Example of a UK NoI & CoR

[ag3nt5mith]

I typed it up from 21stcenturypolitix's series.

It helps to read it over and over.

Hope this will be a valid post for some.

Enjoy:-

Notice of understanding and intent and claim of right.

UK Version MKI:-

(Laying the foundation for your understanding.)

Whereas it is my understanding that the United Kingdom is a common law jurisdiction, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that equality before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a statute is defined as a legislated rule of a society which has been given the force of law, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a society is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the only form of government recognized as lawful in the United Kingdom is a representative one, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that representation requires mutual consent, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither representation nor governance can exist, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that all Acts are statutes restricted in scope and applicability by the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that said scope and applicability is limited to members and employees of government, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that those who have an NI number (National
Insurance Number) are in fact employees of the UK government and thus are bound by the statutes created by the UK government, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one's NI number, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that human beings in the United Kingdom have a right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and thus governed, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and statutory restraints, and,

Whereas a Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations, and,

Whereas I, John-Henry: Smith am a Freeman-on-the-Land, and,

(All of the above is absolutely essential this lays down your understanding, it lays down the foundation of what your going to go into with the rest of the notice and it paves the way for you to claim your rights later on in the notice. Word for word.)

(The following is also essential.)

Whereas it is my understanding that acting peacefully within community standards does not breach the peace, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that any action for which one can apply for and receive a license must itself be a fundamentally lawful action, and,

Whereas I am not a child, and,

Whereas I am a peaceful human being, and,

Whereas I am a Freeman-on-the-Land who operates with full responsibility, I do not see the need to ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, especially from those who claim limited liability, and,

(Understand you will be taking full liability for yourself and your action, freedom comes with great responsibility, do not take it lightly.)

Whereas it is my understanding that a by-law is defined as a rule of a corporation, and,

(Sited in Blacks Law dictionary in all common wealth countries.)

Whereas it is my understanding that corporations are legal fictions and require contracts in order to claim authority or control over other parties, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate ones actions, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it, and,

(This following part is optional, but it is recommended.)

Whereas I claim the right to collect a pension if I have paid into and claim that said right is not affected if I abandon my National Insurance Number, and,

(The following part is essential.)

Whereas it is my understanding that a summons is merely an invitation to attend and creates no obligation or dishonour if ignored, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that peace officers have a duty to distinguish between statute and law and those who attempt to enforce statutes against a Freeman-on-the-Land are in fact breaking the law, and,

Where as I have the power to refuse intercourse or interaction with peace
officers who have not observed me breach the peace, and,

Whereas permanent estoppel by acquiescence barring any peace officer or
prosecutor from bringing charges against a Freeman-on-the-Land under any Act is created if this claim is not responded to in the stated fashion and time.

(We have now got through the understanding part, the following is your declaration.)

Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I, John-Henry: Smith, a Freeman-on-the-Land do hereby state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent to peacefully and lawfully exist free of all statutory obligations restrictions and maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter.

(This must be worded precisely.)

(The following are optional and down to you to choose which you use.)

Further more I claim the right to lawfully:

(1) Exercise my "common law right to travel", unhindered, unencumbered at my discretion in my private conveyance of the day, to wit, my private, unregistered, unlicensed automobile.

(You are NOT driving a vehicle, your are traveling in a automobile, Back this up with the following.)

(2) Exercise my God given right to travel as stated in the Queen's Bible.

(This is powerful in the common wealth.)

(The next part is absolutely vital.)

(3) Exercise my "common law right" to refuse to obtain by submission: any application for any government issued license, permit or seek permission to
perform any fundamentally lawful action or, enter into any government contract under duress, threat and or intimidation which would involve committing an act of fraud and/or theft, or any other crime, by way of deception by "I" and/or any involved government principal, employee or agent, (in compliance with my Common Law Rights, the Magna Carta etc.)

(4) Exercise my right to possess, cultivate or use medicinally any plant of the genus Cannabis.

(5) Exercise my right to possess unregistered, unlicensed firearms and
ammunition and to use the same for target practice at a range or hunting for food and further swear under oath never to open fire on another human being unless as a last resort to protect human life.

(The next part is essential also.)

I claim that pursuant to any action by any government and/or any principal, member, employee, agent, servant, person thereof in Right of Great Britain, a province, or municipality:

"I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform: under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally and I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any contract or commercial agreement not revealed to myself, which are my rights pursuant to Common Law".

Furthermore, I claim the right to engage in these actions and further claim that all property held by me under common law being, any and all intellectual property, real estate, trade tools, private automobile(s) and contents, firearms and ammunition, potted plants: contents at the private posted residence known as "Street, Town, CITY, POST CODE" are held under claim of right.

Furthermore, I claim that, the Crowns claim of: "escheat to the Crown or the Duchy of Lancaster or the Duke of Cornwall or to a mesne lord for want of heirs", as referred to in the Administration of Estates Act 1925, stands as a lawful claim and whereas the UK is an Insolvency, an estate, where everything is owned by God and currently held in trust under the Crown until a competent heir(s) appears and lays a lawful claim of jurisdiction.

Furthermore, I claim that the intentional blurring of the lines with smoke and mirrors, deception, outright lies are too numerous to mention false claims as to the well settled division, between the Crown created legal
entity known as the "PERSON" and the flesh and blood creation of the creator known as a "man" is nothing short of theft, fraud, breach of trust and forced slavery, a heinous criminal activity of the most odious form.

Furthermore, I claim that "all persons, acting as, governments, principals,
employees, agents and justice system participants claiming. "retained legal
counsel" have, by virtue of their own and/or their principal actions, claimed "total incompetence", in handling any of their own affairs in law and have become an instant ward of the court, hence, they are imprisoned by their own actions in hand or lack thereof.

Furthermore, I claim that due to the self evident facts in truth at hand, that all persons, the Crown, governments, principals, employees, agents and justice system participants claiming limited liability or immunity are doing so under the pretense of being in fact deemed totally incompetent and under law made instant wards of the crown and/or courts and therefore, cannot claim good faith or colour of right over anyone who is thus blessed as being a competent heir.

Furthermore, I claim that, "Ignorance of the Law" is not a lawful or legal claim when used by the Crown, government principals, employees, agents and justice system participants at any and all levels to my harm or detriment, especially by those claiming limited liability.

Furthermore, I claim that these actions are not outside my communities' standards and will in fact support said community in our desire for truth and maximum freedom.

Furthermore, I claim that anyone who interferes with my lawful activities after having been served notice of this claim and who fails to properly dispute or make lawful counterclaim is breaking the law, cannot claim good faith or colour of right and that such transgressions will be dealt with in a properly convened court de jure.

Furthermore, I claim that the court in the United Kingdom are de-facto and are in fact in the profitable business of conducting, witnessing and facilitating the transactions of security interests and I furthermore claim that they require the consent of both parties prior to providing any such services.

Furthermore, I claim all transactions of security interests require the consent of both parties and I do hereby deny consent to any transaction of a security interest issuing under any Act for as herein stated as a Freeman-on-the-Land I am not subject to any Act.

(Now we move onto the final part of the notice.)

Furthermore, I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by peace officers, government principals or agents or justice system participants is (GB £250.00) TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY POUNDS PER HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed, searched or otherwise regulated and (GB £2,500.00) TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED POUNDS PER HOUR or portion thereof if I am
handcuffed, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and Notarized consent.

Furthermore, I claim the right to use a Notary Public to secure payment of the aforementioned FEE SCHEDULE against any transgressors who by their actions or omissions harm me or my interests, directly or by proxy in any way.

Furthermore I claim the right to convene a proper court de jure in order to address any potentially criminal actions of any peace officers, government principals or agents or justice system participants who having been served notice of this claim fail to dispute or discuss or lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act or omission with the lawful exercise of properly claimed and established rights and freedoms.

Furthermore, I claim that the law of agent and principal does apply and that service upon one is equal to service upon both.

Furthermore, I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in an open forum using discussion and negotiation and to capture on video tape said discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose I see fit.

(Now the final part.)

Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately within TEN (10) days of service of notice of this action.

Responses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability
and penalty of perjury and registered in the Notary Office herein provided no later than ten days from the date of the original service as attested to by way of certificate of service.

(Make sure the notary doesn't put that "the PERSON handed to me"... Otherwise the whole thing will not stand. Be very specific when getting your notice notarized. Have them put that the Man/Woman, Freeman-on-the-Land, Freeman-on-the-Soil, but never ever the PERSON. You are not a PERSON, that is what this is all about.)

Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an
automatic default judgment and permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence barring the bringing of charges under any statute or Act against My Self Freeman-on-the-land John-Henry: Smith

Place of claim of right:- ??????

Date:- ??/??/????

Claimant:- John-Henry: Smith

Name and address of the Notary Public: ??????

[lesactive]

There's a decent one here for comparison:

http://www.thinkfreeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=4257

for the UK with cites and maxims of law. I'd copy/paste it but I'm too lazy to ask for permission. You may have to register.

[alternative_answer]

There's a decent one here for comparison:

http://www.thinkfreeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=4257

for the UK with cites and maxims of law. I'd copy/paste it but I'm too lazy to ask for permission. You may have to register.

Declaration of Intent and Understanding, Declaration of Claim of Right

I John Anthony of The family Barnes, do solemnly and sincerely declare that,

it is my understanding equality before the law is paramount and mandatory (God's Law-Ethical and Natural Law). (Exodus 21:23-25; Lev. 24:17-21; Deut. 1:17, 19:21; Matt., 22:36-40; Luke 10:17; Col. 3:25. Legal maxims: "No one is above the law."; "Commerce, by the law of nations, ought to be common and not to be converted into a monopoly and the private gain of a few.").

it is my understanding a statute is defined as a legislated rule of society which has been given the force of law,

it is my understanding that law and statutes are separate and distinct as evidenced by the Statutory Declarations Act 1835 which states "and for all bodies now by law or statute or by any valid usage authorized"

it is my understanding a society is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal,

it is my understanding that for something to exist legally it must have a name,

it is my understanding the only form of government recognized as lawful in the United Kingdom is a representative one,

it is my understanding representation requires mutual consent,

it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither representation nor governance can exist,

it is my understanding people in the United Kingdom have a right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and thus governed,

it is my understanding if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and statutory restraints

it is my understanding those who have a NIN (National Insurance Number) are in fact employees of the government and thus are bound by the statutes created by the government,

it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one’s NIN,

it is my understanding the United Kingdom is a common law jurisdiction,

it is my understanding that Common Law which applies to all is: No claim may be bought against me without somebody to make that claim and that claim must be for harm against them, their property or their rights.

The law of agent and principal applies and that service upon one is service upon both,

it is my understanding that the people of the United Kingdom are sovereign this is evidenced by the Declaration of Rights and subsequent Bill of Rights,

it is my understanding that Parliament has no lawful authority ever to breach, surrender, lend or transfer sovereignty except when conquered in war,

it is my understanding that the signing and ratification of the various and several treaties of the European Union are in direct breach of both the Declaration and Bill of Rights

it is my understanding that agreements made on behalf of the United Kingdom by traitors to the United Kingdom do not bind the people of the United Kingdom,

it is my understanding that all existing courts and governments are de facto only and not de-jure,

it is my understanding that government does not clearly express that one may be charged for failure to obey a de facto government or court,

it is my understanding that if one has lawful excuse one may choose to not obey a court, tribunal, statute, Act or order, and that this is evidenced by way of example in the Theft Act 1968 and the Criminal Damage Act 1971,

it is my understanding that a claim of right establishes a lawful excuse and that this is evidenced by way of example in the Theft Act 1968 and the Criminal Damage Act 1971, where belief must be that the law creates and vests a specific right to act in that way. In English law, a limited form of statutory offence is termed "claim of right". Chamberlain v Lindon [1998] 1 WLR 1252 [1],

it is my understanding that in order to include some thing all other things must necessarily be excluded,

it is my understanding that person is defined in the varied and several acts and statutes as including corporations, Her Majesty and the Duke of Cornwall,

it is my understanding that a person is property and not a living entity this is evidenced by the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2006, Section 3, subsection 2

I John Anthony of the family Barnes am not now nor ever have been a corporation or property neither am I Her Majesty or the Duke of Cornwall

it is my understanding that any action for which one can apply for and receive a license must itself be a fundamentally lawful action,

it is my understanding that a fully responsible adult has no need to ask for permission to do something which is fundamentally lawful,

it is my understanding a bye law is defined as a rule of a corporation and is applicable only to officers and servants of the corporation this is evidenced by the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act 1845 Sections 124 - 127, the Evidence Act 1845 section 1 and the Burgh Trading Act 1846 section 3,

it is my understanding that I can use a public notary, or any authorised officer of a court, to perform duties found under any act thus they have the power to hold court and hear evidence and issue binding lawful judgements,

it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it and a workman is worthy of his hire (Exodus 20:15; Lev. 19:13; Matt. 10:10; Luke 10:7; II Tim. 2:6. Legal maxim: "It is against equity for freemen not to have the free disposal of their own property.")

it is my understanding in Commerce truth is sovereign (Exodus 20:16; Ps. 117:2; Matt. 6:33, John 8:32; II Cor.13:8. Legal maxim: "To lie is to go against the mind."

it is my understanding Truth is expressed by means of an affidavit or statutory declaration (Lev. 5:4-5; Lev. 6:3-5; Lev 19:11-13; Num. 30:2; Matt. 5:33; James 5:12)

it is my understanding an un-rebutted affidavit stands as the truth in Commerce (1 Pet. 1:25; Heb. 6:13-15. Legal maxim: "He who does not deny, admits.")

it is my understanding an un-rebutted affidavit becomes the judgment in Commerce (Heb. 6:16-17. Any proceeding in a court, tribunal, or arbitration forum consists of a contest, or "duel," of commercial affidavits wherein the points remaining un-rebutted in the end stand as the truth and the matters to which the judgment of the law is applied.)

it is my understanding a matter must be expressed to be resolved (Heb. 4:16; Phil. 4:6; Eph. 6:19-21. Legal maxim: "He who fails to assert his rights has none.")

it is my understanding He who leaves the field of battle first loses by default (Book of Job; Matt. 10:22. Legal maxim: "He who does not repel a wrong when he can, occasions it.")

it is my understanding Sacrifice is the measure of credibility (One who is not damaged, put at risk, or willing to swear an oath that he consents to claim against his commercial liability in the event that any of his statements or actions is groundless or unlawful, has no basis to assert claims or charges and forfeits all credibility and right to claim authority.) (Acts 7, life/death of Stephen, maxim: "He who bears the burden ought also to derive the benefit.").

it is my understanding a lien or claim can be satisfied only through rebuttal by Counter affidavit point-for-point, resolution by jury, or payment (Gen. 2-3; Matt. 4; Revelation. Legal maxim: "If the plaintiff does not prove his case, the defendant is absolved.")

it is my understanding that a summons is merely an invitation to attend and the ones issued by any court creates no obligation or dishonour if ignored,

it is my understanding police officers, who attempt to enforce statutes against anybody who is not a body corporate, are in fact breaking the law,

it is my understanding that I have the power to refuse intercourse or any interaction with police officers who have not observed me breach the peace,

it is my understanding that if the police are not providing a service they have no reason to stop any one, and if proof of insurance and license is not valuable they have no need to ask for it,

it is my understanding that I have the right to refuse to interact or co-operate with criminals, de facto government agents or negligent police officers,

it is my understanding that if I have the power to appoint directly or by proxy I must have the power to fulfil those duties myself,

it is my understanding that clause 39 “No freeman shall be arrested or imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or in any way victimised, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land", and clause 40 "To no-one will we refuse or delay right or justice”, of the original Magna Carta 1215 are still in effect, and that the expression "law of the land" shall mean Common Law.

Therefore be it now known to any and all interested, concerned or affected parties, that I, John Anthony of the family Barnes am a freeman, this is evidenced by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 1,

A Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations,

Therefore be it now known to any and all interested, concerned or affected parties, that I, John Anthony of the family Barnes am a Freeman-on-the-Land

I hereby serve notice and state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent to peacefully and lawfully exist free of all statutory obligations ,restrictions and that I maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter and exist without deceptive governance and to do so without limitations, restrictions or regulations created by others and without my consent,

I claim that these actions are not outside my communities’ standards and will in fact support said community in our desire for truth and maximum freedom.

I claim the right to engage in these actions and further claim that all property held by me is held under a claim of right

I claim the right to use force to protect my property, thus preventing any other entity claiming the right to use force or violence in regard to my property.

I claim the right to claim, collect, receive or be paid any pension if I have paid into it, or am otherwise entitled to, and claim that said right is not affected by anything I do,

I claim the right to use force to protect my physical body in all circumstances, thus preventing any other entity claiming the right to use force or violencein regard to my physical body.

I claim the right to refuse to supply an intimate or non-intimate sample of DNA for any purpose, without my written and notarised consent.

I claim that the courts in the United Kingdom are de-facto and bound by the Law I further claim they require the consent of both parties prior to providing any such services.

I claim that anyone who interferes with my lawful activities after having been served notice of this claim and who fails to properly dispute or make lawful counterclaim, cannot claim good faith or colour of right and that such transgressions will be dealt with in a properly convened court.

I claim all transactions of security interests require the consent of both parties and I do hereby deny consent to any transaction of a security interest issuing under any Act for as herein stated as a Freeman-on-the-Land I am not subject to any Act..

I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by police officers, government principals or agents or justice system participants is FIVE HUNDRED GB POUNDS PER HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise regulated and FIVE THOUSAND GB POUNDS PER HOUR or portion thereof if I am handcuffed, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and notarised consent. Also if violence be done to either me or those under my care and protection the fee shall be FIFTEEN THOUSAND GB POUNDS in addition to any compensation that may be awarded.

I claim the right to use a declaratory judgement, statutory declaration , charging order or warrant, to secure payment of the aforementioned FEE SCHEDULE against any transgressors who by their actions or omissions harm me or my interests, directly or by proxy in any way.

I claim the right to convene a proper court de jure in order to address any potentially criminal actions of any police officers, government officials, principals or agents or justice system participants who, having been served notice of this claim fail to dispute or discuss or make lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act or omission with the lawful exercise of properly claimed and established rights and freedoms.

I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in an open forum using discussion and negotiation and to capture both video and audio evidence of said discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose as I see fit.

Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein, or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately within TEN (10) days of service of notice of this action. Responses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and received via registered mail to:

1 Gopsall Road,
Hinckley,
Leicestershire,
LE10 0DY,
no later than TEN (10) days from the date of original service as dated by way of Royal Mail
recorded delivery service.

Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an automatic default judgement and permanent and irrevocable estoppels by acquiescence barring the bringing of charges under any statute, act or regulation against myself, John Anthony of the family Barnes for exercising these lawful and properly established rights, freedoms and duties.

and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835.


___________________________ John Anthony: Barnes.




___________________________

[yozhik]

That seems a very thorough one :) ... I like it.

After reading this pdf file on the matter of Trusts;
Trusts pdf (http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Media/Antishyster/V12N1-Trusts.pdf)

... I believe it is important to incorporate the "at arm's length" within the NoU and CoR. Please read this document - its a bit technical, but worthwhile.

Do you think this NoU covers the "hot potato" topic of terrorism/anti-terrorism?
My concern is that if the current emphasis on restricting liberties under the banner of "terrorism laws" isn't addressed directly, then tptb will find some way to wriggle out ;)

Are we also able to stipulate that we also reserve the Right to refuse their "legal tender"?

[basel]

forgive my ignorance but where is the part that deal with your bond and receiving your dividend

[yozhik]

forgive my ignorance but where is the part that deal with your bond and receiving your dividend

What you refer to is Commercial Redemption, or part thereof.

[basel]

What you refer to is Commercial Redemption, or part thereof.

Many thanks

[free_at_last]

Hello all,

Is there a US version and who do you send this to once filled out?


Also I am a Brit in the US can I still declare I am a Freeman?

Or because I am a Brit have no claim of right?

Thanks

[yozhik]

Hello all,

Is there a US version and who do you send this to once filled out?


Also I am a Brit in the US can I still declare I am a Freeman?

Or because I am a Brit have no claim of right?

Thanks

Being a Brit in the US should be fine, given that the US is still a British colony :D
Should you further up the food chain than most already there.

[free_at_last]

Thanks,

So where do I get a COR, NOI example for the US if anyone knows, and where do I send it?

I was thinking they would boot me out of the US if I did this LOL.

[sindakit]

Any idea if these NOI would apply to Scotland, Wales and NI or is it just for England?

[rob menard]

Thanks,

So where do I get a COR, NOI example for the US if anyone knows, and where do I send it?

I was thinking they would boot me out of the US if I did this LOL.

I would like to seriously warn you and all that the Notice of Understanding and Intent needs to be your words, your understanding and your intent. It is not a form you can fill out without comprehenssion. Nor does it have to be as inclusive and large as the one I originally did. That one was not only to express my understanding to the government but to educate and share with a larger audience. It is a notice of your understanding and you best be able to defend it. It is a notice of your intent, and you best be able to exercise that as well.

One of the most powerful NUI and COR I have ever seen was crafted by a guy who struggled to understand all the concepts like common law, transaction of a security interest and all the rest. He was very frustrated and I suggested he simply look in his heart instead of my words, find his own understanding and express his own intent. I told him it could be as big or small as he wanted, as long as it expressed his understanding and intent.

He went into the other room and came out about 30 minutes later all giddy and excited with what I thought was a master piece.

It was only one page and the following is a close approximation of what he crafted.

I have looked in my heart and soul and see that love is the only law.
I have looked at your words and could not find the word love anywhere within.
I conclude your words are not my law.
I intend to follow the law as I understand it.
I claim the right to do so.

He had all the style and worded it properly, but it was short and sweet, it was his and he could defend it.

Ensure whatever you do that the NUI you craft does in fact reflect your understanding. Do not think that someone else's will work for you.

DO NOT COPY AND PASTE AND SIGN WITHOUT COMPREHENSION!!!

It worked for them because it was theirs. It may not work for you if you do not share the exact same understanding, nor do you have to study for years to have some form of expressible understanding.

Hope that helps.
Rob

[boots]

Any idea if these NOI would apply to Scotland, Wales and NI or is it just for England?

It applies everywhere in the commonwealth ;) and it should REALLY be Common-Wealth.:mad:

.

[iamfreeee]

this is an excellent thread :)

i'm 40 years old and everything i know i've had to teach myself because even when young and attending school i was never there and that's resulted in my having a limited vocabulary and understanding of words, is it possible to write up a NOI and simply state that i don't understand a single thing these people say but have a firm grasp of common law, or something to that effect?

[ag3nt5mith]

Yes I believe so, you could potentially state that is your understand that the Legal system is over complicated to the point where the common man speaking English can no longer understand it, and,

Furthermore state that the language the legal codes are written in (Legalese) is not your language, and that by its very nature is deceptive. Then you can go on to claim the rights you wish to.

The search for a perfected English version continues...

It would also help if we could gather the names and addresses of the people we would need to send them to.

[free_at_last]

I would like to seriously warn you and all that the Notice of Understanding and Intent needs to be your words, your understanding and your intent. It is not a form you can fill out without comprehenssion. Nor does it have to be as inclusive and large as the one I originally did. That one was not only to express my understanding to the government but to educate and share with a larger audience. It is a notice of your understanding and you best be able to defend it. It is a notice of your intent, and you best be able to exercise that as well.

One of the most powerful NUI and COR I have ever seen was crafted by a guy who struggled to understand all the concepts like common law, transaction of a security interest and all the rest. He was very frustrated and I suggested he simply look in his heart instead of my words, find his own understanding and express his own intent. I told him it could be as big or small as he wanted, as long as it expressed his understanding and intent.

He went into the other room and came out about 30 minutes later all giddy and excited with what I thought was a master piece.

It was only one page and the following is a close approximation of what he crafted.

I have looked in my heart and soul and see that love is the only law.
I have looked at your words and could not find the word love anywhere within.
I conclude your words are not my law.
I intend to follow the law as I understand it.
I claim the right to do so.

He had all the style and worded it properly, but it was short and sweet, it was his and he could defend it.

Ensure whatever you do that the NUI you craft does in fact reflect your understanding. Do not think that someone else's will work for you.

DO NOT COPY AND PASTE AND SIGN WITHOUT COMPREHENSION!!!

It worked for them because it was theirs. It may not work for you if you do not share the exact same understanding, nor do you have to study for years to have some form of expressible understanding.

Hope that helps.
Rob

Thanks Rob

[iamfreeee]

Yes I believe so, you could potentially state that is your understand that the Legal system is over complicated to the point where the common man speaking English can no longer understand it, and,

Furthermore state that the language the legal codes are written in (Legalese) is not your language, and that by its very nature is deceptive. Then you can go on to claim the rights you wish to.

The search for a perfected English version continues...

It would also help if we could gather the names and addresses of the people we would need to send them to.

thanks for the reply, its very much appreciated.

at the moment i am far from drafting a NUI or a COR simply because i may understand what the difference is betwen common law and an act/statute, i simply don't have enough understanding of what my rights would be, i still have much work to do :confused:

maybe i could draft it and simply say i don't understand ANY of it and add something along the lines of what you posted with regards to legalese?!


getting the names and addresses in 1 place and making it a sticky would be a great idea :)

[scotfree]

Hi Boys & Girls,

I have just joined this illustrious Forum today, xmas eve,
[I wont expect any presents].

My 1st. & 2nd. Affidavit have been sent to HM Queen Elisabeth
[1st. of Scotland]

and here follows a copy of my NOUCOR,

[though now I believe to be Free all one has to do is BE FREE]
tis that simple.

Sent to:
Home Office
Crown Office
Scottish Government
Highland Cooncil
Highland Constabulary
et al ..........


Notice Of Understanding And Intent And Claim of Right


Whereas it is my understanding


I, David Alisdair: Allison, Sui Juris, a flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, do hereby state the following is My Statement of Truth

Whereas it is my understanding that the United Kingdom is a common law jurisdiction, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that equality before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a statute is defined as legislated rule of a society which has been given the force of law, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a society is defined as a number of people joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine, and act for a common goal, and ,

Whereas it is my understanding that the only form of government recognised as lawful in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland is a representative one,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that representation requires mutual consent,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither representation nor governance can exist,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that all Acts are statutes restricted in scope and applicability by the Constitution and/or Bill of Rights,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that said scope and applicability is limited to members and employees of government,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that that those who have an NI number (National Insurance Number) are in fact employees of the UK government and thus are bound by the statutes created by the UK government,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one’s NI number,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that human beings in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland have a right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and thus governed ,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and statutory restraints,
and,

Whereas a Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations,
and,

Whereas I, David Alisdair: Allison am a Freeman-on-the-Land,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that acting peacefully within community standards does not breach the peace,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that any action which ones can apply for and receive a license must itself be a fundamentally, lawful action,
and,

Whereas I am not a child,
and,

Whereas I am a peaceful human being,
and,

Whereas I am a Freeman-on-the-Land who operates with full responsibility, I do not see the need to ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, especially from those that claim limited liability,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a by-law is defined as a rule of a corporation,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that corporations are legal fictions and require contracts in order to claim authority or control over other parties,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate to ones actions,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding that natural law is the permanent underlying basis of all law, and theories of natural law have been an important part of jurisprudence throughout legal history. Natural law is distinguished from positive law, which is the body of law imposed by the state. Natural law is both anterior and superior to positive law. Oxford Dictionary Of Law 5th Edition ISBN0-19-860756-3 page 326.

Whereas it is my understanding that Common Law which applies to all living souls is:
We are free to do what we please, as long as we do not infringe on the life, liberty,
property, or rights of another.

Whereas it is my understanding the United Kingdom is a common law jurisdiction, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that Parliament which has no lawful authority ever to
breach, surrender, lend or transfer (even temporarily) sovereignty except when conquered in war, and
Whereas I do firmly and truly believe the signing of European Union Lisbon Treaty is an overt act of treason, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that no one (neither Monarch, nor Prime Minister, nor any prelate, politician, judge or public servant) is above the Common Law of the United Kingdom that forms the British Constitution (including Magna Carta [1215], the Declaration and Bill of Rights [1688/89], Acts of Union, Succession and Settlement
[1701-07], the Coronation Oath Act [1689]).

Whereas it is my understanding equality before the law is paramount and mandatory, and,

Whereas it is my understanding a statute is defined as a legislated rule of society which has been given the force of law, and,

Whereas it is my understanding a society is defined as a number of people joined by
mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that for something to exist legally it must have a name, and,
Whereas it is my understanding the only form of government recognized as lawful in the United Kingdom is a representative one, and,

Whereas it is my understanding representation requires mutual consent, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither
representation nor governance can exist, and,

Whereas it is my understanding people in the United Kingdom have a right to revoke or
deny consent to be represented and thus governed, and,

Whereas it is my understanding if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist free of government control and statutory restraints, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a claim of right establishes a lawful excuse and that this factual truth is expressed by way of example in the Theft Act 1968 and the Criminal Damage Act 1971, where belief must be that the law creates and vests a specific right to act in that way. In English law, a limited form of statutory offence is termed "claim of right". In Chamberlain v Lindon [1998] 1 WLR 1252 [1] Lindon demolished a wall to protect a right-of-way, Despite allowing nine months to pass before acting, Lindon honestly believed that it was immediately necessary to protect his legal rights without having to resort to civil litigation. For the purposes of s5(2): it is not necessary to decide whether Lindon’s action was justified as a matter of civil law. For the purpose of the criminal law, what matters is whether Lindon believed that his actions were reasonable, i.e. a subjective test.

Thus a "lawful excuse" may be acknowledged by a court to arise when a person honestly, even if mistakenly, believes that the actions are necessary and
reasonable, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if one has lawful excuse one may choose to not obey a court, tribunal, statute, Act or order, and that this factual truth is expressed by way of example in the Theft Act 1968 and the Criminal Damage Act 1971 and,

Whereas it is my understanding that government does not clearly express that one may be charged for failure to obey a de facto government or court, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that all existing courts and governments are de facto only and not de jure, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that agreements made on behalf of the United Kingdom by traitors to the United Kingdom do not bind the people of the United Kingdom, and,

Whereas I honourably refuse to be bound by agreements made by traitors, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that any police officer who co-operates with foreign
armed troops to govern or regulate the population is also committing treason, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that historically the purpose of a national armed force was to ensure that foreign powers never invaded and governed under a force of arms, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the existence of armed foreign troops patrolling and policing our streets is evidence of a war fought unsuccessfully, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that agreeing or conspiring to agree to allow armed
foreign troops to patrol and police our streets is an act of treason, and,

Whereas a flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, has lawfully revoked consent and does exist free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations,
and,

Whereas I, David Alisdair: Allison, am a flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that acting peacefully within community standards does not breach the peace, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that any action for which one can apply for and receive a license must itself be a fundamentally lawful action, and,

Whereas as I, not a child, am a flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, who operates with full responsibility and I do not see the need to ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, especially from those who claim limited liability,
and,

Whereas it is my understanding a bye-law is defined as a rule of a corporation or corporate body, and,

Whereas it is my understanding corporations are legal fictions and require contracts in order to claim authority or control over other parties, and,

Whereas it is my understanding legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate ones actions, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I can use a public notary, or any authorised officer of a court, to perform duties found under any act thus they have the power to hold court and hear evidence and issue binding lawful judgements, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a public notary, or any authorised officer of a court, can also be used to bring criminal charges to bear against traitors, even if they hold the highest office, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have a right to use my property without having to pay for the use or enjoyment of it, and,

Whereas I claim the right to claim, collect, receive or be paid any pension if I have paid into it, or am otherwise entitled to, and claim that said right is not affected by anything I do, if I abandon my National Insurance Number and,

Whereas it is my understanding that a summons is merely an invitation to attend and the ones issued by any court creates no obligation or dishonour if ignored, and,

Whereas it is my understanding police officers or peace officers who attempt to enforce statutes against Freeman-on-the-Land, a flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, are in fact breaking the law, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have the power to refuse intercourse or interaction with police officers or peace officers who have not observed me breach the peace, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that permanent estoppel by acquiescence barring any police officer or prosecutor from bringing charges against a Freeman-on–the Land, flesh and blood man and blessed living Soul serving God alone, under any Act is created if this claim is not responded to in the stated fashion and time, and

Whereas it is my understanding that the common law right to travel on the highways
without license provided we are not engaging in commerce thereupon is lawful and still exists although it does appear to have been deceptively hidden, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if the police are not providing a service they have no reason to stop any one, and if proof of insurance and license is not valuable they have no need to ask for it, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I have the right to refuse to interact or co-operate with criminals, de facto government agents or grossly negligent police officers, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if I have the power to appoint directly or by proxy I must have the power to fulfil those duties myself, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the Police although having an illustrious history has had members recently acting in a grossly criminal manner which does tarnish the previous history and record, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the Law provides remedy at all times, even against rogue or negligent police officers and de facto governments apparently hijacked by soulless corporate interests, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the act of registering the birth of a baby creates a legal entity called a “person” that exists in association with that baby and that the manner in which offspring are registered transfers superior guardianship rights over that offspring to the government, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that this creation of a person and transfer of authority is not fully disclosed to the parents and if it was, all good parents would refuse to register their offspring, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the person and the human being to which it is
associated are two very separate and different things and that the people playing roles in government only have the right to act upon the person, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that if I do not exist in association with a person I cannot be lawfully governed by the people playing roles in government, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that I David Alisdair: Allison have since birth registration been used as surety for the legal fiction “DAVID ALISDAIR ALLISON.

Whereas it is my understanding that I can and do now take charge of my legal fiction “DAVID ALISDAIR ALLISON” and I David Alisdair: Allison now act as the legal fiction “DAVID ALISDAIR ALLISON” 3rd party agent, and

Whereas it is my understanding that I am not obliged to obey the orders of any one
claiming to be acting on behalf of Queen or King, as no one who does make claims that abandon and erode the concept of equality has any authority over me, and,

Whereas it is my understanding that the Bible warns all players and actors of de facto courts “judge not lest you be judged”, and it is my understanding that the people in the government are merely playing roles.

Whereas it is my understanding that clause 39 “No freeman shall be arrested or
imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or in any way victimised, neither will we
attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land", and clause 40 "To no-one will we refuse or delay right or justice”, of the original Magna Carta 1215 are still in effect, and that the expression "law of the land" shall mean Common Law.


Therefore be it now known to any and all interested, concerned or affected parties, that I, David Alisdair: Allison am a freeman and do hereby serve notice and state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent to peacefully and lawfully exist free of all statutory obligations, restrictions and that I maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter and exist without deceptive governance and to do so without limitations, restrictions or regulations created by others and without my consent.

Furthermore, I claim that these actions are not outside my communities’ standards and will in fact support said community in our desire for truth and maximum freedom.

Furthermore, I claim the right to engage in these actions and further claim that all property held by me is held under a claim of right.

Furthermore, I claim the right to lawfully:

(1) Exercise my “common law right to travel”, unhindered, unencumbered, at my discretion in my private conveyance of the day, to wit, my private, unregistered, unlicensed automobile.
(2) Exercise my God given right to travel as stated in the Queen’s bible.


I claim that pursuant to any action by any government and/or any principal, member, employee, agent, servant, person thereof in Right of Great Britain, a province, a municipality:

Furthermore, I claim the right to use the force that I deem appropriate to protect my property, thus preventing any other person claiming the right to use force or violence in regard to my property.

Furthermore, I claim the right to use the force that I deem appropriate to protect my physical body in all circumstances, thus preventing any other person claiming the right to use force or violence in regard to my physical body.

Furthermore, I claim the right to refuse to supply an intimate or non-intimate sample of DNA and Fingerprints for any purpose, without my written and notarised consent.

Furthermore, I claim that the courts in the United Kingdom are de-facto and bound by the Law and I further claim they require the consent of both parties prior to providing any such services.

Furthermore, I claim that anyone who interferes with my lawful activities after having
been served notice of this claim and who fails to properly dispute or make lawful
counterclaim, cannot claim good faith or colour of right and that such transgressions will be dealt with in a properly convened court in full public view.

Furthermore, I claim all transactions of security interests require the consent of both
parties.

Furthermore, I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by police officers,
government principals or agents or justice system participants is
FIVE HUNDRED BRITISH POUNDS STERLING PER HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise regulated and
TWO THOUSAND BRITISH POUNDS STERLING PER HOUR or portion thereof if I am handcuffed, transported, incarcerated, regulated or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and notarised consent.

Furthermore, I claim the right to respond with any order made by a court over or against my person against my wishes and without my express written and notarised consent will generate a bill that will be submitted to the court for immediate payment.

Furthermore, I claim the right to use a declaratory judgement, or statutory declaration or warrant, to secure payment of the aforementioned
FEE SCHEDULE OR BILL FOR ORDER ISSUED IN COURT against any transgressors who by their actions or omissions harm me or my interests, directly or by proxy in any way.

Furthermore, I claim the right to convene a proper court de jure in order to address any potentially criminal actions of any police officers, government officials, principals or agents or justice system participants who, having been served notice of this claim fail to dispute or discuss or make lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act or omission with the lawful exercise of properly claimed and established rights and freedoms.

Furthermore, I claim the law of agent and principal applies and that service upon one is service upon both.

Furthermore, I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in an open forum using discussion and negotiation and to capture on video tape said discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose as I see fit. Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein, or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately within TEN (10) days of service of notice of this action. Responses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and received via registered mail at the address herein provided, no later than TEN (10) days from the date of original service as dated by way of Royal Mail recorded delivery service.

Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an automatic default judgement and permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence barring the bringing of charges under any statute, act or regulation against myself, Freeman-on-the-Land David Alisdair: Allison, for exercising these lawful and properly established rights, freedoms and duties.

Place of Claim of Right:
XXXXXXXXXXX Muir of Ord, Ross-shire, Scotland
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Dated:



Freeman-on-the-Land

[yozhik]

Hi and Merry Xmas!

Without going into specific detail right now, I suspect that ALL of these NoI&U are deeply flawed. My reason for saying this is simple; the United Kingdom is NOT a Common Law jurisdiction.
If you have built your NoI&U upon this premise, then you run the risk of building your entire argument on a false premise.

To avoid any posts accusing me of "trolling" or not adding substance to a mere "opinion", let me give you one factual "snippet" that will show you the glaring error in your document and point you in the right direction to correct it; the United Kingdom is not a country.

Do the research. You will find what I am stating to be factual. The rest will flow from there. However, to be clear; if you build your understanding on Common Law in the United Kingdom, then you do not have enough comprehension/understanding of the facts.

Good luck on your journey. :)

[ag3nt5mith]

This is why I put England in all my notices.

The UNITED KINGDOM is of course a corporation. :cool:

England is definitely a common law jurisdiction.

[yozhik]

This is why I put England in all my notices.

The UNITED KINGDOM is of course a corporation. :cool:

England is definitely a common law jurisdiction.

I'm not convinced. The research I have done so far, does not support this with 100% certainty. I believe the name required might go back further in time. I'm continuing my research.

However, on the first part you are correct :D ... go to the top of the Freeman research class! ;)
The United Kingdom is NOT a jurisdiction of Common Law because it is a corporation; so any NoI&U which claims Common Law jurisdiction in the United Kingdom, IMHO, is flawed.

Also, any reference to a man or woman being "British" is also acknowledging membership in a society of corporate enslavement.

Trivia Questions: When did Great Britain become the United Kingdom? How was this transition flagged? On what authority was it done? When did the "people of the land" agree to it? If "British" citizens come from "Great Britain"; which citizens come from "United Kingdom"?

(I have no answers to these questions, but thought it might be relevant to ask them for thought starters ...)

[ag3nt5mith]

Cool, I'm top of the class hehe...

You raise some interesting point there. Our history isn't as clear as it should be. We really need to track this all back to it's source and document the changes along a clearly defined time line, once we do this we can see where we have been, where we are now and finally where we are going with all this...

My family has suggested creating a political party and going from there. However I countered with the idea that we need an international Freeman society for all to join, with national representation in all the common wealth.

Once we get enough support they will have to listen to our message.

I still maintain that our best solution is to take back the system, Freemen in key positions could do this. Remember this is how they (TPTB) play the game

The best way to find out if England is still a common law jurisdiction is this:

Walk up to a police/peace officer and ask them directly. It would be interesting to know what they say...

I believe England is a common law jurisdiction because of the following:

Common law man & wife.

Common assault. Etc...

These are the only one I can think of at the moment, but I'm 100% sure there are other examples in law for us to find.

[iamfreeee]

My family has suggested creating a political party and going from there. However I countered with the idea that we need an international Freeman society for all to join, with national representation in all the common wealth.

Once we get enough support they will have to listen to our message.

I still maintain that our best solution is to take back the system, Freemen in key positions could do this. Remember this is how they (TPTB) play the game



hi mate, i also believe some kind of freeman society is badly needed in order for the freeman movement to gain credibility, standing in the community as well as making the freeman movement MUCH better known to the general populace, at the moment nobody in the general public even knows of the concept of Freeman-On-The-Land :confused:

the added benefits of such an organization or society if you prefer, would be that 1, becoming a freeman and getting the right info would be far easier, and 2, with greater acceptance of the freeman comes a lot less hasle from the authority's...

IMHO, this is not only needed but desperately so!

[yozhik]

Also, any reference to a man or woman being "British" is also acknowledging membership in a society of corporate enslavement.


Further investigation reveals this might be "half correct".
The origins of "British" is a label for the LANGUAGE, not for the country or nationality. So, a "British citizen" means; a citizen who speaks the language of British.

That places a different light on things, doesn't it? :rolleyes:

[danster82]

Why even file a COR? I mean the very act of having to notice to someone or some thing which is not God that you are infact a freeman only affirms you are a slave, why do you need to file a COR to a machine? who are you trying to convince, why convince? Its in the terminology itself "claim of right" so your "claiming" your right from something, impossible I say you cannot claim your right because you already have them as they are God given so whoever your claiming from you are affairming are higher than your rights and thus higher than your God.

Just be the freeman that you know you are and then remind the agents of the machines of your rights when required.

P.S What is a successful reply from a COR supposed to look like? or is it simply the fact you have sent the COR and have proof via recorded delivery.

[hussellj]

Can we get an example of the Schedule of Fees (is that the correct term) please?

[weeman]

Can we get an example of the Schedule of Fees (is that the correct term) please?

Fee schedules you say? In the 'freeman use of' :

http://unrepentantoldhippie.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/unbranded-bullshit-stamp.jpg

[girlgye]

That seems a very thorough one :) ... I like it.

After reading this pdf file on the matter of Trusts;
Trusts pdf (http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Media/Antishyster/V12N1-Trusts.pdf)

... I believe it is important to incorporate the "at arm's length" within the NoU and CoR. Please read this document - its a bit technical, but worthwhile.

Do you think this NoU covers the "hot potato" topic of terrorism/anti-terrorism?
My concern is that if the current emphasis on restricting liberties under the banner of "terrorism laws" isn't addressed directly, then tptb will find some way to wriggle out ;)

Are we also able to stipulate that we also reserve the Right to refuse their "legal tender"?

There's a notice of mine up at WFS. It covers all aspects of being labelled an insurecctionist. Better better get your facts straight or else.

[weeman]

Fee schedules you say? In the 'freeman use of' :

http://unrepentantoldhippie.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/unbranded-bullshit-stamp.jpg

I apologise hussellj.

My previous post doesn't really explain anything does it?

As far as I am aware, FOTL prepare fee schedules charging/threatening [mostly] ludicrous amounts for arrest, detention and hand-cuffing (denial of liberty etc).

Strangely, these fee schedules ARE NOT SUPPOSED to be collected upon and are used merely to show you 'know your rights'.

Quite a pointless exercise in my opinion.

But hey ! What do I know?

[girlgye]

I'm not convinced. The research I have done so far, does not support this with 100% certainty. I believe the name required might go back further in time. I'm continuing my research.

However, on the first part you are correct :D ... go to the top of the Freeman research class! ;)
The United Kingdom is NOT a jurisdiction of Common Law because it is a corporation; so any NoI&U which claims Common Law jurisdiction in the United Kingdom, IMHO, is flawed.

Also, any reference to a man or woman being "British" is also acknowledging membership in a society of corporate enslavement.

Trivia Questions: When did Great Britain become the United Kingdom? How was this transition flagged? On what authority was it done? When did the "people of the land" agree to it? If "British" citizens come from "Great Britain"; which citizens come from "United Kingdom"?

(I have no answers to these questions, but thought it might be relevant to ask them for thought starters ...)

It's on the securities exchange, that it is a company. I have the date it was dissolved but not the date it was formed.

You can dissassociate from the UK. Why not?
You can dissassociate from England if it floats your boat too.

[weeman]

You're not quoting posts from late 2008 to try and bury my replies by any chance GG? :confused:

You have after all, had two years to ask any questions or raise your view, but choose to do it now.....?

[blakeriede]

HEY I found this at the beginning of somebodies NOU/COR:
-
Whereas I understand that a Notice of Understanding, Intent, and Claim of Right hereinafter NOUI/COR are ancient concepts that have a firm and binding foundation in law, and,
-
can anybody reference do the ancient tradition or society that this sentence is talking about... :confused:

[blakeriede]

I'm not convinced. The research I have done so far, does not support this with 100% certainty. I believe the name required might go back further in time. I'm continuing my research.

However, on the first part you are correct :D ... go to the top of the Freeman research class! ;)
The United Kingdom is NOT a jurisdiction of Common Law because it is a corporation; so any NoI&U which claims Common Law jurisdiction in the United Kingdom, IMHO, is flawed.

Also, any reference to a man or woman being "British" is also acknowledging membership in a society of corporate enslavement.

Trivia Questions: When did Great Britain become the United Kingdom? How was this transition flagged? On what authority was it done? When did the "people of the land" agree to it? If "British" citizens come from "Great Britain"; which citizens come from "United Kingdom"?

(I have no answers to these questions, but thought it might be relevant to ask them for thought starters ...)

seemingly, the definition of a circuit court is a court that is in common law jurisdiction and therefore if your court systems are considered circuit court systems they are under common law jurisdiction and i would assume this defaults the county/state/province/area/planet it is representing as being common law as well. correct me if im wrong please

circuit court definition: Circuit court is the name of court systems in several common law jurisdictions.

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circuit_court

notice that wikipedia references to england website

from the england and wales circuit court website:

Neither the palatinates of Durham nor Chester were allocated to a circuit. Lancaster, although granted palatinate powers in 1351, had had exclusive jurisdiction over common law and equity causes for some generations.

link: http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/about/circuits/a-historyofthecircuits/

in conclusion, see what kind of courts are in the world around you ;)

[gawp]

For your consideration:

http://freetheplanet.net/articles/123/DUI

namaste
:)

[milky]

very interesting stuff