Alfed the Great, Balmoral Castle, Bog People, Cana'an law, Canada, Canon Law, Common Law, courts, Danes, debt, Dooms of Alfred, England, Game of Thrones, Heresy, Ine Offa Knutus Alfred, Inner City of London, Inns of court, James VI/I, judges, keys to heaven and keys to earth, King George VI, King James Bible, lawyers, Lord Privy Seal, Magna Carta 1215, Mercians, national debt, Northumbrians, oath of allegianace to the queen, Papacy, Pentateuch, Picts, Pope, Privy Council Office, Queen Elizabeth the Second, Rome, thomas jefferson, Throne of Thorns, Torah, United States of America, unum sanctum 1302, Vatican, Wickerman
The family unit is the pillar of society. Families flow from our tribal ancestry, most of which has been beaten out of us. There are those whose tribal genealogy has been maintained and for a reason.
What you are about to read should not be construed as being in relation to the commercial-cult activities of “religion” but as a presentation of the facts as set out from readily available sources. One should always conduct their own research in order to verify other’s research, claims, opinions or snake oil including my own aforementioned.
To understand what tribalism is all about you must first look at what a tribe is. Tribes are listed in the Bible under the first book of Moses called; “Genesis”. From Genesis we find the; Israelites, Edomites, Cana’anites, Amorites and other “ites”. What we don’t find is the “Jew” tribe and I provide more on this topic in other posts.
Further into the Bible we find certain prophecies and happenings having a bearing on where we are today. From the Bible we learn of Noah’s son messing with his concubine and Reuben messing with Jacob’s bedroom meaning adulteration of the bloodlines.
The Bible also covers other areas such as divorce. From the Bible we find the man is the head of he household and the wife is the glue holding the family together. If the husband dies the wife is to marry the brother in law under certain circumstances, if the wife leaves the relationship the husband must return her dowry, I assume, for her to live on until she finds another husband. However, when she leaves she can return but if she marries she cannot.
If the wife wants out of the relationship the husband grants her her divorce. If he puts her out then he is to support her but the children always stay with the dad, not with the mother. Why?
In order to qualify to become a son of God you must be a son of man. God created man out of the earth but woman was created from man. To qualify to become a son of God one must be a son, or daughter, of man. When a mother raises the children, to the detriment of the dad, the children become sons and daughters of woman. With very few exceptions those who are sons of women are bastard children who come from prostitutes thus unclean and don’t qualify to become sons of God.
In lands where Elizabeth is the head of state the Laws attached to her come from the Pentateuch. This is because Elizabeth is of Judah who is God’s delegated authority to rule on this earth.
All those who subscribe to an oath of allegiance to Elizabeth instantly become bound to her and the Laws attached to her.
If what I am saying were true then why is there a seeming divorce industry which sprouted up nearly 50 years ago? Why is custody of the children an issue? Well, in some instances custody may very well be an issue however this is where the extended family comes into play. They are there for the support we need in raising families. Under an ancient doctrine of parens patrae the state assumes the right over certain “persons” consistent with the last provision of the papal Bull unum sanctum 1302. This is relevant only to the pagan rulers, perhaps I should say; non-Judahite rulers. Yes, there exists a “Game of Thrones” switching non-Judahite rulers with Judahite rulers. Currently, we enjoy a Judahite ruler in Elizabeth.
In practice we have a variation of what is known as the “code of canon law” which I wrote of in my “Law of the Land” post. This is called the “adversarial system” of law. In certain ecclesiastical circles the adversary is referred to as Satan.
You must experience this system to full come to terms on just how repugnant to the Laws attached to Elizabeth and her subjects.
In the current system the couple goes to their separate lawyers. They tell their story and the lawyer gives some advice and asked if he or she would like to retain his services. Once a lawyer-client relationship is created the lawyer asks the client to fill out a financial statement.
From the client’s financial statement the lawyer can quickly assess the time and cost involved on all issues except divorce. The divorce is automatic after 1 year living separate and apart. The division of property is another issue but the biggest is the custody of the children. The parents are pitted against one another with the lawyer taking the children’s inheritance. The children, for the most part, are raised as bastards.
In the western way of doing things the wife calls the police and complains of assault. The husband automatically goes to jail and does not pass go. While away his possessions are vulnerable. There are restrictions then the children are kept away and the meter starts ticking. If the husband knew the law there would be no domestic violence as all he has to do is grant her a divorce and let her go! No big deal!
In those lands where the police subscribe to an oath to Elizabeth, to commit to such family destruction, runs contrary to their oath of office thus subject to harsh sanctions under the Law. Society authorizes police to carry guns. The citizens have been prohibited from carrying side arms for quite some time. Because of the position in society the police hold they are expected to know the Law. In subscribing to their oaths of office they then know where the Law comes from and those Laws are known as the “Constitution written in Heaven”. We know the police are standing under laws different from the Law so who are they really serving?
When you consider police often call into the dispatch to speak with the on-duty lawyer who then gives the police direction and legal advice. Clearly, since the police had to speak with a lawyer proves they lack legal knowledge. What is seldom observed is “who is pulling the trigger; the lawyer giving direction or the police?”! If you study the history of the law profession you will find they are rooted in English customs and traditions throughout the pagan ruling years. We do need law and the lawyer can prove to be an asset in some instances. However, as the law stands now, it is wholly inconsistent with the Law of the Land so much so one must question the competence of the profession’s governing body as a whole. Whether or not the lawyer he spoke with has an oath to Elizabeth or not is unclear to me however what appears to have happened, in 1937 a Judahite ruler was set upon the English throne (throne of thorns) in George VI. At this time the law ought to have yielded to the Law thereby creating a gradual shift in the legal business.
The Law of the Land comes from Elizabeth who is head of state in Canada. No provision has been made for sub-contracting this obligation therefore all other laws are fictions. While the lawyer may not have subscribed to an oath to Elizabeth the courts sure do therefore they too have an obligation to the Law but you have to force the issue. If not, then the effect would be to have Elizabeth’s authority terminated at once. They can’t have it both ways, take Elizabeth as the head of state yet rely on laws foreign to those Laws attached to their oaths of office.
Information on the so-called Constitutions of Canada are under another head and well worth noting and I will give you a couple of examples. The British North America Act 1867 was never given Royal Assent. When Elizabeth came to Ottawa, April 17th., 1982 to sign the Charter of Rights and Freedoms she used a pen. Unfortunately, someone of her stature usually relies upon a “signet ring”. A signet ring is the authority of the holder and is pressed into wax melted into the parchment. That failed to happen.
Legal work is not for the faint of heart. If you are insecure standing before a judge but insist on doing so I would suggest you wear your best brown pants as you will probably need them. If you have legal problems and would like to try this method I am not so sure a lawyer would apply this method but one could try. However, using Elizabeth’s Law could affect the course of the legal proceeding and done outside the court. Nonetheless, when in doubt I would suggest you get a lawyer, study and live to battle another day.
If you would like to conduct your own legal proceedings but find the courts intimidating you might like to sit in on court proceedings. You can see criminal proceedings, civil proceedings and trials unless there is a court order preventing the public. The courts are free to attend and you can get the feel of the room, how the lawyers present how the judge does her thing etc. Watching and appearing are two different things. Technically your paperwork should speak for you.
Templates for court are available
Donations would be appreciated