Jump to content

Common Law


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

Thanks for starting this thread seclorum.


The common law is gaining momentum among activists and so deserves some attention. I will try and summarise what I understand of common law below (although I am not necessarily endorsing it or the organisations named). It's a huge topic so my summary may be a little long...


The main activist groups I know of are as follows:

  • Earth United who are coordinating mass action of common law claims worldwide to lawfully regain the public courts. They are developing an app to aid with this, as per the video in the OP. https://www.earthunited.global/

  • Event 202 – Their YT channel states that Event 202 “will be a simulation exactly like the Event 201 simulation but from the reverse angle, simulating how millions of people might come together to overcome the fear and terror instilled into the masses and avert the pre-planned solutions by an elite class hell bent on imposing supra-Orwellian control over the entire earth”. https://event202.org/

  • Common Law Court (CLC) “has created an International database for all living men and women. By submitting a declaration for your birth, you have confirmed that you exist.” They also run cases, offer learning materials and support and are looking to recruit sheriff officers to help enforce decisions. https://www.commonlawcourt.com/

  • Practical Lawful Dissent focuses on using article 61 of Magna Carta throughout the Commonwealth to protect from rights violations. https://www.practicallawfuldissent.com/home

  • Stand Up X have been promoting common law too and the Bristol group served a notice of treason on the Bristol Mayor – DannyUK started a thread on this in the Covid-19 forum. https://www.standupx.info/

According to the video in the OP, UK Column, DI and Save Our Rights UK have also expressed interest in common law and how it can be utilised in the current climate.


There appear to be two main approaches to common law:

  1. Reclaiming your “legal fiction” or “strawman” and regaining your individual sovereignty taken away under “maritime admiralty law”.

  2. Rights set out in Magna Carta (part of the British constitution) – in particular article 61.


Historical Context


According to Jordan Maxwell, maritime law is thought to date back at least to the Phoenicians, during the time of Canaan, who were renowned seafarers and merchants focused on trade and commerce especially around the Mediterranean.


The Romans took over as the main force in the Mediterranean region with civil Roman law borrowing from the Rhodians (a major source of maritime law) with the belief that men and women were not endowed with the ability to rule themselves. The Romans therefore practiced slavery and were highly militarised. Roman Catholicism saw the introduction of Canon or Papal law claiming that only it has legitimate authority on earth and that people and governments are subordinate.


After the Romans left Britain, it is thought by some that, during Anglo-Saxon times, an ancient English constitution developed which protected individual English freedoms but that this was later overthrown by the Normans after the 1066 invasion.


In 1215, Magna Carta was signed at Runnymede during the reign of King John I with a view to protecting the people - barons and serfs - against abuses of power and arbitrary rule by the elite such as monarchs and popes. It has been said to have restored ancient English constitutional rights. Article 61 (the “security clause”) of Magna Carta provided for a council of 25 barons to monitor and ensure adherence to the charter – failure to do so empowered the barons to seize the monarch's castles and lands until, in their judgement, amends had been made. The charter was reissued in 1225 and again in 1297 (by Edward I “Longshanks”) at which point and it entered England's statute law.


During the aftermath of the Great Plague and the Great Fire of London with hundreds of thousands of people dead or missing, the Cestul Que Vie Act was enacted in 1666 by James II which declared all men and women dead and lost at sea with all their property put into trust and into the custody of the state. The state became the trustee of the property until it was claimed back by the living man or woman.


During the 1600s, Magna Carta regained much interest, particularly within the context of the English Civil War and attempts by monarchs such as James I and Charles I to extend the authority of the crown. The Petition of Right in 1628 cited the Magna Carta in its preamble. By 1689 the rebellion against James II caused the Bill of Rights to be enacted – it has effect in all Commonwealth realms, limits the power of the monarch and reasserted “certain ancient rights and liberties” and natural justice.


The matter of the UK constitution is complex and not codified into a single document. But the Magna Carta forms an important part of the constitution alongside Acts of Parliament including the Petition of Right (1628), Bill of Rights (1689) and Act of Union (1707).


It has been claimed that Magna Carta was repealed in the 19th and 20th centuries. However, common law advocates state that this is not true because the Magna Carta cannot be repealed by Parliament as it was not a party to the original common law contract. Instead, it is the 1297 statute that has been repealed (in part) but the original charter still stands.


Common law used to be taught in schools but this was apparently stopped in the 1970s by Edward Heath who has been accused of treason, under common law and the constitution, for unlawfully deceiving the British public by entering the EEC on the basis of a bribe.


Principles of Common Law


Under common law, everybody is expected to act in honour and there are two main principles to as follows:

1) All things are held in common whereby no-one has more of a claim to the earth than anyone else.

2) The law does harm to no-one.


The table below, of which I owe much of the content to Jason Whitney, compares the foundational workings of the two contrary systems of law.

Common law

Maritime law

Natural law (of the land)

Personal responsibility / sovereignty (present)

Real (substance)






Straightforward, plain language

A jury of peers

Merchant / corporate law (of the water)

Re-presented by another

Fiction (paper certificates)


Devoid of consciousness





Judges of the bench and representatives


Spiritual Considerations – The War on Consciousness


It has been said that the whole court and banking system is based on ancient esoteric principles whereby the people are seen as products and a resource to be exploited. Money, after all, is representative of energy. It is a system where wealth and power from can be extracted from us as energy sources (batteries), via our enslavement, with our bodies being the vessel of delivery. This trespass takes place from birth and is dressed up in complex legalese, with parallels to the Tower of Babel event, in order to confuse and deceive us.




Much has been said about the use of language within the legal and banking world, and comparisons have been drawn between the words in use, maritime terminology and the view of our legal fiction as an energy resource to be exploited. Jordan Maxwell can be credited with the examples below:

  • We are born via the birth (berth) canal in a delivery room.
  • Birth certificates are issued to us by the Doc. just as ships are given berth certificates at the dock.
  • Banks – also found as mounds or ridges either side of water which directs the flow of the current.
  • Currency or "Current-sea".
  • Cash “flows” just as water flows and energy flows.
  • Another use of the word “court” is when playing a game such as tennis. Some courts are called “circuit” courts reflecting a flow of energy.
  • You are “charged” if you break the law
  • In court, you are re-presented by a lawyer rather than presenting the case yourself. It is said that the lawyer is re-presenting the artificial because, in legal terms, you’re dead.


Approaches to Common Law


1) Reclaiming your “Legal Fiction” or “Strawman”




Legally, we are considered to be a fiction, a concept or idea expressed as a name, a symbol. That legal person has no consciousness; it is a juristic person, ENS LEGIS, a name/word written on a piece of paper. This traces back to 1666, London is an Independent, City, State, just like Vatican is an Independent City State, just like Washington, DC is an Independent City State.

The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated? It’s private. The temple bar is in London, every lawyer called to the “bar” swears allegiance to the temple bar. You can’t get called without swearing this allegiance.

Our only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown created, become the executor and then collapse the called Cestui Que Vie trust and forgive yourself of your debts and then remove yourself from the admiralty law that holds you in custody.

When London burned, the subrogation of men’s and women’s rights occurred. The responsible act passed… CQV act 1666 meant all men and women of UK were declared dead and lost beyond the seas. The state took everybody’s property into trust. The state takes control until a living man or woman comes back and claims their titles by proving they are alive and claims for damages can be made.


NB - the link above also purports to cite Canon Law (2048 – 2057) which came into effect in 1933 and allegedly removes a child's rights to property and freedom from birth. However, the links are broken and I haven't been able to verify the source(s) so I remain somewhat reticent as to the veracity of these claims.


The CLC offer a birth declaration database and you can order an ID card showing that you are a flesh and blood man or woman and now come under common law jurisdiction.


2) Magna Carta Rights


I found this “public notice” which summarises the Magna Carta article 61 approach. Those looking to invoke this article are asked to swear to and submit an oath of allegiance to the Committee of Barons who invoked the ancient rights in 2001 – corresponding with the Queen - in a bid to prevent the UK from entering the EU. This oath should, once sworn, be sent to the courts and police.


Those who favour reclaiming your legal fiction, have said that police and courts ignore Article 61 saying that it has been repealed.




It seems that the system is coming down and that we are not going back to “normal”. Was what we had normal anyway? Could using common law as a counter movement be part of the solution to creating a new future?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

If you are going to use common law you had better get your finger out and do something rather quickly....time is on no ones side....lengthy online discussions aint exactly cutting it...people need to see actions otherwise they will just carry on slumbering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The great thing with comman law is you don't have to read it or learn it. You know in your heart what is right and wrong.


1) Remember that you man or wo/man are born free.

2) You are NOT owned by anyone or anything.

3) You have the power within to take control of your own health and happiness.

4) Nothing is above creator (what ever you believe that to be) and you are as much a part of that as the controllers themselves.


Above all is the control of FEAR. Let go of this and you will never be owned.


ps- Great post Eve.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks @seclorum 

I have been searching for a common law thread.



Below posted from https://windowsontheworld.net/what-is-common-law/




There is a lot of misleading information which is being touted around as common law. The descriptions below are as accurate as it gets. The customs and traditions upon which it is founded have also been wrapped up in sound bites and are guaranteed to get the gullible and ignorant into trouble.

Ever since the “Freeman” movement was injected into proceedings the courts have become wise to it and do not hear the arguments which are mainly irrelevant to all court proceedings.

Only a knowledge of how a court works will have any effect.

The worse aspects of common law are execution and all manner of cruel punishments.

The best parts are the upholding of natural law and truth through tradition. As the court is directed by the judge a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but a good solid understanding of the court procedures and common law can help you win, if you know what you are doing.

(Check out our archive for more)




This short introduction is in the main from “The History of Common Law in England” by Sir Matthew Hale published in 1739.

Sir Matthew Hale (1609 – 1676) attended Lincoln’s Inn to study the law. He became the chief justice of the Court of King’s Bench,


There are two types of law:

Lex scripta, the written law and Lex non scripta, the unwritten law.

Not all laws have the original text available in writing.

The unwritten laws have obtained their force by immemorial usage and custom.

Written Laws are usually called statute laws or acts of parliament.

Written up for the tripartate of King, Lords and Commons,

Without the consent of all three, no such laws can be made.

The monarchy with the advice of the parliament can make laws.




There are two types of statutes:

Those not in time of memory and those within time of memory.


Time within the reign of Richard 1st was classified as within memory.

Therefore within time of memory in a legal sense was from 6th July 1189.

Because any time before this was presumed to be without beginning the laws previous to 6th July 1189 are part of common law through usage and custom.

The first statute roll is The Magna Charta and is in The Tower (as at the time of writing in 1739).

Leges non scripta or customary laws before William 1st the conqueror and in the time of Richard 1st. This is the legal limitation of time of memory.

Those statutes extant in The Book of Magna Charta

The first available record of a summons to parliament was during the reign of Edward 1st.

The records before this have been lost or mislaid.

The laws before memory are not only of course oral, they have been written and transfer from one age to another.

A vast number of Legis non Scriptae are all allowed as the rule and direction of justice and judicial proceedings.



Common law in its usual and proper acceptance is:

The Law which proceedings and determination in the Kings Ordinary Courts of justice
are directed and guided.

(This is why common law is useful in holding court, you can steer the court into common law if you know what to do.)

The various and particular customs of cities, towns and manors are thus part of the common law.

The common law does determine what of those customs is good and reasonable and void.

The common law gives to those customs that it adjudges reasonable, the force and efficacy of their obligation.

The common law determines what is that continuance of time which makes such a custom and the limits and extensions thereof. It cannot be altered or changed by an act of parliament.



Ecclesiastical and Civil law

Neither canon nor civil law have any obligation as laws within this Kingdom as the Popes emperors made those laws.

All strength that either the Papal or Imperial Laws have obtained in this Kingdom is only because they have been received and admitted either by the consent of parliament and are part of the Statute Laws of Kingdom are else by immemorial use or custom.

Their authority is founded merely on their being admitted and received by us which alone gives them their authoritative essence and qualifies their obligation.





There are three courts of note, wherein the Civil and in one of them the Canon and Ecclesiastical Law has been, with certain restrictions allowed in this Kingdom:

1 The Courts Ecclesiastical of the Bishops and their derivative officers.

2 The Admiralty Court

3 The Curia Militaris, or Court of the Constable or Marshal, or those persons commissioned to exercise that jurisdiction.

(Neither the canon nor the civil law have any obligation within the kingdom, as they were at the time of writing not recognized as they were of foreign authority) The only inclusion of these laws would be by Act of Parliament and not derived from themselves. The courts of England are not bound by the courts of the Pope or Justinian. The only jurisdiction is therefore derived from the Crown.

The sentence in Ecclesiastical courts is excommunication as at time of writing in 1739. (Henry V111 legitimatized the issue of common law writs of execution for heresy by burning in conjunction with the Ecclesiastical Court)

The Civil Law is taken in as a director in exposition in court, especially of Wills and Legacies.

The Admiralty was restricted to a thing done at sea but from 1296 courts were using the Admiralty jurisdiction on land and
rebuked by the wig lawyers for it, yet these same lawyers were also using it for their own benefit. See The Development of Admiralty Jurisdiction and practice since 1800 (page 4).

This was used until 1861 after which anything within the body of a country on land or sea was removed from the Admirals Court and declared triable only at common law. Various devices consisting chiefly of legal fictions were employed in the common law courts but writs of prohibition were issued against civilians who tried using Admiralty during the reign of Elizabeth 1 – James 1.



Here are the other articles referred to in the show:


Freeman V Legal Fiction

Are Administrative Courts Unlawful?

Are You a Pauper?

Is a Birth Certificate a Death Certificate?







  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The police and courts just ignore the Freeman on the Land stuff, apparently it doesn't stop proceedings at all, any more than being uncooperative in general like refusing to sign a document or not standing for a judge. In fact, they go all out to make things worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2021 at 12:15 PM, rhydra said:

The police and courts just ignore the Freeman on the Land stuff, apparently it doesn't stop proceedings at all, any more than being uncooperative in general like refusing to sign a document or not standing for a judge. In fact, they go all out to make things worse.


Thanks for that...very productive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
On 1/13/2021 at 1:15 AM, rhydra said:

The police and courts just ignore the Freeman on the Land stuff, apparently it doesn't stop proceedings at all, any more than being uncooperative in general like refusing to sign a document or not standing for a judge. In fact, they go all out to make things worse.


You've got to assert status otherwise they will just treat you like a normal person.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
  • 3 weeks later...
On 11/16/2021 at 3:15 AM, labrats said:

Sorry to say, fiction in practice, you can't beat the system, it's too powerful and established, it is entertaining though, just watched a video on it


This is not true. People have stood their ground to express that they are a living wo(man).

The law of the sea, “maritime admiralty law” judge cannot deal with a living wo(man). On the other hand, a human/human being, an infant or a person which all belongs to the category of animal therefore you have no rights and a slave.


The tricks/hidden question they ask you at the beginning to establish the jurisdiction legal vs lawful....

  1.  Are you are Mr(s) Alex Blogg? If you are a living wo(man), you'd reply, 'No. I am a living wo(man), Alex Blogg (without pronoun)'
  2.  Do you have a bank account?
  3.  Do you receive an utility bill?
  4.  Do you have a driving licence?

There are probably more but if you have any of the 2-4, you inadvertedly confirmed that you come under the legal system.


Also, never say "I understand (under-stand)" when asked "Do you understand?" You don't stand under their authority.



Edited by DaleP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
3 minutes ago, DaleP said:


Can I ask, I heard that UCC is only applicable to the US. Is this correct?


She's gone all ballistic on it here.




It seems to be the case as set out below.





International UCC Equivalents

To protect assets and interests in today's global economy, it is critical to know what types of laws similar to the Uniform Commercial Code Article 9 exist in countries outside of the United States, and how to search for secured assets as well as the processes to secure assets in those countries. Although the UCC Article 9 exists only in the United States as a matter of law, many other jurisdictions outside the U.S. have laws similar to UCC Article 9. Where to look, private versus public, and common law versus civil law, are all questions that warrant careful consideration when transacting business abroad.

Two Guiding Principles

There are two main principles to consider prior to filing or searching for an international UCC equivalent. The first and arguably most important principle is that there is no UCC outside of the United States. The Uniform Commercial Code, and by extension, Article 9, exist only in the U.S.

Canada has adopted the PPSA (Personal Property Security Act) province by province, and this act is based on UCC principles. In various Commonwealth countries, you can file or search for Charges, a UCC equivalent, against a business entity.

The second principle that is important to understand is the difference in doctrine and methodology between civil law countries and common law countries. In common law countries, which include Great Britain and approximately 80 other countries influenced by the British Empire, a register of Charges is generally available. However, in some common law jurisdictions, registering the Charge is voluntary.

In civil law countries, the most prevalent system of law in the world, there is usually no system comparable to the UCC, and except for new registries (ex-communist countries), a register of Charges is rare. The systems used in civil law countries are possessory and pledge based. These pledge agreements tend not to include intangible property, and information about these agreements is not publicly available. Filings are usually against the asset and not against the entity.

Outside of the United States, UCC equivalent filings and searches are jurisdiction specific, and in those jurisdictions where there is a comparable system, these systems are largely statute based.


One of the most popular jurisdictions for U.S. lenders to file or search for a UCC equivalent is Canada, mainly for reasons of proximity, opportunities arising out of NAFTA, and similar business practices.

Canada has embraced the United States' model of the UCC. In 1967, Ontario became the first province to pass the PPSA, which was based on UCC Article 9. All other common law provinces have followed suit. It should be noted that Quebec is a civil law jurisdiction and has a civil code that parallels the PPSA and UCC model.

Historically in Canada, all differing forms of security interests such as corporate securities and consignments have their own regulating statutes. Hence, each different type of interest had its own set of technical rules concerning attachment, filing, priority, and enforcement. Today, all security transactions of substance fall under the definition of "security interests" and are covered by a singular act, the PPSA. From structure to terminology to collateral categories, the Canadian PPSA and the UCC are very similar. However, since the adoption of Revised Article 9 (RA9) and the new choice of law rules, there is a significant difference between the two regimes.

That difference is choice of law for perfection. The old UCC Article 9's "conflicts regime" was very similar to the PPSA. Previously, under both regimes, the appropriate perfection venue was based on the form of collateral. Now, under RA9, the law of the location of the debtor governs perfection for all forms of collateral, whether tangible or intangible, subject to limited exceptions. Despite this considerable difference, U.S. lenders wanting to do business in Canada should have no problems adapting to the PPSA.1

Common Law Jurisdictions

In common law jurisdictions, the seminal influence, England & Wales, have a Charges register that provides an example of how the register works.

A Charge is simply the security a company gives for a loan. Most Charges must be registered at Companies House. The registration need not be by the company itself. In most cases, registration is by the lender or the lender's agent. To register a Charge, the details of the Charge, together with the original document creating or evidencing the Charge, must be delivered to Companies House within the specified time limit.

If you do not register the Charge in time, then in the event of the company's insolvency, the Charge will be void against the liquidator or administrator and any creditor of the company. This means that the debt for which the Charge was given will remain payable, but it will be unsecured.

There are a few peculiarities to the UK statute. For instance, the client has 21 days from the date of the loan agreement to register the Charge. Do not wait before registering a Charge, especially since the 21 days includes weekends and holidays and, where relevant, rejection and correction time (plus regular mail days).

Another distinctive UK statute norm is that there is no requirement to notify Companies House if the company has fully or partially paid off a Charge or that a Charge no longer belongs to the company. This means that if you are doing a search, you may not obtain an accurate picture of current liens. In that same vein, it is in the company's best interest to notify Companies House when it has paid off a debt.

Commonwealth Countries

Many Commonwealth countries such as Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Ireland, and BVI have a register of Charges. Each is governed by its own Companies Act.

Note that New Zealand now has a PPSR (Personal Property Securities Register),which brings them more in line with Canada and the U.S. In the BVI, filing is mandatory at the registry level and this differentiates these islands from the other UK Offshore Centers such as the Caymans, where the statutory obligation is on the registered agent to maintain the register of Charges.

Civil Law Jurisdictions

The process for searching and filing liens in a civil law jurisdiction is much more complex. There is no UCC equivalent, and the filing is usually against the asset. Accordingly, assets such as land, patents, and trademarks are the least complicated because you can search against the land registry or the patent and trademark register.

For most other assets, although there is usually a system to register, registration is perfected at certain departments or a ministry in one central location. Accordingly, in many of these civil law jurisdictions, it's a case-by-case analysis because these transactions are getting more complicated and it takes a notary or lawyer in the jurisdiction to see if the agreement falls within local laws. Each country is different, and you need to evaluate the details before you file in the foreign jurisdiction.

U.S. Collateral; Offshore Debtor

One of the most important sets of rules dealing with cross-border financing is RA9. Article 9 comes into play when the debtor is overseas and the collateral is in the U.S. RA9 modified the rules for determining the governing law for perfection (i.e. where to file), the effect of perfection, and priority.

Under RA9, the general rule for determining the law that governs perfection of security interests is the state in which the debtor is located. Formerly, the general rule was collateral location, with limited exceptions.

Changing the governing law to debtor location has the effect of significantly reducing the number of filings since collateral such as inventory and equipment will now require a single filing in one place - the debtor location - rather than in each of the states in which the collateral is located.

So, where exactly is the debtor located? Under RA9, registered organizations such as corporations, limited liability companies, and limited partnerships are located in their state of registration.

RA9 also provides that, with respect to debtors located outside the United States, individuals and entities are located in the foreign jurisdiction if such jurisdiction has a public filing system, but are located in the District of Columbia if the foreign jurisdiction does not have a public filing system. As an added layer of protection, you may also choose to file in D.C. On behalf of lenders, it is imperative to consider RA9 when drafting loan agreements for overseas debtors.2

Credit Reports

Article 9 provides regulation and direction when it comes to filings in cross-border financing. There is an alternative to lien searches in jurisdictions where there is no public lien-filing system. Credit or other financial reports may be an acceptable substitute.

A vast amount of information can be gathered in a full credit/status report. The usual information provided in a full report is date of incorporation; incorporation number (if applicable); registered business address; line of business/activity; details of directors/principal officers; number of employees; banking details; organizational structure; share holding; locations; trading terms; references; litigation search; bankruptcy; financials including abridged balance sheet and P/L account (subject to availability); ration analysis; and scientifically evaluated credit rating. In place of a UCC equivalent search, a full status report is a very effective due diligence tool.


It's common for law firms and in-house counsel to feel frustrated by the complexities of navigating international filings and searches. Although countries like Canada and the UK can be straightforward, re-inventing the process for each country is not uncommon, and missteps can be costly.

While many registered agent firms are still early in the process of building-out their international services, a few have complete offerings delivered by experienced professionals. These are the organizations that have the expertise to help you build your own processes or partner with you to deliver international services to your firm.

1 See generally Revised Article 9 and the PPSA - A Comparison of the American and Canadian Secured Property Legal Regimes by Daryl E. Clark, The Secured Lender (January 2003).

2 See generally The New Governing Law for Perfection Under Revised UCC Article 9 by Ben Carpenter, J.D., CCH Focus.


@zArk and @SoundOfSilence & others likely have more knowledge on this than I.

The more perspectives we have the better imho.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


Thank you. I heard it from US lawyer so I thought he was right though in this day and age, we don't know who to believe.

Although she wrote "UCC is world-wide, not just the USA."..... and went about her way, she got it wrong and those who don't know will copy her..... rinse n repeat. 🤦‍♂️


Looking under 'UK' that word....lien.....again. Obviously I am guided to pay attention to this topic.

I need to buy the Lien Machine written by Observation Deck. I haven't a faintist idea what's in it but it sounds good.....like US Fed money printer. purrrrr! lol


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

If its one thing I have learnt, its, you don't mess with the system, bit of a defeatist attitude I know, but I am telling you, its easier to comply and just get on, it's always been a Police state, there is a secret Police, there is no Government, it's all scenery, when they flick the switch, your screwed man, they will come at you with things you couldn't imagine, they will have your own people turn to finish you off and sit back and watch, I have learnt there's somethings you simply don't mess with or upset and it aint a bad place on the other side, it is entertaining nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
5 hours ago, Basket Case said:



You reminded me that I had this tucked away to watch later:

"The British Constitution" 




Good lecture.


People exists in nature. Governments (fiction) were created by the people.

Fiction cannot gain an authority over the Creator.


Common Law private prosecution
"If you're a public servant that has been involved in passing legislation that is deemed to be unfair by the jury, you can be prosecuted by a member of the public."


Recommended book:
Democracy Defined: The Manifesto by Kenn d'Oudney
His website: https://www.democracydefined.org/




Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi everyone,

John Smith from the CLC gave an interview and he mentioned they had brought out a common law passport, its backed by the UPU,  i;ve been on the website in the hope there would be more info with regards on experiences people have had using it, has anyone looked into it?


Thanks Di 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...