OATH TO THE LORDS

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby huntingross » Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:41 am

Article 61 is to “better allay the discord arisen between us and our barons”

The “WE” and “US” referred to within Article 61 is expanded in paragraph 2 :

“if we, our chief justiciar, our bailiffs or any of our officials”

Should WE

“offend in any respect against any man, or break any of the articles of the peace or of this security, and the offence is notified to four of the said twenty-five barons, the four shall come to us”

This is where the 40 days comes in to remedy the transgression and failure to do so

“the four barons mentioned before shall refer the matter to the rest of the twenty-five barons. Together with the community of the whole land, they shall then distrain and distress us in every way possible, namely by seizing castles” etc.

So the barons WITH the community of the whole land, THEY [the barons] shall then distrain…..

“Whoever in the country wants to, may take an oath to obey the orders of the twenty-five barons for the execution of all the previously mentioned matters and, with the barons, to distress us to the utmost of his power. We publicly and freely give permission to every one who wishes to take this oath, and we shall never forbid any one from taking it. Indeed, all those in the land who are unwilling to this oath, we shall by our command compel them to swear to it.”

You may take an oath to obey the orders of the 25 barons [the WE/US publicly and freely give permission to….and shall never forbid anyone from taking it] and, WITH the barons distress US to the utmost of HIS [is this the barons or any baron] power.

If you are unwilling to take this oath, WE shall compel THEM [whoever in the country / community] to swear it.

So with regard to the oath, whether you have been asked to swear, want to swear or are unwilling to swear, you will be compelled to swear.

The distrain and distress in every possible way by seizure of property is by the Barons WITH the community….it IS NOT the community acting without the Barons.

Property so seized is only returned once the barons are satisfied that “redress has been obtain in their opinion”……” And when amends have been made, they shall obey us as before.”
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby huntingross » Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:46 am

@ Farmer

I have a feeling your comment might relate to one of your FOI's :

How can you be born British ? You can be born in Great Britain and you can apply to be British....but if the act of being born makes you British...then why apply.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby holy vehm » Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:19 pm

Some very interesting thoughts and points raised there.

The magna carta, to me at least, has never sat too well to be honest, but it has been said that its all we have at this point and for that reason i go along with it. Personally i am interested in what went before, before barons and kings, when people were just people, living on the land and bound by a set of common laws, mainly the law of tradition.

Freemen or free men? have we ever been free, nature herself enslaves us to some degree, we are bound by certain rules, natural law.

If lawful rebellion is to be used as it was intended, then the barons need to step upto the plate now, they are the leaders in this, we are their soldiers. Next time a court is to be 'seized' then it should be with the barons not without. Otherwise lawful rebellion is meaningless. Without we are just a rabble of angry men. Without we may be acting unlawfully.

But why would the barons create lawful rebellion and then sit back? I suspect, and have done for a while, it is not for our benefit but for the benefit of the barons and their ilke. Suppose the EU went tits up and the uk needed a way out, they could use article 61. Its not for us to use, otherwise a baron had the opportunity last week to come forward and confirm that a state of lawful rebellion had been created and although the protest wasnt quite in accordance with the rules, we are none the less in lawful rebellion. That did not happen and you do need to ask why.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:35 pm

No man can truly be free when his actions are dependent upon the authority of another. Therefore, at least in my own reckoning, a Freeman is simply a man who denies or revokes his consent to be governed. The right to self-determination is even enshrined by international law, under the Decalaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Since it is clear that reliance upon the Magna Carta for remedy is dependent upon the subjects' allegiance to the Crown, a Freeman can only rely upon the inalienable and ancient rights described therein, such clauses 39 and 40, which describe the rights to due process and a fair trial, irrespective of allegiance to the Crown.

However, it is my contention that the entire British legal system is predicated on a fraud of the grandest magnitude, and as such, can be rendered null and void by a properly convened Grand Jury, following a fair trial of all the available evidence. It also seems evident that the monarch has fatally breached her contract with the people of these lands, which her family has exploited for their own private gain for almost a millennium. It might now be worth re-reading article 61...

[61] Since, moreover, for God and the betterment of our kingdom and for the better allaying of the discord that has arisen between us and our barons we have granted all these things aforesaid, wishing them to enjoy the use of them unimpaired and unshaken for ever, we give and grant them the under-written security, namely, that the barons shall choose any twenty-five barons of the kingdom they wish, who must with all their might observe, hold and cause to be observed, the peace and liberties which we have granted and confirmed to them by this present charter of ours, so that if we, or our justiciar, or our bailiffs or any one of our servants offend in any way against anyone or transgress any of the articles of the peace or the security and the offence be notified to four of the aforesaid twenty-five barons, those four barons shall come to us, or to our justiciar if we are out of the kingdom, and, laying the transgression before us, shall petition us to have that transgression corrected without delay. And if we do not correct the transgression, or if we are out of the kingdom, if our justiciar does not correct it, within forty days, reckoning from the time it was brought to our notice or to that of our justiciar if we were out of the kingdom, the aforesaid four barons shall refer that case to the rest of the twenty-five barons and those twenty-five barons together with the community of the whole land shall distrain and distress us in every way they can, namely, by seizing castles, lands, possessions, and in such other ways as they can, saving our person and the persons of our queen and our children, until, in their opinion, amends have been made; and when amends have been made, they shall obey us as they did before. And let anyone in the land who wishes take an oath to obey the orders of the said twenty-five barons for the execution of all the aforesaid matters, and with them to distress us as much as he can, and we publicly and freely give anyone leave to take the oath who wishes to take it and we will never prohibit anyone from taking it. Indeed, all those in the land who are unwilling of themselves and of their own accord to take an oath to the twenty-five barons to help them to distrain and distress us, we will make them take the oath as aforesaid at our command. And if any of the twenty-five barons dies or leaves the country or is in any other way prevented from carrying out the things aforesaid, the rest of the aforesaid twenty-five barons shall choose as they think fit another one in his place, and he shall take the oath like the rest. In all matters the execution of which is committed to these twenty-five barons, if it should happen that these twenty-five are present yet disagree among themselves about anything, or if some of those summoned will not or cannot be present, that shall be held as fixed and established which the majority of those present ordained or commanded, exactly as if all the twenty-five had consented to it; and the said twenty-five shall swear that they will faithfully observe all the things aforesaid and will do all they can to get them observed. And we will procure nothing from anyone, either personally or through anyone else, whereby any of these concessions and liberties might be revoked or diminished; and if any such thing is procured, let it be void and null, and we will never use it either personally or through another.


If the Barons are unable to address the crimes against the people under constitutional law, it is time for the Freemen of these lands to step forward and bring the necessary actions, by any lawful and non-violent means necessary.

Peace
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby enegiss » Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:43 pm

ime with ya on that HV, its always seemed that way to my mind, the ingraining to their psyches says it all, that these people have the audacity to presume that we actually give a flying for what they have written on a piece of paper declaring somehow barons (whatever that means)have more rights than myself is a little bitter pill i aint swallowing lol, theyre just so funny to read that its scary he he :grin: we have always been individually free, collectively we are slaves to the insanes, unfortunately. peace and light
if you wish to create a favourable History, then you have to start now.
enegiss
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby musashi » Mon Mar 14, 2011 1:28 pm

Nice to see some quality debate and argument going on here. It sharpens the mind and clears the path in front of us.

Perhaps the only freeman ever to exist was Adam - the first man - because he was alone. The moment someone else entered his orbit he had to compromise and rules for behaviour came into existence. Compromise or be anti social and tyrannical. We see the results all around us of those who refuse to compromise, who put themselves first. It manifests itself in rape, robbery, political terrorism and other terrible actions.
Man must temper his actions when others live with him, and a crowd of ten thousand may not speak their individual thoughts but must appoint one other to do so for them. There is no other way. The footage from Birkenhead court room shows what happens when all shout together - chaos, and no real communication can take place. Without communication there can be no resolution and no end to the madness.
When the ancient Germans were threatened as a people they chose a man to be king and to lead them. When the problem was sorted the king was deposed immediately and the Germans went back to ordinary life. Should any king try to stay as king he was killed. There were no exceptions, and their most famous and successful resistant to Roman invasion was killed without any hesitation when he merely suggested that he should remain as king.
My point is that allegiance is a thing we own and control and, as we are learning, we can send it anywhere we please.
Other than acting in simple treason by not making oath, by living the life of an outlaw, I would ask any and all out there for a real, practical solution to our immediate problem. Some of the argument, while interesting, has become too philosophical for practical application immediately. Working out how things might be better done in future may be a necessary adjunct to today's debates, but the immediate problem demands our attention far more. We must use what we have today to achieve our ends - then we may think of change for the better future. If you want change then you'd better take control, because only tose who have control can effect change.
Musashi
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1177
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby newmannewy » Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:52 pm

Im just happy that you guys understand that the Magna Carta is a contract between the barons & the queen/crown & does not involve the people. I was a bit perturbed to see magna carta being banded about as the answer to everything. When deep down I knew it wasnt really for us.. I appreciate your clear thinking on the subject musashi and fully understand your stance. Im just not sure if thats the way the "freemen" want it to go. It's certainly an option. Does anybody have any contact with a baron ?

In 1213/15 the Barons took their rights & freedoms by force from the crown/king who claimed a monopoly on all rights.. Im thinking this awakening of the population is the peoples turn to take their rights & freedoms back.. Im not sure what has "erupted" out of the box can be put back in to the box in an orderly fashion in order for us to get to where we need to be.

After all at the moment we still have slave status! "Capitus Diminutio Maxima" & the system is refusing to see us as anything but.
http://www.thebigwakeup.co.uk - My own personal site dedicated to helping newbies wake up and see the bigger picture.
Feel free to pass comment, point out my failings & or generally critisice - (It's a working progress)
newmannewy
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:25 pm

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby pedawson » Mon Mar 14, 2011 5:59 pm

I am just a simple man, and I believe that we the people of this Earth are free, at least in the natural order of things. Yes we are a slave to nature but we work with it to provide what we require.
The authorities / PTB / corporations (whatever you wish to call it) have taken over nature. It is this, we have today, that we have to contend with and it is totally unnatural.
I don't believe anyone actually knows what 'freedom' is, it is many things to many people. BUT this is not the point, it is that we 'SHOULD' have a right to choose, this right to choose gives us the ability to grow and contribute in a way that we are able, individually. Not all people can contribute as I may but this does not mean they do not contribute.

The struggle we have right now is not whether the barons or the queen or the government has power, it is that they have assumed that we have given them power over us. They have taken this power and profited from it, they have also shared it with those who can generate bigger profits. If you where a billionaire, you would be pampered in to joining them.

There is a LINK between 'US' (the people) and the only authority to which we the people have 'LENT' our power (sovereignty) to the queen, these are the Barons. We have the right and the mechanisms to petition the queen but we have tried this and it has been ignored thousands of times. SO the only people who have actually done something that is of substance ARE the Barron's - They petitioned the queen and demanded remedy.

I see this as being something that helps our cause and will back that cause,
HOWEVER
and here comes the crunch, backing the Barron's is NOT the final step. Once we have what we want from this quarter, negotiations will have to be started so that we can continue to support the Barron's but have back our freedoms, leaving we the people not having to 'OBEY' without regard to the common law.

So the allegiance, is, in a way conditionally unconditional. We back you until we are all equal and we can live in peace. Being equal is what removes the shackles.

Namaste, Phil;
Don't be surprised to discover that luck favours those who are prepared
User avatar
pedawson
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby newmannewy » Mon Mar 14, 2011 11:24 pm

Im down with that..

But havent the barons already tried and failed to get redress ? didnt blair kick them out the house of lords ? Where does that leave us ? Where are we know - at what stage do we find ourselves ?
http://www.thebigwakeup.co.uk - My own personal site dedicated to helping newbies wake up and see the bigger picture.
Feel free to pass comment, point out my failings & or generally critisice - (It's a working progress)
newmannewy
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:25 pm

Re: OATH TO THE LORDS

Postby holy vehm » Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:25 am

newmannewy wrote:Im down with that..

But havent the barons already tried and failed to get redress ? didnt blair kick them out the house of lords ? Where does that leave us ? Where are we know - at what stage do we find ourselves ?


I think we need to contact the barons for clarification.
"A ruler who violates the law is illegitimate. He has no right to be obeyed. His commands are mere force and coercion. Rulers who act lawlessly, whose laws are unlawful, are mere criminals".
User avatar
holy vehm
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 3077
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 7:17 pm
Location: http://www.fmotl.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=9142

PreviousNext

Return to Lawful rebellion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron