The reason law is confusing is because its deliberately made so, with cunning.
But ultimately because of witchcraft.(demonology)
Demonology being particularly obvious when you are trying to uncover the ruse used to destroy christian law. The same ruse used in the American revolution and I would imagine in every country of the British empire.
And I was subject to hauntings, ghostly manifestations and owl attacks, in the period i was figuring this out . Strange as that may seem to those oblivious to the way of this world.
So when reading how that ruse was orchestrated please bear that witchcraft in mind
Rather than get upset that the explanation is vague or confusing.
The hidden British empire is run via freemasons – who are witches.
(Or warlocks as ive been informed recently.)
I believe they go through elaborate ceremonies invoking demons and whatever evil they can conjur ~ to protect the secrecy of their ruse for conquering Christendom.
And emerging from a century where witchcraft was considered fantastic & the stuff of fairytale ~the masonic ruse was well protected by spirits of confusion.
Aswell as populations utterly oblivious of demonology. And thus all the more vulnerable to it.
But we need not be confused. Christian law is very simple!!
The monarch’s promise to uphold the law (our rights therein)
and defend the faith (protestant Christianity)
Its simple for a reason.
So that you cannot be confused.
That was our law degree. We now know the law.
The macchiavelian ruse to get around the simple genius of contractual monarchy, however, is not simple. its complex.
There seems no profit in forgetting the simplicity of our law whilst delving into the murky waters of the masonic ruses used to subvert it.
That is the masonic goal, i.m.o.- the battlefield- the monarch’s contract. Her coronation promise to uphold our law & defend the faith.
Combine the neccessary complexity to get around that promise, with the masonic demonology applied~and its very difficult to explain to others how it was done.
Particularly when you must stand on one foot and read about it under your left armpit to follow the logic
So perhaps it is best explained piecemeal.
1) who is doing it? British freemasonry
2) what is their overall motive ? to replace çhristian law as per king james bible and victory at arms by Crowwell & friends.
And replace it with Plato’s republic
3) what is their first objective? overturn the simple genius of contractual monarchy. Which is how christian law is upheld.
These points seemed to me reasonable foundations on which to base a search,online.
After I realised that freeman gurus were masons. And thus i must figure out what’s really going on by myself.
I discarded a couple years of wasted reading and memorising stuff from youtube seminars-based wholly on freeman guru worship.
And started from scratch. Looking for self evident truths and reading histories with discernment.
standard accepted history, but is it biased?
(slideshow takes a few minute to load)
First asking myself -WHAT IS LAW?
what is its foundations in reality ?
Freeman gurus would have us believe law is a fiction.
The invention of wise men.
If true then that leaves us utterly powerless & subject to the philosophical musings of the intelligensia.
Peculiar definition of a freeman isnt it?
If your freedom is subject to the imagination of strangers.
And the weight given to their opinions by strangers……
and in this era- who spams their opinions most.
Another popular idea is that contract makes the law. Which to a degree is true enough but doesn’t quite take us out of the realm of paper into the real world.
Reading about Cromwell and his adventures helped me to answer this question- what is law?
Answer it with conviction that I’d found a rather obvious self evident truth . In an age of lies and confusion.
That truth being the war maketh the law.
Contracts signed between adversaries may represent concessions made to bring peace. Or even avoid more war.
But the war itself is the concrete foundations of law, Firm foundations in reality on which to build reasoning upon.
And thus armed with firm foundations in understanding law, who the goodies were and the baddies
what their objectives were
I put myself in the baddie’s shoes and conjectured.
post #2 in a series explaining piecemeal how & why & by whom Australia was conquered through the law.
In post #1 i claimed that the WHO was the British Crown , in particular its freemasons.
the WHY was because our law is christian and masons are satanic.
And that christian law is protected by the monarch’s promise.-contractual monarchy- ingeniusly simple law.
This post I will endeavour to explain how I believe contractual monarchy was usurped in the north American revolution, because the same basic strategy seemed to be used for Australia.
(and probably other countries in the British commonwealth)
If you put yourself in king George’s shoes. If he decided to ignore his contract and rule as a tyrant, then his throne was forfeit and perhaps his head too.
However if he could convince his subjects to abandon their side of the contract , he, his head and his heirs would be fine.
And his masons could set about subverting christianity (as they’re wont to do ) without nasty consequences such as the king being tried & executed for treason.
(Bearing in mind many protestant christians had already fled to the new world- north America. For refuge. And masons are the wolves in scripture. )
So he set about it by utilising the British east india company
to foment revolution and have the Americans abandon the accountable executive of contractual monarchy, under the pretext of nationalism.
Swapping christian fervour for patriotic fervour. .
And near- perfect law for intentionally flawed law.
i’ll digress for a moment in order to refute the popularised notion that Americans are free. Or more to the point- their law makes them so.
Because many Australians wish for American law, or try to base their ideas of freedom on American foundations. Or american style constitutions and even quote their founding fathers. Or worse still the platitudes of the masonic philosophers of the day.
When our own law is so far superior to USA law !
The intentional flaw in American law being made glaringly obvious in our generation- when Americans ask – who is held accountable when American judges,congressmen or presidents- break the law?
Corruption, conspiracy and treason as we are seeing now particularly via a well coordinated consiracy ~,should be brought to account by an independent and accountable executive.
Preferably accountable generationally.
To keep it in check.
e.g. a king
But i digress, apologies….that’s for a different post.
So, when the British Subjects that had declared independence in America became citizens they became aliens of the crown, in law.
American citizens yes but also aliens of the British Crown.
And from the British admiralty’s point of view were now fair game.
An alien of the crown is self explanatory, i believe, please correct me if i’m wrong. Because that status will become more important later in this explanation
If you read the treaty of Paris, signed after the American revolution ~ British subjects living in America were to have their property restored to them.
After the revolution.
Thus they mustve had the means to retain and pass on that status.
Which i conjecture was passed father to son, as spelt out in the British Subject Act passed through the Australian federal parliament in 1958.
I can only speculate how many Americans retained that status, but at least 150 000 Australians have retained it since the 1986 Australia Act cut us off from English law.~ ( According to the electoral roll)
And now cut-off , an Australian citizen was no longer commensurate with British Subject status.
But just like American citizens was now an alien of the crown.
I don’t recall much hoopla at the time about Australia becoming independent.
We weren’t asked, we simply had the queen of Australia forced upon us, and the queen of England in the capacity of contractual monarch quietly removed.
And thus the simple genius of christian law protected via contractual monarchy was usurped in Australia.
Via faux American-style independence. Changing our status from British Subjects to aliens of the crown.
The next post i hope to explain how we and our commonwealth were seized using imperial prize law 2 years later. So that the monarch might retain her investment in Australia.
Having her cake and eating it too.
As done in America i.m.o.
(controversially suggesting the American revolution was faked/orchestrated).
(british east india company flag as designed in 1707 and carried into battle by the American revolutionaries) ——————————————————
If king George had deliberately lost the American revolution in order to escape Christian law. He then had to retain his investments in America. Somehow without Americans noticing.
Perhaps he could do that through a secret society. For example Scottish Rite freemasonry. And their control of the U.S.Supreme court.
In 1812 Britain went to war with the newly independent United States, again.
Bearing in mind Britain controlled the seas in 1812. Had a navy of 1000 men of war. Versus America’s navy of 20 ships.Bolstered by privateers.
And yet Britain mysteriously failed to defeat them , this time too.
During this war a court case was heard in the U.S. Supreme Court, to decide the fate of a ship & cargo taken as a prize of war.Decided by Judge Story ( freemason) and Judge Marshall (also a freemason)
Prize Law being international law . Used to determine ownership of vessels & their cargoes seized during wartime.
And it works much like the common law ,i believe, in the sense that prior judgements form the body of the law.
Thus any Prize case can & should be considered as a reference to the boundaries & principles of Prize law.
In contrast to the popular belief that law should be codified and set out in one source, such as an Act of congress, or parliament.
I stumbled onto this case by googling keywords in googlescholar.
And though initially dry & boring to read a few points in the judgement set off alarm bells, to a conspiracyhound like me.
For example ~to facillitate use of Prize law outside of wartime, war may be declared on a thing, such as debt.
~prizes may be taken on land and sea
If these judges were not setting up Americans to be enslaved in this fashion, it was an extraordinary coincidence that FDR asked congress for special powers to declare war on the great depression 80 odd years later.
FDR declares war on a thing-i.e. the depression
Which they granted, in spite of it being an utterly bizzare request.
Not so bizzare if considered in the context of this obscure Prize law decision decades earlier
Armitz Brown vs. US 1814 Prize law
There are many theories online of who & by what law US is secretly governed.
My interest is Australia & British law, but that case coupled with bizzare declarations of war on things by US presidents could theoretically be used to take Americans and their commonwealths as Prize or cargo. By the British Admiralty.
And then we come to Australia and the faux independence forced upon us via Bob Hawke’s Australia Act.
Followed closely (& quietly) by creation of this little provincial govt. for the suburbs of Canberra & surrounds.
Using British law so soon after Bob Hawke declared us independent of Britain ? Does that make sense?
this was on the front page of their founding legal claptrap a few years ago.
Its since been altered (because obviously it wasn’t confusing enough to escape notice, if i found and published it)
Created using British Prize law & prize court acts, in spite of , or perhaps because of Bob Hawkes Australia Act making Australian citizens aliens of the Crown in Imperial Prize law
So at this stage i have a plausible theory~
Who ? the masons- via either British and/orAmerican navy?
WHAT? steal the commonwealth we each own a share of & make merchandise of men (slaves)
WHEN ? between 1986 & 1988
WHY ? to dismantle christian law and nullify protestantism. The queen handing us back to the pope just as Salome handed John the baptist’s head on a plate to her mother Herodias.
HOW ? faux independence making us aliens of the Crown,thus subject to British Prize law
An interesting theory. Until someone read the terms and conditions he had to agree to in order to join MYGOV. Posted his concern at agreeing to submit to the jurisdiction of these A.C.T courts and the laws of the A.c.t self government Authority on facebook.
I read his post and said to myelf hello.
And suddenly my wacky conspiracy theory became so much more.
i had an admission of sorts from the horse’s mouth.
Combined with their dilligent changing of terms & conditions since then. And rendering all links i’d provided to back my theory- broken.
i dare say now that my theory is as good as fact.
Explaining the sell off of commonwealth assets throughout the 1990s.
And the governments starting to advertise on TV at this time.
(which irritated me so much i couldn’t watch TV )
New parliament house being built.
And the beginning of being given orders by public servants & police.
the next post in this piecemeal explanation I hope to review the cunning ways my original blogged theory was made incomprehensible via corrupting links i’d provided. But could in a way, be viewed
Post #4 mygov terms & conditions
Note the screenshot below of term 8.2 taken today
and compare it with original terms & conditions when i first blogged my theory
Which i will have to show via a new blog pages as my computer is playing up.