FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:22 pm

Nice one, some good food for thought there. brb.

:peace:
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby kevin » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:34 pm

interesting stuff there

So they see children as subjects and adults as citizens
kevin
Newbie
Newbie
 

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:44 pm

interesting the idea that this being my native land

-- If I renounce my citizenship I would be subject to border control ...? - well if I'm reading that right, this looks like a lot of fun. Where the hell would the ptb send me then? And if they wanted to send me somewhere couldn't I come back under international law?. .?
:peace:
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby holy vehm » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:57 pm

if you give up uk citizenship you have 6 months to find another one and if you dont you become a uk citizen again by default.
write to every embassy in the uk asking for citizenship and see if any accept you, if they do then accept, making you an illegal immigrant and wait for border police to round you up and deport you to your new country at their expense.
im thinking somewhere like the carribean or some island in the pacific or indean oceans.
i believe the government pay immigrants to go home, ive heard a couple grand even.

so thats four plane tickets and 8 grand (2 grand each) and a new life in the sun.
:8-):
hv
"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: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby Travels » Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:22 am

Farmer wrote:
2. By what authority does parliament or Parliament have to make this requirement?


It is a constitutional convention that the Parliament at Westminster is competent to make or unmake any law whatever.


So we do have a constitution then? :puzz:
Hatreds never cease by hatreds in this world. By love alone they cease. This is Ancient Law.
- Dhammapada
User avatar
Travels
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Fluid...

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby Farmer » Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:01 am

Travels wrote:
Farmer wrote:
2. By what authority does parliament or Parliament have to make this requirement?


It is a constitutional convention that the Parliament at Westminster is competent to make or unmake any law whatever.


So we do have a constitution then? :puzz:


This is one of the replies I am not happy with because I asked "By what authority". However, I think the reply itself is accurate because:

Black’s Law Dictionary First Edition 1891

Convention: In English law. An extraordinary assembly of the houses of lords and commons, without the assent or summons of the sovereign. It can only be justified ex necessitate rei, as the parliament which restored Charles II., and that which disposed of the crown and kingdom to William and Mary. Wharton.


In other words, parliament took it upon itself to give itself that power after the civil war. It does not have any authority at all; it just continues to exercise power through the use of violence.
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby Farmer » Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:04 am

Sent the following clarification:

Dear Ms K Dooley,

Thank you for your informative reply.

In regard to question 2:
=================

I am a little confused by the answer you gave to question 2:

"2. By what authority does parliament or Parliament have to make this requirement?

It is a constitutional convention that the Parliament at Westminster is competent to make or unmake any law whatever."

My understanding is that constitutional convention means:

Black’s Law Dictionary First Edition 1891

Convention: In English law. An extraordinary assembly of the houses of lords and commons, without the assent or summons of the sovereign. It can only be justified ex necessitate rei, as the parliament which restored Charles II., and that which disposed of the crown and kingdom to William and Mary. Wharton.

In other words, parliament took it upon itself to give itself that power after the civil war. It does not have any authority at all; it just continues to exercise power through the use of violence or we are all slaves owned by something because I have not consented to this, so there is no authority for parliament to exercise its will upon me.

Could there be something else that is missing?

In regard to question 11:
==================

Further to question 11, is it possible for a British citizen to be a legal fiction as defined in the question?

Also, why do ships and aircraft need to have a nationality?

In regard to question 15:
==================

Your reply "These will depend on what citizenship they renounce in favour of. Many countries will not recognise a renunciation unless the individual is a dual national and can evidence another citizenship." Suggests that a person is a slave and must submit to the will of a master. Citizenship appears to be a controlling tool where it is only possible to pass from one master to another.

Is it the case then that countries have conspired to to control all peoples on this planet through the use of international treaties (agreements) between themselves?


In regard to question 19:
==================

The purpose of question 19 was to discover what status a new born child has. My thinking goes like this: A child is born but not registered. Three days later it is abandoned by the parents. The citizenship of the parents is not known.

What status or citizenship does this child have, and what position or rights does it have when it becomes 18 years of age?

In regard to question 20:
==================

To clarify question 20, by sovereign I mean not being a citizen of any country and exercising my God given rights. If I cannot renounce British citizenship without gaining another citizenship from another country, I am simply a slave. Being sovereign means that I do not have to do this. I am a creation of God, not a country. It cannot be that a legal fiction such as parliament has a higher authority than God. I have also not consented to being controlled unless there has been fraudulent concealment, or the simple use of violence to enforce the will of parliament on me as pointed out above.

So, How does a British citizen become sovereign?

Yours sincerely,

John Smith
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:29 am

Bloody good job, Farmer, ya never fail to amaze with the depth and detail of the questions. :yes: :clap:

Glad you're on our side, m8 :hug: Keep it up! :sun:
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby enegiss » Sun Dec 06, 2009 11:39 am

good call farmer, i bet there heads are up their arses with some of those questions :grin: peace
if you wish to create a favourable History, then you have to start now.
enegiss
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: FOI - Citizenship Renunciation

Postby Farmer » Mon Dec 07, 2009 8:18 pm

The final reply and all I can say is WOW. This has been an excellent request. Have a look at my clarification to question 20 above, and then the answer below. In the clarification I deliberatly wrote "In regard to question" instead of "With regard to question". I did this because I wanted to see whether it would be corrected in the reply. As it happens, the grammar and spelling are all checked, so in the reply to question 20 it is strange that the word 'The' is used, which is a mistake, instead of 'They' which I think is what is meant, or 'You'. Question 20 is of course also the most important. I think it is fair to say that an effort has been made not to hide anything. As for the answer to question 20, all I can assume from it is that all the members countries of the UN have conspired to enslave every human being on this planet



Dooley, Kathy

7 December 2009

Dear Mr Smith

Further to your latest correspondence

With regard to question 2:

By convention in this context we mean a custom or pattern of behaviour which is regular and generally observed. The British constitution is largely unwritten and therefore consists mainly of such customs/conventions. The most important characteristic of the British constitution is the legislative supremacy- sometimes called sovereignty- of the UK Parliament. Positively this means that Parliament can legally pass any kind of law whatsoever; negatively it means that there is no authority whose legal power competes with it or overrides it.

With regard to question 11:

No, the term describes the status of a natural person having the appropriate characteristics.

With regard to the question as to why ships and aircraft need a nationality you will need to contact the Department for Transport about this, this is not an issue for the United Kingdom Border Agency.

With regard to question 15:

This applies to the signatories to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

With regard to question 19

See Section 1(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981 which relates to foundlings.

Under s.1(2), a new born infant found abandoned in the United Kingdom on or after 1 January 1983 can be regarded, for the purposes of s.1(1), as having been:

born in the United Kingdom on or after 1 January 1983; and born to a parent who at the time of the birth was a British citizen or settled in the United Kingdom unless either can be disproved.

(Under s.1(1), a person born in the United Kingdom on or after 1 January 1983 is a British citizen at birth if, at the time of the birth:

either parent is a British citizen; or either parent is settled in the United Kingdom)

With regard to question 20.

The cannot because of the 1961 UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

Yours sincerely

Miss K Dooley
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

PreviousNext

Return to Freedom of Information only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron