Re: THE CENSUS, ARE YOU IN THEIR WAREHOUSE? BC, SECURITISATION

by Waffle Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:54 pm

For the birth registration they used to have a lord lieutenant instead of the superintendent registrar, the Lord lieutenant was responsible for the birth records and was most certainly militia, this position was demoted to a ceremonial position and appears to be the same as the queen, the Lord lieutenant is a ceremonial figurehead of the county and Queen is ceremonial figurehead of the country.

And just done a little background research, WOW, here we have it!!!!

The Custos Rotulorum is the keeper of the rolls, responsible for the county records.........

Today the Custos Rotulorum is the Lord Lieutenant, HA, this need exploring! I say Today, the Lord Lieutenant has been the Custos Rotulorum since 1836, makes sense now the title superintendent registrar, militant title with a militant boss. The Custos Rotulorum is also head of the magistrates for that county, the magistrates are now looking like a type of military court, dig into this one guys, its quite a discovery!

if your hung up on the Mr thing I think the boys down under have stated its a military title, if the Custos Rotulorum is the Lord Lieutenant who used to be a military Lord for that county and today still brandishes a military title, would it be out of this question that the Mr as Romley and Rohan have stated, is in the UK also military??

by Guest Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:06 pm

Hi Waffle

The queen has more going on than we know (i'm not even thinking about scales either) but you're right, for a long time she has been presented as a mere ceremonial figurehead.

On the conspiracy side of things there are quite a few who believe her and everything about her monarchy is fake in one way or another. i'm one of them.

We discussed in another thread about the power of the Bishops in USA didn't we? They do seem to carry a lot of influence.....

The UK does indeed have several secret 'civil' systems, including the talmudic noahide apparently. As for secret testaments the church is well known for producing 'ancient' texts to legitimise anything they want so god knows (ha!) what that could be.....

'Body' is ambiguous in that it can represent substance (flesh) as well as fiction (person). Add that to the double-negative corporate in that line and it is indeed as Candor pointed out - very circular and totally confusing!

Flip it back? Yes. How? By patiently doing what we are all doing - it will happen....

Cheers!

(Just seen you've posted while i was composing this)

by Waffle Sat Oct 07, 2017 11:26 pm

Im amazed right at the moment, I'm going to apologise for the forthcoming drippy research, but this appears to me to be quite a substantive discovery.

The Lord lieutenant is the highest civic officer of a county, more senior than a mayor and the first citizen of a county. The Lord Lieutenant is chairman of the advisory committee for magistrates and Custos Rotulorum!

The Lord Lieutenant is usually a life long personal representative of the crown/the queen.

If the Lord Lieutenant is chief of the magistrates, the highest ranking civil officer of the county and the county councils grew as a discharge of functions from the magistrates then the county councils must be under some type of military jurisdiction, Ha, us the belligerents....

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:03 am

Hi guys

Waffle - Good finds, kudos to you fella! Did the office of Lord lieutenant go back as far as Henry VIII? Or at least as far back as, say, 1604? i know you said he took over the role of custos-wotsit in 1836, but i suspect 'Lord' ties into the House thing.....

Ooh, bit of anagogy - superintendent. You know 'super' is synonymous with 'sur'?

Some people have said we might be under military law - and that we use military scrip for money..... you could be onto something there!

Military 'Mr' is something i've considered, and there is a certain type of warrant officer in the U.S. military hierarchy that bears the title Mr. as rank. i've seen several items that suggest it but.... i don't know. i'll percolate that a little longer i think.

Custos rotulorum, eh? Latin dictionary here i come....

Cheers!

(.....and i've just seen your new post)

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 12:26 am

Yes the office of Lord Lieutenant was first initiated by Hen VIII

I've seen something else in the past suggesting Mr is military, I'll have to see if I can find it again.

Custos Rotulorum means Keeper of the Roles, birth records used to be kept on roles, a stitched back registration book tucked in the basment of the records office is the roll the custos (custodian) Rotulorums is keeping. They are the chief of the records office for that county, which is what makes them the highest ranking civil officer, as well as her majesty's personal and military representative.

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:08 am

Hi guys

Waffle - Henry VIII, really? Woo-hoooo! Thanks buddy, that corroborates something for me. Anagogy too - lord place holder (french), holy see in there too (if you have eyes for it....).

It'd make sense that it would be a lifetime role, they wouldn't want to spread that secret far at all......

Cheers!

by **assassin** Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:30 am

Look at it again, what is a queen? its a title, she even has a fake name and two birthdays.

What is a state? another fictitious entity used to define an area of land.

The queen is anything but a ceremonial office, on the contrary it is a huge commercial enterprise using a fake title over an area of fake land they claim to own and I bet they cannot provide deed of title to this state.

Monarchs are not appointed by Government as they fought and won the lands and introduced hereditary title so their ancestors would retain this office for eternity or a revolution.

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 1:52 am

Hi guys

assassin - yup, absolutely a fake. But she might not be the only one to have two birthdays - ie is it true that there can be a few days difference between the date on the live-born record and that on the birth certificate.....?

'State' is as you say a fictitious entity and more than that it is an abstract concept - but it doesn't define land in any way. It is 'funds', or 'that which pays'. E-state translates to 'personal funding' and your 'status' defines you according to your level of funding.

Monarchs are sometimes gained purely through conquest but there are such things in history - and today - as 'kingmakers'. The church and the merchants.

Cheers!

by **assassin** Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:04 am

Look at the word "kingdom" as this is used to describe the width and breadth of the land a monarch rules and presides over, how do we go on with a queen as it is a kingdom and not a queendom so should we even have a queen.

If we move a little further to foreign conquered lands, these become an empire and the word empire derives from the word empirical, so what empirical rights are granted to a monarch and by whom? I doubt Governments of the day gave our monarch these rights under anything other than distress, so even today this contract under which they rule an empire isn't worth the paper its written on as it is a void contract which never came into force.

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:11 am

Hi assassin

Funnily enough the words 'king' and 'queen' are both rooted in one name.....

Cain.

And you're correct about the false authority they wield. Unfortunately we have ever suffered control via the indoctrination of tradition, custom..... and fear. It is only on losing the fear that we can question these things......

Cheers!

by **assassin** Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:44 am

How true, and very well said.

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:47 am

Hi assassin

(blush) thank you!

Cheers!

by Candor Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:30 am

Their is indeed a secret civil domain: in the words of High Initiate and Freemason Sir Francis Bacon;_ "that Civil law the ancient romans knew nothing of and the citizens are not to know" he may have said people instead of citizens also.

So we are dealing with a system which operates on the basis of deception, but is also military in its nature, while appearing civil in its character.

Waffle you may benefit from speaking with Mike, he was told quite bluntly when he was incarcerated for contempt in Crown Court (asking them which crown they were representing and ultimately telling the court to stick their admirality jurisdiction), the Crown Circuit Judge I think it was told him "I will now deal with YOU as military officer" that is not bullshit either.

Hospitals themselves were founded by a military order that also founded the temple BAR, you can see where this militant undercurrent has come from and how it has revamped itself overtime as a Christian and charitable organisation.

The loss of real Monarchy, that which had English or britannic roots is soley down to the Jewish Financiers of Amsterdam inciting Cromwell, the Sax- Coburgs are a genetic by-product or Rothschild DNA, as is the current Lord Chief Justice who worked for their operation before doing law, as is the chap who writes the scrivener code for the Stones judicial dictionary Greenberg.

We are being lied to and deceived on so many levels its insane.

But what strikes me the most is the discovery of David Clarence in an old Boviers or ballentines Edition:

The Registrar (and their seal) is the Probate Court.

The Custos rotolorum is the Probate Registrar, I hope this is making people think of the implications and logical meaning that follows.

by Candor Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:51 am

As for persons, they are masks or sounds through which characters appear or speak, I wonder why King Jim authorised the part of the Bible that said "God is no respecter of persons" ?

Incorporate - to make into a corpus or body now lets give you a sole and voila you have a corporation sole - yeah its voodoo 101, my research and intuition leads me to believe that this is the ancient cult of Mithra now rebranded as Christianity, particularly the roman cult and its churches, it goes back to Babylon and Aegyptus which is where the trinity actually first appeared and the watcher of the DEAD claimed the souls of the underworld - Anubis.

Yes so a body is either a Corpus comprising the one (the sole) or the many (the aggregate) in their corporate and Civil House they claim we are their property and wards, meaning we are bastards in natural law and that your mum and dad have no right to claim you and hence are being very naughty and need to be punished for not handing you over to the council as a child to have your estate (funds) used and abused for their own enterprise.

Not my words, that is their words as published publically in statute, while you were watching Eastenders or were at work, they have been putting us on enquiry all the time, which is why they believe they have done no wrong, they are a wolf in sheep's clothing is what they are.

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:01 am

Hey Candor, what happened to mike is ringing true with this current research.

For those reading this thread I have also found public general statutes, whereby the registrar general is appointed and salaried by the Lord lieutenant, that was 1844. It was down to the the Lord Lieutenant to appoint registrars and superintendent registrars and a bunch of other officers for the county, although the Lord Lieutenant has no political duties the Lord Lieutenant works very closely with the local government....

The GRO was set up in 1836 the year the Lord Lieutenant took charge of the county records.

The church used to be responsible for local militia, those functions transfered to the Lord Lieutenant.

As you say Candor the hospitallers do appear to have their military orders pulling this crap down the pan. They are also situ in Rome..... where all roads lead

It's sounding like the civil system is a type of military jurisdiction/order.

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:10 am

Some other interesting titles well worth looking at are the cleark of the peace, Lord Lieutenant's right hand.

And the High Sheriff who is part of the Lord Lieutenants office, again cerimonial but ultimately responsible for the police force within that county and discharges its functions to the Chief Constance Officer...

by Candor Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:58 am

Yes we will have to probe deeply into this business, I would imagine an FOI request would be refused on some frivolous grounds, so its just as well the older statutes still show us such things.

Talking of FOI shut downs, what I actually think is happening is we are dealing with people who know less than we do, in fact they are not supposed to know too much by design, so our questions simply appear to bizarre and unorthodox for them to deal with, and in the case approval from upstairs is sought, we can never know why they are shutting us down, well we do know, because unless you corner them, they will not tell you the truth. and even when they are cornered they simply pull up the drawbridges and hide.

Buts that's Ok because we are building a record of their unconscionable and dishonourable behaviour.

It took me over six months with the VOA investigator to get a an admission that the supreme court defines what things are, and I already had their definition at hand, they really will play dumb or very smart to get you off the trail, but perseverance pays off eventually.

Its time to go on the offensive with councils ...so you claim you own me and my estate do you ? prove it.

by Guest Sun Oct 08, 2017 3:03 pm

Hi guys

A lot to take in here. i'll have to ponder over it to get the most out of it i think.

i suspect the Lord Lieutenant will be found to be under the Crown Corp now rather than the monarch, with perhaps particular responsibility for the Crown Estates.

This research is what will change things - this subject is at the root of everything.... the root of all evil......

Cheers!

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:34 pm

Still Rolling with it Very Happy

We are now looking at seaman registration, which is extremely complex, so I'm not going to at this point delve into it, but it links to the latest discovery about our military jurisdiction.........

In 1910, the Advisory Committee on Merchant Shipping proposed to the Board of Trade that a Central Index Register of merchant seamen should again be created. The Central Index Register was started in October 1913 and maintained until 1941. Registration was made compulsory by the Registration of Merchant Seamen Order of September 1918, under the Defence of the Realm Act.

http://www.archives.norfolk.gov.uk/view/NCC098539

What was DORA?

When introduced the Defence of the Realm Act 1914, or DORA for short, was a simple act. It was passed in order to control communications, the nation's ports and subject civilians to the rule of military courts.

https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/parliament-and-the-first-world-war/legislation-and-acts-of-war/defence-of-the-realm-act-1914/

It appears the defence of the realm act has a huge part in our subjection to a military jurisdiction. It was passed without any objection.

Here is the Defence of the Realm Act 1914

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/4-5/29/contents/enacted

As far as I can see its been repealed, but its provisions were reenacted in 1920 in the emergency powers act and a replication (not identical) was made for the second world war, The Emergency Powers (Defence) Act 1939.... That Act was then repealed by the Emergency Laws Repeal Act 1959, however, I doubt very much they have fully removed the provisions entirely but rather encrypted them into our future.....

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:58 pm

Title Mr Ms Mrs, is this its origins

In the Army and Air Force, non-commissioned officers are also addressed officially by their titles, although they may also use “Mr.” or “Ms.” socially. Warrant officers are called “Mr.” or “Ms.” both officially and socially.

A warrant officer (WO) in the British Armed Forces is a member of the highest group of non-commissioned ranks, holding the Queen's (or King's) warrant, which is signed by the Secretary of State for Defence. Warrant officers are not saluted as they do not hold the Queen's Commission, however they are to be addressed as 'Sir/Ma'am' by subordinates. Commissioned officers may address warrant officers either by their appointment (e.g. QMSI, RSM or sergeant major) or as "Mister", "Mrs", or "Ms" and then their last name, e.g. "Mr Smith".

Wiki

by Waffle Sun Oct 08, 2017 10:12 pm

Just throwing this one out there I'm sure someone will get it

Confirmation, is a word that suggests substantial positivity

confirmatio (kon-far-may-shee-oh). [Latin "confirmation"]
Hist. A confirmation of a voidable estate. See
CONFIRMATION (3).

Confirmation

3. The act of ratifying a voidable
estate; a type ofconveyance in which a voidable estate
is made certain or a particular estate is increased

confirmatio perficiens (kon-far-may-shee-oh par-fishee-
enz). [Latin "perfecting confirmation"] A confirmation
that ratifies a wrongful and defeasible title, or
makes a conditional estate absolute.

by Guest Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:19 am

Hi Waffle

Wow! That's a lot. You certainly have been busy!

That DORA stuff must have been years in the making, and the fact they proposed the merch navy register four years before WWI tells me they were planning for a large-scale harvesting of estates ...... and yes, it does seem to add credibility to the military rule theory. Ha! Military Rule - MR ! Another anagogic candidate for that most elusive of title definitions!

The wiki one mentions female officers, so maybe not far back enough in time? Could be though.

The church really are the original realtors aren't they? Confirmation..... seems obvious now you point it out - right in the open as per bloody usual!

....i reckon we'll be finding rabbits soon.

Cheers!

by Candor Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:14 am

That's wicked waffle, meaning good.

Now I just need the hansard nerd to send me that DORA report for a better picture on what they did.

Maybe the Military Occupation is note even overtly published in statute, perhaps it is a protocol or convention they understand, I also think the terrorism acts brought in post 9-11 have in effect created a martial law scenario anyway, where normal procedures of due process of law are dispensed with, it is as clear as day to me they are treating us a belligerents or officers bidding for mutiny, and what happened to peace constables, did we ever have them ?, we now have machine gun wielding commando's walking about and turning up on random stop and searches of usual suspects around London and other cities, why is murder or even manslaughter now a health and safety breach for police officers ?

When a circuit court judge in crown court clearly says "I am treating you as military officer, (not sure if he was talking about himself or the defendant or both) and clears the court before doing so, you know this shit is not just a hunch.

Your anagog may be correct there iamani - if the cap fits .... and I say it does we may well have found the smoking gun?

by Candor Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:23 am

Aha confirmation of the estate , yes the life title or the death title.

Be confirmed yea, by the seven sacraments of Mithra or be DEAD in our eyes.

The thing is how far and high up the chain of titles in their system do you have to go until you can get an answer from some one who even knows how their system works, do they even know themselves anymore ?

Why have they remained mute on questions of significance and fundamental import in their own doctrines, is it quite simply because we are not supposed to know anyway ?

by Waffle Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:11 am

Like the anagog MR iamani, yes the wiki link does mention female warrant officers, however, when we trace back the inception of the Lord Lieutenant who is the highest ranking civil officer in a county because they are responsible for the county records, we can see it dates back to Henry the VIII. So if the Lord Lieutenant was granted charge of the civil birth records in 1836, at the conception of the GRO we could hypothesis that every office below is a military title holder and that the persons they hold in custody mr, miss, mrs are military officers supposed defenders of the realm, who have become belligerent civilians. I'm convinced penal laws have not been abolished but are more discrete than they used to be. Officers were and still are today (mostly) sworn in by oath, citizens used to have to take conforming oaths and perform the sacrements to acquire any kind of status/standing. We don't have status or standing today and seem enemies of the state, unfortunately for them they still have to maintain a certain amount of care for belligerent citizens under international law. If we can use history as a lesson to learn from them there would be a path for us to discover in terms of conforming/confirming to establish some kind of status/standing, everything stems from religion.

by Sponsored content