PUBLIC NOTICE
Bernard Jason Weckmann
Freeman-on-the-Land
Toowoomba
PUBLIC NOTICE
Be it known that LAWFUL and ENFORCEABLE Commercial Liens to the value of $50,000,000.– (Fifty Million Dollars) each have been placed on the individuals named below:
Anna Bligh
formerly trading as:
CEO of the Queensland State Government (ABN 75 818 456 675)
Lien and Affidavit issued: 1. December 2011 Australia Post Article Id 506190131017
Neil Roberts
formerly trading as:
CEO of the Queensland Police Service (ABN 29 409 225 509)
Lien and Affidavit issued: 5. July 2011 Australia Post Article Id 504429645014
Paul Lucas
formerly trading as:
CEO of the Dept. of Justice and Attorney-General of Queensland (ABN 13 846 673 994)
Lien and Affidavit issued: 5. July 2011 Australia Post Article Id 504429646011
Hayden Stjernqvist
trading as:
Magistrate at the Toowoomba Magistrates Court, a subsidiary of the Dept. of Justice andAttorney-General of Queensland (ABN 13 846 673 994)
Lien and Affidavit issued: 21. April Australia Post Article Id 504708405018
Upon request printed copies of all relevant documents, signed and sealed by the affiant, are available to any interested party/parties.
You can contact me:
Bernard Weckmann
c/o Gardentown Post Office, Toowoomba, Qld 4350
email: bewe@live.com.au
Toowoomba this 16th day of April, 2012
Will You Be Labelled Mentally Ill?
—oooOOOooo—
Do you question authority? Fail to accept conventional wisdom? Lose your
temper when you hear a politician make a promise that you know he or she
won’t keep?
If so, you may be mentally ill, according to the most recent revision of the
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). In this
revision, psychiatrists hope to add dozens of new mental disorders.
Unfortunately, many of these so-called illnesses target people who merely
think or behave differently.
A case in point is “oppositional defiant disorder (ODD).” DSM defines ODD
as “an ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behaviour toward
authority figures.” Symptoms include losing one’s temper, annoying people
and being “touchy.” Other “disorders” include antisocial behaviour,
arrogance, cynicism and narcissism. Sounds like lots of people we know!
While diagnosis of ODD “victims” focuses on children, there’s no reason that
ODD can’t exist in adults. Indeed, ODD can evolve into “conduct disorder”
(CD), which DSM defines as “wherein the rights of others or social norms are
violated.”
Uh-oh. So violating “social norms” is now a mental illness as well.
Let’s connect the dots, shall we? There’s a long and sordid history of
governments using psychiatry for political repression. In the Soviet Union,
thousands of political prisoners were detained in mental hospitals. There
they were isolated from friends and family, and, in many cases, forcibly
medicated. Nazi Germany went even further: it murdered over 180,000
psychiatric patients.
Laws in many countries allow child protective services agencies to forcibly
drug children. Indeed, if a parent fails to administer drugs ordered by a
physician or force children to submit to vaccinations, the parent can be
imprisoned.
A wise writer observed:
“If seven-year-old Mozart tried composing his concertos today, he might be
diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and medicated into
barren normality.”
The conversion of personality differences into psychiatric disorders, and
the forced medication of children, are dangerous trends. It is but a short
step to extend these laws to adults who have a pattern of “negativistic,
defiant, disobedient and hostile behaviour toward authority figures.”
We’d prefer a different approach: institutionalizing the psychiatrists who
came up with these new disorders. Perhaps we could call their condition
“overmedication psychosis.”
It’s All About Money!
—oooOOOooo—
HERE IS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW!
Psychiatry/psychotherapy/psychology are NOT sciences but belief systems based on nothing more than the hang-ups and spiritual emptiness of sexually frustrated Victorian-age males, most of them Jewish, packaged and sold to the world as sciences. To present them as scientific descriptions of the psyche and how it functions, to use them as yardsticks with which to measure all humans and as tools to “heal” is not only monumentally fraudulent but criminally dangerous.
Freud’s “talking cure” is a scam, designed to keep the patient “sick” for as long as possible and to take his money. Freud’s letters are very revealing in this context: turning down an invitation to travel he wrote of his fear that a wealthy client might get well during his absence. This mercenary attitude displayed by the founder of this “science” is continued by its practitioners and explains why psychiatrists are constantly expanding the range of psychiatric “illnesses” that only they are qualified to diagnose and treat using mumbo-jumbo and powerful psychoactive drugs.
These “psychobabble sciences” are not only schemes to make money for the psychiatrists and their partner in crime, the pharmaceutical industry, but they also lend themselves beautifully to covert manipulation and mind-control. And that is the aspect your government is most interested in!
Under Common Law your mental and physical well-being and integrity are inviolate!!!
Allegations/suspicions of mental instability or mental illness must be based on facts observed rather than the mere whimsical notions of an ignorant cop or teacher (in the case of children) or the malevolent intentions of a public servant such as a magistrate/judge.
You do NOT have to consent to a mental health assessment for yourself or your children, not even if “ordered” to by self-appointed “authority figures”, such as teachers, doctors, policy officers and magistrates/judges.
Unless there is proof that you are a CLEAR and PRESENT DANGER to somebody’s mental-physical health and well-being neither a doctor, nor a teacher, nor police, nor the judiciary has any authority to order or force you to do anything
Unwarranted interference with someone’s mental and physical well-being and integrity is a crime under Common Law – ASSAULT!
A doctor, a psychiatrist, a teacher, a policy officer or magistrate/judge who forces you or your children, against your express wishes, to subject to a mental health assessment and/or medication of any kind is committing a breach of the peace, i.e. a crime, and becomes personally liable for damages; and this also applies, of course, to any health care professionals such as nurses, etc. etc. who play along with this sordid piece of “health care”.
Defend yourself and your loved ones! Deny the thugs the power and authority that they have usurped!
Legalese
If for any reason you are summonsed to court or otherwise roped into defending yourself from the legal system, you would be well advised to become acquainted with the word magic that lawyers use.
The legal profession speaks legalese. They rely on the fact that you will think it is English! It isn’t! Legalese is designed to mislead and deceive you by making it sound like English.
Lawyers and judges are constantly trying to get you to “contract” with them, which they do by getting you to sign various documents, verbally consent to something on the record, or tacitly consent to something by not responding.
To combat their trickery on and off “court” it is a good idea to examine their “playbook” which in this case is Black’s Law Dictionary, the default legal dictionary used in most court rooms and legal disputes.
Reading through Black’s Law will give you a good base education on their word magic and how they use complicated or convoluted terms to confuse you into consent.
Example: To you and me understand means comprehend. In legalese it means something entirely different: to stand under, to accept, to own up
So when you answer Yes to the seemingly harmless question “Do you understand the charge/s?” you really mean to say “Yes, I comprehend what I am charged with!” while the court will hear your answer thus: “Yes, I stand under, I accept, I own up to what I am charged with!”
Quite a difference, isn’t it? By answering YES you have effectively admitted, at least to the satisfaction of the crooks that run this sordid show, that you are guilty and you have stated that you will accept the legal consequences.
Let’s take another example. Imagine you receive a summons from your local pizza parlour asking you to appear in their restaurant at a certain time on a certain day to order a large pizza with a side salad and a fizzy drink. Hilarious, isn’t it? But read on: they threaten that you could be arrested if you fail to turn up. Not so funny any more, is it? In fact outrageous!
But this is what courts and police do all the time: they issue a summons/notice to appear knowing that you will accept it as a lawful and binding order to appear in court when according to their own legal dictionary a summons is no more than an invitation/offer to enter their commercial premises in order to conduct business – with the court acting as the paid arbiter in the dispute between plaintiff and defendant. The loser in the dispute pays which makes it a win-win setup for the court and its principal, the “government”. And that is all they really care about .
A threat to have you arrested if you do not turn up is actually a criminal offence!
Police and courts of summary judgment NEED your clear and unequivocal consent to proceed!
Are they going to ask you for your consent knowing that no sane person would grant it? Of course not!
So the only way for them to get your consent is by f…ing with your mind, using manipulation, misdirection, harassment, intimidation and, yes, outright lies.
The use of legalese to confuse you is one of their most beloved tools of making you “stand under” the definitions they use.
If you accept their legalese definitions you grant them jurisdiction and authority over you. Your ignorance of the true meaning of their words is entirely irrelevant to them. They are not interested in truth and justice – just in your submission to their authority and, of course, your money!
It is a principle of law that the accused must be able to understand (comprehend!) the charges against him before a court can proceed.You have the right to compel the police and judiciary to speak your language, English. NEVER EVER take anything a police officer or a lawyer or a member of the judiciary tells you at face value. Question every single word!
But beware: even if they speak English policy officers are usually abysmally ignorant about the law whereas lawyers and the judiciary are routinely lying!
The Sovereign and the Law
Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition devotes more than a whole page to the definition of law but the following part is the most revealing: in old English jurisprudence law is used to signify an oath.
The radical definition of law is oath. Other words with a meaning similar to oath include contract, agreement, covenant, treaty, pledge. In essence then, law is nothing more than a man’s agreement to behave in a certain way.
A Sovereign, or Freeman (this includes women, of course), is a man who is NOT bound by oath or contract or agreement to serve another man or group of men.
You were born a free sovereign man/woman and unless you have knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily waived your sovereign status and inalienable rights and sworn/pledged/agreed to become the subject, ward, slave or chattel of another man or group of men you are still a Sovereign!
So we are Sovereigns, free men and women! How is it then that we do not know this? What went wrong?
When we are born we enter, without our knowledge or consent, into an invisible contract with the group or groups (ethnic or national or religious or political or whatever) that our parents/carers belong to. This is a so-called social contract. Our consent is presumed. This is as it should be because in order to survive physically and become truly human we need the support of other human beings: family and tribe. Moreover, we neither know our rights nor are we in a position to assert them; for better or worse our parents/carers will act on our behalf.
As we grow up we are being “educated” and turned into “responsible” members of the group: we are taught by our elders (who have themselves been taught by their elders) the laws, rules, guidelines of the group and we are threatened with unwelcome consequences should we fail to abide by them. By the time we ought to be mature self-directed adults we have absorbed and internalized the group laws to such an extent that few of us even realize that we are free and could either renegotiate the contract or opt out altogether. We have become conditioned – very much like rats in a lab! We have forgotten that we are Sovereigns - or, more accurately, we never knew. Unwittingly and tacitly we agree to maintain the contract and continue to live in what amounts to a prison of the mind, shackled by chains forged of ignorance and fear.
Using the conditioned respect for what appears to be law and the conditioned fear of the consequences of law-breaking, people are cunningly manipulated into waiving their inalienable sovereign rights, thus turning them into slaves.
Let us shake off the chains!
—oooOOOooo—
As Sovereigns we have the right to make our own laws according to the maxim: The decree of the Sovereign is the Law! (from Black’s Law Dictionary)
YOU ARE THE LAW!
I can hear the objection now: Good grief! Won’t there be chaos if we all made our own laws?
We are actually doing this all the time! We just do not think of it as making laws although that is exactly what it is. Let me illustrate what I mean with the help of an everyday example: in my house you cannot smoke. That is one of my laws!
I have the right to enforce this law. If you do not like it you have to leave. If you do not leave when asked to do so you are trespassing and I can use reasonable force to throw you out. For an honoured guest I might make an exception and allow him to smoke but that is a revokable privilege, not a right!
In your house, of course, you make the laws. You might, for instance, be a nudist and decide everyone has to walk around naked. I might consider this law of yours silly but I have to abide by it or leave.
As Sovereigns, then, you and I have the right to make any law we want to. We have the right to freely enter into agreements with anyone we choose to – or not, as the case may be. We have the right to do anything we want so long as we do not harm any other man or violate his rights. Our freedom to do as we please ends where other people’s freedom begins. That means: neither of us can impose his laws onto somebody else nor can we extend them into the public arena.
In the public arena it is Common Law that prevails.
Not common as in ”vulgar, coarse, low” but common as in “shared, belonging equally to, joint, general, public” : the law which we all share. If there is a conflict in the public arena it needs to be settled in a de-jure court/Common Law Court, which is a court operating with a jury of twelve Sovereigns.
Common Law is law made by the people for the people in de-jure courts. The magistrate or judge is nothing more than a servant of the people – an umpire. His one and only mandate is to make sure that everything is done according to the law – and statutes are decidedly NOT law! Common Law is made by juries, a panel of twelve Sovereigns.
Their judgments become precedents and Law!
It is the jury, not the judiciary, that is in full control of the proceedings and it is the jury that decides every aspect of the case regardless of what the corrupt judiciary, usurpers of the law, would have you believe.
A Common Law Court is democracy in action! Exactly the kind of power the criminal elite does not want us to have. We need to show up the frauds in black robes and fancy wigs for what they are – members of the BAR (Bastards And Robbers) mafia. We need to take back the power they have stolen from us!
To sum it up:
Your word is your law and my word is my law. If your law and mine conflict we sit down and negotiate a compromise. If we cannot work out a solution that is acceptable to both of us we agree to differ and part company.
However, should one of us harm the other or his property or violate his rights that would constitute, depending on circumstances, either a breach of the peace or a breach of contract or both. If we cannot settle the matter ourselves it will be decided in a Common Law Court according to Common Law!
Everything else is fraud unless you have given your informed consent to have the matter adjudicated by a de-facto court/court of summary judgement which operates without a jury. De-facto courts are corporations, commercial outfits. They operate for profit. They are not dispensing justice – they are dispensing with justice! Why would any sane self-respecting man or woman give consent to the jurisdiction of a court which is only there to raise revenue for the “government”, which is nothing but another commercial outfit, one that masquerades as a lawfully constituted government?
—oooOOOooo—
Sovereignty is invested in us - The People.
TOGETHER we are the true government!
TOGETHER we make and enforce the laws.
TOGETHER we administer justice in Common Law Courts.
It can’t be that simple, can it? It is that simple! All we need to do is to take our rights back from those who have stolen them!!!
Courts
The True Nature of Courts
In ages past rulers were not only makers of law but interpreters of law and dispensers of justice as well. Subjects would journey to the place where the ruler was domiciled, i.e. the “court”, in order to present petitions, to settle disputes and to seek his decision on a variety of matters brought before him. A court was thus a) the dwelling of a sovereign ruler and his retinue and b) the place where justice is administered.
Later, as civilization became more complex, the authority to determine controversies and to dispense justice was delegated to an organized body, with defined powers, meeting at certain times and places for the hearing and decision of cases and other matters brought before it. We still refer to both these organized bodies and the places where they meet as courts. Now as then, however, a court’s power to adjudicate is NOT inherent but derived – from the sovereign!
Who then is the sovereign? You are! You were born free and unless you have KNOWINGLY, INTENTIONALLY and VOLUNTARILY signed away your sovereignty and your inalienable rights and agreed to be the subject/slave of another man or group of men, you are still a Sovereign , although, most likely, you are completely unaware of it because this fact is intentionally hidden from you!
The authority of a court is derived from sovereign men and women – people like you and me!
A Court needs standing in order to act on a matter. For the court to have standing to take up a matter one party must make an accusation against another. The accusation must be backed up by an affidavit, i.e. a statement sworn under oath, otherwise it lacks validity to engage the court.
Today’s courts are – with very few exceptions - courts of summary judgement. These de-facto courts are corporations, i.e. they are in the business of making money for their principal, “the government”, which is yet another commercial corporation. A de-facto court operates exclusively on the basis of CONSENT!
The very fact that the judiciary feels the need to employ intimidation and manipulation, misinformation and misdirection, lies and subterfuge, denial of due process and other criminal practices, ought to tell you that they are well aware of the fact that without your clear and unequivocal consent they are powerless.
In order to become the arbiter in the dispute/controversy both parties must agree to accept the court’s ruling. If one of the parties refuses to authorise the court’s action then it is disempowered. The court CANNOT lawfully proceed!
CONSENT TO JURISDICTION
It is law that, in any action, the court must obtain the clear and unequivocal consent of both parties to be without a jury – otherwise, the court has no jurisdiction to proceed summarily, ie: without a jury. Should the court disregard these legal rights or legal procedures anything done or said by such a court is unlawful and therefore null and void (Confirmation of Charters 1297, Petition of Rights 1627), and the offending judge or magistrate is liable to severe penalties (Habeas Corpus 1641).
The most important point to note about courts is: THEY ARE NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF. We, the people, have the power!
Here are some examples of their fraudulent practices to manipulate you into giving consent unwittingly:
State your name!
Do you understand the charges?
How do you plead?
Come forward!
These questions or instructions sound innocuous, don’t they? They are framed in plain everyday English, aren’t they? Beware! These questions/instructions do not mean what they seem to mean! The judiciary speaks legalese and they rely on the near-certainty that you think it is English! It isn’t! It is a language designed to mislead and deceive. These questions and instructions are nothing more than camouflaged attempts to lure you into their jurisdiction and accept their authority. State your name, move from the public gallery or answer YES to the question about charges and you are considered to have granted the court jurisdiction. Enter a plea, regardless of whether you plead GUILTY or NOT GUILTY and you grant them jurisdiction! In fact, carry out any of their instructions and they acquire jurisdiction. They won’t tell you this, of course. That would give the crooked game away!
Bluff and Bluster
Most people have been indoctrinated to see themselves as subject to the demands of the court and government officials, and therefore unable to resist the impositions, judgements and demands made by a court or government official.
Because agreement to the authority of the court is essential for the court to exercise authority over people a series of apparently authoritative processes has been put in place to intimidate and manipulate people into accepting the role of the court in their affairs. Such things as a summons, court order, judgement, penalty and fine carry the impression of authority. They are rarely worth the paper they are printed on. Did you know that a summons, for instance, is nothing more than an invitation/offer to enter into a contract with the court in order to do business? Invitations can be lawfully declined!
Court Room Architecture
Courtroom architecture and processes give people the impression that individuals have no real standing and that the court has all the authority. This really stands out when one views the Victorian Magistrates Court Virtual Courtroom on their website www.magistratescourt.vic.gov.au
The images and video clips show the magistrate sitting high and above all, presiding over the whole realm of the court. The witness box appears like a small prison cell and it is seen as a tough place to be. The lawyers have the right to stand before the magistrate, but the real people, with the real issue to be resolved, are slumped in chairs in the background, as powerless ones, watching other people deliberate about their lives.
Court rooms are divided into two sections: a) the public gallery (where the audience sits and where the defendant waits until his case is called) and b) the area where the proceedings take place. The boundaries are always clearly marked by some sort of barrier. The two sections are connected either by a simple opening as shown below or an actual gate.
Unfortunately, too few people are aware of the significance of this architecture. A look at the illustration below will show you what the treacherous legal fraternity is hiding from you:
The public gallery represents dry land. Here you are under the jurisdiction and protection of Common Law, also known as the Law of the Land. Under Common Law you are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty and furthermore, you have the inalienable right to trial by jury.
The other part of the court room represents a sea-going vessel. Here you are under the jurisdiction of admiralty law, also known as the Law of the Sea. Things are topsy-turvy here: you are considered guilty unless you can prove your innocence and the right to trial by jury has been abolished.
Step from the the public gallery into the other part of the court room and you are considered to have boarded a ship; you now come under the jurisdiction of admiralty law, administered by the captain of the imaginary vessel, the magistrate/judge. This ship, however, is flying false colors, i.e. it is making itself out to be a lawful court when in reality it is nothing more than a commercial outfit operating for profit/plunder. To put it bluntly: you have fallen amongst pirates! Needless to say they will not tell you of the switch from Common Law jurisdiction to Admiralty jurisdiction.
If you, from the safety of the public gallery and the protection of Common Law, clearly and unequivocally tell the magistrate/judge of a court of summary judgement that you do not consent to his jurisdiction he does NOT have jurisdiction! He will almost certainly attempt to manipulate you into thinking that you are misinformed and if that doesn’t cut any ice with you he will probably threaten to have you arrested. That is nothing but more of their bluff and bluster. Stand your ground! You ARE free to walk out!
If they touch you after you have denied consent in order to drag you into their jurisdiction they are committing a crime, i.e. ASSAULT, unless there is probable cause, i.e. you have committed a breach of the peace!
Another of the traps they might set for you is to threaten you with “contempt of court”. Do not fall for that! “Contempt of court” is an invention of the judiciary designed by them to remove themselves even further from the law than they already are. It allows them to do pretty much anything they fancy without fear of consequences – this device serves two purposes a) to gain control over anyone who challenges them and b) to weasel out of accepting liability for any unlawful conduct!
Should that happen ask them: “Is this a criminal or a civil offence?”
A criminal offence needs to be based on an affidavit of probable cause (who was harmed? what is the harm done? what is the remedy sought?)
A civil offence needs to be based on a lawful contract.
Needless to say they will not be able to produce either an affidavit or a contract to back up an offence that does not exist.
If you do not want to fall into the hands of pirates:
Never walk into a court room without witnesses.
Make sure to independently record the proceedings as the pirates are not above tampering with official records.
Do not enter their jurisdiction by stepping from the public gallery onto their pirate ship.
Clearly and unequivocally deny them your consent to proceed.
Do not ever carry out ANY order or instruction.
Do not allow them to touch you.
Do not fall for their “Contempt of Court” trick.
For some more details read the post “How To Close Down A Court“
Bernard
Lawful Rebellion
—o0o—
“A man can’t ride your back unless it’s bent”
Martin Luther King
—o0o—
Fellow Australians! Who is riding our backs?
Do you love Julia Gillard’s carbon-tax agenda based on fraudulent climate change science?
Are you looking forward to an ever-shrinking pay packet to support yourself and your family and an ever-increasing tax burden to feed and fatten the piggishly greedy bankers (oops! that’s an insult – to the pigs!), treasonous politicians, a lawless judiciary, a genocidal military, pompous power-drunk public servants and a host of other criminally insane miscreants and leeches?
Are you dreaming of your future – an impoverished retirement?
Perhaps you feel safe and secure in a Gestapo-style “Law and Order” state?
Are you happy that a bunch of morons in power tells you what you can think and say, what you can see and read on the Internet, what you can eat and drink – or smoke?
Or perhaps you are thrilled to bits that you are made to consume water laced with rat poison (fluoride), the very same poison used by the Nazis to pacify the concentration camp inmates?
Do you take as gospel the lies that the whores in the mainstream media serve up as “news”?
Is it ok with you that your government slashes or cuts down on a wide range of essential services but will always find a few million dollars to pay for its participation in illegal wars in countries halfway around the world that have not done us any harm whatsoever? Killing innocent men, women and children - in your name! Can you sleep at night? Fighting at the behest of a foreign power for causes which have nothing to do with legitimate self-defence and getting paid for this makes the boys and girls in uniform bloody mercenaries! Do you still think of them as heroes?
Beneficiaries of our “War On Terror”
I have a few more questions but the above shall suffice. If you answer “yes” to even one of them freedom and dignity and honour and decency are evidently alien to you. Enjoy your chains! Enjoy the miserable crumbs that your masters deign to throw you from time to time – until they decide they don’t need you any more and put you down!
For the rest of us there is a tool to set ourselves free – Lawful Rebellion, based on Common Law, the only true Law, as enshrined in the Magna Carta.
The psychopathic money-and-power elite that presumes to rule us and run the planet for its own benefit has incrementally and stealthily enslaved us by subverting the law. They have taken away our rights under Common Law, by turning us – living sentient men and women – into legal fictions (e.g. persons, corporations, citizens, etc) so that they can fraudulently apply admiralty law to us.
People all over the world are waking up from the nightmare of globalist- corporate fascism that masquerades as democracy. The time for Lawful Rebellion has come!
LET’S GET OFF OUR KNEES!
LET’S SHAKE OFF THE CRIMINALS THAT RIDE OUR BACKS!
LET’S STAND STRAIGHT!
What – if anything – is holding you back from standing up to the corporate-globalist fascist bullies? What is holding you back from Lawful Rebellion?
If it is fear that is holding you back take heart! Here is a simple and inspiring truth:
The ruling elite is far more afraid of us, the people, than we are of them !!!
They only have as much power as we grant them, either expressly or by our aquiescence – they certainly know it, and now you know it, too!.
They are afraid of us: that’s why they took away our guns so that we do not pose a threat to them (one of Hitler’s first acts after taking power was to disarm the citizens!)
They are afraid of us: that’s why they poison our water with fluoride. Out of concern for our dental health? Do you still believe in the tooth fairy? Their goal is to dumb us down and keep us docile enough to accept the global concentration camp they are planning for us.
They are afraid of us: that’s why they have introduced hate/thought crime statutes to get us to censor ourselves and one another, thereby destroying free speech
They are afraid of us: that’s why they have enslaved us by subverting the law, substituting statutory “law” and admiralty jurisdiction for the real thing: CommonLaw!
They are afraid of us: that’s why they want total control of the Internet – to ensure we cannot access the kind of information presented here and on countless other sites concerned with freedom (and you thought it was to protect your children from on-line predators!)
While the word rebellion may conjure up images of the bloody revolutions of the past Lawful Rebellion is emphatically not mob rule, it is not anarchy. It is not violence and lawlessness, not upheaval, turmoil, terror and bloodshed a la French Revolution (although the thugs in power will no doubt try to make you see it like that in order to generate fear).
What then is lawful rebellion? It is nothing more and nothing less than: a) commitment to the values and principles of Common Law and b) refusal to accept the unlawful authority of the self-appointed criminal elite!
Restoration of the Common Law Trial by Jury justice system is the sole – peaceful! – means of reversing the tyranny that masquerades as democracy and preventing its future recurrence. That is the heart of Lawful Rebellion!
The Magna Carta says quite clearly, in Article 61, that it is the Inalienable Natural Right and Duty of each and every one of us to rebel with lawful excuse, if it becomes necessary. That time has come!
We can and will beat them and take back our freedom, our lives, our health and wealth and happiness. They are few and we are many. And we fight them, not with weapons, but by using the law against them.
Common Law and Equity Law
Admiralty Law/Maritime Law, also known as the Law of The Sea, is entirely irrelevant to most of us. It only applies where international contracts are involved.
There are only two sets of laws that apply to us in our everyday lives: Common Law and Commercial/Equity Law.
—oOo—
Common Law
The principles of Common Law, also known as the Law of the Land, are few and simple.
1. Do not harm your fellowman
harm being defined as anything done to him which diminishes his pysical, mental and emotional integrity, health and well-being, the only exception being legitimate self-defence
2. Do not interfere with or cause damage to his property
3. Do not interfere with or violate his rights
4. Do not do mischief
Another way to understand Common Law is: men have the right to do anything they want so long as they do not harm any other man or violate his rights.Your freedom to do as you please ends where mine begins.
Any intentional violation of Common Law is a breach of the peace, i.e. a criminal offence, and you are liable for damages. If the breach of the peace is unintentional you are still liable for damages, although it is not a crime as it lacks the element of intent.
These moral precepts are near-universal and can be found in virtually all religions. They might even be implanted into the human soul by God, or the gods or whoever or whatever you may believe created mankind. But even he who has no religious-spiritual beliefs can easily understand the beauty and the power of these principles, if for no other reason than enlightened self-interest – because they protect everyone.
Common Law trumps statutory “law” – always and everywhere!!! Anyone who tells you otherwise is either ignorant or lying!!!
Statutes are NOT law but the rules, codes, guidelines of a commercial corporation, the government. Statutory “law” is presented to you as lawful and binding so that the crooks can apply Admiralty Law/Law of The Sea to you! It is easier for them to keep you on a leash with statutory “law” than with Common Law!
Statutes only apply to you if you are an employee of the government or you have knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily consented to be bound by them. Have you? I haven’t and I do not know anyone who has (well, at least not anyone who is sane).
—oOo—
Commercial Law/Equity Law
Commercial Law/Equity Law is based on contracts. The principles that govern contracts are, like those that govern Common Law, few and simple. In fact, there is so much overlap that it could be argued they both spring from the same source – commonsense and moral imperatives.
For a contract to be lawful, binding and enforceable it needs to meet certain criteria; if even one of them is missing or defective the contract is null and void from the start:
Full Disclosure: all facts relevant to the contract/agreement must be out in the open; nothing must be intentionally hidden from the parties
Equal Consideration: a sum of money, an item of value or a benefit that the parties offer one another
Mutually agreed-upon Lawful Terms & Conditions: theft or murder, for instance, are unlawful and can therefore not be a part of a lawful contract
Mutual Consent: either expressed, such as a hand-written signature or a clear gesture or implied by conduct
Parties to the Contract must be Sui Juris: i.e. of age and competent to enter a contract and accept liability
—oOo—
Summing Up:
If you never breach the peace, i.e. if you never commit a crime, and furthermore, if you never breach a lawful contract, which you have knowingly, intentionally and voluntarily, entered into then you should never have to appear in any court on any charge.
NO BREACH OF THE PEACE – NO CRIMINAL CASE!!!
NO BREACH OF CONTRACT – NO CIVIL CASE!!!
Police
POLICE
The one and only mandate of the police is to act as peace keepers. They have authority only when acting in that capacity. That means that unless you have breached the peace you do not have to interact with them in any way whatsover, unless you choose to.
In most cases they go way beyond their mandate: the cops in the field, having been brainwashed like everybody else, are as ignorant of the law as their hapless victims. They have been pressed into serving as enforcers of the policies of the thugs that make up the ruling elite. They are in effect fund-raisers for the commercial corporation known as the government which in turn is a fund-raiser for the criminal international banking cartel owned and controlled by the Rothschilds, the Vatican and the City of London.
If a peace officer acts as a policy officer – which is most of the time – he is acting outside his scope of office, outside his authority and outside immunity; he is, in fact, acting criminally and becomes personally liable for damages.
The Queensland Police Service is a commercial corporation: ABN 29 409 225 509 - and so are ALL other State and Federal government departments and agencies.
They are all, quite literally, in the business of making money for the various State governments and the Federal government which are commercial corporations themselves! The Queensland State Government, for example, has the ABN 75 818 456 675
Check it out on the government’s own website:
The motto of the Queensland Police is “With Honour We Serve”. Well, they do not serve – they lord it over the people. And with very few exceptions they have absolutely no honour. They are not there to protect you – they are there to enforce the mercenary policies of the corrupt elite and this end justifies the means!
Whenever the public complains about a police officer’s conduct the predictable response from those higher up is the same: the culprit is exonerated because his/her conduct was justified. Strip-searching a twelve-year old girl as recently happened in Hobart, Tasmania? No problem for the police! Fully justified! Tazering and pepper-spraying with minimum provocation – or none at all? Child’s play! Aboriginal deaths in custody? All in a day’s work for our heroes, the policy officers!
It seems to me that a well-developed streak of psychopathy and a relatively low IQ might be a prerequisite for a job in the police and military! The government needs morons and sickos because no sane intelligent decent man or woman would want to do the things cops and soldiers routinely do. As for the sickos amongst us: wherelse can you indulge your basest instincts and make your sordid conduct look like you are doing a splendid job for the public?
And then these morons and sickos are surprised and offended that the much-suffering public views them as scumbags!
Here is the warning I always carry. It is clear enough I would think. Anyone can understand the message. Most policy officers do back off after reading it but, as they say, there is one born every minute …and they will have to learn the hard way.
Warning To Police And Other Would-Be-Thugs
“NO YOU CAN’T”
Tahrir Square, Cairo, Egypt
Too far away to concern us? If we do not stand up now to the thugs in power and their lickspittle tools, the police and the military, this WILL come to a square or street near you!
What powers does the police have?
As policy officers they have zero power and authority!
As peace officers they are empowered to maintain and protect the peace of the realm:
They can arrest/detain and question you ONLY when they have probable cause, i.e. when one or more of the following conditions are met:
when they observe you breaching the peace
when they have grounds to suspect you have breached the peace
when they have grounds to suspect you are about to breach the peace
when they present a lawful warrant signed by a magistrate or judge - but even then the warrant MUST be based on a breach of the peace or it isn’t lawful, i.e. it is null and void.
Anything beyond that is a CRIMINAL OFFENCE.
Unlawful arrest is a crime, i.e. assault!
Resistance to unlawful arrest is legitimate self-defence!
—oooOOOooo—
The article below has been written by an American. What he has to say hits the nail right on the head. It applies to Australia and almost every country I can think of as well. It has been posted here with kind permission of the author.
Bernard Weckmann
—oooOOOooo—
The New Breed of Hero
By John Brennan
December 21, 2011
The United States has done a remarkable job over the years convincing you that the folks in law enforcement are here for no other reason then to “protect and serve.” The words sound honorable and are meant to instill trust and confidence. You see this worn out, duplicitous motto emblazoned across every squad car in every small town across America. But it has become just another slogan that means nothing at all any longer.
In an earlier essay I wrote about buzzwords; words politicians like to spew out when speaking to the people. We’ve heard liberty, freedom and democracy so often , they have become nothing but empty, meaningless, over-used words, just like the slogan, “protect and serve.” Perhaps they never did mean anything, but we – the American people – were brainwashed into believing that somehow they meant something important. We’ve been duped into thinking that the people of law enforcement are here to actually protect us and to serve us as humble, appreciative public servants. But as I have come to realize, this is really not the case at all. In fact, their ultimate end purpose may prove to be far more sinister as time goes on. Maybe law enforcement’s new motto should be “subdue and enslave”, because this is what their mission now seems to be.
Growing up, I was taught to respect the men in law enforcement. I was told that you could trust men in uniform and they were people of integrity. I say only men, because when I was a kid you didn’t see any women-men like you do today. What’s a woman-man you ask? I think you know what I mean. Rough gals. You see them everywhere in law enforcement; females out to prove something to somebody. Maybe they feel cheated because they were born without a ……..Well, you know what I’m saying. They are the unattractive, masculine creatures you see acting like tough guys . Just like the type of men now attracted to law enforcement; genetically short-changed . The type we made fun of as kids. They were the misfits, the bullies and the weirdoes and they now are the ones wearing the uniforms. Maybe its always been this way, but I seem to notice it more today than ever before. This is the type of personality I see on all levels of law enforcement ; angry people who have some insatiable need to control others . This is the new small-minded, tough guy breed now attracted to police work. They saw how those in uniform were revered after 9/11 and they ,too, wanted in on this new hero business.
Everyday I read stories about police abusing their authority: unnecessary beatings, questionable shootings, and torturous tazings. It is not my imagination, it seems to be happening everywhere. In small towns in the rural Midwest to the big cities of New York and Los Angeles, and all points in between, cops are abusing and killing people at an alarming rate. I know there are bad guys out there and some of these cases are justified, but too often, it is the cops who are guilty of escalating the situation into something more violent. With cellular technology, we are now able to see what has been going on for years. Go to Youtube.com and see for yourself. Type in “police brutality” and watch what comes up. You can see actual footage of a particular event, allowing you be the judge. Something has gone terribly wrong in America. You see it in their surly attitude and cocky demeanor and blatant disregard for civil liberties. They no longer see themselves as public servants, but instead as overseers of an unruly public; all of us to be treated accordingly; with a heavy hand.
And it is scary how military-like they have become; not only in appearance but in attitude. Every small force in every one-horse town across the country is now run like some independent army unit, with an overweight police chief pompously displaying his four silver stars on his collar. Make no mistake about it, police across America now see the general public as the new enemy, and themselves as the frontline soldiers in a war against the people. 9/11 has allowed them to unleash their aggression under the guise of fighting terrorism. This perverse approach to policing will only attract a strange crowd; mentally troubled individuals desperate to prove how tough they are.
What kind of person tazes an 80-year-old woman? What kind of cowardly man beats an unarmed, mentally ill homeless man to death? What kind of human being shoots a sleeping baby through a plate glass window? What kind of chickenshit weakling feels so threatened by a 15-year-old girl holding a screwdriver 30 feet away that he opens fire, killing her? The answer to all four questions is simple: Cops! And they are doing it more frequently than ever before. They have truly been given a license to kill and in many cases, using that license to full advantage.
Let me focus on one case; the Kelly Thomas murder here in Fullerton, California. Six cops beat a 30-year-old, unarmed, mentally ill homeless man to death. They beat him into a coma and he died five days later. They broke ribs, fractured facial bones and broke his thorax which eventually caused his death. Hospital pictures show the face of a human being beaten beyond recognition. All this because of an anonymous call to 911 saying a man was looking into car windows and pulling on door handles. The officers responding to the call knew Kelly and demanded to search his backpack. Frightened and confused, he took off running, leaving the backpack behind. The cops caught up to him and began their deadly assault. A young man is now dead because of an anonymous report of someone looking into car windows. Hardly seems worth killing a man over, but they did. How does this happen?
Of the six officers involved only two have been charged. The other four are on administrative leave. I’m amazed the District Attorney even filed against the two. Most of the time in cases like these, the police department involved will claim the incident was justified and tell the public it is under investigation and then you never hear about it ever again. But the real question here is where does this form of brutal policing stem from? What kind of twisted, sick human being could beat a man to death in front of approximately 100 witnesses and think he can get away with it? A man who has been given tacit approval from higher up, that’s who. And this is the problem. The cover-up began right away and started with the chief himself. All the officers involved remained on duty for four weeks after Kelly’s death. If it hadn’t been for public outcry, I’m sure these officers would still be on duty today, protecting and serving the citizens of Fullerton. Which tells me this type of behavior is tolerated if not encouraged by superiors. Testimony revealed that one of the officers later boasted about, “f—–g up a homeless guy”, as if he had performed some noble task. Incidents like this seem to be much more prevalent since 9/11.
Have you grown tired of the word “hero”? I sure have. The traditional definition of “hero” was rewritten after 9/11. We now are constantly reminded of how those in uniform gave their lives helping others .But isn’t this what they signed on to do? I have no doubt that some involved in the rescue effort during the attack on the World Trade Center acted in a heroic manner. However, they were merely doing what they were hired to do. Simply doing your job doesn’t make everyone who died in uniform a hero. Have you ever noticed when the events of 9/11 are mentioned in the media, the word “hero” is used only when referring to those first responders who died that morning in the tragic attack? You never hear the term used when referring to all the other victims who died performing their duty on that same day. What about the secretary who also reported to work that morning? The computer programmer sitting at his desk? And the janitor in uniform performing his duty when the attack occurred, isn’t he just as much of a hero? Apparently not. Only the policemen and firemen are heroes, and no one else. This new concept of “hero” has trickled down to the street cops patrolling our towns across America; causing them to lose sight of what they are really here for; “to protect and serve” the American public.
Something really ugly has happened to my country. 9/11 seems to have given police the green light on aggressive, unlawful behavior. Malevolent policing has become par for the course. Police now have a tremendous lack of respect for the very people they were sworn to “protect and serve”. I don’t know how much the American people are willing to tolerate before fighting back, or if they even will. Any organized movement will be quickly squashed as we saw with the Occupy Wall Street attempt. The slogan “protect and serve” will mean even less in the future as the creatures of law enforcement abuse the rights of citizens. In order for the government to really clamp down on civil liberties, they need soldiers on the street willing to carry out the orders. They will need thugs to implement their plans. Are they concerned? No. The creatures of law enforcement are already in place and are more than willing to start cracking heads; anxious to be recognized as the new “heroes” in the war against the American people.
John Brennan is a freelance writer living in Mexico jbrennan08@yahoo.com
—oooOOOooo—
How To Close Down A Court
How To Close Down A Court
There are many court room strategies to choose from. Which one you choose depends on many variables such as the nature of the case, your knowledge of the law and, of course, your level of confidence and ability to handle confrontations. The best thing is never to go into any court in the first place. Unfortunately, that is not always possible. In this post I share with you my experiences and my wife’s.
The most important consideration for my wife and myself is this: we do not want to waste our precious time on fools and thugs. Our strategy is therefore quite simple: rather than enter a court in order to argue with the judiciary about the law and the merits of a case we deny them jurisdiction right from the start!
Why spend precious time and energy on studying statutory law and admiralty jurisdiction when they do not even apply to living men and women – only to corporations? Why try to master the intricacies of court procedures – which are based on nothing more than sophistry and outright deception Why board their pirate ship and play their game according to their rules?
We have the inalienable right to trial by jury but the criminal judiciary will not grant you a trial by jury knowing full well that this means the end of their control and power over us.
If they do not grant me what I want and am entitled to (i.e. trial by jury) the next best thing to do is to deny them what they want – and need! - in order to proceed against me: consent to jurisdiction. As simple as that!
Remember the legend of Alexander The Great and the Gordian Knot? All the nimble-fingered attempts to unravel the knot failed. Then Alexander came, drew his sword and lo and behold! the problem was solved. Not very subtle? Perhaps not – but effective!
Think of my approach to the courts of summary judgement as the equivalent of Alexander’s sword – short and sharp and effective!
We do not argue – we do not discuss! We tell them that we do not consent to their jurisdiction! END OF STORY!
Summonses are nothing more than offers to enter into a contract with the court to do business (Surprise! Surprise! The government is after your money!) We have written letters to the court declining such invitations and we have sent affidavits in which we clearly and unequivocally denied consent to their presumption of jurisdiction – which should have been the end of it, if they had had any intention of upholding the law. All to no avail! These crooks will happily ignore the law! So we decided to meet them in the court room and, in front of witnesses, show them up for the powerless pathetic critters that they are! We have done this successfully four times!
You would think that having their fingers burned once would be enough to send a message. But hey, courts are agencies of the government, we are talking about the likes of dinosaurs – huge and brawny but with pea-sized brains.
There is no way in the world I’d ever consider hiring a lawyer. A lawyer is an officer of the court and his loyalty is to the court – NOT to his client. Never Hire an Attorney
Hire a lawyer and you become a “ward” of the court with a diminished legal status -equivalent to that of a minor. The court will handle your affairs now and woe to you, then! To put this rather bluntly: your lawyer will hold your hand and console you while the court is raping you – and he will do this for a share of the loot!
But you do not need a lawyer. Anyone has the right to handle his own affairs.
Here now is the skeleton of our approach:
STEP ONE
We tell them in an affidavit well before the scheduled appearance in court, submitted in the form of registered mail with delivery confirmation, that they do not have nor will they get IN PERSONAM jurisdiction. It is almost certain that they will ignore the affidavit. We are therefore prepared for the the fact that they will go ahead with their kangaroo court proceedings.
If they know that they do not have jurisdiction, and if they know that we know why would they still want to continue? First of all, the lower levels of the judiciary do not necessarily know the law. Strange, but true! Furthermore, used to having their way they simply won’t accept that they are up against somebody who not only knows his rights but is also ready to assert them. They always assume that they can intimidate you into submission or manipulate you into granting jurisdiction unwittingly.
STEP TWO
When our names are called we rise and remain standing! Some people make a show of not rising, arguing that the court will not show the same courtesy to them. We rise, not out of respect for the court, but for a far more practical reason: psychologically speaking, you enhance your presence and your impact by standing. Quite literally, we stand up for ourselves and our rights! We are also more visible to everybody in the room and at the same time we are now more or less level with the magistrate or judge who usually is placed a bit higher than everybody else. Last but not least it is also easier to be assertive in a standing position.
We NEVER address the magistrate/judge with “Your Honour” or similar honorifics
We do NOT shy away from interupting – rudely if it must be
We raise our voice – if necessary to shout the magistrate/judge down
Just think of the impression this makes on the audience: they see and hear somebody who fearlessly faces a court, denies jurisdiction, humiliates and embarrasses the court and walks away! In fact, I once had one man come up to me after I had walked out of the court room giving me the thumbs up and saying, with a broad smile: “Good show!” He may or may not be ready to do the same but this is one man who now knows that these scoundrels in fancy dress and fancy wigs are essentially nothing but powerless pathetic clowns and he is likely to talk to his friends about what he witnessed and they in turn ……..
STEP THREE
We do NOT EVER cross the bar that separates the public gallery from the actual court; if we did we would be stepping from the jurisdiction and protection of Common Law, also known as the Law of the Land, into admiralty jurisdiction, or the Law of the Sea.
In the fantasy world of the legal fraternity you are considered to have boarded a ship if you cross the bar. Having crossed the bar you have lost the protection of Common Law and the captain (the magistrate or judge) of the imaginary vessel (a pirate ship), will deal with you according to the Law of the Sea. This captain, however, is nothing like the likeable rogue and decent Pirate Captain Jack Sparrow:
Jack Sparrow
This captain is more like his opponent Davey Jones, a slimy many-tentacled denizen of the netherworld who will lie and steal and rape and cut your throat!
- Magistrate/Judge
We deal with the court from the public gallery, i.e. from dry land, and always from the last row!
They cannot physically force us to cross the bar! If they did they would be committing a breach of the peace, i.e. assault, a criminal offence. Neither can they arrest us to get us into their jurisdiction; without probable cause such an arrest is likewise a breach of the peace, a criminal offence.
STEP FOUR
After rising we announce that we are NOT the name that has just been called; our names are Bernard or Edith. We are agents for the legal fiction! We refuse instructions to come forward: they are really nothing more than invitations to board their ship and enter into their admiralty jurisdiction.
We do not respond to being addressed as Mr or Mrs …………..
We tell the magistrate/judge that we claim protection of Common Law and that we do not consent to his or her jurisdiction!
STEP FIVE
We address the audience in the court room, asking this simple question:
Does anybody here have a claim against me?
Note: Claims MUST be backed up by an affidavit of probable cause or sworn statement showing amongst other things: the breach of the peace for which you have been summonsed, the name of the plaintiff who must be a human being (not a legal fiction such as a government agency or police) and the nature and extent of the harm done to the plaintiff.
Alternatively, the plaintiff needs to produce a lawful contract which you entered into knowingly and intentionally and which was subsequently not honoured by you, thus causing the plaintiff harm.
Obviously, few cases meet those criteria. If you are up for driving without a licence, for instance, ask yourself: What is the harm done? No harm was done to anyone! Is the plaintiff a human being or a legal fiction? The police officer who booked you is a human being but he has not been personally harmed, has he? He therefore has no case against you! The police, however, is a legal fiction and can neither make a claim nor sign an affidavit! Do you have a contract with police that obliges you to take out a drivers licence or do anything else, for that matter? I don’t and I’d be surprised if you did!!
To sum it up: without an affidavit of probable cause there is NO criminal case and without a lawful contract there is NO civil case!
We allow a few moments of silence to let anyone come forward who might have a genuine claim against us. If nobody comes forward (and there is, of course, never anybody with a valid claim) we wrap everything up with the following statement: “There is nobody here in this room who has a claim against me! My business here is finished!”
We warn the court of the serious consequences of trying to arrest us when leaving.
THEN WE WALK OUT !!! That’s it! That’s all!
We do not look back and do not respond to anything more coming from the court.
I have posted Edith’s case of “obstructing police” on the loveforlife website: the link below will get you there. You can read about the background of the case and you can listen to the audio recording which we made with our mobile . This recording will show you how our approach of denying them jurisdiction works in practice. Enjoy! http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8114
Commercial Liens
Commercial Liens
The Basics:
When a government official takes an Oath of Office to uphold the law he enters into a lawful, i.e. binding and enforceable contract. By virtue of his Oath of Office, he assumes a contractual duty or obligation to obey the law! This bears repeating: he is UNDER CONTRACT!
If an official who has sworn an Oath of Office ( i.e. contracted to obey the law) breaks or ignores any law he’s sworn to uphold, he is breaching his oath and his contract with the people. He is acting criminally and has now lost his immunity. Anyone affected by his crimes can place a Commercial Lien on his property that will paralyze his ability to buy, sell, or lease any property and ruin his credit rating until he corrects his breach of contract and once again obeys the law.
A Commercial Lien is a non-judicial instrument, that means: there is no court involved in filing it or indeed at any other stage of the process. There is nobody who can prevent you from placing a lien on anybody and there is no court which can lift a lien already in place, except a properly convened Common Law court, i.e. a court operating with a jury.
Any attempt by any magistrate or judge to interfere with a lawful Commercial Lien would constitute an attempt to pervert the course of justice, a criminal offence as per “Section 43 of the Crimes Act 1914″ (Commonwealth of Australia), entailing serious legal consequences for said magistrate or judge.
It is a private process, conducted entirely between two people: you, the plaintiff, on the one hand and your opponent, the respondent, on the other. This is a very powerful tool – exactly what the thugs in power do not want you to know about because it would spell the end of their evil empire and their ill-gotten gains.
By submitting your claim/s to the respondent, in the form of an affidavit (a sworn statement of truth), you, the affiant, have in effect created a court – your court, the court of a Sovereign!
One of three things may now happen:
a) the respondent accepts your claim/s and pays up
Good for you – but not likely to happen if the respondent is someone in high places. They love their money too much and accepting your claim and paying up is tacit admission of guilt.
b) the respondent disputes your claim/s
If the respondent wishes to dispute your claim/s he needs to do so with an affidavit of his own in which he refutes your claim/s point-by-point. Affidavits may thus move back and forth between you, the affiant, and the respondent, until one affidavit is left that cannot be refuted anymore.
THAT AFFIDAVIT NOW STANDS AS TRUTH AND JUDGMENT
c) the respondent does nothing
This is the most likely response in the case of the thugs in power since they will be very very reluctant to perjure themselves by attempting to rebut your affidavit of truth with an affidavit containing an untruth: perjury would make things a lot worse for them.
This is lethal for the respondent; failure to respond is tacit admission that the claims you made are true and correct and this failure to respond now becomes a default judgment against the respondent. The matter is now decided and that judgment cannot be overturned by any court, other than a Common Law court!
As you can see: they are damned if they do and damned if they don’t!
Can one actually enforce the lien and collect? Yes, you can! But those in power believe in and practice “Might is right!” and will resist enforcement in any crooked way they can. So do not expect this to be easy! A properly drawn-up Commercial Lien, however, is a lawful and enforceable judgement, valid for a very long time! This is a lengthy process but never fear: we’ll get there!!!
For more info on commercial liens read/download these pdf files:
—oOo—
On Tuesday the 15th of February 2011 about 6 or 7 (SIX or SEVEN!) jack-booted storm-troopers, also known as police officers, intercepted me unlawfully, arrested and hand-cuffed my wife on trumped-up charges of obstructing police and then impounded my car. Only two of these thugs I was able to identify.
The officer who carried out the unlawful arrest, one Robert Edwards of the Toowoomba Police, has since had a Commercial Lien placed against him for his criminal conduct, to wit: ASSAULT occasioning bodily harm. The other officer, one Jason McLeod Burrows also of the Toowoomba Police, has had a Commercial Lien placed against him for his criminal activity, to wit: ROBBERY (i.e. theft accompanied by threats of violence to people and property!)
Thug No 1 R Edwards
Thug No 2 J M Burrows
Despite all the warnings they received the morons in the Queensland Police Service and in the Toowoomba Magistrates Court continued their criminal activities against us.
We have been dealing with them a few times and each and every time we have given them the thumbs down. They have not yet returned our car so I cannot claim complete victory.
But neither have we lost! Their attempt to charge my wife with “obstructing police” backfired – spectacularly. An audio recording of her court appearance can be found here: http://loveforlife.com.au/node/8114
Their attempt to forfeit our property, fine us and make the theft look like justice is being done also failed: without my consent they have no jurisdiction and without jurisdiction they cannot lawfully take away our property. The car is still ours by right! They stand revealed as nothing more than common criminals, i.e. thieves!
I have placed commercial liens against a magistrate, one H Stjernquist of the Toowoomba Magistrates Court, and against the thugs in high places aiding and abetting his crimes:
The Dishonourable Paul Lucas MP, QLD Attorney-General and Deputy Premier
The Dishonourable Neil Roberts MP, QLD Minister for Police.
Below you will find links to some documents; they are intended to illustrate the affidavit process (but they are more than that – they are the pdf versions of the actual documents that I have served upon the individual named, the Deputy Premier and Attorney-General of the State of Queensland, one Paul Lucas). Read them in the order in which they are given below.
This same process was also applied to the magistrate, one H Stjernquist, of the Toowoomba Magistrates Court and to the Minister of the Police for the State of Queensland, Neil Roberts.
—oooOOOooo—
UPDATE 1
As of the 5th of October, 2011 the Premier of Queensland, The Dishonourable Anna Bligh MP, is now a respondent in this matter:
UPDATE 2
As of 24th of October, 2011 the following documents have been served upon Anna Bligh: A Notice of Fault and Opportunity to Cure and an affidavit. The Notice is published below; the Affidavit is a copy of the one mentioned above
Bligh Fault_Opportunity_To_Cure
UPDATE 3
On the 2nd of December 2011 the following documents have been served upon Anna Bligh: Notice of Default, Commercial Lien and Affidavit. The Notice and the Lien can be found below; the Affidavit is a copy of the one mentioned above.
UPDATE 4
On the 28. 02. 2012 a letter, using registered mail with delivery confirmation, was sent to Dun & Bradstreet, Toowong, Qld. D&B is an internationally operating credit reporting agency. In this letter the agency was informed of the above-mentioned Commercial Liens.
A copy can be found here:
A near-identical letter was sent on the 8. 03. 2012 to VEDA ADVANTAGE, an Australian/New Zealand credit reporting agency, located in Sydney, NSW.
UPDATE 5
5. May 2012
The liens have now been offered for sale to major Australian banks and interested overseas parties.
—oooOOOooo—
The matter is now res judicata, i.e. decided!
