23rd of October, 2015 the International Tribunal for Natural Justice will have received all documents, deposit and everything necessary to make a final decision on:
  4. IF they are willing to take on such an onerous title? we won’t blame them if they don’t; however, we have to continue nonetheless at the law of necessity;
  5. And if they are, to set a date for the trial which more than likely will be live-streamed or recorded; we will know soon enough from ITNJ and report;
  6. Our common-law case: 2013/06/S11 with the CONcourt which started in 2013 is documented at https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/constitutional-court/  
  7. The Founding Affidavit in our case has just been posted at:  https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/annexures/
  8.  A few weeks ago we had emailed the UZA invitation to the CONcourt to show support for the ITNJ: http://www.itnj.org/
  9. Today when we arrived at the CONcourt, Hillbrow the assistant registrar, Delano Louw was obviously expecting us; somehow he was more hue-man, not his usual sneering attitude;
  10. The only people’ court on the land was dead quiet, as it mostly is… Ironic… no people complaining there… should be 1 000s there daily; only the tourists give it a bit of life; soon, our presence and offices will liven it up J
  11. Since the Registrar, Martie Stander resigned in 2014 (went on ‘pension”) a new registrar still has not been appointed…
  12. Workshops have taken off in the townships and UZA already has the support of a few referral marketing communities, stokvels, NGOs; it’s growing fast; all groups that are ‘under investigation’ by the National Credit Council;
  13. UZA has the support of a few churches; and, hopefully soon millions will show solidarity;

2016.01.28 CONhill Annexures

28th of January, 2016: WHAT IS HAPPENING SOUTHERN AFRICA?!?!?!

  1.  We are challenging Germany’s record: on that day we declare to have more than 250 00 people to OCCUPY PEACE on Constitutional Hill to witness our Justices re-oath themselves to we, the people; either with an International Chief Justice present and or World Hereditary Chiefs
  2. Failing which we occupy constitutional hill; we will notify you along the way as to what is unfolding; this is the only remedy and probably our LAST chance to avert chaos; as a last resort we reserve the right to declare a people’s state of emergency and call up our peace-keepers and peace-makers and peace officers and all who solemnly affirm/oath themselves to we, the people as the lawful state and Republic;
  3. Townships are already burning; Cosmos City, Vosloorus; we are doing workshops in these areas and educating people on their rights and lawful defence;
  4. AND TO STAND WITH US ON THE 28TH JANUARY 2016!!!
  5.  We, the people are binding the Justices with the chains of the Constitution:
  6. to the original meaning of a Republic;
  7. to their oath;
  8. to the original Bill of Rights at centre stage;
  9. failing which, they must vacate office immediately and we will have replacements on hand; even if Tribal Elders: 1 from each tribe would be ideal;  

Southern Africa Bills to be passed on the following:

  1. Note: in order for us to have pedigree, we must be written into the Constitution;
  2. Our already established rights are written into the original Bill of Rights;
  3. National People’s Newspaper Gazette; (the current one is a fraud);
  4. Southern Africa Express Trust: an interim transmitting utility  to facilitate commercial transactions and be an interim revenue fund; we call it “re-public” i.e. we, the people are re-publicing our asset value;
  5. re-public = re-present – re-view – re-oath – re-voke – re-instate – re-purpose – re-habilitate – re-venue – re-ferendum – re-tain and maintain;
  6. Superior jurisdiction people’s courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to be recorded (not registered) and Via (not enacted) gazetted;
  7. The natural law procedure for people’s trial by jury courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to: convene, summons, hold fair hearings, making rulings, verify for judicial review at International Law, gazette, implement if not contested;
  8. Moratorium on ALL commercial claims against natural ‘citizens’;
  9. Full contract, settlement, closure on books of RSA as per GAAP within 30 Days;
  10. Full global audit and repatriation of gold, silver, minerals, heritage and all collateral wealth to balance the books;
  11. Full national audit on ALL public commonwealth i.e. everything on and in the land;
  12. Power of banking placed back in the hands of we the people;
  13. People’s Bank to be launched and positive economics ventures funded;
  14. SAPS and Military and all public servants re-oath themselves; failing which to vacate office;
  15. People to be informed and educated via people’s gazette
  16. Interim National Referendum ( 1 page); starting 28th of February 2016;
  17. Complete the 1 page interim referendum and receive:
  18. a debit card for R5 000 per month; every month;
  19. a sim card for 30 min free talktime daily and 25 sms free daily;
  20. National Referendum to start 29th of January 2016 on issues such as self-governance and self-determination;

How do we declare courts? The natural law procedure for people’s trial by jury courts, forums, oversight committees and tribunals to: declare, convene, summons, hold fair hearings, making rulings, verify for judicial review at International Law, gazette, implement if not contested;

Gandhi you must be the change

If you are still reading this then you are probably the 1% of the 99% he he; may as well consider volunteering; sadly, there is NO other remedy: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/volunteers/

The Ghoringhaicona Hereditary Council will be declaring their court to rule and find remedy for their natural birthright claim to land on the Cape Flats by their custom; we expect others to follow;

use common sense to declare a fair court; imagine you are the receiver of a summons from a people’s court… what would you feel is fair? And keep in mind: it’s about reconciliation and NOT retribution; rather rule on turning Monsanto into an organic company than shut it down; the Southern Africa Trust will foot the bill if it’s towards positive change; start preparing your cases people!!

Soon, you can hold people accountable who act as agents for harmful CORPORATIONS…

Without prejudice, ex causa onerosa, in peace,

UZA Seal & Sign Manual

 

ITNJ Ceremonial Seating Preview

Dear People,

Without prejudice,

FINALLY… a Real Natural Remedy… by the people, for the people, of the people;

You are invited to watch 25 min of thought-provoking footage, presentation and interviews…

Some of the Southern Africa crew speak in this video beginning at timestamp 21:12….

Pomp and circumstance not being our cup of tea he he, but it is for the people…

Have you signed the ITNJ Treaty? http://www.itnj.org/

And…

scarcely has it been posted on you-tube and the first disinformation starts in the comments section… which we felt compelled to respond to;

Maxim: “An error not resisted is approved.”

Comments:

Lynnie: Nice Introduction but isn’t this the one, hijacked by Bar Attorneys as Rod Class and others who started the ITNJ are saying? >”Hijacked” being the key word.<

brother-thomas: Hi Lynnie, without any prejudice and only in order that the truth may set us free are we responding; your presumption is unfortunately incorrect; pay no attention to false prophets…

Rest assured that we the people of Southern Africa have done our provisional filings at natural law and the ITNJ has accepted our terms as an independent sovereign court of record as we, the sovereigns are the court and all proceedings will be according to our wishes with our jury as this is a Southern Africa matter and ITNJ are merely arbitrators:

maxim: “The court is the person and the suit of the sovereign.”

and, at natural law, we are peers and disputes can only be settled before a jury;

maxim: “The decree of the sovereign makes law.”

This is a SA matter with SA remedies by the people, for the people and of the people; the ITNJ will just be affirming our representative administrative action which will be held to referendum once the first extraordinary remedies have been implemented starting 28th of January 2016 for RSA at Constitutional Court of South Africa which will be live-streamed; we aim to have more than 250 000 people on Constitutional Hill to witness our Justices re-oath themselves to the original Bill of Rights and the original Constitution of the original Republic of South Africa;  Our Constitutional Court has already granted quiet title action, but they requested we get a Chief Justice: enter ITNJ;

Final proof of the un-restricted sovereignty and access to court that ITNJ has granted us:

Affidavit of Truth: I brother-thomas, a people hereby solemnly affirm to whom these presents shall come; that, as administrator of UZA the first people’s court on the land; and, a religious man who by Black’s Law 4th Edition, 1968 is civilly dead, the ITNJ have nonetheless provisionally accepted our court filings of “We, the People” v. RSA INC.; specifically, the people ACTing as Justices of our Constitutional Court of South Africa; final filings will be in by 17 October 2015; trial to commence in November;  

Details and navigational links to our actions are at giftoftruth dot wordpress dot com: click on the FAQs page for brief descriptions and navigational links; be blessed;  

What we have here with the Baptists is evidence of how destructive the ego can be and poor America has a lot of that going on ACROSS the board: from corporate to sovereign; this destructive ego will lead to a violent confrontation on US soil; Is history seeking to repeat itself? Is it necessary? Does it matter who is right if our common goal is LIBERTY!!! THAT IS WHAT WE ALL HAVE IN COMMON! THE REST IS BAGGAGE; let it go already… we rest our case, your honour…

Natural Law - MLK

Us Africans are one people and do not easily entertain trifles and avoid scandals; so, we are friends  with sacha, rod, Rebecca and co; EVERYBODY EQUALLY; we wrote them we love them but what they are doing is un-Christian; anyone may email us at commonlawsa at “gee”-mail dot com if they have ANY evidence to the contrary and we will repent in public and amend our ways; this is it, people; ripleys believe it, or not… the silver bullet (we, the people)… whatever you want to call it; Until then, in the words of Thomas Paine:

Thomas Paine - lead

“UNITED WE STAND; DIVIDED WE FALL!”

Sincerely, ex causa onerosa,

be blessed, in peace,

administrator uza – brother-thomas

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS – “A Judge should have two salts…”… Do they?…

UZA ITNJ Document banner

Without any prejudice,

We have first-hand experience, on numerous occasions, in the courts of Southern Africa that  people acting as commercial executive administrators acting as “Judges” fall short on at least 90% of the following; we say that we stand witness to the Judges to be found wanting… ex causa onerosa; in peace – uza

Let us know what your experience is?

 

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS *

With Amendments to January 1, 1968

Ancient Precedents.

“And I charged your judges at that time, saying Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s; and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I wil hear it” — Deuteronomy, I, 16-17.

“Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shat not respect persons, neither take a gift; for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.” — Deuteronomy, XVI, 19.

“We will not make any justiciaries, constables, sheriffs or bailiffs, but from those who understand the law of the realm and are well disposed to observe it.” — Magna Charta, XLV.

“Judges ought to remember that their office is jus dicere not jus dare; to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law.”

“Judges ought to be more learned than witty; more reverend than plausible; and more advised than confident. Above all things, integrity is their portion and proper virtue.”

“Patience and gravity of hearing is an essential part of justice; and an over speaking judge is no well-tuned cymbal. It is no grace to a judge first to find that which he might have heard in due time from the Bar, or to show quickness of conceit in cutting off evidence or counsel too short; or to prevent information by questions though pertinent.”

“The place of justice is a hallowed place; and therefore not only the Bench, but the foot pare and precincts and purprise thereof ought to be preserved without scandal and corruption.” – Bacon’s “Essay Of Judicature.”

Preamble.

In addition to the Canons for Professional Conduct of Lawyers which it has formulated and adopted, the American Bar Association, mindful that the character and conduct of a judge should never be objects of indifference, and that declared ethical standards tend to become habits of life, deems it desirable to set forth its views respecting those principles which should govern the personal practice of members of the judiciary in the administration of their office. The Association accordingly adopts the following Canons, the spirit of which it suggests as a proper guide and reminder for judges, and as indicating what the people have a right to expect from them.

Preamble.

In addition to the Canons for Professional Conduct of Lawyers which it has formulated and adopted, the American Bar Association, mindful that the character and conduct of a judge should never be objects of indifference, and that declared ethical standards tend to become habits of life, deems it desirable to set forth its views respecting those principles which should govern the personal practice of members of the judiciary in the administration of their office. The Association accordingly adopts the following Canons, the spirit of which it suggests as a proper guide and reminder for judges, and as indicating what the people have a right to expect from them.

  1. Relations of the Judiciary.

The assumption of the office of judge casts upon the incumbent duties in respect to his personal conduct which concern his relation to the state and its inhabitants, the litigants before him, the principles of law, the practitioners of law in his court, and the witnesses, jurors and attendants who aid him in the administration of its functions.

  1. The Public Interest.

Courts exist to promote justice, and thus to serve the public interest. Their administration should be speedy and careful. Every judge should at all times be alert in his rulings and in the conduct of the business of the court, so far as he can, to make it useful to litigants and to the community. He should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts instead of the courts for the litigants.

  1. Constitutional Obligations.

It is the duty of all judges in the United States to support the federal Constitution and that of the state whose laws they administer; in so doing, they should fearlessly observe and apply fundamental limitations and guarantees.

  1. Avoidance of Impropriety.

A judge’s official conduct should be free from impropriety and the appearance of impropriety; he should avoid infractions of law; and his personal behavior, not only upon the Bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach.

  1. Essential Conduct.

A judge should be temperate, attentive, patient, impartial, and, since he is to administer the law and apply it to the facts, he should be studious of the principles of the law and diligent in endeavouring to ascertain the facts.

  1. Industry.

A judge should exhibit an industry and application commensurate with the duties imposed upon him.

Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Ed. Rev.

LX IX

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

  1. Promptness.

A judge should be prompt in the performance of his judicial duties, recognizing that the time of litigants, jurors and attorneys is of value and that habitual lack of punctuality on his part justifies dissatisfaction with the administration of the business of the court.

  1. Court Organization.

A judge should organize the court with a view to the prompt and convenient dispatch of its business and he should not tolerate abuses and neglect by clerks, and other assistants who are sometimes prone to presume too much upon his good natured acquiescence by reason of friendly association with him.

It is desirable too, where the judicial system permits, that he should cooperate with other judges of the same court, and in other courts, as members of a single judicial system, to promote the more satisfactory administration of justice.

  1. Consideration for Jurors and Others.

A judge should be considerate of jurors, witnesses and others in attendance upon the court.

  1. Courtesy and Civility.

A judge should be courteous to counsel, especially to those who are young and inexperienced, and also to all others appearing or concerned in the administration of justice in the court.

He should also require, and so far as his power extends, enforce on the part of clerks, court officers and counsel civility and courtesy to the court and to jurors, witnesses, litigants and others having business in the court.

  1. Unprofessional Conduct of Attorneys and Counsel.

A judge should utilize his opportunities to criticise and correct unprofessional conduct of attorneys and counsellors, brought to his attention; and, if adverse comment is not a sufficient corrective, should send the matter at once to the proper investigating and disciplinary authorities.

  1. Appointees of the Judiciary and Their Compensation.

Trustees, receivers, masters, referees, guardians and other persons appointed by a judge to aid in the administration of justice should have the strictest probity and impartiality and should be selected with a view solely to their character and fitness. The power of making such appointments should not be exercised by him for personal or partisan advantage. He should not permit his appointments to be controlled by others than himself.

He should also avoid nepotism and undue favouritism in his appointments.

While not hesitating to fix or approve just amounts, he should be most scrupulous in granting

Or approving compensation for the services or charges of such appointees to avoid excessive allowances, whether or not excepted to or complained of. He cannot rid himself of this responsibility by the consent of counsel.

  1. Kinship or Influence.

A judge should not act in a controversy where a near relative is a party; he should not suffer his conduct to justify the impression that any person can improperly influence him or unduly enjoy his favor, or that he is affected by the kinship, rank, position or influence of any party or other person.

  1. Independence.

A judge should not be swayed by partisan demands, public clamor or considerations of personal popularity or notoriety, nor be apprehensive of unjust criticism.

  1. Interference in Conduct of Trial.

A judge may properly intervene in a trial of a case to promote expedition, and prevent unnecessary waste of time, or to clear up some obscurity, but he should bear in mind that his undue interference, impatience, or participation in the examination of witnesses, or a severe attitude on his part toward witnesses, especially those who are excited or terrified by the unusual circumstances of a trial, may tend to prevent the proper presentation of the cause, or the ascertainment of the truth in respect thereto.

Conversation between the judge and counsel in court is often necessary, but the judge should be studious to avoid controversies which are apt to obscure the merits of the dispute between litigants and lead to its unjust disposition. In addressing counsel, litigants, or witnesses, he should avoid a controversial manner or tone.

He should avoid interruptions of counsel in their arguments except to clarify his mind as to their positions, and he should not be tempted to the unnecessary display of learning or a premature judgment.

  1. Ex parte Applications.

A judge should discourage ex parte hearings of applications for injunctions and receiverships where the order may work detriment to absent parties; he should act upon such ex parte applications only where the necessity for quick action is clearly shown; if this be demonstrated, then he should endeavor to counteract the effect of the absence of opposing counsel by a scrupulous cross-examination and investigation as to the facts and the principles of law on which the application is based, granting relief only when fully satisfied that the law permits it and the emergency demands it. He should remember that an injunction is a limitation upon the freedom of action of defendants and should not be granted lightly or inadvisedly. One applying for such relief must sustain the burden of showing clearly its necessity and this burden is increased in the absence of the party whose freedom of action is sought to be restrained even though only temporarily.

  1. Ex parte Communications.

A judge should not permit private interviews, arguments or communications designed to influence his judicial action, where interests to

LXX

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

be affected thereby are not represented before him, except in cases where provision is made by law for ex parte application.

While the conditions under which briefs of argument are to be received are largely matters of local rule or practice, he should not permit the contents of such brief presented to him to be concealed from opposing counsel. Ordinarily all communications of counsel to the judge intended or calculated to influence action should be made known to opposing counsel.

  1. Continuances.

Delay in the administration of justice is a common cause of complaint; counsels are frequently responsible for this delay. A judge, without being arbitrary or forcing cases unreasonably or unjustly to trial when unprepared, to the detriment of parties, may well endeavor to hold counsel to a proper appreciation of their duties to the public interest, to their own clients, and to the adverse party and his counsel, so as to enforce due diligence in the dispatch of business before the court.

  1. Judicial Opinions.

In disposing of controverted cases, a judge should indicate the reasons for his action in an opinion showing that he has not disregarded or overlooked serious arguments of counsel. He thus shows his full understanding of the case, avoids the suspicion of arbitrary conclusion, promotes confidence in his intellectual integrity and may contribute useful precedent to the growth of the law.

It is desirable that Courts of Appeals in reversing cases and granting new trials should so indicate their views on questions of law argued before them and necessarily arising in the controversy that upon the new trial counsel may be aided to avoid the repetition of erroneous positions of law and shall not be left in doubt by the failure of the court to decide such questions.

But the volume of reported decisions is such and is so rapidly increasing that in writing opinions which are to be published judges may well take this fact into consideration, and curtail them accordingly, without substantially departing from the principles stated above.

It is of high importance that judges constituting a court of last resort should use effort and selfrestraint to promote solidarity of conclusion and the consequent influence of judicial decision. A judge should not yield to pride of opinion or value more highly his individual reputation than that of the court to which he should be loyal. Except in case of conscientious difference of opinion on fundamental principle, dissenting opinions should be discouraged in courts of last resort.

  1. Influence of Decisions Upon the Development of the Law.

A judge should be mindful that his duty is the application of general law to particular instances, that ours is a government of law and not of men, and that he violates his duty as a minister of justice under such a system if he seeks to do what he may personally consider substantial justice in a particular case and disregards the general law as he knows it to be binding on him. Such action  may become a precedent unsettling accepted principles and may have detrimental consequences beyond the immediate controversy. He should administer his office with a due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law.

  1. Idiosyncrasies and Inconsistencies.

Justice should not be moulded by the individual idiosyncrasies of those who administer it. A judge should adopt the usual and expected method of doing justice, and not seek to be extreme or peculiar in his judgments, or spectacular or sensational in the conduct of the court. Though vested with discretion in the imposition of mild or severe sentences he should not compel persons brought before him to submit to some humiliating act or discipline of his own devising, without authority of law, because he thinks it will have a beneficial corrective influence.

In imposing sentence he should endeavor to conform to a reasonable standard of punishment and should not seek popularity or publicity either by exceptional severity or undue leniency.

  1. Review.

In order that a litigant may secure the full benefit of the right of review accorded to him by law, a trial judge should scrupulously grant to the defeated party opportunity to present the questions arising upon the trial exactly as they arose, were presented, and decided, by full and fair bill of exceptions or otherwise; any failure in this regard on the part of the judge is peculiarly worthy of condemnation because the wrong done may be irremediable.

  1. Legislation.

A judge has exceptional opportunity to observe the operation of statutes, especially those relating to practice, and to ascertain whether they tend to impede the just disposition of controversies; and he may well contribute to the public interest by advising those having authority to remedy defects of procedure, of the result of his observation and experience.

  1. Inconsistent Obligations.

A judge should not accept inconsistent duties; nor incur obligations, pecuniary or otherwise, which will in any way interfere or appear to interfere with his devotion to the expeditious and proper administration of his official functions.

  1. Business Promotions and Solicitations for Charity.

A judge should avoid giving ground for any reasonable suspicion that he is utilizing the power or prestige of his office to persuade or coerce others to patronize or contribute, either to the success of private business ventures, or to charitable enterprises.

He should, therefore, not enter into such private business, or pursue such a course of conduct, as would justify such suspicion, nor use the power of his office or the influence of his name to promote the business interests of others; he should not solicit for charities, nor should he enter into any business relation which, in the normal course of events reasonably to be expected, might bring his personal interest into conflict with the impartial performance of his official duties.

I,XX I

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

  1. Personal Investments and Relations.

A judge should abstain from making personal investments in enterprises which are apt to be involved in litigation in the court; and, after his accession to the Bench, he should not retain such investments previously made, longer than a period sufficient to enable him to dispose of them without serious loss. It is desirable that he should, so far as reasonably possible, refrain from all relations which would normally tend to arouse the suspicion that such relations warp or bias his judgment, or prevent his impartial attitude of mind in the administration of his judicial duties.

He should not utilize information coming to him in a judicial capacity for purposes of speculation; and it detracts from the public confidence in his integrity and the soundness of his judicial judgment for him at any time to become a speculative investor upon the hazard of a margin.

  1. Executorships and Trusteeships.

While a judge is not disqualified from holding executorships or trusteeships, he should not accept or continue to hold any fiduciary or other position if the holding of it would interfere or seem to interfere with the proper performance of his judicial duties, or if the business interests of those represented require investments in enterprises that are apt to come before him judicially, or to be involved in questions of law to be determined by him.

  1. Partisan Politics.*

While entitled to entertain his personal views of political questions, and while not required to surrender his rights or opinions as a citizen, it is inevitable that suspicion of being warped by political bias will attach to a judge who becomes the active promoter of the interests of one political party as against another. He should avoid making political speeches, making or soliciting payment of assessments or contributions to party funds, the public endorsement of candidates for political office and participation in party conventions.

He should neither accept nor retain a place on any party committee nor act as party leader, nor engage generally in partisan activities.

Where, however, it is necessary for judges to be nominated and elected as candidates of a political party, nothing herein contained shall prevent the judge from attending or speaking at political gatherings, or from making contributions to the campaign funds of the party that has nominated him and seeks his election or re-election.

the impression that if chosen, he will administer his office with bias, partiality or improper discrimination.

While holding a judicial position he should not become an active candidate either at a party primary or at a general election for any office other than a judicial office. If a judge should decide to become a candidate for any office not judicial, he should resign in order that it cannot be said that he is using the power or prestige of his judicial position to promote his own candidacy or the success of his party.

If a judge becomes a candidate for any judicial office, he should refrain from all conduct which might tend to arouse reasonable suspicion that he is using the power or prestige of his judicial position to promote his candidacy or the success of his party.

He should not permit others to do anything in behalf of his candidacy which would reasonably lead to such suspicion.

  1. Private Law Practice.

In many states the practice of law by one holding judicial position is forbidden. In superior courts of general jurisdiction, it should never be permitted. In inferior courts in some states, it is permitted because the county or municipality is not able to pay adequate living compensation for a competent judge. In such cases one who practises law is in a position of great delicacy and must be scrupulously careful to avoid conduct in his practice whereby he utilizes or seems to utilize his judicial position to further his professional success.

He should not practise in the court in which he is a judge, even when presided over by another judge, or appear therein for himself in any controversy.

If forbidden to practise law, he should refrain from accepting any professional employment while in office.

He may properly act as arbitrator or lecture upon or instruct in law, or write upon the subject, and accept compensation therefor, if such course does not interfere with the due performance of his judicial duties, and is not forbidden by some positive provision of law.

  1. Gifts and Favors.

A judge should not accept any presents or favors from litigants, or from lawyers practising before him or from others whose interests are likely to be submitted to him for judgment.

  1. Social Relations.

It is not necessary to the proper performance of judicial duty that a judge should live in retirement or seclusion; it is desirable that, so far as reasonable attention to the completion of his work will permit, he continue to mingle in social intercourse and that he should not discontinue his interest in or appearance at meetings of members of the Bar. He should, however, in pending or prospective litigation before him be particularly careful to avoid such action as may reasonably tend to awaken the suspicion that his social or business relations or friendships constitute an element in influencing his judicial conduct.

  1. A Summary of Judicial Obligation.

In every particular his conduct should be above reproach. He should be conscientious, studious, thorough, courteous, patient, punctual, just, impartial, fearless of public clamor, regardless of

LXXII

___

  1. Self-Interest.

A judge should abstain from performing or taking part in any judicial act in which his personal interests are involved. If he has personal litigation in the court of which he is judge, he need not resign his judgeship on that account, but he should, of course, refrain from any judicial act in such a controversy.

  1. Candidacy for Office.**

A candidate for judicial position should not make or suffer others to make for him, promises of conduct in office which appeal to the cupidity or prejudices of the appointing or electing power; he should not announce in advance his conclusions of law on disputed issues to secure class support, and he should do nothing while a candidate to create As amended August 31, 1933 and September 20, 1950.

** As amended August 31, 1933.

___

CANONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

public praise, and indifferent to private political or partisan influences; he should administer justice according to law, and deal with his appointments as a public trust; he should not allow other affairs or his private interests to interfere with the prompt and proper performance of his judicial duties, nor should he administer the office for the purpose of advancing his personal ambitions or increasing his popularity.

  1. Improper Publicizing of Court Proceedings.*

Proceedings in court should be conducted with fitting dignity and decorum. The taking of photo graphs in the court room, during sessions of the court or recesses between sessions, and the broadcasting or televising of court proceedings detract from the essential dignity of the proceedings, distract participants and witnesses in giving testimony, and create misconceptions with respect thereto in the mind of the public and should not be permitted.

* Adopted September 30, 1937; amended September 15, 1952 and February 5, 1963.

Provided that this restriction shall not apply to the broadcasting or televising, under the supervision of the court, of such portions of naturalization proceedings (other than the interrogation of applicants) as are designed and carried out exclusively as a ceremony for the purpose of publicly demonstrating in an impressive manner the essential dignity and the serious nature of naturalization.

  1. Conduct of Court Proceedings.*

Proceedings in court should be so conducted as to reflect the importance and seriousness of the inquiry to ascertain the truth.

The oath should be administered to witnesses in a manner calculated to impress them with the importance and solemnity of their promise to adhere to the truth. Each witness should be sworn separately and impressively at the bar or the court, and the clerk should be required to make a formal record of the administration of the oath, including the name of the witness.

* Adopted September 30, 1937.

I,XXII

end

Don’t YOU know?!? Talkin Bout a Revolution…

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Talkin Bout a Revolution 2

While they’re standing in the welfare lines

Crying at the doorsteps of those armies of salvation

Wasting time, in the unemployment lines

Sitting around, waiting for a promotion

Talkin Bout a Revolution 3

Don’t you know, they’re talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Poor people gonna rise up and get their share

Poor people gonna rise up and take whats theirs Talkin Bout a Revolution 4

Don’t you know, you better run, run, run, run, run

Run, run, run, run, run, run, run

Oh, I said you better, run, run, run, run, run, run, run

Run, run, run, run, run

Talkin Bout a Revolution 5

‘Cause finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution

‘Cause finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution, oh no

Talkin ’bout a revolution ,oh Talkin Bout a Revolution 6

While they’re standing in the welfare lines

Crying at the doorsteps of those armies of salvation

Wasting time in the unemployment lines

Sitting around waiting for a promotion

Talkin Bout a Revolution 7

Don’t you know, theyre talkin ’bout a revolution

It sounds like a whisper

Talkin Bout a Revolution 8 And finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution

Yes, finally the tables are starting to turn, talkin ’bout a revolution, oh no

Talkin bout a revolution, oh no, talkin bout a revolution, oh no

 Songwriter: Chapman, Tracy L

 Talkin Bout a Revolution 1

ABSA BANK SOUTH AFRICA is RUNNINNGGG…………

The people of Southern Africa are beginning to smell the fear…

Of the BANKSTERs!

ABSA - not today

They are officially on the run and we will corner them before an International Tribunal; Thankfully, we do not have the level of psychopaths running around the northern hemisphere;

As we say in Afrikaans, here we give them a “SNOT KLAP” literally translated as “SNOT SLAP” meaning: “I will slap you until the mucous orbits around your head” or “I will stick my finger in your eye and dial your face to zero… my china”;

For further explanations you will have to come visit us and experience our lingo for yourself; we are course like salt;

All this is figurative of course, and a BANK is ONLY a legal fiction: it does not exist…

as they say using their larney words: “Corpus Delict”; no body: If anyone has ANY complaints about the herein logos, the first question we will be asking is:
“Please produce the body?”… 

Here is a heads up from our FB friends regarding another ABSAsnot klap”:

from facebook: John to ‎Banking – SECURITIZATION – 2012

ABSA - winner in fraud

Cautiously Optimistic

(shame : “cautiously optimistic” even though they have already won… the fear, the trauma, the atrocities… we ALL are gonna need counselling after this…)

Sanlam Home Loans (Pty) Ltd Maybe some more good news – There was a successful defense against a summons for summary judgement for an alleged mortgage default – THE BANK – our friends ABSA (of libor and Docufile “fire” fame) – WITHDREW – TWICE – and it is quite possible they cannot rise from the ashes this time. The Plaintiffs were: ABSA HOME LOANS 101 (PTY) LTD First Plaintiff ABSA HOME LOANS GUARANTEE COMPANY (PTY) LTD Second Plaintiff Formerly: Sanlam Home Loans (Pty) Ltd Anybody destitute with a SANLAM MORTRGAGE BOND now ABSA – THE DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE for possible / alleged mortgage default defense!!! Mark: Please steer me to these defence docs. Marie: Thankfully, this may be it. To help us all. Marie: Haha, may I have the info to keep fighting these jackasses. Lol. Jan: epic, ABSA HOME LOANS GUARANTEE COMPANY (PTY) LTD and ABSA HOME LOANS 101 (PTY) LTD, i had no idea that ABSA had pulled off a similar stunt like Standard Bank & SA Home Loans (Sanlam Home Loans, SA Home Loans, mmmh), using the very same structure, i.e. numerous trustees (101, 102, 103, etc) like the ever Changing Tides (Pty) ltd and the ominous SA Home Loans Guarantee Trust; at least they got more open and simply merged the 2 (on paper, since SHL has always been nothing but ABSA/Barkleys…), what brought me to this: http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACT/2010/22.html

which is absolutely remarkable just reading the first few lines, when the courts & ‘judges’ didn’t even know how to spell securitization, when most of us had no idea what is in 2012, here the competition tribunal seems to be all knowing : The primary acquiring firm is ABSA Bank Limited (“Absa”), a company duly registered in terms of the company laws of South Africa. Absa is a subsidiary of Absa Group Limited (“Absa Group”), a public company listed on the Johannesburg Securities Exchange. Absa Group is ultimately controlled by Barclays Plc, a public company listed on the London Stock Exchange, the Tokyo Stock Exchange, and the New York Stock Exchange. The primary target firm is Sanlam Home Loans (Pty) Ltd (“SHL”), a company registered in terms of the company laws of South Africa. Pre-merger SHL is jointly controlled by Absa (with a 50% shareholding) and Sanlam Life Insurance Limited (“Sanlam”) (with a 50% shareholding). Absa Group and Sanlam each controls in excess of 40 subsidiaries. The SHL business model involves the securitisation of home loans originated through the business as a means to secure medium- to long term funding and minimise the cost of funding. The merging parties submitted that as part of a securitisation structure, SHL owns 100% of the issued preference shares in Sanlam Home Loans 101 (Pty) Ltd (“SHL 101”) and Sanlam Home Loans 103 (“SHL 103”). The ordinary share capital of these two entities is held by two trusts, which operate for the benefit of two separate special purpose vehicles. This structure ensures that SHL 101 and SHL 103 are bankruptcy/insolvency remote. The merging parties further submitted that the financials of SHL 101 and SHL 103 are consolidated with those of SHL for accounting purposes since SHL is deemed to control SHL 101 and SHL 103. p.s.; i did ask john for the files

ABSA - dismissed

We have now set down 2 of the major banksters on the land of Southern Africa;

The others are busy getting their notices;

Sincerely, ex causa onerosa, all rights reserved

administrator – uza

I Want to Know More?

https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/faqs/

A Case that Beat the RSA Banks:

https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/a-case-that-beat-the-rsa-banksters/

All templates to the case are at: https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/legal-defence/

Universal Charter of Liberty

2015 iamfree sticker

Decree at Natural Law in the Spirit of the Universal Law of Liberty 

We, the People, living inhabitants who walk the Earth hereby declare for ALL the world and ALL of Creation above, around, below, within and without, from alpha to omega to know and remember the un-written laws of the heart and to take care of the following:

We say that the Earth, our home belongs to all creatures who are born on it and inhabit it, with equal rights and freedoms and that no church or government or any institution impersonating a living Church or living State, in both which the power is vested in the People, can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of the People;

We say that our people have been robbed of their birthright to land, liberty, justice and peace by a SECRET MYSTERY HIDDEN form of government founded on injustice and inequality since the beginning of mankind;

We say that our communities and countries will never be prosperous or free until ALL  people live in brotherhood and are enjoying equal rights and opportunities;

We say that with reference to the 17 Goals of Global Agenda 2030: only full participation by the people, for the people and of the people, each by their free will choice to their own self-determination and self-governance and based on the will of all the people can secure for each people, equally their birthright without distinction of colour, race, sex or belief;

We say and declare that we are not subject to, nor do we have any accountability to ANY REGISTERED STATE or authority, but before an assembly, forum, jury or tribunal of living peers;

We say that we are only all equally subject to a mutual compact, the law of nations and guided by The One Universal Law of: “do no harm, cause no loss” and the 5 ethics of: truth, integrity, responsibility, accountability and transparency;

Birthright

We say that we are the true Heirs as inhabitants of Earth and only full equal custodianship, management, shareholdership and participation of the Global Estate Trust of which Earth is the Asset which was Granted by Source to We, the People as Sole Beneficiaries for our ethical and sustainable custodianship can secure the birthright and liberty of all people as equal shareholders and natural heirs;

As custodians of our birthright and heritage from Prime Creator Source we are living, breathing, flesh and blood sentient beings with limbs i.e. sovereign souls and we are NOT corporate legal fiction entities of the HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE or any CITY or any STATE or any other legal fiction non-entity which is hereby declared deraigned and no longer exists ab initio.

Notice

We say and declare by our own free will and repudiate any and all false claims as to our consent to any and all contracts, treaties, errors or ommissions ab initio which we consider to be harmful to people and to the New Earth, our home.

We hereby denounce as null and void ab initio any and all contracts made in the past, present, or future and re-claim and declare our Sovereignty now and forever more. We will forever use our free will to keep in direct alignment with the Prime Source Creator, the Alpha and Omega, Father of Beginnings, hereinafter Source.

We say that our charter of liberty is declared by our own free will choice and that we are of sound mind, body, and soul ab initio.

We say we adopt this Charter of Liberty and we pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing neither strength nor courage, until the lawful changes herein set out have been attained.

Our liberty is hereby invoked by the power invested in us by Source. We are sovereign and we are free from alpha to omega. Without prejudice; All rights reserved; in peace.

 So It Is. So Be It. It is Done.

International Tribunal for Natural Justice – International Chapters meeting – feedback to the People – 2015.07.17

Without prejudice,

This is a brief report on the online meeting of the various Chapters who have volunteered their efforts for the International Tribunal for Natural Justice, inaugurated 15th June, 2015, which now happens on a fortnightly basis; This report is to inform You as one of We, the People because our actions are of the people, for the people, by the people;

 blueskyblackitnj

This was the second week that we gathered and most of it has been people introducing themselves to each other and a brief story of their journey; Ordinary people who have investigated the deception on we, the people have already volunteered with the ITNJ from countries such as America, Canada, Denmark, England, India, Ireland, Holland, Pakistan, South Africa. Each of these people are engaged in some form of judicial and people’s activism and are now uniting as representatives of a global effort which can only be achieved by your support.

One member raised the issue of REGISTRATION; she felt that this would give their Chapter standing in their country; however, the group consensus was that to REGISTER the ITNJ would be a limitation on our Sovereign Rights and then we could not possibly be representing the people who support our actions; we did find an alternative acceptable remedy for her to create a win-win for all;

This is clear proof that ITNJ is not prepared to compromise its values “of the people, for the people, by the people” and gives me further confidence in the success of our collective vision; United we stand.

What’s Next?

Invitations will go out for endorsements between various international common law grand juries and ITNJ committee members and the endorsement of the ITNJ Treaty; if this resonates with you then download, read and hopefully sign the Treaty at http://www.itnj.org/itnj/itnj-treaty/

We are currently translating the ITNJ Treaty into all participating languages;

Brief profiles and contact details of all participating Chapters will be posted in due time;

Workshops have already been launched in America by the common-law grand juries:

  • Common-law & Natural law juries and courts of record
  • Private Attorney Generals
  • Oath-keepers
  • Bounty Hunters and how to affect people’s arrests
  • Sheriffs We will be inviting other judicial activist groups to join us in solidarity; finally, we are putting our differences aside and focusing on that which we, the people have in common; If this is all new to you then go to: www.itnj.org and www.itnjcommittee.orgIn peace, SA Chapter ITNJ
  • Later in the year we expect to launch ITNJ workshops in participating countries on how to convene a court of record in order to settle disputes between people and with corporations; and, failing lawful remedy, how to transfer the matter for cause before the ITNJ;
  • A brand new Public discussion forum has been launched at www.naturaljusticeacademy.org

Natural-Justice-Academy_silver_logo-horizontal-180-px-high

For Southern Africa Chapter workshops go to https://giftoftruth.wordpress.com/workshops/

2015 UZA Seal

In Peace, SA Chapter ITNJ