Court de Jure

[emmanualgoldstein]

In terms of the oath, it is my understanding that Her Majesty stands as a symbol for the people so swearing an aoth to her is swearing an oath to the people.
AD

Who is the Queen's Majesty (note the apostrophe). No one officially speaks to the Monarch, they speak to his or her Majesty. Wikipedia says that "it came to mean" the actual person, and that originally it referred to the inviolable state. Encylcopedia.com describes its etymology to mean "first of the glory of god". Thinking of the word myself I wonder if theres any connection between majesty and magistrate. Could it be the Queen's judge it refers to? Now who could that be?

PS baldy - yep thats helps, thanks.

[drew]

hi all, you can count me in.and i know a couple of friends who would also be take part.
there are hundreds if not thousands of police men/women loosing their jobs and there are plenty of MP's and other prominent people walking out/stepping down or retiring ,we should get these people joining hands with us
love and peace

[big hare]

Most definatly count me in, i'm still at the begining of my learning curve but I've been thinking about this alot.

extract from a BBC news article about the same:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7234870.stm

Note the phrases: "These "courts" are legally recognised in English law as a means for warring parties to agree to arbitration.

isn't the key frase here "warring parties agree"
2 muslims may agree to settle there dispute in a sharia court
but no bankster or extortionist is gona agree to anything with us
we need sharp pointy teeth

dont wana put downer on this but isn't this why the first monopoly of any government is a monopoly on violence
or was it the issue and control of money

[big hare]

Personally, i feel that if there were more Sovereigns in the audience than there were on the jury and they perceive an injustice occurring, that they would have the ability collectively to call for a miss-trial.

Your thoughts please.
AD

wouldn't this leave the door open to mob rule, they who bring the most soverigns to the court wins.

[strawmansarah]

Count me in. I'm currently in conversation with the courts of justice - threatening commercial liens (gently at the mo - I'm not quite brave enough yet). How do they dare call it justice when no such thig exists! Grr...

[kenb]

YES, I was talking to my parents about this very same thing the other day, this would be fantastic! Defo count me in.

[barny00]

Yes to all!

We really need to get something going here in the UK! Or am I just out of the loop and things are already happening?

[robandragon]

The court of common law . has my vote

[dmurphy25]

Put my name down too...

Has anybody seen the video called "The Solution" where an alaskan guy "Shaeffer Cox"(sp?) lays out the structure of the Common Law Courts that they have apparently set up in Alaska?

[Dipsy]

Heads UP! You should be aware that such a process in underway in the US right now. After 2 years of planning and a process which kicked off in 1st Feb this year which involves ALL 50 states to form a court-de-jure from members of the common people. The initial process of signing a declaration which supports and recognizes fully the American Constitution has been going on behind the scenes now for weeks 24/7 people been holding meetings and flying/driving here there and everywhere to get this done.

Im pleased to tell you that ALL 50 states have now been seated and the final packages are being presented to the military and the high courts within the next 48 hours.

The process will be swift, decisive yet almost like stealth the transformation should be incredible over the coming days and weeks! Whatever happens to America WILL effect what happens here in the UK and indeed every country on earth. We must pray this works for all our sakes.