The Falsification of History: Our Distorted Reality (118 page)

Common Law was first laid down in the original Magna Carta which King John was forced to sign by the Barons in 1215 at Runnymede, near London, England.
 
Simply speaking, if we do not breach the peace, nor cause harm or loss to another nor employ mischief in our agreements, the tenets of Common Law will not be breached.
 
The use of Common Law is the use of common sense in that each situation can be judged on its merits without 'statutory' laws or statutes that are all essentially ‘modern’ laws that tell the judge what he or she must do in given circumstances.
 
One modern definition is this:

“Common law is the system of deciding cases that originated in England and which were latterly adopted in the USA.
 
Common law is based on precedent (legal principles developed in earlier case law) instead of statutory laws.
 
It is the traditional law of an area or region created by judges when deciding individual disputes or cases.
 
Common law changes over time.”

However, this change is so slow a process that Common Law was of little use to the Elite families.
 
Because they wished to create a ‘closed’ society they needed laws that can be introduced quickly and be changed at will to suit their agenda, whenever it was expedient.
 
One thing that they certainly did not want was for people to be able to create their own laws.

So, in a nutshell, the Elite usurped Common Law which is the law of the land, as the prime arbiter of human affairs, with Statute Law which is in effect the law of the sea.
 
This is also referred to as Maritime Law or Admiralty Law, Commercial Law and Civil Law, among other terms.
 
Thus, the Elite bloodlines took the laws of shipping and trade by sea and brought them to dry land and named them ‘Statute Law’, which by its nature is commercial law or the law of contracts.

These then are the 'laws' introduced by governments and parliaments and they can often do this overnight, literally, if it suits their agenda – and it often does and of course this is absolutely perfect for the imposition of onerous, draconian laws that create a virtual slave state.
 
When the Queen signs an Act of Parliament or the US president signs a bill into law they are simply signing a ‘contract’ to make a ‘contractual’ agreement and this is not actually ‘lawful’ under Common Law.

During the last Labour government in Britain (1997-2010) they created 3,800 new criminal offences almost one new crime for every day they were in office.
 
This is possible using Statute Law, the law of the sea, but not with Common Law, the law of the land.
 
The other important aspect to Common Law is that it refers to a living, breathing human being whilst Statute Law is the law of contracts and so the instigators of Statutory Law had to invent fake 'personas' ie corporations, to which the contrived new 'laws' could apply.

This is the 'straw-man' principle, a ‘legal’ (but not lawful) fiction, which is in effect activated by writing names in all-capitals.
 
So peter smith and its other variations, such as peter: smith and peter: of the smith family are, under Common Law, the living, breathing, human being with a soul and PETER SMITH is the legalised fictional corporation, created to fall under the jurisdiction of Statute Law.

Whenever governments, law enforcement, corporations, legal and financial agencies etc, communicate with us they almost always write our names in all capital letters and this is because they are not writing to us, the living, breathing being, but to the fake 'straw-man' that is created when your birth is ‘registered’. 
 
What they would like us to believe is that peter smith and PETER SMITH is exactly the same, whereas in truth it most certainly is not.
 
We all need to understand that countries, governments, local councils, courts and the police force etc. are actually private companies and corporations and this can easily and simply be confirmed by checking this information with Dun and Bradstreet, which provides credit information on businesses and corporations worldwide.

Actually, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INCORPORATED and THE UNITED KINGDOM CORPORATION plc are at this moment in
 
a state of what is referred to as ‘Chapter 11 bankruptcy’ which...
 
“... allows businesses to reorganise themselves, giving them an opportunity to restructure debt and get out from under certain burdensome leases and contracts.
 
Typically a business is allowed to continue to operate while it is in Chapter 11, although it does so under the supervision of the Bankruptcy Court and its appointees.”

So who controls the 'Bankruptcy Court and its appointees' that are currently 'supervising' the 'government' corporations of the United States and United Kingdom?  None other than our old friends, the House of Rothschild banksters and their international banking conglomerate.
 
So in truth, governments are corporations and the Presidents, Prime Ministers, Royalty and cabinets are the CEOs and the boards of directors.
 
Only insiders of course, will know this, but most of them will be unaware of how the very system they are briefly administering, really works.
 
The shareholders in these corporations are the general population and citizens of the country, but of course we are never told this plain fact.

Each and every time a new-born baby is registered, a single share in the corporation is issued in its name in all-capital letters of course, but because this fact is systematically kept from us we never ask for either the share or the money it is worth.
 
Instead, the share is held in trust by the government as are all dividends due and the corporate voting rights that go along with it.
 
The trustee, the government corporation, uses these 'votes' to decide the future of the corporation and whether for example, it will agree to a ‘corporate merger’ in the creation of the European Union or North American Union.

So by keeping their true lawful status from the people, they turn the shareholders into employees of the corporation, or actually slaves to be more accurate and one of the principle ways this is achieved is by the utilisation of words that have one meaning to the population and another in law.
 
As alluded to already, the term 'legal' is not the same as lawful.
 
This is why banking is sometimes derided by being referred to as ‘legalised robbery’.
 
It is certainly 'legal' under Statute Law, but it is also in effect robbery which is under Common Law, an unlawful offence.
 
So, Common Law is that which is lawful and Statue Law is that defined as 'legal'.

We may believe that a 'person' is a living human being, but under the 'legal' definition of Statute Law a 'person' is a corporation and, to meet the criteria of Maritime Law, the 'person' represents a ship in effect and so that is why when a 'person' attends court, which in reality is a maritime court, the 'person' stands in the dock.
 
We see this symbolic language also in other areas of the law, for example, all the maritime language in everyday use, especially with reference to governments and legal terms such as ownership and citizenship.
 
We also indulge in courtship before agreeing a corporate merger, more commonly referred to as marriage in which we contract with the other government subsidiary corporation (the spouse) by means of a marriage certificate.   And of course when that merger subsequently results in the patter of tiny subsidiaries, the new corporation’s registration is confirmed by the issuance of a birth / berth certificate.

The ‘Stars and Stripes’ flags displayed in every federal building, court, school etc, in the USA are all framed with a gold/yellow fringe for this reason.
 
And whenever the President makes an address or speaks officially there is always the flag behind him, complete with its gold/yellow fringe, signifying that all those institutions/corporations operate under maritime law and not the ‘law of the land’.

Under the International Law of the Flags, the type of flag displayed by a ship decrees the law that applies aboard that vessel and by boarding the ship you are automatically accepting the jurisdiction of the law that applies to that flag.
 
Exactly the same is true with regards to foreign embassies.
 
The flag they display/fly ensures that the law of the country it represents applies within the confines of the embassy.

A flag with a gold fringe always indicates Admiralty Law and so if we are summoned to appear in a court displaying this version of the flag, we are in effect agreeing to be tried under Statute Law, the law of the sea that applies to a legalised fiction and not to the person.

“When you enter a courtroom displaying a gold or yellow fringed flag, you have just entered into a foreign country, and you better have your passport with you, because you may not be coming back to the land of the free for a long time. The judge sitting under a gold or yellow fringe flag becomes the ‘captain’ or ‘master’ of that ship or enclave and he has absolute power to make the rules as he goes. The gold or yellow fringe flag is your warning that you are leaving your constitutionally secured rights on the floor outside the door to that courtroom.”
 
usa-therepublic.com

Even the US troops fighting abroad in such places as Afghanistan, have the gold-fringed flag clearly displayed on their uniforms, indicating in fact, that they are the army of the corporation of the United States and not of the people or the country for which they believe they are fighting.
 
Many lawyers, solicitors and court officials genuinely have no idea of what Statute Law really consists, but this certainly cannot be said of those in the upper echelons of the global legal profession including the judges and senior government administrators, whom I suppose must be appraised of the real facts as they reach a certain stage on the career ladder.

However the tangled mess is slowly beginning to be unravelled by those brave pioneers and champions of Common Law who are now challenging magistrates and judges in their own domains throughout the country and demanding evidence of the proof of the lawfulness of courts and their deceptive practices.
 
It is absolutely possible, as these fearless men and women have shown, to permanently disconnect from statute slavery if you have a basic awareness of Common Law and have the fortitude to stand-up for your rights as a citizen.

In addition, the wording of all communications with the State and ‘authority’ should be carefully constructed, not least of which is the way in which our names are denoted on documents.
 
We should never forget that we are peter: smith and not PETER SMITH.
 
Indeed should we respond to communications referring to us as PETER SMITH, then we have lost the war before the first battle has begun as Statute Law will then prevail.
 
But use peter: smith and we will no longer be subject to Statute Law, only Common Law.

There will of course be no anarchy when Statute Law is eventually overturned and Common Law is returned to its rightful place in human affairs.  If the peace is breached or should we cause harm or loss to another or employ mischief in our agreements, then we are still subject to the penalties of Common Law, no matter what.

What is social-engineering?
 
Social-engineering may be defined as the art or science of psychologically manipulating people into acting or thinking in way that may not be their natural, normal mode of behaviour, usually without their express permission or knowledge.

It may take the form of one of the two extremes of a one-off, simple confidence trick such as making someone believe something untrue in order to deceive them.
 
Or it can be used against an entire population by the ruling Elite in order to modify their beliefs about society and the world around them into thinking that they are entirely different constructs to that which they assume to be the truth.

It is this latter circumstance upon which we will concentrate for the purposes of this section.

Before governments can engage in social-engineering, they must have reliable information about the society that is to be engineered and also must have effective tools with which to carry out the engineering.
 
Both of these elements only became available relatively recently, roughly within the past century.
 
The development of social science made it possible to gather and analyse information about social attitudes and trends, which is necessary in order to judge the initial state of society before an engineering strategy is undertaken and the success or failure of that attempt after it has been implemented.
 
At the same time, the development of modern mass-communications technology and the media also provided the tools through which social-engineering may be performed.