Common Law- Just Another Psy Op?

[RobinJ]

So it seems that Common Law is all the rage to 'fight' the New World Order crap. Its taking off just like Q did. I believe this is just another hero on a white charger solution. I may be way off beam here, and I know this will upset some folks purely because it fits outside the current narrative, however, I feel it should be at least debated.

 

We all want freedom, however that very mindset can work against us. After a year of lockdown nonsense, people who want freedom are getting desperate to jump on any band waggon just to feel like we are doing something to rail against the system of control. However, I am coming to feel that the Common Law concept is probably just another psy op with a hero at its head to ride us into battle and slaughter.

 

There is a great article by the secret barrister who explains about common law and why it wont save you from prosecution here https://thesecretbarrister.com/2020/11/28/can-magna-carta-and-common-law-give-you-immunity-from-covid-regulations/

 

You might also want to consider that the Magna Carta, which is widely bandied about as being the document at the base of human freedom, only bound in oath those 25 barons who signed it, not the general populace. So it is in effect meaningless to the populace. It has largely been repealed anyway since it was written.

The definition of a psychological operation is this: It is about shaping feelings, attitudes and behaviour in a favourable direction for the mission

Heres a rough guide to how a freedom psy ops works:

 

1.  Find a vocal hero who declares for the people's freedom

2. target those who need a belief system and get them to spread the word

3. whip them up into a frenzy of 'saviour' hero complex mind control

4. Keep them under control while you bring in the real agenda

5. Full control implemented via despair when the ruse is shown 

 

My own personal belief is that all LAW is control and enslavement. Interestingly, 'Law and order' as a term has only been coupled since 1796. Same sort of time the banking system took control...Perhaps the only truth is that we do indeed live inside a Westworld/ Matrix combo where very few are actually truly human with open consciousness and the rest are actors to keep the virtual matrix alive.

[Niels12]

Everything is connected with our name on paper. If we do not consent to that, there is nothing they can do. In your example in the link, it is a business. That is completely different and much more complicated. We are born with the law of free will. This means they can only do things with our consent. You are also talking about "law" in a different way. You have the law of the land and statued law. 

 

This is however very dangerous to these parasites. The illusion that you are helpless and weak is their most important way of mindcontrol. So obviously there will be imposters/misinformation etc. But there is nothing wrong with the concept itself. And else just try it out at a police officer. It probably is on film somewhere. 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2021 by Niels12

[zArk]

On 2/14/2021 at 3:53 PM, RobinJ said:

My own personal belief is that all LAW is control and enslavement.

 people living in a group require a set of rules for fair play and equity

as corporations grew, they needed a separate system of rules for fair play and equity

 

On 2/14/2021 at 3:53 PM, RobinJ said:

You might also want to consider that the Magna Carta, which is widely bandied about as being the document at the base of human freedom, only bound in oath those 25 barons who signed it, not the general populace. So it is in effect meaningless to the populace. It has largely been repealed anyway since it was written

 

law of the case and 'the law' are not exactly the same thing

 

i reccommend a good read of this

 

www.1215.org

 

there are audio lectures on there

 

 

 

[RobinJ]

On 2/15/2021 at 10:56 AM, zArk said:

 people living in a group require a set of rules for fair play and equity

as corporations grew, they needed a separate system of rules for fair play and equity

 

 

law of the case and 'the law' are not exactly the same thing

 

i reccommend a good read of this

 

www.1215.org

 

there are audio lectures on there

 

 

 

 

I agree that all law is a form of enslavement. We do not need laws to live a good life.

 

Neils2: Ive never believed we are helpless or weak, unfortunately there are those who love to follow rules ( my sister is one) and who feel that governments are for our own best interest regardless of the damage they do to humanity.

[RobinJ]

Neils- that website is American. I cant read stuff thats on that site as its such a bad website. However, frankly I ignore most of the bullshit laws. I am extremely glad to have left the UK. All my friends tell me how bas it is now but they all have the apathy mindset. "I'll just keep my head down, everything will be OK" meanwhile the world goes to shit around them, brought on by their own inactivity and fear of authority.

[Grumpy Grapes]

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. I find it difficult to believe that this apparent medieval Knight in shining armour is coming to our rescue in the middle of a world changing pandemic. Why now? 

 

I believe its' true purpose is to undermine national laws as a prelude to the dominance of UN international law. 

 

Also, is it possible that a sinister organisation could invoke Common Law to impose rules that are even more draconian than those of the National Government? A security guard in "Harrods" said to me last xmas that the government's rules on mask exemptions didn't apply to them as they were "a private shop". At the time I thought it was a pathetic excuse, but now I'm wondering if they could have been utilising Common Law. 

[zArk]

5 hours ago, RobinJ said:

I agree that all law is a form of enslavement. We do not need laws to live a good life.

unfortunately the law is not being enacted upon all criminals

unfortunately not everyone wishes to live a good life

[RobinJ]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Grapes said:

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. I find it difficult to believe that this apparent medieval Knight in shining armour is coming to our rescue in the middle of a world changing pandemic. Why now? 

 

I believe its' true purpose is to undermine national laws as a prelude to the dominance of UN international law. 

 

Also, is it possible that a sinister organisation could invoke Common Law to impose rules that are even more draconian than those of the National Government? A security guard in "Harrods" said to me last xmas that the government's rules on mask exemptions didn't apply to them as they were "a private shop". At the time I thought it was a pathetic excuse, but now I'm wondering if they could have been utilising Common Law. 

 

Or maybe its one rule for the rich...dont the owners of Harrods have connections to the monarch still? I personally cant believe that any kind of law will 'save' humanity. Only way we save ourselves is to fully escape the system of control.

[Macnamara]

The Uk Column is doing a series on the constitutions of different countries and their pros and cons

 

I suppose where it becomes useful is if our constitution confers rights and whether or not statutory law is trying to override them because if it is then the people have a claim that the government is acting unlawfully. This won't stop a dictatorial government if it can get enough hired thugs to impose its will but it might persuade some not to go along with it

A Dissident's Guide to the Constitution: Episode 1

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/dissidents-guide-constitution-episode-1

[Guest Gone Fishing...]

On 2/14/2021 at 3:53 PM, RobinJ said:

So it seems that Common Law is all the rage to 'fight' the New World Order crap.

Moved to Common Law Section..
BC

[Macnamara]

On 2/14/2021 at 3:53 PM, RobinJ said:

So it seems that Common Law is all the rage to 'fight' the New World Order crap. Its taking off just like Q did. I believe this is just another hero on a white charger solution. I may be way off beam here

 

maybe you are a little correct in that perhaps people are being told things that they then expect to be some sort of magic bullet that will save them from the state but i don't think a growing awareness of COMMON LAW is a bad thing. In fact it might be one of the key solutions to get us out of this mess

 

One of the key aspects of common law is the idea of a trial by jury because the jury can listen to the facts of a case and then decide from their conscience whether or not they think justice would be served by punishing the person. 'The law' on the other hand might say that a person is guilty because according to the letter of the law, as created by statute in parliament, a person is technically in breach of that law but if the common folk in a jury decide that having weighed all the considerations and facts of the case there is no malicious intent they may decide that JUSTICE is best served by going against the letter of 'the law'.

 

In the past this would lead to 'the law' then changing because it did not match the morals of society and was therefore illigitimate. This was called 'annulment by jury' and it meant that each trial wasn't just passing judgement on the accused, it was also passing judgment on the law itself

 

The 'common law' on the other hand was that which common folk knew instinctively to be wrong or right and as such is the law that is written upon our hearts if not on the statute book.

 

To get around this the system has pushed for more and more kinds of law to be decided by judges and not by juries. As members of the 'law society' judges are bound to statute law and therefore believe in the supremacy of statute law. The common folk on the other hand are part of wider society and they believe that what is moral is what should be supreme.

 

A system with no regard to common law is free to pass whatever laws it wishes even though they may be immoral. Common law should be the protection of the people against such tyranny

 

Now the problem we have is that the common law is only backed up by the peoples willingness to assert it. If they do not assert it in the face of a tyrannical government then of course the immoral laws of the government will win the day. The first step is to realise that we all have unalienable rights and the next step is to then assert them

 

 

Edited February 21, 2021 by Macnamara

[RobinJ]

On 2/21/2021 at 12:03 PM, Macnamara said:

 

maybe you are a little correct in that perhaps people are being told things that they then expect to be some sort of magic bullet that will save them from the state but i don't think a growing awareness of COMMON LAW is a bad thing. In fact it might be one of the key solutions to get us out of this mess

 

One of the key aspects of common law is the idea of a trial by jury because the jury can listen to the facts of a case and then decide from their conscience whether or not they think justice would be served by punishing the person. 'The law' on the other hand might say that a person is guilty because according to the letter of the law, as created by statute in parliament, a person is technically in breach of that law but if the common folk in a jury decide that having weighed all the considerations and facts of the case there is no malicious intent they may decide that JUSTICE is best served by going against the letter of 'the law'.

 

In the past this would lead to 'the law' then changing because it did not match the morals of society and was therefore illigitimate. This was called 'annulment by jury' and it meant that each trial wasn't just passing judgement on the accused, it was also passing judgment on the law itself

 

The 'common law' on the other hand was that which common folk knew instinctively to be wrong or right and as such is the law that is written upon our hearts if not on the statute book.

 

To get around this the system has pushed for more and more kinds of law to be decided by judges and not by juries. As members of the 'law society' judges are bound to statute law and therefore believe in the supremacy of statute law. The common folk on the other hand are part of wider society and they believe that what is moral is what should be supreme.

 

A system with no regard to common law is free to pass whatever laws it wishes even though they may be immoral. Common law should be the protection of the people against such tyranny

 

Now the problem we have is that the common law is only backed up by the peoples willingness to assert it. If they do not assert it in the face of a tyrannical government then of course the immoral laws of the government will win the day. The first step is to realise that we all have unalienable rights and the next step is to then assert them

 

 

Well there ain't no magic bullet, or someone on a white charger who will save them. Thats the programming we have been taught kicking in.

the whole judicial system is just a ruse to make it look like we get justice, when the dice are loaded as always before we even get to court. I really hope you are right, however, personally I feel its just another side show to stop people really taking action or just not complying with all the bullshit. I hear stories from folks who manage to get to Mexico every day from all parts of the world, none of the 'rules' on the various govt web sites are really adhered to, except USA flights ( not land borders)

The vast majority of it is pure bullshit designed to scare people into compliance. The 'law' is another such ruse.

[shabbirss]

I dont think its a psyop...
common law has been investigated for a while now already by people like ken cousens,etc ...
 

[zarkov]

 

Common Law is not a psy-op, but like everything in modern life, it is distorted and subject to mans whimsy.

Common law is Law of the land.

Statute law is an invading law of the sea.

Admiralty law, maritime law, ecclesiastical law, roman law, UCC (uniform commercial code) - all aspects of statute law.

 

If any aspect of law is a psy-op, I would relegate that position to statute law.

 

The aggregate understanding of Principles verses Law decides the prevailing lawful conditions.

(the law is what people are willing (or coerced) to accept)

 

If a population is of a low moral index, then principles of law will proportionally reflect this.

 

Freedom is directly proportional to morality.

Objective morality is the basis for Natural Law which is the foundation of a true law of moral principles and a basis for Common Law.

M Passio aggressively navigates natural law and connected principals here. (2 hrs)

 

 

 

Edited August 15, 2021 by zarkov

[Morpheus]

People in England take over 1st public building using common law

url: bitchute.com/video/BDaq2jgLfoik/

[kilowon]

On 2/14/2021 at 7:53 PM, RobinJ said:

So it seems that Common Law is all the rage to 'fight' the New World Order crap. Its taking off just like Q did. I believe this is just another hero on a white charger solution. I may be way off beam here, and I know this will upset some folks purely because it fits outside the current narrative, however, I feel it should be at least debated.

 

We all want freedom, however that very mindset can work against us. After a year of lockdown nonsense, people who want freedom are getting desperate to jump on any band waggon just to feel like we are doing something to rail against the system of control. However, I am coming to feel that the Common Law concept is probably just another psy op with a hero at its head to ride us into battle and slaughter.

 

There is a great article by the secret barrister who explains about common law and why it wont save you from prosecution here https://thesecretbarrister.com/2020/11/28/can-magna-carta-and-common-law-give-you-immunity-from-covid-regulations/

 

You might also want to consider that the Magna Carta, which is widely bandied about as being the document at the base of human freedom, only bound in oath those 25 barons who signed it, not the general populace. So it is in effect meaningless to the populace. It has largely been repealed anyway since it was written.

The definition of a psychological operation is this: It is about shaping feelings, attitudes and behaviour in a favourable direction for the mission

Heres a rough guide to how a freedom psy ops works:

 

1.  Find a vocal hero who declares for the people's freedom

2. target those who need a belief system and get them to spread the word

3. whip them up into a frenzy of 'saviour' hero complex mind control

4. Keep them under control while you bring in the real agenda

5. Full control implemented via despair when the ruse is shown 

 

My own personal belief is that all LAW is control and enslavement. Interestingly, 'Law and order' as a term has only been coupled since 1796. Same sort of time the banking system took control...Perhaps the only truth is that we do indeed live inside a Westworld/ Matrix combo where very few are actually truly human with open consciousness and the rest are actors to keep the virtual matrix alive.

could not have said it better. for those looking for a deeper insight into this check out the work of Clint Richardson at https://realitybloger.wordpress.com. The guy is relatively obscure.

[whatthefoxhat]

On 8/31/2021 at 5:09 PM, kilowon said:

could not have said it better. for those looking for a deeper insight into this check out the work of Clint Richardson at https://realitybloger.wordpress.com. The guy is relatively obscure.

Common law is relatively obscure to the majority ,if the people promoting common law would abide by the K.I.S.S principle they may get more uptake,I'm not a genius but i'm not thick either but every time i have looked at anything to do with common law within 5 minutes my eyes have glazed over as its apparent the person trying to get th point across either in print or video knows EXACTLY what they are talking about but has never once considered how to get that message across in the simplest terms possible to as many as possible

 

People need to know how it will effect them,what the bottom line is what people don't need is lectures on barons the arcane differences between various forms of law etc

 

Break it down

 

Whats it it for me and how much is it going to cost and how do i go about it without recourse to becoming some kind of paralegal

 

I have no interest in any articles or links thank you,i'm not trying to understand it,i've tried ,i've observed people trying and the public library takeover begs the question are they still in the library ? if not why not? if they are not there or have 'reclaimed' why is it not being publicised,if it was a stunt it worked but as a challenge to the hegemony of government it failed

 

 

[kilowon]

On 9/3/2021 at 8:10 PM, whatthefoxhat said:

Common law is relatively obscure to the majority ,if the people promoting common law would abide by the K.I.S.S principle they may get more uptake,I'm not a genius but i'm not thick either but every time i have looked at anything to do with common law within 5 minutes my eyes have glazed over as its apparent the person trying to get th point across either in print or video knows EXACTLY what they are talking about but has never once considered how to get that message across in the simplest terms possible to as many as possible

 

People need to know how it will effect them,what the bottom line is what people don't need is lectures on barons the arcane differences between various forms of law etc

 

Break it down

 

Whats it it for me and how much is it going to cost and how do i go about it without recourse to becoming some kind of paralegal

 

I have no interest in any articles or links thank you,i'm not trying to understand it,i've tried ,i've observed people trying and the public library takeover begs the question are they still in the library ? if not why not? if they are not there or have 'reclaimed' why is it not being publicised,if it was a stunt it worked but as a challenge to the hegemony of government it failed

 

 

agreed. These guys need to do a better job at breaking it down for the layman.

 

[EnigmaticWorld]

On 2/14/2021 at 3:53 PM, RobinJ said:

My own personal belief is that all LAW is control and enslavement.

 

If think there is a case for beneficial law in a homogeneous society where you're not occupied by a hostile clique that hates you, but that's not the case in Western Europe where law gets used against us.

Edited October 11, 2021 by EnigmaticWorld

[RobinJ]

any law can be twisted and used against you if the instigator wants to find a way....

[Spartacus]

The cornerstone of our common law is God's Law: Thy Shall Not Kill

Can we not all agree that this law is worthy of keeping equally among all men?

 

Mod Edit:

Your website does not respond and so I have removed your link.

 

Edited March 24, 2022 by ink
Remove link

[zArk]

On 3/24/2022 at 8:08 PM, Spartacus said:

The cornerstone of our common law is God's Law: Thy Shall Not Kill

 

and yet War is performed upon common law.  Murder can be lawful.

 

Murder, though, is illegal

 

2 clearly distinct systems.

 

and if you read the actions of Jesus, at times he was  rousing war. calling his followers to war.

And God isnt 100% anti-killing. He is also written as vengeful.

 

 

Edited March 26, 2022 by zArk

[RobinJ]

On 3/24/2022 at 2:08 PM, Spartacus said:

The cornerstone of our common law is God's Law: Thy Shall Not Kill

Can we not all agree that this law is worthy of keeping equally among all men?

 

Mod Edit:

Your website does not respond and so I have removed your link.

 

 

Well if its 'gods law' then how is that any better than the rubbish we have now that's touted as law?  There is no such thing as one almighty powerful being who sets laws. We are all one consciousness. 

[pi3141]

While I'm not certain its a Psyop, it seems Freeman on the Land started with good intentions, however I don't think its valid.

 

I got into it 12 years ago before the birth of my first child. I bought a Family Bible with space for a Family tree. Apparently, according to FoL I just needed to write my Daughters name in the book and that was a valid Birth Registration.

 

If I had been hauled into court the fine for non registering was £1.

 

However I looked deeper and I could not convince myself it was real. But of course we live in a 'Law of the Jungle' I could intellectually refuse to consent as much as I want but in the end they have the Police Force, the Courts and Prison's and if I pushed to far, no amount of intellectuality would stop them from forcibly arresting me and forcibly detaining me in Prison.

 

Then John Harris announced he was wrong and, tragically, took his own life.

 

I thought that was the end of it.

 

My final thoughts was the Freeman on the Land had no force in Law and even if it did, they control the Police, Courts and Prison's and if they want to lock you up, they will.

 

However, there is some validity in it. For instance, you don't need insurance to drive a vehicle on the road - but the proviso is, you have to deposit a large sum of cash into a Bond to pay out for any accidents you cause.

 

I worked for a well known businessman, he had many cars, including a London Black Cab, this allowed him to use the Bus lanes to get around London, he didn't have multiple insurance policies, just a £1M Bond.

 

So you see, if your rich, there are ways to buck or game the system. However if your on benefits and you think you can buy an un-roadworthy car and drive it without Tax, Insurance or Licence on Public roads because you claim rules don't apply, well I'm sorry but your heading for trouble and no amount of screaming 'I don't consent' when they drag you to jail will save you.

 

I know see FoL as a Philosophy, if you can, if your rich, you can play by a different set of rules, but they are still valid legal rules in force that you can exploit.

 

You can think of yourself as Freeman, if you buy your own land and go off grid, you can actually live it. 

 

But what will you do if you break a leg or get sick? Will you go to a Hospital and ask for help? A hospital paid for by other people that you refuse to support but would want access to in emergencies?

 

How does that work?

 

I watched a docu on living wild in Alaska, these people were 'self sufficient' turning their backs on society (the society that educated them, kept them healthy) however when word reached them that a family member was sick, what did they do? They turned to the TV crew and asked to borrow a phone so they could make contact. Seemed a bit hypocritical to me, your self sufficient until an emergency arises, then you want access to phones, hospitals, doctors - all the things you supposedly turned your back on.

 

So, if you can do it LEGALLY, go ahead, buy some land, go self sufficient, become a Freeman, but remember when the shit hits the fan, you'll be asking for help from the society you disowned.

 

Freeman on the Land is a personal philosophy but I think it has no basis in law and even if it had - they own the Police, Courts and Prisons. Do something bad enough and they WILL come and take you away and lock you up.

 

Thats the reality. (imo)

[RobinJ]

hmm I understand what you are saying about us living in a dual system right now. However, to live off grid does not mean we have to run back to the system. Perhaps the Alaskans used that route because it was the easiest at that point in time. We dont need to be separate or alone to live off grid, we can still be part of a community and ask my new community for help. That is the point of community- ie- as Max Igan puts it "lets put the common unity back in community"