Search This Blog

Monday, 30 November 2015

CONSENT - The Most Important Word In The English Language

CONSENT - The Most Important Word In The English Language

by | Monday, 15th November 2010
- And Possibly The Least Understood We are all familiar with the concept of being "governed by consent", but how many of us truly know what this means?
The answer, I’m afraid, is very few of us indeed.
There is a widely held view that voting at elections is the way by which we give our consent to being governed by a particular group of politicians – this is an entirely false assumption as can be deduced logically from the fact that not everyone votes for the political party that eventually secures office. There may be a temptation to think that consent is somehow a collective notion, but this flies in the face of common sense. If somebody makes a decision on your behalf contrary to your wishes, then it is patently obvious that you have not consented - you have been coerced i.e. forced to accept the imposition of others, and this cannot be construed as consent under any circumstance.
When we vote at elections we are simply deciding which political party will run the executive. Consent is an entirely different matter. Consent is categorically an individual action. You are governed by the government of the day entirely because you and you alone consent. The trick is of course that ‘they’ have secured your consent without you realising how and when.
You give your consent every time you engage with the government or with one of its many institutions, such as the Inland Revenue. The next time you fill in your tax return, remember that at the moment you sign it, you are consenting to paying tax. The same applies when you complete your car registration, you are consenting to paying road tax.
The list goes on - whenever you sign your name, you are consenting.
No matter how difficult it may be to understand... TAX IS VOLUNTARY.
Now, those of you who feel compelled to shout ‘rubbish’ at the page – calm down and read on. Turn down your internal switch marked ‘conditioning’ and turn up the switch marked ‘logic’ and you will start to make more sense of it all – it won’t come easily but it will slowly start to dawn on you that all governance, including taxation - must be consensual. If not, then we are mere slaves, compelled to do as we are told.
How many times do we tell ourselves that government is there to serve us and not the other way around? The formula is perfectly simple. We need governance for our convenience to run vital services and our collective defence and for this ‘benefit’ we are prepared to make a voluntary contribution by way of taxation to the running of the system. If we do not contribute, then we do not partake of the benefits. This is a logical and sensible arrangement which most of us would agree is a good system. The problem is that the voluntary element has been replaced with the assumption of compulsion and with it we have lost control. The system has moved slowly towards a ‘pay-up-or-else’ format which of course suits the modern day political order who no longer consider themselves as holders of ‘office’ but holders of ‘power.’ The mind set has changed. Not only do they think that we must do as they command, but worryingly – so do we. We have been systematically hoodwinked into relinquishing our authority under the clever cloak of assumption.
When you combine the assumption (by you) of their absolute authority and the assumption (by them) of your automatic consent (subservience) - you have the very essence of how it is that ‘they’ control ‘us’ – the ultimate smoke and mirrors.
It is time we started to re-evaluate how government is supposed to work and reassert our authority by first understanding that we do not have to consent to their governance – elected or not - if they are not governing us according to our wishes.
If we accept the principle that we are governed by consent, then we must also accept that we have a right to withhold our consent - a mere extension of logic.  If we have no right to withhold our consent, then it isn’t consent – plain and simple – it is a dictatorship. And the beauty of consent and withholding it is that we can do so at any time we chose. Elections are of no consequence to the withholding of our consent.
We are policed by consent. When a policeman asks us our name, and we give it, this is ‘tacit consent’
Many of us have heard the expression ‘acquiesce’ - another interesting word which means that your consent is assumed because you do not protest. To ‘acquiesce’ is to consent tacitly i.e. to consent without stating it directly. If somebody assumes authority over you and you do not protest then you will be deemed to have consented by acquiescence.
If somebody walks into a room of 100 strangers and declares ‘I am in charge here’, guess who will end up in charge, and his right hand man will be the guy who stands up and says ‘who says so.’ We are easily convinced of the authority of those who have the brass to declare it.
Consent is given in many ways. If you look up the meaning of consent, you will see amongst its several definitions the word ‘yield’ which means to ‘give way to’ – this should give you a clue as to how you might sometimes be giving your consent without fully realising it. If somebody tells you to do something and you meekly obey... you are consenting. When you get a parking notice... it is an invitation to pay.. If you pay, you are consenting. The police operate very effectively on the assumption of your consent – i.e. when they tell you to jump... you will jump, because if you tell them NO... there is a high degree of probability that they will arrest you and march you down to the police station to impose their will upon you. But in order to do so lawfully, they must get your consent first. How do they do this? Well upon your arrest they will simply ask you for it and almost certainly – you will give it, albeit unwittingly. An essential part of the arrest procedure is to read you your rights and then ask you ‘do you understand’ – the word ‘understand’ is synonymous with ‘stand-under’ – they are asking you whether you are prepared to ‘stand-under’ their authority... and when you answer yes – you are giving your consent.
Before we discuss ‘withholding consent’ let’s be clear about one thing... the political establishment have become so used to us doing their bidding without objection, that when we start to flex our muscles and remind them that it is they who serve us, they are not going to shift from their control mentality easily – they are going to put up a fight.. They will bring all their assumed authority down to bear on us, with a poorly informed police force ready in the wings to do their dirty work for them, albeit unwittingly. The powers-that-be will not be dragged down from their pedestals without a fight. They are going to take the assumption of their absolute authority to the Nth degree and challenge us to prove our point – and they will fight dirty.
Withholding consent requires a working knowledge of the legal fiction (see previous article in UK Column). By ‘working’, I mean an ability to walk into court and defend yourself against anything and everything they throw at you. One of their most potent weapons is fear, and they use it at the drop of a hat. They will threaten to fine you, imprison you and bankrupt you... if you do not succumb to their authority.
Some of us are up to the challenge and we are telling them to ‘bring it on’ – across the country individuals are going to court and using their ‘legal fiction’ defence to defy the authority of the government. We are refusing to pay speeding and parking fines... and we are refusing to pay our council tax. We will not pay until the government starts governing according to our wishes.
Lawful Rebellion is now moving apace. We are getting more nimble in the courts and have witnessed one judge after another stand up and walk out when confronted with our ‘we do not consent’ attitude.

Please use link to go to the UK Column Website for real truthful News 

Sunday, 29 November 2015

Britain 2015: A Fully-Fledged Fascist Police State

                             Britain 2015:

A Fully-Fledged Fascist/Communist Police State

In the immortal words of the ancient Oriental sage, Lao Tzu:
“Do not conquer the world with force, for force only causes resistance. Thorns spring up when an army passes. Years of misery follow a great victory. Do only what needs to be done without using violence.”
As the events of the past two centuries on these islands have clearly demonstrated, the statist armies of the crown house of Rothschild are covertly attempting to conquer the world via the monopolisation of power, money and information, which, as history shows, ultimately leads to the exponential growth of resistance to tyranny, whether it comes in the form of a communist or a fascist jackboot, once the people affected become aware of the crimes being perpetrated against them. This is why no imperial empire has ever lasted longer than two centuries.
However, when it becomes obvious that increasing numbers of genuine front-line opponents of the totalitarian state, perfectly understand that such regimes invariably imprison innocent people, dispossess them of their property and brutally slaughter or enslave all who oppose the state’s aims and objectives; an inevitable question must then arise:
Read the rest of the Article at THE BERNICIAN 

Sunday, 15 November 2015

Paris Terror Attacks: Blowback or False Flag?


Multiple likely well-planned Friday night attacks in Paris had a disturbing aroma to them – including France’s knee-jerk police state reaction. Here’s what happened.
At least seven apparently well-coordinated attacks occurred, gunmen with automatic weapons and suicide belts killing over 150 victims. Many others were injured. Stade de France stadium was struck during a football (soccer) match between France and Germany.
So was the Bataclan theater during a concert, restaurants full of patrons, a cinema, and pedestrians on Bichat Street, the Avenue de la Republique and Boulevard Beaumarchais.
Reports indicated other Paris locations were attacked, including the Forum des Halles shopping area attracting an estimated 150,000 daily visitors.
The predictable aftermath so far includes French President Francois Hollande declaring a state of emergency – effectively suspending constitutional rights under martial law.
“Two decisions will be taken,” Hollande announced. “The state of emergency will be decreed, which means several places will be closed off, and traffic will be limited in certain areas.”
The state of emergency will apply across the country. The second decision I have taken is to close the borders, so that the people who have committed these crimes can be apprehended.
We know where this attack came from. We must show compassion and solidarity, but we must also show we are united. There is much to fear, but we must face these fears as a nation that knows how to muster its forces and will confront the terrorists.
Heavily armed French soldiers were deployed around key Parisian locations. Five metro lines were shut. Orly airport flights were suspended. All city schools and universities were closed.

De facto martial law legitimizes repressive police state powers. Constitutional protections are suspended. Following the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombing, a no-fly zone was ordered over a 3.5 mile radius of the incident.
read more at   Global Research

Wednesday, 11 November 2015



Evidence of HIGH TREASON against Britain & the British people, we are Sovereign, where the rest are CRIMINALS who've been part of unbelievable repugnant, vile EVIL acts against children,humanity!

An idea whose time has come Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215

By John Banks
There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and is an idea whose time has come
Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215
Everyday, more and more people are waking up and realising that they are being unlawfully controlled and herded by the political, economic and legal systems that have been created in defiance of the Common Law, aided and abetted by corrupt officials of all kinds. Any open and honest mind can see what is happening and how all the dots are connected. As a result, the British political establishment is about to be hit by the biggest rebellion since the signing of Magna Carta in 1215. The genie is now well and truly out of the bottle – the hard truth is there for all good and decent people to see.
With the truth coming towards them like a tsunami, the British establishment now has a very simple choice. They can try to perpetuate a regime that feeds on debt, greed, corruption, deceit and the ultimate pursuit of unlawful global governance or they can yield to the inevitable exposure of truth that will give the British people real freedom, security and happiness. It’s really that simple! The political parties have failed us, they have all been compromised and are all ultimately controlled by the same secretive power base and mindset that makes up the New World Order.
What is coming to replace conventional politics is a movement – a movement to restore the Common Law, based on the principles of, wisdom, decency, humility and truth: a movement to restore happiness, love and real freedom and brings an end to oppression. Once the process of dismantling the systems of control, fear and suppressed truth is completed (with the precedence of Common Law in situ to protect the people from any possible resulting violent unrest and criminality), the British people will come together in a lawful Constitutional Convention, based on the procedures that produced the Magna Carta of 1215 and the Declarations of Rights of 1688, in order to secure their common law rights as an inheritance for generations yet unborn.
This is the future and it’s coming fast. There is absolutely no grey area for politicians to prevaricate and in which to hide – no fence or wall to sit on. The choice is simply this. Side with the British people, or face the wrath of the British people as they apply age-old and supreme Common Law against those who have betrayed them. The politicians of all parties have been warned – it’s now their call! Will they do the decent thing … or will they experience trial by Common Law and suffer the consequences?
The Statement:
We, The British People, KNOW what is being done unlawfully in our name and are now taking back our country from the highly-placed traitors and criminals by using the precedence of Common Law over Parliamentary Statutes and by carrying out effective and peaceful actions; exerting our ancient right to Lawful Rebellion under Article 61 of Magna Carta 1215.

Sunday, 8 November 2015

Magna Carta 1215, Article 61 Lawful Rebellion

Magna Carta 1215, Article 61
Lawful Rebellion 

Magna Carta 1215, Article 61

Lawful Rebellion
Rebellion in itself has a number of different meanings and is in fact quite close to another word that seems to be on everyone’s lips; Revolution. Defined meaning of Rebellion; Refusal to accept some authority or code or convention. An act or show of defiance toward an authority or established government. Defined meaning of Lawful; Being within the law; allowed by law: lawful methods of dissent. (The lawful refusal to conform to the authority that is unjust)
Under article 61 of Magna Carta 1215 (the founding document of our Constitution) we have a right to enter into lawful rebellion if we feel we are being governed unjustly. Contrary to common belief our Sovereign and her government are only there to govern us and not to rule us and this must be done within the constraint of our Common Law and the freedoms asserted to us by such Law, nothing can become law in this country if it falls outside of this simple constraint.
Article 61 shows quite clearly who really holds the power in this country, that being quite simply us the people; we have Sovereignty not any Parliament and nor can this be taken from us by any Parliament who claim to have taken the people’s Sovereignty. As defined above any act passed by a Parliament to remove the power the people possess, or to remove the power from the point of constraint we invested the power in, is invalid as it falls outside of the constraint laid down by Common/Constitutional Law.
This is a simple safeguard put in place to protect our freedoms under said law and to never allow such freedoms to be removed or diminished. So in reality any Act, Statute and subsequent law or legislation formed by these actions, that effects our freedoms asserted to us, is quite evidently unjust, invalid and most certainly illegal.
By invoking article 61 we are quite clearly stating that we feel we are being governed unjustly and after giving the head of state (Her Majesty) 40 day’s to correct this, if this is not corrected, then we can simply enter into lawful rebellion and we do this under the full protection of our Constitutional Law.
Lawful rebellion allows quite simply for the following recourse; Full refusal to pay any forms of Tax, Fines and any other forms of monies to support and/or benefit said unlawful governance of this country. Full refusal to abide by any Law, Legislation or Statutory Instrument invalidly put in place by said unlawful governance that is in breech of the Constitutional safeguard.
To hinder in any way possible all actions of the treasonous government of this land, who have breeched the Constitutional safeguard; defined with no form of violence in anyway, just lawful hindrance under freedom asserted by Constitutional Law and Article 61. Above are listed the three main ways we can as a people rely upon article 61 and what this allows for. The British people were given over 700 years ago a Law to use as there recourse when faced with either a Parliamentary dictatorship, or a Sovereign trying to rule by Divine Right, which amounts to the same thing. We have a right, and a birth right at that, to be governed properly under our birth right law and no other and certainly not by laws introduced on the pretence of being British Law, when in fact all laws passed since 1973 have been European laws in the guise of British law.
We have a right to freedom within our true law and no Parliament can remove this for they were not present in its implementation nor did it need any Parliament, or any Parliament involvement, this was quite simply a deal struck between the people and a Sovereign, a deal which can never be broken.
The traitors that reside in the Parliament of this country only fear one thing and that quite simply is us the people and they know that they can never defend themselves, or defend their treasonous actions, lies and deceit against the power of the people, asserted by and given by, the founding document of our Constitution Magna Carta 1215.
They realize, as many others do, that once the British public grasps the power of Magna Carta in both hands and start to use it in their defence; their game is quite simply up. What does Magna Carta stand for? In stands for freedom, that the people have Sovereignty that cannot be removed by anyone and it stands for the only real true rule of law; that no one, without exception, is above the law.

The Bill of Rights was an Act of re-enforcement and re-statement of the Common Law of this land. The Bill of Rights was enacted by Parliament in recognition of the conditions contained within the Declaration of Rights its preamble document.
Parliament itself has provided evidence of its own responsibility to uphold Common Law.
FACT! So for an example of their blatant disregard for the Common Law of this land; the clause that says… That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegal and void…
Quite clearly states that all fines given without first being tried in a court of law are void and subsequently so are all forfeitures. So why are many people paying fixed penalty fines and allowing forfeitures of their property before conviction? The simple answer is you do not know your own laws and the MP’s passing these Statutes/Acts to make you submit to this are illegally using these Statutes and Acts to fool you.
This relates to any fixed penalty fine given to you and any attempt to remove your property before you have been convicted in a court of law, by a jury of your peers (equals in status). This pertains to another clause found in Magna Carta 1215, article… [39] No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights and possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. So any court of law that denies your right to a jury, is acting outside of its lawful duty to uphold the Common Law of this land and this should be maintained by all those swearing the Judicial Oath of Allegiance. Please note a jury is the most powerful element in any court of law for they have the power to null a case and even to go against the law if they feel the law is unjust, hence why juries are being denied in the courts; even more evidence of the power of the people!!
Let’s take for another example the MP’s Oath of Allegiance and their blatant disregard for the Oaths they swore and Parliaments conduct over the past 100 years. All Statutory and Parliamentary Acts of law must adhere to one simple rule…all Statutes/Acts of Parliament must only be for the strengthening and preserving of the Common Law of this land…
Any Statute/Act of Parliament to the contrary is not valid as proven by…. That all and singular the Rights and Liberties asserted and claimed in the said Declaration are the true ancient and indubitable Rights and Liberties of the People of this Kingdome and so shall be esteemed allowed adjudged deemed and taken to be and that all and every the particulars aforesaid shall be firmly and strictly Holden and observed as they are expressed in the said Declaration And all Officers and Ministers whatsoever shall serve their Majesties and their Successors according to the same in all times to come.
So all Ministers who have swore allegiance to Her Majesty are required by Common Law and by the evidence of their sworn oath, to maintain the format of Government in accordance with the terms of the Coronation Oath, an Oath taken by the Queen to regulate the Government in accordance to the laws and customs of the people entrenched in the Common Law of this land. Any minister who breaks this oath has removed his legitimacy to his position within Parliament by his own actions and the evidence of his none legitimacy is in the above.
As Major and Straw have both said on past occasions…Parliament is without the authority to require the Queen to break the terms of her coronation oath….this, quite simply, say’s it all.

Treason? The trial of the Magna Carta barons: Westminster Hall, 31 July ...