Claiming again

The Peace Keepers are doing it again, Note they are selective where they are getting their definitions from. They have still not shown any definition of person being
a living man / homo sapien ,what could be easier. Their claim about asking anyone in the street to define ,and they will say wo/man proves nothing except that most people go along without any research into anything (where have we seen that over the past 3-4 years.)
Why does the bible warn many times not to be a person?
The same with individual and include.
It seems to me that they use definitions to suit .

Yes, i have pointed this out before, they are misleading people, WHY ?

I dont want this to turn into an argument.

Living in England, I have always been interested in what Marc has to say about Bill of Rights 1688, the Coronation Oath, Act of Settlements etc.

I am fully aware of legalease, living man / woman and the strawman. I own a copy of my Common Law living man / woman birth certificate signed by 100 of my peers.

I am curious as to why people see the video as misleading.

Is it that in your view, a PERSON is a legal title used by governments to tax us to high heaven?
Do you feel that a LIVING MAN is not and can never be A PERSON.

As I say this isnt to cause a problem I am genuinely interested in others thoughts


No Fear

I agree they are doing very good work ,the only issue i have is this one.
Yes i agree a PERSON is a legal entity, Definitions = describe the true meaning of a word . As in my brief comments above ,nowhere is a person solely a living man,
an adult Homo Sapien .That would be a short unambiguous answer , instead all defs skirt around it by phrases such as 'natural person' 'human' etc.
In my opinion a Natural person is a living man taking on the persona of the legal fiction for a given time.
The argument about ask anyman in the street what a person is ,is a stupid one .If you asked anyman on the street is the far side of the moon dark they will
without doubt say yes because everyone else says so, I fact the other side must get just as much sunlight .

The problem is Once the curtain has been removed, the trick can not be seen as magic anymore , its just seen as Monkeys, Puppet Masters an BS , an you can cut through all that with Facts an Evidence real evidence not some BS "it says it here BS" but hey most people can't think !!!!

"Every man is independant of all laws,except those prescribed by nature.
He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow man without his
consent" [Cruden v Neale,2N.C.338(1796) 2 S.E.]

"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person,an abstraction,and a
creature of the mind only,a government can only interface with other artificial
persons. The imaginary,having neither actuality nor substance,is foreclosed
from creating and attaining parity with the tangable.The legal manifestation
of this is that no government,as well as any law,agency,aspect,court,etc.
can concern itself with anything other than corporate,artificial persons and
the contracts between them" [Penhallow v Doane's Administrators,(1795)
Supreme Court of the United States]

Romans 2:11  "There is no respect of persons with GOD"

Job 32:21 " Let me not,I pray you,accept any mans person,neither let me give
flattering titles unto man."

Of course you could ask anyone on the street,but most are busy acting as persons.

Yep your right, this is not for everyone "it should be, but the mind shift is to great for some" , thats why i 'm thinking about starting an Private study group an that NDA has to be signed an sealed !

[quote="Miss Kermit"]I dont want this to turn into an argument.

Living in England, I have always been interested in what Marc has to say about Bill of Rights 1688, the Coronation Oath, Act of Settlements etc.

I am fully aware of legalease, living man / woman and the strawman. I own a copy of my Common Law living man / woman birth certificate signed by 100 of my peers.

I am curious as to why people see the video as misleading.

Is it that in your view, a PERSON is a legal title used by governments to tax us to high heaven?
Do you feel that a LIVING MAN is not and can never be A PERSON.

As I say this isnt to cause a problem I am genuinely interested in others thoughts
oldie,but stil relevent...

Very good ,the only thing i would add is play it at 0.75 speed.

Maybe that is why the channel is named in CAPITAL LETTERS. I always thought that was odd.

daveiron wrote:"Every man is independant of all laws,except those prescribed by nature.
He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow man without his
consent" [Cruden v Neale,2N.C.338(1796) 2 S.E.]

"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person,an abstraction,and a
creature of the mind only,a government can only interface with other artificial
persons. The imaginary,having neither actuality nor substance,is foreclosed
from creating and attaining parity with the tangable.The legal manifestation
of this is that no government,as well as any law,agency,aspect,court,etc.
can concern itself with anything other than corporate,artificial persons and
the contracts between them" [Penhallow v Doane's Administrators,(1795)
Supreme Court of the United States]

Romans 2:11  "There is no respect of persons with GOD"

Job 32:21 " Let me not,I pray you,accept any mans person,neither let me give
flattering titles unto man."

Of course you could ask anyone  on the street,but most are busy acting as persons.  

Simple question, what is a law? in the UK it is an evolutionary process from the High Court using a series of precedents which evolve with time and only a judge and/or jury can make them and the only court above a high court is the Supreme court.

Anything else is not a law, the magistrates and crown courts are not courts and don't Crown make paint, as they are star chambers and cannot act without your consent and this is why they try every trick to get you to consent and accept their authority and without your name and your true consent they have nothing. Remember consent can be through words or actions.

Act of parliament, certainly not laws and to begin parliament is a private company registered on companies house and as a registered company it is by default a dead entity and something dead cannot act, so back to the word "act" as an actor acts and parliament is full of actors, rich actors we are paying so lets join the dots.

Private company acting so trying to convince you they make laws when they dont, but people fall for it.

Yes your right assassin, the Romans never left !, we are under Feudal Law ruled over by an foreign state. We the people don't have an Flag etc etc, trickery thats all it is. And when you tell someone this you should hear the BS trying to defend the trickery an deceit thats been pulled on them, you could write a book on that one. Q, So where do we go now ?

I am beginning to wonder about PKs
It seems Brian just goes along with everything Marc says without question.
Why do the Mags court always respond with 'it has nothing to do with us,we have no records of this,
you need to contact the council' If what PKs are claiming is correct ,it has everything to do with the court.

daveiron wrote:I am beginning to wonder about PKs
It seems Brian just goes along with everything Marc says without question.
Why do the Mags court always respond with 'it has nothing to do with us,we have no records of this,
you need to contact the council' If what PKs are claiming is correct ,it has everything to do with the court.

Given the amount of publicity the Leighton case received, councils are going to have to provide something from the court when instructing any sort of enforcement.

It all seems very dubious, the courts wanting to distance themselves from it. If their was nothing untoward the court would at the very least have someone dedicated to
CT ,if not a dept. Why no records at the court?

daveiron wrote:Why no records at the court?

My understanding is that the court does have records, but only for the batch considered at each "hearing" and signed off by the court in one go. Not one-to-one with a discrete record for each defendant as you would have for any other judicial decision. Similarly the council receives back confirmation of which orders were made, and the council acts on this.

The issue in the Leighton case was that the bailiffs were acting on council instruction, but treating that as authority from the court, which it clearly wasn't. And they were caught out. Potentially that's a serious blow to CT enforcement. I don't see why similar challenges can't be raised against other enforcement measures like AOE for example.

I hear what you are saying, but it seems people who question any of the processes or judgments with the court are told you must contact the council,its nothing to do with us.

daveiron wrote:I hear what you are saying, but it seems people who question any of the processes or judgments with the court are told you must contact the council,its nothing to do with us.

very true this

i spent quite a while on the phone to the court requesting a copy of 'their' liability order issued against me in favour of the council, you can argue until your blue in the face but all i got was repeatedly

" you will have to speak to the council" whatever i said thats all i got until the very end when the court staff member said actually all the records of the hearings for that day are held at x court ( 25 miles away ) , so we ended the call and i telephoned the court that held the records. They had no idea what i was talking about !

it is all a massive con the courts are not involved i just haven't yet found any form of remedy but one day i will.

modern slavery act 2015 section 3 point 5, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/30/section/3/enacted

More misleading tapnewswire.com/2024/01/withdraw-england-from-british-goo/#clip=47tqhwbslz0g , making people these flags are different !

waylander62 wrote: It is all a massive con the courts are not involved i just haven't yet found any form of remedy but one day i will.

And I have no doubt you will mate…

It is done totally dishonestly and the courts actually have nothing to do with it and I will explain why?

This is done under "Private Law" and they do this very simply:
1) They hire a room in the court and note they hire a room and NOT the court.

2) They hire a magistrate acting in their PRIVATE CAPACITY to approve all the liability orders and they sign a job lot off with one signature which may now be wet ink or a digital signature.

3) the applicant which may be bailiffs, councils, etc receive them electronically onto an I pad and go out to collect and claim this is a liability order signed by a court, which obviously it is not, only a magistrate acting in his/her private capacity.

4) They then claim this is a court order and it has come from XYZ court when no magistrate acting in their professional capacity has ever seen it, it is never listed as it never goes to a court and if it is never listed for court there can be no court judgement so no records ever exist.

How to deal with them:

You write to the company claiming to hold a liability order and ask them which court made the order, which magistrate signed the order and on what day, and what court list this was on as not all court hearings are held in a court room, then demand the insurance company of the magistrate and usually it will disappear.

They will never give you the name of the court as it was never in a court, merely a rented room in the court building and remember a court is only a function and nothing more.
They will never give the name of the magistrate or their insurers as their indemnity insirance only cover them in their professional cpacity and not their private capacity so the magistrate becomes liably themselves for their unlawful actions and have to pay any award from their own pockets.

You can contact the court IN WRITING ONLY and ask who rented rooms in the court building and they have to tell you.

Financial benefits, who benefits? the court hiring the room for 1/2 or full day receives the income from the hire, at the time of writing I believe the cost of a bulk order is £6 per order issued and the magistrate gets half and the ocurt get the other half, so for a day of uncontested orders the magistrate reads and signs one every 3 minutes so 20 orders per hour and for a full 7 hour day this equals 140 orders per day and at £6 each we have a figure of £840 per day so the magistrate gets £420 and the court gets £420 plus the room rent.

Very interesting Assassin… Thank you. Again, a form of smoke and mirrors, relying on the fact that almost everyone just accepts things (especially ‘power’) as it is, not knowing the power they (the general public) have - which almost always surpasses the power ‘from above’ - as soon as they are empowered by something as simple as knowledge…

Thanks again Assassin, you’re a light in the darkness of deceit, as are the likes of DaveIron, Waylander62 and others.

Greetings every one, the following have common themes an puppet masters are highlighted if you can see the wood for the trees !

tapnewswire.com/2024/02/england-is-dead/#clip=47tqhwbslz0g

tapnewswire.com/2024/02/venom/#clip=47tqhwbslz0g

tapnewswire.com/2024/02/i-was-driving-fast-cars-and-drinking-too-much-now-im-an-exorcist/#clip=47tqhwbslz0g

p.s. he should start on his own mob first !!!!!!

tapnewswire.com/2024/02/charlemagne-defender-of-the-west-or-servant-of-the-jews/#clip=47tqhwbslz0g

the list is endless but people have been programmed not to see it, until the s...t hits the fan then they think its something new !!!!!!.

All good and helpful knowledge. Many thanks all, I'm slowly starting to comprehend and remove the layers of ignorance.