Page 1 of 7

OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:46 pm
by musashi
As said before, the procedure of article 61 requires us to transfer our allegiance from the queen to the lords. Rebellion without this transfer is not lawful. It is simple treason.
Having sent my oath to the Lord Ashbourne, I am now, for the first time, lawfully in rebellion. As long as my actions are in accord with Magna Carta; as long as I obey the lords in the matter of article 61; as long as I return allegiance to the crown when they say that redress is achieved I am untouchable – by law!
Any official action against me not sanctioned by the lords is, at the very least, fraud by misrepresentation and attracts positive legal action, making me the claimant in a superior court in which they may not withhold jurisdiction.
I rarely counsel others in great matters, but this matter is too great not to. If you want to act in lawful rebellion then you must make oath to the barons and transfer your allegiance.
The oath I sent is in the attachment. Use it or not, but make one you must.
Musashi

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:05 pm
by pedawson
Is Lord Ashbourne one of the original Lords who petitioned the queen?
Who are we to send our oath to? Lord Ashbourne and where?

Namaste, Phil;

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:21 pm
by musashi
pedawson wrote:Is Lord Ashbourne one of the original Lords who petitioned the queen?
Who are we to send our oath to? Lord Ashbourne and where?

Namaste, Phil;


Yes, Lord Ashbourne was the one who handed the petition to Sir Robin Janvrin to give to the queen. I chose to send my oath to him for that reason. I sent it special delivery to Lord Ashbourne, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW. One way or another it'll get to him. If he's no longer at that address then I'll try elswhere.
musashi

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:09 am
by pedawson
Thanks Bud your a star

Namaste, Phil;

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 12:47 pm
by nickm
Thanks Musashi. Pleasingly short and sweet. :shake:

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 3:49 pm
by kenb
The only thing I'm unsure about this, is giving any power that was mine to start with to any lords or whatever, is this not allowing them to use us to their advantage? I just can't give my trust to anyone in so-called power at the moment.

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sat Mar 12, 2011 7:15 pm
by pedawson
The Barons have approached the queen and have stated their case. To this end they have acted in accordance with lawful rebellion magna carta article 61
The barons shall choose any twenty-five barons of the realm they wish, who with all their might are to observe, maintain and cause to be observed the peace and liberties which we have granted and confirmed to them by this our present charter

This in in the third person from the king 'Royal WE'

The article in the 1215 document has been disputed for centuries but the Magna Carta was and still is held 'as is' and 'as was' for ever, Regardless of who say's what or if the king was allegedly forced to sign 'Signed it WAS'
The Barons 'The Duke of Rutland, Viscount Masserene and Ferrard, Lord Hamilton of Dalzell and Lord Ashbourne' on 24th March 2001' Stated in accordance with the Charter’s Clause 61, the famous enforcement clause, four Barons presented a vellum parchment at Buckingham Palace, declaring that the ancient rights and freedoms of the British people had to be defended.
No response was forthcoming and as we freemen on the land know that if a petition, affidavit, notice etc. is presented and conditions apply (IE 40 days to respond) the recipient acquiesces to the contents. This failure to respond or report in any way 'HAS', as if it wasn't already, brought the article BACK to current. IT WAS UNCONTESTED.

So to answer this question of trust, the Barons have acted in accordance with everything we believe in, as for the 'we have to hand power to them', NO, this is allegiance, we promise to back them up if they need us. If they abuse this allegiance it is taken away and placed elsewhere. Such is our POWER we HOLD our own allegiance and lend it where we feel it warrants lending. It boils down to trust.

Namaste, Phil;

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:35 am
by newmannewy
how many here have pledged allegience/trust to a lord ?
also would the lords need a certain amount of people backing them in order to give validity to their rebellion ?

just out of interest.

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:51 am
by jonboy
I will not be "obeying" any so called "lords". WTF????

:thinks:

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

PostPosted: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:37 am
by Farmer
This is an opinion and not a criticism of anyone or what they are doing. It has come about because of my observations.

The Magna Carta has always been a contract between the Barons and the King so making it part of England's constitution. It is the Barons that will be protecting our rights. I also have never understood why Joe Average thinks they can be freeman. The only freemen that I am aware of are those that have been made freeman of a city or something else. Of course there were also free men that were not bound by an oath to Lord of the Manor, in other words, because of the oath allowed to farm the land owners land for contributions, which normally meant their whole lives. So I would say that people in general now are free men, not having taken any oaths.

So my view is that the procedure and reasons outlined by musashi are correct; and as pedawson has pointed out, the allegiance can be withdrawn at any time. The only drawback I can see to this is that being British does not require any oath of any kind as long as you were born British. However, taking the oath may actually change your status and rights.