By Debra Siddons
For those of you who have been following the John Anthony Hill (JAH) Case, it is great to be able to share that he was acquitted, on the 12th of May 2011, of the ridiculous and politically-motivated charge of attempting to "pervert the course of justice". For those of you less familiar with this landmark case, John Anthony Hill is the Producer of the documentary film "7/7 Ripple Effect". For more details about this extraordinary case and the trial itself, please visit the following links:-
There are two very important precedents that were established with this case that need to be studied in detail. There was a preliminary argument presented to the court to challenge both the jurisdiction and the sovereignty of Elizabeth Battenberg/ Mountbatten which was based on two distinct points.
The first point being she was knowingly, and with malice aforethought, coronated on a fake stone in 1953 and thus has never been lawfully crowned. There are those who may wish to argue that this point is irrelevant, as Judge monarch's signature.
Jeffrey Vincent Pegden did at the trial, wrongly thinking the Coronation is just a ceremony because she has been pretending to be the monarch for over 58 years. In actual fact the Coronation is a binding oath and a contract, requiring the
Which brings us to the second point.
At that Coronation
ceremony, Elizabeth signed a binding contract, before God and the British
that she would do her utmost to maintain The Laws of God. This she solemnly swore to do, with her hand placed
on the Sovereign's Bible, before kissing The Bible and signing the contract. Please note well that in The Law of
God, found in the first five
books of The Bible, man-made legislation is strictly prohibited.
The very first time that she gave "royal assent" to any piece of man-made legislation, she broke her solemn oath with God and with the British people and she ceased to be the monarch with immediate effect. To date, she has broken her oath thousands and thousands of times, which is a water-proof, iron-clad, undeniable FACT. She is therefore without question not the monarch, but instead is a criminal guilty of high treason among her other numerous crimes.
[Nazarene Remnant comment: Here are a couple of extra points from the Law of God. First, even when the Israelite nation had rejected Yahweh from ruling over them, as recorded in 1 Samuel 8, and demanded a human king to be their ruler, that king and his successors down through the ages had to write for himself a copy of God’s Law, and read it every day of his life to make sure he never transgressed in any way:
The effect throughout the world of the British Sovereign willfully and arrogantly disobeying God’s Law at every opportunity has seen the destruction of the family (through false divorce laws enacted by her cronies--such as Lionel Murphy in Australia--in the various countries); the replacement of God’s Law about usury, theft, and a host of other commerce matters by British Maritime Law, and a whole host of other laws too numerous to mention here.
Secondly, Deuteronomy 17: 15 makes it clear that the king shall rule only over his own "brethren," and not over strange kingdoms. This is another way of saying that the king shall not add other kingdoms to his natural family kingdom, as the British monarchs have done all down through the period of the British Empire. Even today, for example, Queen Elizabeth II (who is actually Queen Semiramis II of Babylon) is supposedly the Queen of Australia according to the Australian Constitution. Here is God's Law on this matter:
Thirdly, here are several other transgressions the British Sovereign delights in defying God and His Law:
Finally, there is the law about feeding the poor and the stranger in the land. This was the Law of the Gleanings. It is important that all farmers clearly understand that they have a Divine command to obey, concerning the poor and the stranger in the land. Seeing that all bounty and blessings come from God, principally through the farming of both the land and the sea, it is important that eventhe stranger in the land, and the poor, participate in these great blessings. In fact it is a truism to say that if the various Kings and Queens of England had obeyed these Divine Laws, as they were commanded to, then there wouyld not have been the mass transporation of so-called criminals to places like North America and Australia, for "offences" such as stealing a loaf of bread! If God's Law on the subject of feeding the poor and the stranger (e.g. Leviticus 19: 9-10; and Leviticus 23: 22 below) had been kept, there would never have been the massive scale of petty theft in England, Scotland, and Ireland, that led to the convict settlement of places like Australia.
As you read the following scriptures, keep in mind the following points:
Leviticus 19: 9-10:
“And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither shalt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest. And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather [every] grape of thy vineyard; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger: I [am] the LORD your God.” (Leviticus 19: 9-10)
Adam Clarke’s commentary on Leviticus 19: 9:“When ye reap the harvest—Liberty for the poor to glean both the corn-fields and vineyards was a Divine institution among the Jews; for the whole of the Mosaic dispensation, like the Christian, breathed love to God and benevolence to man. The poor in Judea were to live by gleanings from the corn-fields and vine yards. To the honor of the public and charitable spirit of the English, this merciful law is in general as much attended to as if it had been incorporated with the Gospel.”
Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary on Leviticus 19: 9 “… they should leave the gleanings of their harvest and vintage for the poor, Lev_19:9, Lev_19:10. Note, Works of piety must be always attended with works of charity, according as our ability is. When they gathered in their corn, they must leave some standing in the corner of the field; the Jewish doctors say, “It should be a sixtieth part of the field;” and they must also leave the gleanings and the small clusters of their grapes, which at first were overlooked. This law … teaches us, 1. That we must not be covetous and griping, and greedy of every thing we can lay any claim to; nor insist upon our right in things small and trivial. 2. That we must be well pleased to see the poor supplied and refreshed with the fruit of our labours. We must not think every thing lost that goes beside ourselves, nor any thing wasted that goes to the poor. 3. That times of joy, such as harvest-time is, are proper times for charity; that, when we rejoice, the poor may rejoice with us, and when our hearts are blessing God their loins may bless us.”
Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament: “In reaping the field, 'thou shalt not finish to reap the edge of thy field,' i.e., not reap the field to the extreme edge; 'neither shalt thou hold a gathering up (gleaning) of thy harvest,' i.e., not gather together the ears left upon the field in the reaping. In the vineyard and olive-plantation, also, they were not to have any gleaning, or gather up what was strewn about (peret signifies the grapes and olives that had fallen off), but to leave them for the distressed and the foreigner, that he might also share in the harvest and gathering. ... lit., a noble plantation, generally signifies a vineyard; but it is also applied to an olive-plantation (Judges 15: 5), and her it is to be understood of both. For when this command is repeated in Deuteronomy 24: 20-21, both vineyards and olive-plantations are mentioned. When the olives had been gathered by being knocked off with sticks, the custom of shaking the boughs … to get at those olives which could not be reached with the sticks was expressly forbidden, in the interest of the strangers, orphans, and widows, as well as gleaning after the vintage. The command with regard to the corn-harvest is repeated again in the law for the feast of Weeks or Harvest Feast (Leviticus 23: 20); and in Deuteronomy 24: 19 it is extended, quite in the spirit of our law, so far as to forbid fetching a sheaf that had been overlooked in the field, and to order it to be left for the needy. (Compare with this Deuteronomy 23: 24-25.)”
Leviticus 23: 22:
“And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I [am] the LORD your God.” (Leviticus 23: 22)
Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary on Leviticus 23: 22: “Those who are truly sensible of the mercy they received from God, will show mercy to the poor without grudging.”
Wesley’s comment on Leviticus 23: 22: “When ye reap, thou - From the plural, ye, he comes to the singular, thou, because he would press this duty upon every person who hath an harvest to reap, that none might plead exemption from it. And it is observable, that though the present business is only concerning the worship of God, yet he makes a kind of excursion to repeat a former law of providing for the poor, to shew that our devotion to God is little esteemed by him if it be not accompanied with acts of charity to men.”
“Yet gleaning grapes shall be left in it, as the shaking of an olive tree, two [or] three berries in the top of the uppermost bough, four [or] five in the outmost fruitful branches thereof, saith the LORD God of Israel.” (Isaiah 17: 6)
“When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people, [there shall be] as the shaking of an olive tree, [and] as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is done.” (Isaiah 24: 13)
“If grape gatherers come to thee, would they not leave [some] gleaning grapes? if thieves by night, they will destroy till they have enough.” (Jeremiah 49: 9)
End of Nazarene Remnant comment]
All of the courts in the
U.K. are referred to as HM courts or "her majesty's" courts, which means every judge draws their authority from
her. All cases brought by the state are "Regina vs. Xxxxxxx", which means they are all
brought in the name of the queen. So if she isn't really the monarch, then she doesn't have the authority or the
jurisdiction to bring a case against anyone else. And neither do any of "her majesty's" courts or
Bearing in mind the legal maxim that no man can judge in his own cause, it should be crystal clear that no judge in the Commonwealth could lawfully rule on a challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of the monarch. It is a question of their own authority, so they are obviously not impartial to the outcome. That is why the ONLY way the question of jurisdiction can lawfully and impartially be decided is by a jury. And that is exactly why John Anthony Hill requested a jury trial to decide his challenge to the jurisdiction and sovereignty of Elizabeth.
No judge under any circumstances can deny someone their right to request a jury trial. No judge can lawfully rule in their own cause. That doesn't mean they won't try, it only means that when they do, they are committing a criminal act (just as Judge Jeffrey Vincent Pegden did at John Anthony Hill's trial) and that their decision is immediate grounds for an appeal and for a citizen's arrest. The fact that the court and its corrupt judge tried to ignore this particular point is proof that they are well aware they have no lawful authority.
That is one of the reasons why this is a landmark case. If everyone began using this defence tomorrow, in all of the Commonwealth courts and in the United States, the entire legal system could be brought to its knees in a matter of weeks if not days.
The signed by E2 coronation oath (Exhibit 1) and the Bible she swore on at that Coronation (Exhibit 2) clearly orders judges and lawyers to obey the Laws of God. These two factual pieces of evidence ought to be presented at the start, as defence in every single victimless case, or those in progress, where you have been wrongfully charged, and to proceed forth Lawfully.
To make this perfectly clear, the way is available with the two pieces of evidence to shift the cases to begin to use only God's Laws which demands a trial by jury, to proceed forth maintaining only God's Laws with judges roles clearly defined.
Whilst E2 is committing treason, explained in full detail in the Lawful Argument, the signed oath orders obedience to all subjects to maintain only the Laws of God.
Judges/lawyers have taken an oath (B.A.R.), thus ordered to comply to Exhibit 1, and Exhibit 2 (Bible), and it is as simple as that. People lacked awareness of that which was in place, and there for people to use, but didn't know. We know now.
For those of you in the United States who may be thinking "hey, we aren't a Commonwealth country, why would this affect us?" all you really need to know is that these three little letters:- B.A.R., stand for the British Accreditation Registry. It doesn't matter whether it is the Australian BAR or the Canadian BAR or the American BAR association; they ALL report to the British monarch, who is the head of the BAR.
So thanks to John
Anthony Hill and this amazing precedent, we now all know a peaceful way to bring the system down. If enough
people ACT and use this simple, bullet-proof defence, we can put an end to this insanity and injustice. All that
is required now is for YOU to spread the word to as many as possible so that this peaceful rebellion can begin
immediately. Or you can watch the last remnants of your freedoms swept away as the Global Elite plunge the
entire world into bankruptcy and WW3 to usher in their "New World Order".
For additional details about this bullet-proof defence, please visit: http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes
By now some of you may be beginning to see the Light at the end of this very dark tunnel and are so enthusiastic about putting this simple plan into motion that you may have forgotten there was a second precedent set during this landmark case.
While the official reason for this trial was to address this trumped-up and frivolous charge of attempting to "pervert the course of justice", the real reason for this trial was so the authorities could punish John Anthony Hill for making the "7/7 Ripple Effect" which, in less than an hour and using strictly mainstream media reports, completely dismantles the official government conspiracy theory. The film is so credible that even the prosecution at the trial, after showing it in its entirety to the jurors, admitted that the film was made in such a way that it "changes the minds of people who see it." That's how powerful the truth really is.
This was the first time this information was shown at an official proceeding and the results were impressive. At least 83% of the jurors felt the film accurately depicted what happened in London on July 7th, 2005 and that John Anthony Hill did the right thing. For those unfamiliar with the case, JAH forwarded copies of the "7/7 Ripple Effect" to the Kingston Crown court in 2008 in the hope of correcting misleading statements made by the judge and the QC at the outset of the first trial of the supposed "7/7 helpers" (who were also found not guilty).
John Anthony Hill was also able to enter into the official record his testimony about what happened on September 11th, 2001 in the United States and that both 9/11 and 7/7 were false flag attacks. He went on to show the jurors the now infamous BBC report of the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building (WTC7) by Jane Standley on 9/11/2001. She reported the collapse 25 minutes before it actually occurred, and with the building clearly visible and still standing in the window behind Jane Standley's left shoulder, leaving no doubt that the BBC had foreknowledge of the event.
As a result of the "7/7 Ripple Effect" being shown to the jurors by the prosecution and John Anthony Hill's testimony about 9/11, the truth that those two events were false flag attacks and that the mainstream media is nothing more than a government propaganda machine is now officially on record.
And the "Not Guilty" verdict by the jury is a ringing endorsement of that official record.
This case brings with it a New Hope and the opportunity for a new beginning, where liberty, justice, and peace aren't just nice sounding words, but a reality. This could be heaven on earth instead of the hell we have let it become by allowing all of this evil to grow up around us. Just as John Anthony Hill has shown us by example, all it takes is a dauntless faith that good will always triumph over evil and the courage to take action to do the right thing, regardless of the personal cost.
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
If you haven't seen "7/7 Ripple Effect" yet, please go to http://jforjustice.co.uk/77 and download it now. As James Fetzer points out, "It's a free tutorial on how these false flag operations are pulled off."
Queen Elizabeth Fronts for Rothschild's Crown
The Crown Temple by Rule of Mystery Babylon
Queen Elizabeth II's Achille's Heel
See the article “Gangsters in Tiaras,” in Reading 45: “Zeroing In On The Antichrist: ‘Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing,’” in our free book, The Warning of the Last Days, available here: http://NazareneRemnant.org/the-warning-of-the-last-days.html
See the articles “The British Monarch is Not the Crown,” “The Occult Roots of The Wizard of Oz,” and “The Wizard of Oz = the Crown Temple,” in Reading #42: “The Wizard of Oz,” in our free book, The Warning of the Last Days, available here: http://NazareneRemnant.org/the-warning-of-the-last-days.html
Elizabeth II and Ripple Effect (video)
Comments for "Landmark Case Could Stymie Legal System"
Rino said (May 21, 2011):
In reference to Landmark Case, isn't it interesting? I have noticed on most websites that when someone speaks the truth, there is always an attorney keeping a watching eye on what is being written to the point that when the truth comes out to awaken people about facts, these attorneys jump in (as they do in any court scenario) and they either attack what has been presented or attack the one who is presenting the information, as delusional or frivolous.
However we know as fact that every lawyer speaks in a 'foreign tongue' (code) usually with marbles in their mouth and will most certainly attempt to profit from people's misery,a legal mercenary for hire. Everything an attorney or lawyer in court scenario presents is always hearsay, they never have first hand personal knowledge of any fact and for the most part present 'joint the dots' evidence. I would never want to take on this profession of being a lawyer, why?
Because it is one of only two professions that Christ condemns. When an attorney speaks out as something being rubbish or delusional then it is time to pay attention to what he doesn't what you to pay attention to. The other critical point to make is that in order to 'apply the substantive Law' you need lawful money, i.e. silver or gold coin to pay any debt. While we use 'legal tender', currency, as money we deal in fictions only and trumped up charges, this, is the reality.
The Law cannot be applied when we use legal tender so now the attorneys deal in procedures only and make attempts to contract with any 'victim' by agreement of his or her default responses or conduct using construed/implied conduct that is taken under 'judicial notice' that a victim must have agreed with the prosecution because they either 'argued' or failed to respond to a 'charge' and therefore must be 'agreeing' to be guilty by their conduct.
Christ tells us how we can win these legal/fictional cases, 'agree with your adversary quickly while you are on the way with him', in other words, they key is to come to an agreement in the private and then bring that into the court for ratification and not for re-deterimation. Information that you present here Henry in relation to this case is very important so that people can protect themselves from these vultures in the legal system who operate as Satan do, they accuse the angels night and day with trumped up charges! Thank you for this very revealing piece of writing.
Rod said (May 21, 2011):
Boys, J.D., a tad touchy on the subject aren't we? Obviously you are on the attack here as your livelihood could/would or may be, jeopardized.
Your over-the-top discrediting, ridiculing, and bashing is all too common-place when truth is presented and the curtain gets drawn back just a little.
Maybe, just maybe, even you have been kept in the dark as you proceeded up the "legal" pyramid to get you to your lofty perch. Why don't you seek to remove the pole from your own eye before attacking someone who is looking for freedom for all. You may represent what we have been brainwashed to accept as "legal" but that doesn't make it "lawful".
To answer your question as to "where" the Bible says about law(s) it is in (KJV) Deuteronomy 4: 2 "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." So now you have heard it. God's "command" to His people Israel (12 tribes, of which 2 are Jews, and the other 10, that include the British commonwealth nations and the USA).
Your sidetracking about taxes confirms to me that your issue is about money. Isn't that just what your "legal" is all about. Certainly not justice for all. And that is what exposing this imposter queen is all about.
[Nazarene Remnant comment: It is an old error, even a ploy, to include the Jews as being part of the children of Israel. This is not so! The Jews were never a part of national Israel. They first appeared in history as the children of Cain, then Canaan, and finally became fused in the multi-racial Edom-Mongol, Amelekite, Canaanite stock that occupied various lands in the Middle East. The Jews have never been identified with Our Heavenly Father’s people, the Kingdom, nor the Messiah. The word Jew was never applied to any people in the Bible until we come to II Kings 16: 6 in the year 739 BC. For more details see the article "The Distinction Between Jew and Judah," here: http://NazareneRemnant.org/the-distinction-between-jew-and-judah.html ]
WW said (May 22, 2011):
This brings to head another hairy issue, in that with this accreditation comes a grant of royal title, that of Esquire. All members of the BAR are entitled to the use of Esquire after their name, whether they chose to disclose this or not.
This brings every said lawyer in conflict with the US Constitution as far as eligibility for public office in the United States.
Royal title is in conflict with eligibility for holding office in the federal government:
Article I, Section
The War of 1812 was actually fought ove the original 13th Amendment which put teeth into Secrion 9 above--a whole other story...
Mike said (May 21, 2011):
I feel that the article is badly in need of clarifying because Debra kind of butchered her explanation of the situation and has offered a poor reflection of a very important topic. Perhaps its even worth putting some of the following directly at the end of the article, instead of as a comment, so people actually understand the situation. The comment is:
"I've been following the trial of Muad'Dib/JAH for some time and know the situation clearly. Whilst I do agree that this is potentially a landmark case, which could be used to seriously disrupt the UK/Commonwealth courts (and thus much more), the jurisdictional argument used by JAH was NEVER designed to be used in America. He explained that many times, so Debra is stretching things.
To clarify the situation for everyone, as it shows/proves on JAH's website, Elizabeth made with the British people where she promised to "maintain the Laws of God" to the utmost of her power (http://jahtruth.net/signed-o.jpg ). If you watch the BBC footage of the coronation, it is made extremely clear during her coronation that the "Laws of God" are written in the Bible, not parliament …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwzOHVx8LV8 (watch the first 1minute 20seconds of the video--note well 1:10 into it).
Elizabeth is handed a Bible and told that in it is the Royal Laws of God, which is what she swore to uphold. This is done so that there is no doubt what the "Laws of God" are. At this point, it doesn't matter whatsoever if someone is christian, atheist, or satanist. No one's personal beliefs change the FACT that Elizabeth swore to uphold the Biblical Law. The evidence JAH collected shows video, audio, and paperworkproof of her making this contract, and what the terms of that contract were. Other people's personal beliefs have NOTHING to do with this.
In the Biblical Law which Elizabeth swore to uphold, Deuteronomy 4:2 says: "Ye shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it"
So, Elizabeth made a legally binding contract which says she promises not to make new laws. This means that the very first time she gave "royal assent" to pass new legislation in the UK, she was in breech of contract, as that would add more laws, when she swore NOT to do that.
Since the contract Elizabeth made is what entitles her to the "crown", and the authority of that position, when she broke that contract, she lost her crown and therefore her power to legally and lawfully bring criminal cases against people.
This is extremely simple contract Law and JAH kept it very simple so as not to confuse people. You have a contract with very clearly identified terms, and Elizabeth broke it. Since that contract is what gave her authority over the courts, she's broken the contract, she has no authority, and thus she had no jurisdiction over JAH.
THAT was the case, pure and simple, and because its so bullet-proof obvious, the court couldn't argue against it.
What "Paul" said makes sense in the US although it will never take down the awful system, which is what needs to be done. "JD"'s ego-based rant and talking about the Bible like he knows what it says when he doesn't, isn't helping anything. Debra has confused the matters and wrongly extended its scope. I hope the explanation above clears things up."
Paul said (May 21, 2011):
Speaking as someone based in the United States, I don't know whether challenging the jurisdiction of a court based on QEII's coronation oath, or lack thereof, or on whether the B.A.R. is really the "British Accreditation Registry", etc, is going to meet w/ much success. Most courts and magistrates here would look upon claims of this nature as being more akin to "kooky" conspiracy theories and litigants must always bear in mind that the #1 purpose of going to court is simply TO PUT ON A GOOD SHOW.
Litigation, and the administrative maneuvering that invariably precedes litigation, is nothing if not show business.
However, speaking from personal experience, I can attest that a rationally argued counterclaim, challenging the jurisdiction of a tribunal, will almost always end in success. Again, I don't know what people in British Commonwealth countries, or in Roman civil law jurisdictions (i.e., the rest of the planet) do, but in the United States it's quite clear and obvious: the sovereignty is vested in the People, and the People -- owing to the fact that in America we have no "King" -- are therefore the holders and rules of court.
When you file legal paperwork with a court in America, don't go in there claiming that you're a "U.S.citizen" or a "Sovereign State Citizen" or a "resident of such-and-such state or county".. All these "statuses" are simply corporate, legal fictions and all this does is give the administrative tribunal jurisdiction over your person. Instead, simply make the claim that you're one of the People of the "jurisdiction" in which you're appearing and reason rationally therefore.
I was recently in traffic court on a quasi-serious misdemeanor charge. I raised about four or five distinct, cogently-reasoned out challenges to the jurisdiction of the administrative tribunal in which I was appearing, and I filed my paperwork before appearing.
Paraphrasing my experience at the arraignment hearing (which, for traffic court, is a room full of hundreds of people in major city I live in), the magistrate was basically yelling and screaming at everyone who was there in line before me, then when I appeared before the magistrate, she simply smiled and ask: "Mr. XXXX, what is it that you would like me to do for you today?" and I replied, "Well your Honor, I would very appreciate it if the court would dismiss these charges".. to which she answered (paraphrasing): "Your wish is granted.. these charges are dismissed".. As I was leaving the room, I heard her (again) yelling and screaming at the next person in line behind me.
The key is HONOR: You must HONOR their process before you can expect them to honor yours. You must (in the language of the New Testament) "give to receive".. Nor is it necessarily "easy".. You do have to have your wits about you. I didn't just cut-and-paste random patriot mythology I slopped off the Internet: rather, I spent several weekends in a row, all weekend, in the law library doing real legal research putting together real legal briefs to submit to a real court. But it is effective, it did work. Challenges to jurisdiction, if cogently and rationally argued, almost always do.
The late Bill Cooper has a series of lectures out on YouTube where he talks about the importance of challenging jurisdiction. To paraphrase Cooper: if you don't challenge jurisdiction, you're almost guaranteed to lose ... if you do challenge jurisdiction, it's almost impossible not to win. The present-day Master of this subject is Bill Thornton down in Orange County, Calif. I invite your readers to explore his Web site and audio lectures at: http://1215.org/. His Web site is a bit rough around the edges (in terms of presentation and navigation), but it's packed w/ some of the best legal information you'll find anywhere.
J.D. said (May 21, 2011):
I've never read such delusional, unabashed lunacy in fifty-six years of life.
This woman is simply loony. She imagines that lawyers aren't really admitted to the bar of the Supreme Court of a given US state, but they are registered with the B.A.R., the British Accredation Registry. I guess that thirty-two years ago, they just forgot to give me my UK registry card at the Wisconsin Supreme Court. And that each time that I've been admitted to the bar of another court, my British papers must have gotten mixed up. When I passed the Illinois Bar Exam, they must have erased my memories of questions concerning English law by mind control. I should wear an aluminum foil cap if I take another bar exam. When I got admitted to the bar of the US Supreme Court, they must have just forgotten to collect my British Registry dues. She's a danger to herself to any fool, desperate for some way out of a pickle, who'd take this seriously.
She doesn't know a damn thing about the law. Conflict or not, it was the US Supreme Court which decided the issue of whether the initial imposition of the income tax, including upon federal judges, impermissibly and unconstitutionally reduced the salary of federal judges during their tenure in office as textually prohibited in the Constitution. The justices admitted the inherent conflict but expressed the doctrine that when it was necessary that someone decide the issue and no one without such a conflict existed, that jurisdiction would vest notwithstanding a conflict of interest because of necessity, and held that the tax was not unconstitutional. Federal judges pay income taxes as a result of that decision by interested federal judges on the Supreme Court. Yes, every judge has jurisdiction to determine his or her own jurisdiction. In fact, in our federal courts, which are all courts of limited jurisdiction, the question is present in every case, must be proven, and is determined in every case. That's a pretty basic principle familiar to any first year law student. I'm telling you that this lady is nuts.
She asserts that the Law of God is what is announced in the first five books of the Bible. But she never proves that, or even tries to prove it. It's a pretty controversial statement to a believer, let alone what an atheist or deist (like Washington or Jefferson or Lincoln) or agnostic would make of it. Maybe some sect of Judaism believes that, but I've never met a person who'd agree. God's law, to a Christian, means more than that. This lady is an arrogant, errant fool.
She claims that God's law says that all human law is without legitimacy. Where is it that the first five books of the Bible say that??? Not a passage I've ever heard. St. Paul says quite the opposite, and Christ had no problems suggesting that taxes be paid. The lady is bonkers.
Shame on you for giving her a platform.
Debra Replies said (May 22, 2011):
To Mike -
You are incorrect when you say JAH's Lawful Defence does not apply, at all, to America.
This is explained further with clarity and specificity in my comment posted to lawyer, J.D..
To J.D. -
Not uncommon for insane lawyers to think they are normal and others are crazy.
U.S. Lawyers have sworn allegiance to the Supreme Court of a given State, and subsequently to the British Accreditation Registry which oversees the whole judicial circus.
Each time you've been admitted to the B.A.R. you swore an oath of allegiance to the Crown Court, never questioning what the B.A.R. stood for, even after thirty-two years. The B.A.R. has been right in front of your face all along.
B.A.R. = BRITISH.
You've said I'm a danger. I am a danger to lawyers, judges, the Crown, anyone else supporting a criminal "legal" system.
No-one is, or ever was, permitted to make-up any rules/laws to rule people. IT IS Wrong. Period.
"Issues" are to be decided by a jury (community ), never / ever by a judge using made-up rules.
American judges having sworn the Judicial Oath before God, which is, to serve only God; thus an oath not Lawful and null and void if not serving God. Associations with the B.A.R. effectively allows for both Exhibits 1 and 2, ordering God's Laws in the Courts. It's quite simple; either you maintain the oath you took, or you must step down and allow the people to practice their God-given rights.
I don't have to prove The Law. It is there and as a lawyer, B.A.R. member, you swore on a Bible.
Which is exactly the point. You are ordered to keep that oath "you" took, then swore to maintain.
The Bible does not command one must know God to follow The Law. Yet it is The Law.
Odd you are not aware of the oath you took, and apparently in numerous States, on Biblical Law.
Clearly you are threatened. God's Law is for humans. The Lawful Defence explains in detail, needing to be read over and over till it sinks in, because the extent of a Rothschild brainwashing is obviously very extensive.
I understand you are threatened. Criminals usually are when caught red-handed.
To those claiming "too religious", nothing is more religious than the Coronation Ceremony itself.
The London 7/7 Bombers Were Innocent
The Trial of Muad'Dib (9-12 May
"9/11 Ripple Effect" about the September 11th, 2001
false flag attack in the U.S.
"7/7 Ripple Effect" about the July 7th, 2005 false
flag attack in the U.K.
The Truth About
the British Monarchy
The Truth About
the Stone of Destiny (aka the Coronation Stone)
Dined on Human Flesh
How Did We Come To Be Such Idiots
All Bad Things Flow from the Oath of a Man
Swear an Oath Tell a Lie
Any Man Who Takes An Oath Is A Liar
The URL of this page is:
Navigation:Nazarene Remnant Church of God - Dedicated to the Restoration of Ancient Christianity and the True Worldwide Religion. >>Articles and Reports >>Landmark Case Could Stymie Legal System
The Most Stern Warning in all Scripture ...
We are entering an age that Satanists call the Age of Fire, when they will use every murderous, demonic, vicious, and most cunning tactics and lies to usher in their Nazi Fourth Reich (aka the New World Order). They have made the following point very clear:
“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.” (David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations Organization) ...
Read the Full
The Warning of the Last Days
"Therefore, behold, I will make them know, this once I will make them know my power and my might, and they shall know that my name is the Lord. The clamour will resound to the ends of the earth, for the Lord has an indictment against the nations; he is entering into judgment with all flesh, and the wicked he will put to the sword." (Jeremiah 16: 21; 25: 31)
Free Download:The Warning of the Last Days
The Usher of Desecration
Usher:Noun: “Somebody who shows people to their seats, e.g. in a theatre or at a wedding.” Verb: “To inaugurate or introduce (something): usher in a new era.”
Desecration: Verb: “1. To violate the sanctity (of something sacred); to profane (it). 2. To treat (a sacred place) irreverently or contemptuously.” The Penguin English Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 2003.
“If someone was planning to murder you, you would like to know months in advance, wouldn’t you?”
Read the Book:
The Real Crisis Is About To Unfold and It's Not Financial.
Read the Book:
The Time for Talk is Over
“The trip is over folks, we are out of road. I wish I could tell you where you are going. If you don't know or don't have a map, it wouldn't do me much good to try to tell you anyway. One thing is for certain; from here you will walkthe rest of the way. For many it will be to destination unknown. Most are on the way to the City of Despair, in the State of Confusion, located within the Nation of Disgrace. For others, the destination will not be pleasant nor a matter of choice. You get the picture. Those who, ‘take all of your belongings and climb into the truck,’ will weep in utter misery for the personal negligence that they brought upon themselves and their families. You will have paid the ultimate price.
“A prudent [man] foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass on, and are punished.” (Proverbs 22: 3, KJV)
So,...will you take the final moments God is
giving you to step away from your ‘stupid zone’ and do what you should have so long ago? Will you finally make some plans? Will you really sell off your unnecessary
toys and purchase
tools that will give you just
a chance to make it through? Will you search out the ultimate truth of our predicament and the One who
can give you peace, serenity and eternal life? Can you admit that putting a dictator in office was one of
your very worst mistakes, and
you will try to make amends by resisting him and his communist platform? Will you do all you can to convert your
family and friends who also voted for him and others supporting him to work against him in every way possible?
That may sting and burn to be told that, but it is far better than the amputation of your limbs that is coming
if he continues to dismantle this nation and its last freedoms.
Editorials like these are expected to consume about 1500 words. This is half that. Like I said, the time for talk is over.”
Read the Article:
Defining the Spiritual War You Failed To Fight
Read the article Defining the Spiritual War You Failed To
“But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.” (2 Peter 2: 22)
“As a dog returneth to his vomit, [so] a fool returneth to his folly.” (Proverbs 26: 11)
Discover the part played by the Illuminati Jew, Rupert Murdoch (pictured above), and his Zondervan publishing company, in the destruction of Herbert W Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God.
What Murdoch "... is not is an Australian 'right wing' billionaire. Murdoch, though born in Australia is an Israeli citizen and Jewish. Why is this important?
Murdoch is now admitted to have controlled the political systems in Britain and America for two decades. He has had the power to choose national leaders, make policy, pass laws at will. Where did the power come from?
We now know it came from spying, blackmail, bribery and propaganda." (Veterans Today Senior Editor, Gordon Duff.)
Get the book here.
"Perhaps in order to engineer and prepare the global collective psyche to the "great earth-shattering announcement" that may be coming any day now, ... that the US, UK and allies are in contact with "technologically superior beings from other worlds, which do exist after all and we are in contact with them."
Read more here ...
"The only correct term for the mis-called 'anti-Semitic' is 'Jew-wise.' It is indeed the only fair and honest term. The phrase 'anti-Semite' is merely a propaganda word used to stampede the unthinking public into dismissing the whole subject from their minds without examination: so long as that is tolerated these evils will not only continue, but grow worse." (The Nameless War, by Captain Archibald Maule Ramsay, p. 63)
Why Are Christian Men Such Wimps?
“Is it ok if I vent a little today? I’ve built up a little frustration over the past couple of months and I just need a pressure release. Will you let me do it?
As you may be aware I have started a varsity football program at a local Christian High School. Although I vowed to myself that I would never return to prowling the sidelines when I walked away from public education in 2000,the opportunity to train young males to be men was something I could not, in good conscience, run from.
Not all males are men. I hope you understand that. Especially convincing is the evidence I have garnered recently that Christian males in particular are the least manly.
How Shall We Tell The Children?
"And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the
caves of the earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the
earth." Isaiah 2:19 (KJV)
"But how shall we tell the children? We probably won't tell them; the knowledge would be too dangerous to the "system" we have developed to ensure our own preservation. As long as they will continue to work in order to support, and in order to die in, for, and because of our system, we will allow as many of them who can do so, to survive until we have lived out our lives in the manner to which we have become accustomed. It has always worked before, so maybe it will continue to work long enough to keep me comfortable until I die. It is a gamble in which the odds are becoming increasingly negative."
How To Get A FREE Copy>>> How Shall We Tell The Children eBook
How The World Really Works, by Alan Jones
Get A FREE Copy>>> How The World Really Works eBook
The picture which Alan Jones paints in this book is one which you must understand if your efforts in truly understanding how the world REALLY works are ever to amount to anything. We paint that picture by presenting an ordered set of book reviews which identify our enemies and describe the primary strategies and actions which they have taken against us over the last 100 years or so. Our goal in writing the book was to provide an accurate portrayal of that picture within the covers of a single moderate- length book. The 12 chapter titles of How The World Really Works are ... the names of the books being reviewed.
How To Get A FREE Copy>>> How The World Really Works eBook
Secrecy or Freedom, by Alan Jones
Get A FREE Copy>>> Secrecy or Freedom eBook
This is Alan Jones' most recent book, published in April, 2001. While countless books have been written revealing yet one more outrage which the New World Order folks have perpetrated on us, Jones has resolved on an entirely different purpose: to define a way of mounting a counterattack on those elites, and not just delay their next victory, but destroy their viability, and take back our country and the world for middle class citizens everywhere. In the same way that an army or a football team will surely lose in the long run if it has only a defense and no offense, we too shall lose our world to the elites if we fail to marshal our resources, mount a viable offense against them, and reduce their present dominance of public affairs to a nullity. To that end, this book goes right back into history to discover their origin, their modus operandi, their strengths, and most importantly, their weaknesses. The exercise has been successful, and reveals a crucial weakness which may readily be exploited. We will, in this web page, outline our search, our major findings, and finally a plan of action to save our country for the benefit, we hope, of a great number of future generations of free citizens. Our historical look will go back 2000 years and beyond. Our sources are not generally well known, are not Nobel prize- winning historians, but nevertheless are historical truth seekers whose researches are uniquely valuable. Each of the chapters of Secrecy or Freedom? carries the title of the historical work which is reviewed in that chapter. In this web page, we will give you an inkling of what is covered in each of these chapters, with the hope that these few words will lead you to order our book, carefully absorb its contents, and then join in our proposed action plan to take back our country.
How To Get A FREE Copy>>> Secrecy or Freedom eBook
How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known To Man, by Mary Croft
You're an asset of the state. You're duped into entering the world of commerce and finance and trapped in imaginary debt bya brilliant but simple con. When you see your name written in UPPERCASE LETTERS it has a very different meaning to the one your parents gave you. This is an amazing ebook. We highly recommend it.
Classy Beauty, 25, Seeks Man Making $500K
Reply to "Classy" Beauty,25, who advertised on Craig's List for a Man Making $500K.
The Answer ...
I read your posting with great interest and have thought meaningfully about your dilemma. I offer the following analysis of your predicament. Firstly, I'm not wasting your time, I qualify as a guy who fits your bill; that is I make more than $500K per year.
"If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." - George Orwell (1903-1950)
We [the Jews] infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church right from the very beginning.
“Regarding the Jesuits, quoting Rabbi Finkelstein: “We [the Jews] infiltrated the Roman Catholic Church right from the very beginning. Why do you think the Pope, the Cardinals and all the Bishops wear yarlmulkahs? (skullcaps) The white race never figures this out. A thousand years later the white race began to wake up ... we had to come up with a plan B ... so we formed the Jesuits. There was a nice boy, Ignatius Loyola. He started the Jesuits.” (Loyola was Jewish. Research/read the Jesuit Extreme Oath.)”
(From The Real History of the Earth.
Why in Hell is All This Happening Again? by David Thatcher.)
False Flag Operations or "False flag terrorism" occurs when elements within a government stage a secret operation whereby government forces pretend to be a targeted enemy while attacking their own forces or people. The attack is then falsely blamed on the enemy in order to justify going to war against that enemy.
"If we ever needed a battering ram to pull down the evil structure of compulsory public schooling, this book should be able to do the job. The book calls for a revolution. But not a violent one. It can be won easily and peaceably by merely taking the kids out of the public schools. It's still legal to do so. That would change America radically. But the pessimists will say that most parents are too brain-dead to care what goes on in the public schools. Those parents who do care have already gotten their kids out and are homeschooling them. But we know that every day more and more parents are beginning to see the light. That's encouraging." (Samuel L. Blumenfeld)
Democracy Is An Illusion
"The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one perhaps of the Right, and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy... But either party in office becomes in time corrupt, tired, unenterprising, and vigorless. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor,approximately the same policies". (Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966, p. 1247-48)
Read more >>
Why Men are So Attracted to Foreign Women
Have you ever wondered why men are so attracted to foreign (non-Western) women? Have you heard from a friend lately that her ex fiancee is now looking for a Russian bride or that a male relative is engaged to a Filipina? And, do you scoff at that and put it down to these men being 'desperate' and those women as just wanting a ticket into the country?
Why You Shouldn't Get Involved With a Married Man [or Woman]
Here's a question that's been sent to me recently about a woman wondering if she should get involved with a married man. Here's my reply telling her why you shouldn't get involved with a married man! This woman's name has been changed to remain anonymous.
What You Should Know About Swine Flu
"These are challenging times and we need to stay calm and think things through - not just panic and react. Fear, panic and emotional reaction got us into this mess and it is certainly not going to get us out of it.
We also need to realise - here, now - that we have long crossed the line into a fully-fledged fascist dictatorship. It has hidden itself to most people this far, but it is about to lift the veil.
It is no longer an option to do nothing or passively acquiesce to authority out of fear or apathy. Or, at least, it's not if we care about our freedoms and, most importantly, those of our children and grandchildren who will have to live almost their entire lives under a global jackboot of sheer, undiluted evil.
The word 'evil' is much overused and I don't say it lightly; but we are dealing with evil in the sense that the word is the reverse of 'live'. Those behind the conspiracy to cull the human population and turn the rest into little more than computer terminals are anti-life. They have no respect for it and no empathy with those who suffer the consequences of their actions, no matter how appalling.
I have been warning of what was coming for nearly 20 years and it is not 'coming' any more - it's here. No more excuses from anyone, please. We have to deal with it. We have to draw a line in the sand and say no more.
Never was this more important than with the conspiracy to force swine flu vaccination upon the global population. The swine flu virus was created in a laboratory to generate mass panic with the specific intention of forcing everyone to have the vaccine. Problem-Reaction-Solution. This 'natural' swine flu virus apparently contains genes from humans, birds and pigs from several continents.
If you concoct and release a virus and then implement a clearly long-planned mass vaccin-ation programme, there can be only one sensible conclusion: swine flu is not the biggest danger here - it's the vaccine." (David Icke)
Free Download: What You Should Know About Swine Flu
This Has to be the Definitive Report on the Vaccination Hoax.
“The only safe vaccine is a vaccine that is never used.” – Dr. James A. Shannon. National Institutes of Health.
Are you scared when you’re told you have to vaccinate your child with 49 doses in 14 vaccines before age 6? Or are you scared at the idea of not vaccinating and so “exposing” your child to serious illnesses?
Are you scared about the school threatening you that if you don’t vaccinate you can’t enrol your child?
FEAR. That’s what all these pro-vaccine campaigns are based on. As a parent, what’s the biggest scare of all? When your child gets sick with a serious disease and you feel responsible for that. As you see, vaccine supporters couldn’t go wrong with this and developed a dogma that’s been bought over and over again over the years by people. The magic insurance policy to solve it all.
So, even if your child gets sick, at least you know you did everything you could for his/her health and vaccinated, right? But what if the very vaccination is able to cause the illness in the first place??
Could The Vaccine Hoax Be Over?
An extraordinary paper published by a courageous doctor and investigative medical researcher has dug the dirt on 30 years of secret official transcripts of meetings of UK government vaccine committees and the supposedly independent medical “experts” sitting on them with their drug industry connections.
The 45 page paper with detailed evidence can be downloaded here.
Also see the short article about this report in Issue #65a of our newsletter Last Days Watch, which is here.
Wolves in Sheep's Clothing
"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matthew 7: 15)
"For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works." (2 Corinthians 11: 13-15)
are Facing Orwellian, Totalitarian Slavery
That's what they want to impose on us. That's the reason behind all the national identity cards, DNA data bases, surveillance cameras, GPS tracking devices in cars and trucks and cell phones, digital micro-chipping of everything from A to Z, Internet surveillance and censorship, telephone taps, body and luggage searches and scans at airports, finger printing of air travelers and bank customers, interrogations at airline boarding gates, intrusive banking regulations, and much more. The Powers That Be are branding and penning up the global "human herd" in just the same way that cattle ranchers tag their cattle herds with ear tags and fence them into feed lots to fatten them up for slaughter. The Powers That Be regard us as their livestock, as their personal property, and they are in the process of branding us, tagging us, and penning us up, so that they can manage us like cattle or swine. Our plight is that stark and simple.
So do you want to be a slave or free? That's the question. Because if you want to be free you're absolutely going to have to do something about it. Millions of people are going to have to go outside of their comfort zone, that's the hard truth of the matter, because the status quo is simply not remotely acceptable for people who want to live as free human beings on this planet.
Don't imagine that you can just vote in the next criminally rigged election and a new set of corrupt politicians will somehow magically make things better. THEY WON'T. The galling thing is that the Powers That Be have set up a global system to which they insist we assiduously adhere and obey every corrupt dictate they issue, while they themselves flagrantly flout the Constitution with impunity, and never cease massively enriching themselves and their plutocrat cronies, and rolling in corrupt luxury, at our ruinous expense.
This pathetic charade will continue only as long as the people permit it, because when the people declare a de facto Jubilee Year, the jig will be up. As a matter of fact, that process is already underway. It is a simple truth that unemployed people cannot service a loan, cannot pay a tax bill, and cannot pay a fine that is imposed on them for failure to do any of the foregoing. So as the unemployed rolls continue to swell, more and more people will simply refuse or fail to make credit card payments, to pay back home, automobile and student loans, and will default on furniture, appliance and pay day loans, and much more. This is already happening and the trend will increase.”
Read the Full
The Manipulated Man
Are You Laughing Yet, or Would You Forward this Email on to a Friend or Relative?
The Email "Are You Laughing Yet?"
Pass this very insightful email on if you think it has merit. If not then just discard it ... no one will know you did. But, if you discard this thought process, don't sit back and complain about what bad shape the world is in.
The Plain Truth About Glorious Carbon Dioxide
"Nature is a self-regulating mechanism that dwarfs any mindless effort to 'control' the amount of CO2 produced by coal-fired utilities, steel manufacturers, autos and trucks, and gasoline fueled lawn mowers. Okay, children, let's all sit up straight at our desks. We are going to begin 2009 with a lesson about carbon dioxide (CO2)." (Alan Caruba)
The Oil, Gas and Energy Crises are Massive Hoaxes
Lindsey Williams, a Baptist minister and author of the 1980's book The Energy Non-Crisis
(on line) has been reporting inside information about oil price-manipulation for many years
now, and generally the information has been accurate.
"Anyone not preaching coming out of the state church and the government system is a false prophet."(Neal King, Iron-Clay.com)
Christ's Flag is The Union Jack
The Union Jack
The Australian and New Zealand flags go back much further than the 200 years you probably are aware of. Notice the most prominent symbol on all these flags is the eight-pointed cross. This 8 pointed cross consists of two different four pointed crosses (the x and the + crosses) that are superimposed!
New Zealand Flag
Their heraldic symbolism goes back 3,500 years; to the time of Moses and Joshua, the great Israelite (not Jewish) Military-Commanders.
The vertical cross on the flag is for the Great Cross that is formed at critical times in the Galaxy, and this is called the Galactic Cross. T he diagonal cross stands for the Earth Cross. The Earth cross is the cross of the Zodiac, while the Galactic Cross is the intersection of the Galactic Equator with the Ecliptic and its perpendicular axis.
Four times during the Great Year (which is 25,920 years long)--i.e. every 6,480 years--the Earth Cross aligns with the Galactic Cross to form a single four-pointed cross in the sky. This is what will occur on December 21, 2012, which will herald the end of the "Dark Cycle."
The red on the flag stands for human blood, and the white stands for the Birthright Holy Spirit, which does the work of redemption (i.e. the born-again process), thus changing a sinful human being into a true blue-blood (i.e. the Elect). Blue is the colour of Sirius, and the Creator God of ancient Khemit (Egypt) known as Ptah (who we call God the Father). In this process it is important to know that there are 216 bones in the human body, and the blood is actually made in the bones!
Furthermore, the science of Khemitology reveals that Ptah was referred to as “He Who Comes from the Blue,” and was always depicted with a blue head covering or with blue skin.
What race was Ptah depicted as?
In the depictions of Ptah from ancient Khemit (the proper name for ancient Egypt) “Ptah is usually depicted with Asian eyes, a Caucasian nose, and Negroid lips. He apparently represents many races as the ‘Father’ or progenitor race from Sirius. Ptah became known as Dyas or Zeus to the Greeks, and later ‘pater’ (father) to the Romans: Ptah, Pater, ‘Father Race.’” (Source: Stephen S Mehler’s The Land of Osiris: An Introduction to Khemitology, Adventures Unlimited Press, 2001, p. 180)
It is also noteworthy that Egyptologist’s word for the bright star Sirius is Sopdet (Sp.dt). According to the science of Khemitology, the Egyptologists have it wrong (and I would heartily agree), and the word should be S.pth, which is Sa-Ptah, “The Birthplace of Ptah.” Thus we see the clear connection between God the Father and the eighth planet of the Solar System, the bright star Sirius.
For more information on the names of the Messiah and God the Father, and these flags, see our free book The God Messiah Worships.
The Heraldic Symbolism of the Unicorn on the British Coat-of-Arms
The British Coat-of-Arms is the Coat-of-Arms of the 12 tribed Kingdom of Israel and Christ their Rightful KING.
The TRUE Israel People have, on their "Coat-of-Arms", a Lion and a Unicorn which is shown as a white horse "rampant" with one horn. The amber Lion "rampant" on the left-side is the emblem of the two-tribed "House of Judah" and the Unicorn or white Wild-Ox "rampant" on the right-side is the emblem of the ten-tribed "House of Israel", collectively making the 12-tribed "Kingdom of Israel".
The word British is Hebrew. It means "the People of the Covenant" or in other words "the People Israel", whose written Constitution; under that Covenant, that they have rejected to their own loss; is written in the Bible (Israel's Book) that they still swear on to tell the Truth, but whose Constitution, under which there are no poor people, is then foolishly rejected by almost everyone, in favour of inferior and unjust, man-made laws and economics which cause poverty and therefore also crime brought about by deprivation and desperation.
Compare the imposter Antichrist's Coat-of-arms (below) ...
The lion facing the East stands for the Zodiacal Sign of Leo, the 12th Sign in the Birthright Zodiac. The unicorn stands for the Constellation of Pegasus in the Zodiacal Sign of Aquarius. Both animals are holding the Shield of Salvation, or the Shield of Damnation, depending upon your attitude to God and your way of life, whether you are in rebellion or submission.
Consequently the Lion stands for the White Crown of Upper Egypt, while the Unicorn stands for the Red Crown of Lower Egypt. While the symbols may have changed, the meaning has remained the same over the Millenia.
The Bible is Not a Jewish Book
The statement is commonly made, even by those who should know better, that “we Christians owe a debt to the Jews, for we got our Bible, and our religion, from them.” While many people have been deceived into believing this, it is completely false. Part of the mistake comes from the complete confusion in the minds of nearly all people as to just what they mean by “Jew.” Are they referring to people of a certain race? Or people of a certain religion? For the two are not the same. There are in Africa today some pure-blooded Negroes who are Jews by religion and there are in China today some pure-blooded Mongolians who are Jews by religion. Likewise, there are some people today who are racially of the stock we know as Jews, but who have been converted to other religions.
Read the Full Article:
How Many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue?
“In another pamphlet, entitled How Many Men are Necessary to Change a Crime into a Virtue? Adin Ballou [another champion of non-resistance] says: ‘One man may not kill. lf he kills a fellow-creature, he is a murderer. lf two, ten, a hundred men do so, they, too, are murderers. But a government or a nation may kill as many men as it chooses, and that will not be murder, but a great and noble action. Only gather the people together on a large scale, and a battle of ten thousand men becomes an innocent action. But precisely how many people must there be to make it so?- that is the question. One man cannot plunder and pillage, but a whole nation can. But precisely how many are needed to make it permissible? Why is it that one man, ten, a hundred, may not break the law of God, but a great number may?” (Quoted in Leo Tolstoy’s book, The Kingdom of Heaven Is Within You, p. 6.)
"Don't think for a moment you are going to vote the Illuminati out of office. They control the major and minor political parties. They control the process of government, they control the process of information flow, they control the process of creating money and finally they control Christendom. (However, God controls the hearts of His people.)" (From The Top 13 illuminati Bloodlines, by Fritz Springmeier)
Woe Unto You Lawyers! (and Policemen)
"Of all the specialized skills abroad in the world today, the average man knows least about the one that affects him most – about the thing that lawyers call The Law. A man who will discourse at length about the latest cure for streptococci infection or describe in detail his allergic symptoms cannot begin to tell you what happened to him legally – and plenty did – when he got married. A man who would not dream of buying a car without an intricate and illustrated description of its mechanical workings will sign a lease without knowing what more than four of its forty-four clauses mean or why they are there. A man who will not hesitate to criticize or disagree with a trained economist or an expert in any one of a dozen fields of learning will follow, unquestioning and meek, whatever advice his lawyer gives him. Normal human skepticism and curiosity seem to vanish entirely whenever the layman encounters The Law.
There are several reasons for this mass submission, One is the average man’s fear of the unknown – and of policemen."