Love for Life

Envirowild/Flora - August 2008 Volume 1 Issue 3

Articles:

• What is Common Law?

• What Governs Common Law?

• Where does Common Law come from?

• Magna Carta 1215

• Bill of Rights 1689

• Habeus Corpus Act 1679

• Maritime Law

• The Colour of Law in Australia

• What do we do about it ?

------------------------------------------------------------

Apologies & Thank you

First, let me make my apologies. It has been a long time since my last newsletter.

The talks on the Brigalow Corporation, myself and others in the Envirowild Team have held in QLD, have been so successful, with the information going out to so many people, that we were overwhelmed with people sending us DVD’s, their own research notes, emails for further information, phone calls, comments, questions and so on.

Combine that with continuing to follow up on the original research, personal & family matters and I ran out of time. I simply wore out for a while.

The other difficulty was that much of the information we were sent was so fascinating and so important that the research actually expanded!

There are some amazing people who have spent many years investigating the theft of our rights and I am in awe of their patience and determination.

So, for anyone who rang and who might not have received a return phone call – please accept my apologies and try again.

I have tried to respond to every email and call but I know I missed some.

I currently use Skype, so if you ring and miss me please leave a landline, not a mobile number and I can ring you back without any expense to either of us.

If you have email info to send, please give me some details about yourself, as I am very cautious about responding to an email without knowing who and why it was sent.

We have received some very interesting ideas, but with absolutely no details of who sent it and I just cannot reply without worrying about putting my computer in jeopardy.

To date, my newsletter goes out to approx 250 addresses, and I know that many of them share it around, print off as many as 100 copies and pass them on through meetings and market stands!

Those people get my great thanks and appreciation for their help.

And each day another person requests a copy to be sent.

Remember, any information, unless it specifically says not to, is available to be passed onto others.
Most importantly, please keep asking questions, keep stirring up your local pollies, keep demanding the return of your rights – because if YOU don’t, then no one will.

One of the greatest crimes of humanity is to see where a fellow man is being destroyed and do nothing about it out of fear that we will be next. Because, in truth, if we do nothing, we WILL be next.

American’s shout “Remember the Alamo!” Australians are saying “We need another Eureka!”
And one of the greatest quotes in the world is - “the pen is mightier than the sword!”

The governments that now reign and rule in Australia, are committed to removing all your rights and ultimately enslaving us in a web of laws, regulations and public servant/little hitler control.

Let’s not help them by hiding in fear.

Let’s not help them by ignoring the freedom messages.

Let’s take a stand!

-------------------------------------------

What is Common Law ?

Historically, Common Law came from the Anglo-Saxon people of England, but it was well known throughout the tribes of Europe..

Common Law was the law for the free women and men living on the land. It existed, and controlled and ruled the land of England previous to the reign of William the Conqueror [1066], when the Normans conquered Anglo-Saxon England.

In it was the Golden Rule that in the negative form reads: Do not unto others as you would not have others do unto you.

The positive form, Do unto other as you would have others do unto you deals with Social Justice.

Under Common Law, it is illegal to deprive anyone of his inalienable Rights (“inalienable” means
is illegal to deprive anyone of his inalienable Rights (“inalienable” means"can not be given or taken away").

There is a Legal Maxim that says, "Rights never die", and the first Right of a Free man is the Right to Trial by Jury.

--------------------------------------------

What Governs Common Law?

The Biblical expression of the concept of common law can be found at Matthew 22:37-40 - Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

That is a profound request and whether or not we are believers in God, that request is at the heart of all manner of human rights, can only create human peace, would prevent abuse in families and workplaces, would give man back his right to live his life in harmony with other souls.

Yet, how can people pretend they live at the common law when they have hired benefactors to take away their neighbors' goods for their personal benefit?

Other ways of understanding common law is are:

- Women and men have the right to do anything they WILL to do so long as they do not infringe upon the similar rights of any other woman or man.

-Your freedom ends where my nose begins.

-Show the evidence that I have caused harm to another and then the law gives you the jurisdiction to proceed within the law against me (this is similar to the old latin phrase habeas corpus or show the body).

So to answer the question – What Governs Common Law?

You do. Each and every individual must use their freely God-given will to ensure that they treat their fellow man with respect and love.

Where does Common Law come from?

It is on record in the Vatican --- The early Christian missionaries reported that the people of Northern Germany "already have the law".

It is suspected that early Phoenician or Hebrew tin traders taught these people the law many years before Christ Some sources report that Joseph of Arimathea who paid for the burial of Jesus (Greek) a.k.a. Yeshuah (Hebrew) sailed on a tin trading ship from Israel to Glastonbury in Britain and ministered the law and gospel to the Celtic people who lived there, and with their help established the first Christian congregation and church in what later became England.

This ministry in Britain by Joseph happened in the first century A.D., centuries before the formation of the Roman Catholic Church.

--------------------------------------------

It has been said…

If you want your God-given rights back, take back your God-given responsibilities.

You cannot abandon one and still demand that you have the other

--------------------------------------------

Magna Carta 1215 – The Great Charter

King John of England was crowned in the early 13th century.

He needed money for armies, but war losses, greatly reduced the state income, and a huge tax would have to be raised in order to attempt to reclaim these territories. Yet, it was difficult to raise taxes because of the tradition of keeping them at the same level.

John relied on clever manipulation of pre-existing rights which were easily broken and severely punished. He increased the pre-existing scutage (feudal payment to an overlord replacing direct military service) 11 times in his 17 years as king, as compared to 11 times in twice that period covering 3 monarchs before him. The last 2 of these increases were double the increase of their predecessors.

He also imposed the first income tax, which raised what was, at the time, the extortionate sum of £70,000.

By 1215, some of the most important barons in England had had enough, and they entered London in force on June 10, 1215, with the city showing its sympathy with their cause by opening its gates to them. They, and many of the moderates not in overt rebellion, forced King John to agree to the "Articles of the Barons", to which his Great Seal was attached in the meadow at Runnymede on June 15, 1215.

In return, the barons renewed their oaths of fealty to King John on June 19, 1215. A formal document to record the agreement was created by the royal chancery on July 15: this was the original Magna Carta.

Although enforced over the King by the Barons, the 62 clauses protected Common Law rights for every tier of English society and this document was truly for the sovereign men and women throughout Britain.

Simply put it dealt with

· A free English church and freeman rights forever.

· Protection of inheritance.

· Protection for widows.

· No more seizure of land to pay a debt.

· No usury for borrowing from money lenders.

· Cities will keep all their ancient liberties & customs.

· The right to a Common Law court.

· All trials to have a jury of peers.

· A freeman & a villein shall not lose his tools of trade to pay a debt.

· No bailiff can take food from another, but must pay; must not take another’s horse or cart; must not take another’s wood.

· One measure of weight & length to be used in the land.

· To be accused there must be witnesses.

· No man can be punished except by the judgment of his peers & the law of the land.

· No one will sell, refuse or delay, right & justice.

· All merchants may trade & travel.

· All judiciary to know the law of the land & honour it.

· All unjust fines to be returned.

· All land illegally removed to be returned.

· … that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly, fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid

Do we still have these rights in place? Aren’t these the very things that are being removed from us now?

Yet the English Monarchy were sworn to protect these rights with their lives!

------------------------------------------------

Bill of Rights 1689

After defeating James II in 5 November 1688 and before they were affirmed as co-rulers of England and Ireland, William of Orange & Mary accepted a Declaration of Right on 13 February 1689. They were then crowned as joint monarchs in April 1689. The Declaration of Right was later embodied in an Act of Parliament, now known as the Bill of Rights, on 16 December 1689.

The basic tenets of the Bill of Rights 1689 are:

o All Englishmen (embodied by parliament) had certain immutable civil and political rights including:

o The King was forbidden to create his own courts or act as judge in order to interfere with laws

o Royal taxation without agreement by Parliament was forbidden.

o freedom to petition the Monarch

o freedom from a peace-time standing army, without agreement by Parliament

o freedom [for Protestants] to have arms for their defence, suitable to their class status and as allowed by law

o freedom to elect members of Parliament without interference from the Sovereign

o the freedom of speech in Parliament, in that proceedings in Parliament were not to be questioned in the courts or in any body outside Parliament itself (the basis of modern parliamentary privilege)

o freedom from cruel and unusual punishments, and excessive bail

o freedom from fines and forfeitures without trial

NOTE: It is very important to note that while this document is still in use in many countries, the Australian government have stated clearly that the Bill of Rights 1688 is no longer relevant to Australian law. Yet Federal Government used it as late as 1995 to protect any government minister from being impeached for anything that is said on the floor of Parliament. This was well after their original statements that it was no longer relevant in Australia.

-------------------------------------------------------

Senior Citizens Are Valuable:

We are more valuable than any of the younger generations:
We have silver in our hair.
We have gold in our teeth.
We have stones in our kidneys.
We have lead in our feet and.
We are loaded with natural gas!

Thanks to the Governor for this gem!

-------------------------------------------------------
 
 

Habeus Corpus 1679

This is an Act of the Parliament of England passed during the reign of King Charles II to define and strengthen the ancient prerogative writ of habeas corpus, whereby persons unlawfully detained can be ordered to be prosecuted before a court of law. Its long name is An Act for the better securing the Liberty of the Subject, and for Prevention of Imprisonment beyond the Seas

-------------------------------------------------------

Maritime Law

Eleanor of Aquitaine, acting as regent for her son, King Richard the Lionheart, established Admiralty/Maritime law in England

In England, special admiralty courts handle all admiralty cases. These courts do not use the common law of England, but are civil law courts largely based upon Roman Law.

Littered throughout Law is the concept of "reasonable belief" (when detaining people or property) which is based on admiralty law, the law of the sea where the captain of a ship only needed reason to believe that his ship was in danger by those under his command to order that certain things be done to protect it's commercial goods and goals.

Everything in admiralty works backwards from due process common law. Guilty before being proven innocent.

In Common Law, crimes can only occur if there is there has been physical damage to someone or to property, AND if there was intent to hurt someone.

Accidents and "negligence" are not crimes. But we can be charged and sued for negligence. Suing is a function of the corporate world.

No longer does there need to be an existing flesh and blood injured party anymore to file a criminal affidavit to initiate criminal proceedings, just the breaching of a statute, a de facto corporate statute (breaching the peace), a by-law or regulation, where the 'injured party' is the state, or corporate entity.

Today in our law courts, all Commercial contracts that private parties enter into with each other that are under Maritime Jurisdiction, are now also under Admiralty: The reason is the beneficial use and re-circulation of Federal Reserve Notes makes the federal government an automatic silent third party to the arrangements.

Admiralty jurisdiction has in many respects, “come ashore”. It currently affects almost every element of our inland commercial society. Today’s practice of Admiralty and Maritime jurisdiction is found on
the navigable rivers of the United States, as well as world-wide off-shore oil drilling activity. Admiralty jurisdiction rules are used to settle claims and grievances regarding cargo, international conventions, financing, banking, insurance, legislation, navigation, hazardous substances from nuclear power plants, stevedoring (the unloading of a vessel at a port), and undersea mining and development, the navigable rivers of the United States, as well as world-wide off-shore oil drilling activity.

Admiralty jurisdiction rules are used to settle claims and grievances regarding cargo, international conventions, financing, banking, insurance, legislation, navigation, hazardous substances from nuclear power plants, stevedoring (the unloading of a vessel at a port), and undersea mining and development.

The reason why Admiralty jurisdiction is of concern to us is because our government is using jurisdiction attachment rules applicable to an Admiralty jurisdictional environment to on land based citizens where Admiralty jurisdiction does not correctly belong.

The only ordinary land based people who should properly be under the government’s in personam Admiralty jurisdiction are government employees (federal and state), military service personnel, and those who specifically contract into Admiralty Jurisdiction (such as employees working for a Defense contractor with a security clearance, and private contractors hired by government to perform law enforcement related work).

So where does this find Australians when it comes to law?

--------------------------------------------------------------

The Colour of Law in Australia

Every Common Law country has been battling the ever increasing surge of Government regulations, which have been removing our ownership rights, personal & civil liberties, rights of free speech and free will choice, that has been a key feature of our common law rights as men and women.

Why?

Money.

After the great wars, most countries were made bankrupt. Australia in 1932. Our country was already in massive debt to the international bankers, based in the City of London (a 1 mile square in the centre of London dominated by banking, insurance companies, trading companies and the like) – as they had funded much of the original early colonisation growth.

The deal was that Australia could continue to borrow – without having to ever repay the principal – as long as the government met the interest repayments.

To to do that they needed assets and the labour of the Australian people was the only asset that could produce money.

Yet, we were free will people with the right to choose whether we would pay off a debt that was not of our making.

So, we were manipulated subtly but surely to agree to contract ourselves to that debt.

How?

By our voluntary agreement to register ourselves as assets, firstly of the government of Australia, then more securely under the corporate government of Australia.

Registering what –

· Our children at birth – for which we are paid a fee (family allowance) to recognize our role as guardians.

· Starting a bank account

· Driver’s licence

· Tax file number

· Electoral role

· Marriage certificate

· Trade licences

· Torrens Title land registration

· Etc, etc

At birth, each child is worth $1 million to the government – the birth certificate is printed on bond paper.

At all stages of registration, your value increases allowing more borrowings.

In many US state documents, the state is not only listed as a third party to every marriage but as the primary party.

This voluntary and ongoing registration enters each of us in a situation where we became contracted to the government and are “forced” to obey laws that would not apply under Common Law.

Therefore we become subject to speeding fines parking fines, rates, dog registration, child innoculations, etc and when we protest, we enter the courts as guilty people having to prove their innocence.

Where is our Common Law?

Oh, it is still there, but as we are no longer Common Law people, having voluntarily given ourselves to the corporation as a chattel, we cannot access it.

And because we still appear to have a Constitution, we can still get a jury trial for murder, we can still appear to have a Monarch guarding us, we THINK we still have access to our long history of rights, when in fact we do not.

We have what is called the Colour of Law. Looks right, but is overlaid with something completely different.

And because the only legitimate money in the world is gold and silver, which government took away from us during the wars, we can only buy and sell with pretend money / fiat money, which ultimately means we have not really paid for anything properly.

Are we the true parents of our children any more? No, we simply mind them for the government, which is why they can step in and take them off us.

Do we truly own our cars? No, the manufacturer’s deed of production is held by government, we simply get to “rent” them yearly.

Do we truly own our land? No, we hold the paper title, but the government holds the primary title through our registering our land under Torrens title.

And Mr Kerry Shine, Minister for Justice and Member for Toowoomba in QLD stated that in a reply to a letter from a constituent, published in the Toowoomba Chronicle August 11, when he said “Finally, in relation to Mr Patch's third enquiry (TC 25/07), Common Law land rights have not applied to Queensland freehold land since the introduction of the Torrens Land Title system in 1861 or the leasehold lands which are governed by the Lands Act 1994. The "Brigalow Corporation" simply administers land pursuant to this Act. This system functions effectively to protect the interest of private landholders in Queensland.”

This explains why we cannot get Common Law relief in a court of law, why we are constantly told the Bill of Rights does not apply, why we have our home taken from us, when this is against common law, why government authorities think they can trespass freely on our land and in our homes.

Here is a Comparison of Common Law vs Civil Law.

Lawful De jure government ...... ..... ……………………………………….………....De facto government

God's Law / Common Law..... ................................................................Admiralty (law of the sea - corporate)

Sovereign authority(people)..................... .........................................................Artificial entities (corporations)

God-given Rights.......... .........................Privileges + civil, natural and political rights (ie: no protected rights)

Unalienable Rights under God........................ ........................................Inalienable civil rights (not protected)

Claim of Right................................... .............................................................................................Color of right

Ownership with fee simple title or contract................................... .............Color of right to possession by 'law'

Full liability for actions............... ............................Limited liability ponzi scheme (Social Insurance/Security)

Government based on sovereign authority..Corporate governments of defacto power or pretended authority.

Organic Constitution................ .........................................Corporate Military Constitution acting on the citizen

State statute that govern how officials uphold the law to protect our God-given rights... ……Federal and State commercial code that we volunteer ourselves into.

Electors elect independant representatives......................... .......Voting in a two or more party corporate system

Inhabitants............ ......................citizens/residents/persons (corporate entities with diminished political status)

Births are recorded........................................................................ ....................Births are registered (certificate)

Sovereigns breaking God's law, Government officials braking lawful statute.. ..Breaching the peace (breaching de facto gov.- straw man citizen statutory/commercial contract - basis of thought crime).

People are responsible for themselves and their own protection......... ......'citizens' want government to 'protect them' on a personal basis

God-given right to own, keep and bear arms............... .......................................licensed privilege to have arms

Intent to hurt or damage is what determines unlawfulness...........accidents or 'negligence' is considered a crime

No conflict of interest in government (prosecutors were private).......... ........Corporate government pays salary of judge, prosecutor and POLICE.

Courts are Constitutional.................... ...........................All courts are in equity (corporate) acting on corporate straw men names!!!

Sheriffs and deputies (Citizens on Patrol:COPs).................. ...................... Peace officers (POLICE = POLICy Enforcer).

Search warrants must be based on affirmation of a verified criminal complaint, based on probable cause by a judge that a crime was committed and signed by a judge.... ......... Searches based on belief, warrant signed by clerk only

First hand knowledge of an injured party crime...................... ..................."Probable cause" to believe a 'crime' committed against corporate statute/by-laws (may or may not be an existing injured party).

It's all about the facts in evidence of violation of rights or harm.............. ............Charges based on allegation or reason to believe

Habeas corpus can be presented to question nature and cause of charge/arrest/being held..... ….....No Habeas Corpus

There is always an official court record................ ...................There is often not even an official court record.

Consent not needed to try................ .............. Understanding and consent of accused needed to be prosecuted.

No negotiable instruments................................. ........Informations and Warrants/Prisoner Bonds are negotiable instruments.

Jury Nullification (juries try validity of the law, and the facts of case).............. ........Juries aren't instructed to try the law.

Lawyer.................................................... .................................................................................Attorney at BAR.

Judge..............................................................................................................................................Quasi-judge.

Judicial.......................................................................................................................................Quasi-judicial.

Lawsuit questioning law and facts........................ .................................................................."lawsuit" of facts.

And there is more.

---------------------------------------------------------

What do we do about it ?

This information explains why the High Court of Australia has been so reluctant to rule over Fee Simple land ownership in recent cases presented to it.

Why courts constantly tell the defendants, “You are right, but you lose.”

Why our government state that we have given them a “Mandate” at the polling booth to make laws we did not ask for.

Why they constantly tell us the Australian Constitution is “old hat”.

Why bank get to do what they want at our expense and misery.

Why magistrates tell the defendants, “I am not interested in your defence.”

Why we have 2 Queens in Australia – the one who approves the unconstitutional Governors and Governor-Generals and the one we know as Elizabeth I.

Why Queensland has been able to claim ownership to every person’s home, land and other possessions.

Why many government ministers, who were on charges of treason, completely ignored them and ran for office in the last elections, including our illustrious Prime Minister and the thinking man’s sex symbol Julia G!

Why the police in the US can tase their citizens without punishment – coming soon to our shores.

Why immigrants are welcomed more than we are – because they bring large families perhaps? And know nothing about common law, so don’t complain as well, I would bet.

1. We learn and we learn fast.

2. Google Honour Dishonour law, Commercial Redemption law, Contract law.

3. We use the government’s laws to protect ourselves first.

4. The answers are there.

5. Find an Honour Dishonour group and class in your area.

6. Help each other.

7. Watch out for each other. We are all we have.

8. Think twice about simply agreeing to do as the government tells you. Often it if bluff, and they want you to think you have to obey, when in fact, you have a choice.

9. Ask them questions like “show me the law that gives you that right”.

10. Learn who you are as a Free Common Law man.

11. God gave us these rights – do you know Him at all? He is not who the media have told you he is and maybe after this document you may understand why we are told lies about Him.

Stop Press

Under Common Law, which normally governs murder, Dr Patel would undergo a Trial by Jury.
As I pointed out in the earlier parts of this newsletter, government have pushed Common Law UNDER the Civil law that now governs our lives.

Common Law is now clearly being dismantled in QLD and has obviously gone in WA. Kerry Shine is the Minister for Justice in QLD – whose justice should be the next question – because it certainly is not justice for the families of those who were apparently murdered.

--------------------------------------------------

Patel may not have to face trial by jury August 19, 2008 12:00AM News.com.au

FORMER surgeon Jayant Patel could be one of the first defendants to have the option of a trial heard by a judge but without a jury. (A Civil law case in other words)

Landmark legal changes will allow extremely complex cases or those involving an accused considered too notorious to be tried by a jury to have a "judge only" trial. (In other words, we the People can’t be trusted to get it right.)

The Queensland Government will also introduce "majority verdicts" for juries in all but the most serious crimes, preventing a single juror from causing a hung jury. (A hung jury is still Common Law justice. No jury is NOT)

The Government will fast-track the laws through State Parliament by introducing them next week and debating them a fortnight later. (The QLD Govt gives their ministers 2 days to debate a new law now.)

Premier Anna Bligh and Attorney-General Kerry Shine yesterday denied the laws were aimed at a specific individual but acknowledged that several high-profile cases had prompted a rethink.

"Clearly there has been recent debate about the jury system here in Queensland arising out of a couple of cases," Ms Bligh said. (Debate designed to persuade us juries don’t work!)

"While these amendments have not been designed with any particular case in mind, they will apply to any case where an application is heard from the time that the amendments become law."

Mr Shine said the "judge only" trials would give defendants an "additional option" for having their case heard. (Defendants are still safer with a jury – they will always lose something with a judge.)

The trials have been modelled on West Australian laws and will be able to take place only after an application by the prosecution or defence.

Applications from the prosecution would require an accused's consent, but a judge would have to assess the merits of either type of application. (What, the accused gets to veto the Prosecution???)

………………………….14 charges including 3 of manslaughter, grievous bodily harm and fraud ………..(and the families don’t get a say under their ancient Common Law rights )

Chief Justice Paul de Jersey (Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia – defender of our Constitution and Separation of Powers) welcomed the reforms. He said that in other Australian jurisdictions, majority verdicts had not led to adverse consequences and they would overcome the "intolerable prospect of retrials in situations where one intransigent juror had refused to do his or her duty in accordance with the law". (Intransigent means these good people would not compromise justice for a verdict they could not believe in, propbably the verdict the judge was pushing for.)

…………………….. Shame QLD, Shame WA & Shame Chief Justice Paul de Jersey.

--------------------------------------------

Web Sites to help

Common Law & Civil Law: http://www.svpvril.com/comcivlaw.html

Sui Juris group: http://www.suijuris.net

Natural Person: http://www.natural-person.ca/index.html

Tom Hyland Story: http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston/tom_hyland_story.html

Contract info: http://www.duhaime.org/LegalResources/Contracts.aspx

The Banker: http://www.tapesite.com/index10.htm

World slaves: http://www.worldslaves.citymax.com/page/page/195600.htm

Robert: Menard: http://stores.lulu.com/ThinkFREE

Freedom Issues: http://realityzone.stores.yahoo.net/freedom.html

Documents various: http://www.scribd.com/search/search?query=presentation&commit=search&adu...

Forum - Various Subjects: http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=18

Travel: http://freedom-school.com/travel

Mary Elizabeth Croft: http://freedom-school.com

Detax Canada: http://www.detaxcanada.org/index.htm

Citizens of the American Constitution: http://www.citizensoftheamericanconstitution.org/homepage.htm

Build Freedom: http://www.buildfreedom.com/what/interview.html

Eldon G Warmen: http://www.detaxcanada.org/cmlawintro.htm

Jackie Patru: http://www.sweetliberty.org/index.shtml

Reserve Bank Scam: http://www.wtv-zone.com/Mary/BIGGESTSCAMINHISTORY.HTML

Reclaim your Sovereignty: http://nomoretyranny.org/index.html

Dr George Gordon: http://db.georgegordon.com/index_by_title.php

Hage Family: http://www.stewards.us/home.htm

Australia, the Concealed Colony: http://www.members.westnet.com.au/unrealneil

Tools for Freedom: http://www.toolsforfreedom.com

I’ve Still got My Guns: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/5804/

-------------------------------------------------------

Interesting End Thoughts

The Right to Free Travel: The forgotten legal maxim is that free people have a right to travel on the roads which are provided by their servants for that purpose, using ordinary transportation of the day.

Licensing cannot be required of free people, because taking on the restrictions of a license requires the surrender of a right. The driver's license can be required of people who use the highways for trade, commerce, or hire; that is, if they earn their living on the road, and if they use extraordinary machines on the roads. In other words, if you are not using the highways for profit, you cannot be required to have a driver's license.

"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." [emphasis added] Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.

Tax or no Tax: It would appear that taxes can only be claimed on the PROFIT of a man’s wage. As your wage does not generate a profit unless you take part of it, purchase something, such as an investment, then on sell it, thereby making a profit – how then is our wage taxed? Well, the earliest form of wage earning was daily pay for daily work – remember, give me my daily bread? Finish the day, get paid, return the next day, finish that day, get paid. No profit involved, therefore no tax whatsoever. Now,we loan the boss our week’s wage. We get paid weekly, or fortnightly, therefore the tax department can conclude that each day is a profit on the one before. And so tax us.

I made it (America: Freedom to Fascism) because the I.R.S. is putting people in jail for now reason, no law. I discovered that there is no law. In 1894 the Congress tried to pass a law, but the Supreme Court shot it down. In 1916 the Supreme Court and in eight subsequent decisions said that the U.S. government did not have the authority to tax the labour of the people. Income as a corporate gain is taxable; it doesn't mean your labour is taxable. Each person owns their own life, and their own labour." * Aaron Russo

Or do they. If we are corporate assets, is our wage now a corporate gain?

The Rightful Order:

God the Creator
Man the Created
Government, Banks, Corporations, etc – the made.

How come the made gets to tell the makers how to live their lives?

Because we let them.

Stop it. Now.

----------------------

Sue Maynes

“Berkeley”
Woodstock NSW 2793

PHONE: 02 63451254

E-MAIL: sue.maynes @ bigpond.com

Without Prejudice
UCC 1-207