Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why isn't ATS exploding with this info? One People's Trust and the return of Common Law

page: 4
180
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by fourthmeal
I appreciate that and will work on providing you what you ask.

Since I don't speak this language I am at a disadvantage. What papers would be necessary to qualify? What would be the name of the document in latin or whatever it would end up being?

Am I looking for a ruling, a precedent, what?


I will take any level court ruling in those jurisdictions. In a common law (not "common law") system, even lower level court rulings can set precedent (they typically aren't cited as such though - but for the free $1k, I don't care what level of court it comes from). All I need is a case number (all real court cases have them) and the names of the parties. I can look it up based on that. All the court case must do is include an opinion by a judge, which has not been overturned, which states someone cited the fake "common law" mythology as part of their case (any part of the common law mythology will do - straw man, UCC-1, human being vs. person, etc.) and they therefore win because of that fake common law concept.

So, to put simply: (1) Any court in the US, Canada, or UK, (2) any subject matter, (3) someone in the case cited a component of the common law mythology as part of their defense and, (4) in the judges ruling, they say they won because of that. I require (4) because sometimes judges are nice and people cite a whole bunch of sovereign mythology but also happen to throw in a valid legal defense...and then win based on the valid legal defense.

Out for now. Have fun!
edit on 4-1-2013 by thelongjourney because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by thelongjourney
reply to post by masta12d
 


Sorry, I should have delineated that second comment. I know you were providing further evidence all this is a scam...my second portion there was directed any of the "believers". Your lawyer friend is quite right about the UCC-1, of course.


I never said it was a scam. In fact I think everything Heather, my friend and anyone else who has been attmpeting to do this is legally justified. In fact my lawyer friend also agrees it has merit. What I am saying is I recognize that my full name is Trademarked as a comapny that was created by my government when they listed me as an asset upon my birth. I also agree that we should be able to take legal action whenever we need protection from crooked bankers. But the issue here isn't does the case have legal merit. How do you use the legal system against a financial system that is rigged with the help of judges, lawyers, politicians who are all getting rich from robbing you blindly. It's kinda like going to a King and demanding restitution from the King because he took your prized heffer to sacrafice to his money gods. The King would simply sacrafice you next. as I stated in the beginning see:

Vinvent Foster, Dr. David Kelly, etc, etc. People die when powerful people are threatend. Why would our government allow itself to collapse because a concerned citizen wanted to keep their house?
edit on 4-1-2013 by masta12d because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by thelongjourney
 





There was no public trust used to institute "private law" - there is no such thing. If there was then you can do me the favor of showing me 1 court case where someone using these legal myths won because of them. Just one case is all it takes.


How do you win a court case in a court that practices admiralty (private law) using common law? The answer is, you do not. What you do... Do, is remove yourself from that system and declare they simply do not have jurisdiction. That does work.

By no means is it easy and they will fight you every step of the way and there is alot of bad information out there and is hazardous to the unprepared or ill informed but to claim that it is a myth that was created in the 70s is just utter nonsense.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Helious
reply to post by thelongjourney
 





There was no public trust used to institute "private law" - there is no such thing. If there was then you can do me the favor of showing me 1 court case where someone using these legal myths won because of them. Just one case is all it takes.


How do you win a court case in a court that practices admiralty (private law) using common law? The answer is, you do not. What you do... Do, is remove yourself from that system and declare they simply do not have jurisdiction. That does work.

By no means is it easy and they will fight you every step of the way and there is alot of bad information out there and is hazardous to the unprepared or ill informed but to claim that it is a myth that was created in the 70s is just utter nonsense.


Well said! That is basically what I was trying to get at. So thank you!



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   
I also want to state, that the $1000 challenge is awesome but the purpose of the thread is to bring the Peoples Trust stuff to light, and let people listen to the interview and all that for themselves to decide.

I'm sure I'm in a catch22 where "common law" (ie not case law which IS common law) was cited, as of course we are talking of Admiralty Law courts. But I do hope to find the case info on Heather's own foreclosure case.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Helious
How do you win a court case in a court that practices admiralty (private law) using common law? The answer is, you do not. What you do... Do, is remove yourself from that system and declare they simply do not have jurisdiction. That does work.

By no means is it easy and they will fight you every step of the way and there is alot of bad information out there and is hazardous to the unprepared or ill informed but to claim that it is a myth that was created in the 70s is just utter nonsense.


Easy - happens all the time. If someone brings a case against you in a court that does not have jurisdiction, all you have to do is challenge the jurisdiction and cite why the court does not have jurisdiction. Case dismissed, the party bringing the complaint has to go file in the proper court.

The problem is that these courts ARE NOT "admiralty" courts - thats another myth. Admiralty courts do exist, and sometimes the same courts that run normal civil/criminal procedure also can hear admiralty cases, but not in the sense this legal mythology proposes. In reality, admiralty really only deals with cases of maritime law. It does not apply to any other type of case. So for example when you get a ticket for speeding and go to traffic court screaming about admiralty jurisdiction, its the equivalent of speaking in tongues - it makes absolutely no sense. The entire idea that courts are secretly admiralty jurisdiction isn't real.


So there is no catch 22 here - show me 1 case where someone challenges the jurisdiction based on admiralty and got the case dropped OR EVEN CHANGED TO A DIFFERENT VENUE. You won't, because your talking the equivalent of legal gibberish when you step into a court and start preaching about admiralty. Anyone can prove me wrong and show that courts are really in secret operating in admiralty by showing me one case that was dismissed based on admiralty having no jurisdiction when the issue had nothing to do with maritime law. Yes, even when dismissed, cases still have records that can prove why it was dismissed.

Sorry, just had to clarify before signing off for the evening.
edit on 4-1-2013 by thelongjourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Bankers are pirating everyone's credit to their benefit . Governments are all complicit is this " game " .

Commercial Law is not about Justice but about profit .

Take ownership of your name via trademark & copyright .
Give notice to appropriate authorities of your claim of Sovereignty .
Conduct your commercial affairs with full liability .

yep , I think that covers it .



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by thelongjourney
 





Easy - happens all the time. If someone brings a case against you in a court that does not have jurisdiction, all you have to do is challenge the jurisdiction and cite why the court does not have jurisdiction. Case dismissed, the party bringing the complaint has to go file in the proper court. The problem is that these courts ARE NOT "admiralty" courts - thats another myth. Admiralty courts do exist, of course, but not in the sense this legal mythology proposes. So there is no catch 22 here - show me 1 case where someone challenges the jurisdiction based on admiralty and got the case dropped OR EVEN CHANGED TO A DIFFERENT VENUE. You won't, because your talking the equivalent of legal gibberish when you step into a court and start preaching about admiralty.


The problem is this....... If you are already in court for something and start the process to remove yourself from the system, you are already in muddy waters but done correctly you can file the papers for dismissal. These cases are few and far between because the information is purposefully hidden by the government and is not easy for a laymen to understand how to excuse himself from the system because the system was not created for people to do so.

People have done and will continue to do this though and what usually happens is the state will continue the case until they violate your right too a speedy trial and the case will be dismissed. This is done for a very specific reason and that is so judges do not have deal with the common law principles that the person is applying. I think it is also in part because not every judge or lawyer fully even understands your true rights as an American citizen, I mean hell.... Mitt Romney doesn't even know whats in the Constitution right?

Remove yourself before you are pulled over for speeding or commit another corporate victim less crime and assert your rights starting with the arresting officer and guess what? 9 of 10 times it won't even make it to "court". This is done to sweep this sort of freedom of rights under the rug, if there were precedent for this left and right, everyone would be doing it and that is exactly what the system doesn't want.
edit on 4-1-2013 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:07 PM
link   
I don't know if this is relevent to the topic but search for a man in Ireland by the name of Ben Gilroy, he uses common law to halt evictions and foreclosures of peoples homes and buisnesses, apologies for no links I am on my mobile.


Just have a look at what he can do,common law can work.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
the answer is.. complacency. people are more like cows rather than sheep.. we're all standing around, chewing our grass blocking out anything farther than a three foot circumference of where we are. everyone is scared to death to disturb the comfy little niche we think we've carved out for ourselves and no one wants to do anything that'll lead to the slightest chance of making our family suffer so we keep standing there, keep chewing our grass.

individually a human is a beautiful, wondrous, marvelous creature but the second you get any more than 3 or 4 of us together we become a very dangerous, stupid, horrifying thing and we're conditioned to cower away from any important, immediate issue we come across we can no longer see the "big picture" anymore we can not deal with anything whatsoever so we let our governments take control in every aspect of our lives so whatever happens in any topic in our lives it's our own fault for what transpires.

we need to stop crying and Do Something!!

kind of a broken record at this point tho so our only real option at this point is to just bend over and just hope lubrication is utilized.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by n3mesis
the answer is.. complacency. people are more like cows rather than sheep.. we're all standing around, chewing our grass blocking out anything farther than a three foot circumference of where we are. everyone is scared to death to disturb the comfy little niche we think we've carved out for ourselves and no one wants to do anything that'll lead to the slightest chance of making our family suffer so we keep standing there, keep chewing our grass.

individually a human is a beautiful, wondrous, marvelous creature but the second you get any more than 3 or 4 of us together we become a very dangerous, stupid, horrifying thing and we're conditioned to cower away from any important, immediate issue we come across we can no longer see the "big picture" anymore we can not deal with anything whatsoever so we let our governments take control in every aspect of our lives so whatever happens in any topic in our lives it's our own fault for what transpires.

we need to stop crying and Do Something!!

kind of a broken record at this point tho so our only real option at this point is to just bend over and just hope lubrication is utilized.


lol

well said..

we need a miracle



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Much to digest here.
Just commenting to make it easy for me to follow.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   
i'd explain it all to you but this thread has gotten hijacked with talk of 'common law'.

people's trust is using the existing 'commerce laws' for this case.

they have discovered the huge flaw commited by those that thought they were in power and are turning their law against them.

i'll try to post in the morning with my explanation.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
i'd explain it all to you but this thread has gotten hijacked with talk of 'common law'.

people's trust is using the existing 'commerce laws' for this case.

they have discovered the huge flaw commited by those that thought they were in power and are turning their law against them.

i'll try to post in the morning with my explanation.



cool, thanks..

i would like to know more



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I give up....
not possible to post link to announcement interesting?
sorry I tried
edit on 4-1-2013 by donlashway because: (no reason given)
edit on 4-1-2013 by donlashway because: tried to post link to official announcement



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   
What happens to consumer pricing when everyone has $5b to play with? Everything will go up-Up-UP!
That "Happy Meal" for your child may soon cost $900 a pop.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   
I've actually watched a person use common law in court and have the case thrown out.... blew everyones mind. No one knew how to process what they had witnessed.

This is not common law I believe. This is turning the current systen against itself. The art of war used in a political/economic style.

Time to dig in and learn learn learn



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thelongjourney
Out for now. Have fun!


How can we?? you sucked all the fun out of this thread, literally!






To the OP I appreciate the news, however hard to believe. I am aware of the Nesara business, common law and sovereignty for the most part. Also there's the whole Fulford and Wilcox business and the 1T lawsuit that is apparently real, but where is it now and what has it accomplished? As skeptical as I sound, I do understand this debt based monetary system is a scam, if not a very deliberate slavery system, worthy of a VERY brutal and bloody uprising if the world population knew the truth.

So... I have to seriously ponder: if I was a huge banking cartel/family/mafia guilty of decades if not centuries or more of worldwide monetary fraud, would I not want a very sweet deal contingency plan if the well-armed population got wise? We have tons of evidence that points to huge global banking conspiracy to pilfer the absolute most profits they could (ok so they just stole from us what they could and we let them), they have unlimited resources apparently to buy us off if we get pissed enough to be the thorn in their side.

But there is also the angle that this is similar to NESARA and just a new age channeled smokescreen while the banks empty the world's coffers. The whole UN new age gnostic channeled info thing has me very confused and wary, why wouldn't it?

If this is true, unlike other posters, I would readily accept it in a minute. If we could shut down the banking system and create a worth based value system it would make leaps and bounds in our evolutionary process I am certain of, but we would have to change the complete structure and concept of how we see government, and there's where I have fewer answers and more questions.

Good discussions here (minus the common law hijack, I want the facts on this actual case please)
edit on 4-1-2013 by Aliquandro because: had tp point out the obvious, again



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by CatrionaBeldame
This is all very interesting. It's going to take me some time to read through all of it, and understand it all. One thing that stands out for me at the moment is the 5 billion, and possibly more that's owed to each of us. How do we get that? Will we get that? I could really use that for many, many things. It'd make it possible for me to have a few acres of land with a small house, and a garden. Just one of the things I dream about having some day.


I hope you realize that IF we all get 5 billion (i really doubt this will happen) , inflation will be sky high!

Your buying power will stay exactly the same. Its status quo for everyone.

No one will be better off but maybe big banks will be bankrupt so that may make the world a little better for a short moment. But as i said earlier, i really doubt any of this will ever happen.

That was my 2 cents. Peace out.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 10:56 PM
link   
While this all sounds great, I am a bit skeptical. Reading through a couple of the links provided in the opening post, I cannot find anything of any real substance. There are many, many claims, but these claims are quite flimsy since they are severely lacking in documentation. Maybe I am overlooking the correct documentation, in which case I would greatly appreciate it if anyone could point me in the right direction. The thing is this: Various people make huge claims, and this is huge, all the time. Yet the vast majority of these people are somewhat delusional, if not outright liars (like certain conspiracy bloggers and "big" names), therefore requiring something to back up those claims is definitely not too much to ask.

Sometimes people get offended when you ask them for corroborating information or documentation, or what basically amounts to proof. Yet when claims are authentic and can be verified, people who are presenting things as they are will show their sources of information and the required proof. Certain claims cannot be proven because documentation does not exist. But for something like this, a whole lot of documented proof should be available somewhere. And I read on the blog linked at the bottom of the opening thread, and it stated that proof would be forthcoming, more or less. What is the point of making claims when the stuff that people really would like to know cannot be released at that time? Why not just hold off until all can be released, and people do not have sit around guessing? That is another reason that makes me leery of huge claims.





new topics




 
180
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join