by John Hamer
“Common law is the system of deciding cases that originated in England and which were latterly adopted in the USA. Common law is based on precedent (legal principles developed in earlier case law) instead of statutory laws. It is the traditional law of an area or region created by judges when deciding individual disputes or cases. Common law changes over time.”
However, this change is so slow a process that Common Law was of little use to the Elite families. Because they wished to create a ‘closed’ society they needed laws that can be introduced quickly and be changed at will to suit their agenda, whenever it was expedient. One thing that they certainly did not want was for people to be able to create their own laws.
So, in a nutshell, the Elite usurped Common Law which is the law of the land, as the prime arbiter of human affairs, with Statute Law which is in effect the law of the sea. This is also referred to as Maritime Law or Admiralty Law, Commercial Law and Civil Law, among other terms. Thus, the Elite bloodlines took the laws of shipping and trade by sea and brought them to dry land and named them ‘Statute Law’, which by its nature is commercial law or the law of contracts.
These then are the 'laws' introduced by governments and parliaments and they can often do this overnight, literally, if it suits their agenda – and it often does and of course this is absolutely perfect for the imposition of onerous, draconian laws that create a virtual slave state. When the Queen signs an Act of Parliament or the US president signs a bill into law they are simply signing a ‘contract’ to make a ‘contractual’ agreement and this is not actually ‘lawful’ under Common Law.
During the last Labour government in Britain (1997-2010) they created 3,800 new criminal offences almost one new crime for every day they were in office. This is possible using Statute Law, the law of the sea, but not with Common Law, the law of the land. The other important aspect to Common Law is that it refers to a living, breathing human being whilst Statute Law is the law of contracts and so the instigators of Statutory Law had to invent fake 'personas' ie corporations, to which the contrived new 'laws' could apply.
This is the 'straw-man' principle, a ‘legal’ (but not lawful) fiction, which is in effect activated by writing names in all-capitals. So peter smith and its other variations, such as peter: smith and peter: of the smith family are, under Common Law, the living, breathing, human being with a soul and PETER SMITH is the legalised fictional corporation, created to fall under the jurisdiction of Statute Law.
Whenever governments, law enforcement, corporations, legal and financial agencies etc, communicate with us they almost always write our names in all capital letters and this is because they are not writing to us, the living, breathing being, but to the fake 'straw-man' that is created when your birth is ‘registered’. What they would like us to believe is that peter smith and PETER SMITH is exactly the same, whereas in truth it most certainly is not. We all need to understand that countries, governments, local councils, courts and the police force etc. are actually private companies and corporations and this can easily and simply be confirmed by checking this information with Dun and Bradstreet, which provides credit information on businesses and corporations worldwide.
Actually, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA INCORPORATED and THE UNITED KINGDOM CORPORATION plc are at this moment in a state of what is referred to as ‘Chapter 11 bankruptcy’ which... “... allows businesses to reorganise themselves, giving them an opportunity to restructure debt and get out from under certain burdensome leases and contracts. Typically a business is allowed to continue to operate while it is in Chapter 11, although it does so under the supervision of the Bankruptcy Court and its appointees.”
So who controls the 'Bankruptcy Court and its appointees' that are currently 'supervising' the 'government' corporations of the United States and United Kingdom? None other than our old friends, the House of Rothschild banksters and their international banking conglomerate. So in truth, governments are corporations and the Presidents, Prime Ministers, Royalty and cabinets are the CEOs and the boards of directors. Only insiders of course, will know this, but most of them will be unaware of how the very system they are briefly administering, really works. The shareholders in these corporations are the general population and citizens of the country, but of course we are never told this plain fact.
Each and every time a new-born baby is registered, a single share in the corporation is issued in its name in all-capital letters of course, but because this fact is systematically kept from us we never ask for either the share or the money it is worth. Instead, the share is held in trust by the government as are all dividends due and the corporate voting rights that go along with it. The trustee, the government corporation, uses these 'votes' to decide the future of the corporation and whether for example, it will agree to a ‘corporate merger’ in the creation of the European Union or North American Union.
So by keeping their true lawful status from the people, they turn the shareholders into employees of the corporation, or actually slaves to be more accurate and one of the principle ways this is achieved is by the utilisation of words that have one meaning to the population and another in law. As alluded to already, the term 'legal' is not the same as lawful. This is why banking is sometimes derided by being referred to as ‘legalised robbery’. It is certainly 'legal' under Statute Law, but it is also in effect robbery which is under Common Law, an unlawful offence. So, Common Law is that which is lawful and Statue Law is that defined as 'legal'.
We may believe that a 'person' is a living human being, but under the 'legal' definition of Statute Law a 'person' is a corporation and, to meet the criteria of Maritime Law, the 'person' represents a ship in effect and so that is why when a 'person' attends court, which in reality is a maritime court, the 'person' stands in the dock. We see this symbolic language also in other areas of the law, for example, all the maritime language in everyday use, especially with reference to governments and legal terms such as ownership and citizenship. We also indulge in courtship before agreeing a corporate merger, more commonly referred to as marriage in which we contract with the other government subsidiary corporation (the spouse) by means of a marriage certificate. And of course when that merger subsequently results in the patter of tiny subsidiaries, the new corporation’s registration is confirmed by the issuance of a birth / berth certificate.
The ‘Stars and Stripes’ flags displayed in every federal building, court, school etc, in the USA are all framed with a gold/yellow fringe for this reason. And whenever the President makes an address or speaks officially there is always the flag behind him, complete with its gold/yellow fringe, signifying that all those institutions/corporations operate under maritime law and not the ‘law of the land’.
Under the International Law of the Flags, the type of flag displayed by a ship decrees the law that applies aboard that vessel and by boarding the ship you are automatically accepting the jurisdiction of the law that applies to that flag. Exactly the same is true with regards to foreign embassies. The flag they display/fly ensures that the law of the country it represents applies within the confines of the embassy.
A flag with a gold fringe always indicates Admiralty Law and so if we are summoned to appear in a court displaying this version of the flag, we are in effect agreeing to be tried under Statute Law, the law of the sea that applies to a legalised fiction and not to the person.
“When you enter a courtroom displaying a gold or yellow fringed flag, you have just entered into a foreign country, and you better have your passport with you, because you may not be coming back to the land of the free for a long time. The judge sitting under a gold or yellow fringe flag becomes the ‘captain’ or ‘master’ of that ship or enclave and he has absolute power to make the rules as he goes. The gold or yellow fringe flag is your warning that you are leaving your constitutionally secured rights on the floor outside the door to that courtroom.” usa-therepublic.com
Even the US troops fighting abroad in such places as Afghanistan, have the gold-fringe
d flag clearly displayed on their uniforms, indicating in fact, that they are the army of the corporation of the United States and not of the people or the country for which they believe they are fighting. Many lawyers, solicitors and court officials genuinely have no idea of what Statute Law really consists, but this certainly cannot be said of those in the upper echelons of the global legal profession including the judges and senior government administrators, whom I suppose must be appraised of the real facts as they reach a certain stage on the career ladder.
However the tangled mess is slowly beginning to be unravelled by those brave pioneers and champions of Common Law who are now challenging magistrates and judges in their own domains throughout the country and demanding evidence of the proof of the lawfulness of courts and their deceptive practices. It is absolutely possible, as these fearless men and women have shown, to permanently disconnect from statute slavery if you have a basic awareness of Common Law and have the fortitude to stand-up for your rights as a citizen.
In addition, the wording of all communications with the State and ‘authority’ should be carefully constructed, not least of which is the way in which our names are denoted on documents. We should never forget that we are peter: smith and not PETER SMITH. Indeed should we respond to communications referring to us as PETER SMITH, then we have lost the war before the first battle has begun as Statute Law will then prevail. But use peter: smith and we will no longer be subject to Statute Law, only Common Law.
There will of course be no anarchy when Statute Law is eventually overturned and Common Law is returned to its rightful place in human affairs. If the peace is breached or should we cause harm or loss to another or employ mischief in our agreements, then we are still subject to the penalties of Common Law, no matter what.
Social-engineering
What is social-engineering? Social-engineering may be defined as the art or science of psychologically manipulating people into acting or thinking in way that may not be their natural, normal mode of behaviour, usually without their express permission or knowledge.
It may take the form of one of the two extremes of a one-off, simple confidence trick such as making someone believe something untrue in order to deceive them. Or it can be used against an entire population by the ruling Elite in order to modify their beliefs about society and the world around them into thinking that they are entirely different constructs to that which they assume to be the truth.
It is this latter circumstance upon which we will concentrate for the purposes of this section.
Before governments can engage in social-engineering, they must have reliable information about the society that is to be engineered and also must have effective tools with which to carry out the engineering. Both of these elements only became available relatively recently, roughly within the past century. The development of social science made it possible to gather and analyse information about social attitudes and trends, which is necessary in order to judge the initial state of society before an engineering strategy is undertaken and the success or failure of that attempt after it has been implemented. At the same time, the development of modern mass-communications technology and the media also provided the tools through which social-engineering may be performed.
Whilst social-engineering may be, and often is, carried out by any organisation whatsoever, whether large or small, public or private, the most comprehensive (and therefore the most effective) campaigns of social-engineering are those initiated by powerful central governments controlled by our Elite masters.
Extremely intensive social-engineering campaigns have always occurred in countries with authoritarian governments. In the 1920s for example, the revolutionary government of the Soviet Union embarked on a campaign to fundamentally modify the behaviour and ideals of Soviet citizens, to replace the old social mores of the Czarist government with a new ‘Soviet’ culture, to create the modern Russian citizen. They used newspapers, books, film, mass relocations and even architectural design tactics to serve as social modification techniques in order to change personal values and private relationships into those which benefitted the state.
Similar examples would be the Chinese ‘Great Leap Forward’ under Chairman Mao Tse Tung and the ‘Cultural Revolution’ programme and also the Khmer Rouge’s plan of de-urbanisation of Cambodia under Pol Pot in the 1970s.
More recently, sustained social-engineering campaigns that create more gradual, but ultimately far-reaching, changes would include initiatives such as the ‘war on drugs’ and the ‘war on terror’, both fake constructs which have seriously changed the hearts and minds of western populations towards a multitude of issues, such as Islam itself and primarily the attitudes to the ongoing foreign wars being fought in the name of British, US and Israeli hegemony and empire-building.
Other examples would include such as the ever-increasing encroachment of intellectual property rights on behalf of the Elite-run corporations and the copyrighting of anything remotely profitable including the human genome, which in my view is an absolutely scandalous act that should never have been allowed in a fair and equitable society. We may also include here, the promotion of faux elections as a political tool, a tactic that has now been in place for over two centuries.
Social theorists of the Frankfurt School (see relevant section) such as Theodor Adorno also commentated upon the new phenomenon in the 1920s and 30s of mass culture and remarked on its manipulative power. When the rise of the Nazis in Germany drove him out of the country around 1930, he and many others of his ilk became involved with the ‘Institute for Social Research’ in the United States. The Nazis themselves of course, were no strangers to the idea of influencing political attitudes and re-defining personal and social relationships. The Nazi propaganda machine under Josef Goebbels was a sophisticated and effective tool for creating and manipulating public opinion to the benefit of the regime.
Social-engineering can and is being used constantly by the Elite, as a means to achieve a wide variety of different results, as illustrated by the many different governments and other organisations that have employed it as an effective tool to retain the balance of power in their favour. The possibilities for large-scale manipulation became more realistic immediately following WWII, with the widespread, exponential growth of television and ongoing social-engineering, particularly with regard to advertising techniques is still pertinent in the abhorrent western model of consumer capitalism that enslaves us all.
In his classic political science work, ‘The Open Society and Its Enemies, The Spell of Plato’, Karl Popper examined the application of the critical and rational methods of science to the problems of the open society. In this respect, he made an important distinction between the principles of what he referred to as 'piecemeal social-engineering' and 'Utopian social-engineering'.
“The piecemeal [social] engineer will adopt the method of searching for and fighting against, the greatest and most urgent evil of society, rather than searching for, and fighting for, its greatest ultimate good.” For him, the difference between 'piecemeal social-engineering' and 'Utopian social-engineering' is "…the difference between a reasonable method of improving the lot of man, and a method which, if really tried, may easily lead to an intolerable increase in human suffering. It is the difference between a method which can be applied at any moment, and a method whose advocacy may easily become a means of continually postponing action until a later date, when conditions are more favourable. And it is also the difference between the only method of improving matters which has so far been really successful, at any time, and in any place, and a method which, wherever it has been tried, has led only to the use of violence in place of reason, and if not to its own abandonment, at any rate to that of its original blueprint.” Karl Popper, Austrian philosopher, 1902-1994
We are all subjected to and affected by social-engineering whether we like it or not but as Popper rightly points-out, there is a world of difference between benign social-engineering and its hugely more malignan
t cousin. Unfortunately the insidious, covert use of social-engineering techniques upon the whole of mankind is a valuable tool in the armoury of those who seek to deceive us and thus enslave us. Social-engineering could also be said to be a less-intrusive version of that other popular Elite tool, mind-control techniques.
Mind Control
MK Ultra (short for the Germanic form, Mind Kontrolle) was introduced shortly after WWII using Nazi scientists and hypnotists procured via Project Paperclip (see section on WWII). Its aim was to research into hypnotic techniques for interrogation, secure courier duties and reducing fatigue for the armed forces and also to research the effects of primitive drugs like barbiturates and cannabis for drug-assisted interrogation.
A man by the name of George Estabrooks was the leading proponent of hypnosis as the ultimate method of manipulation of the human mind. His book, Hypnotism, published in the early 1940s, has been decried as too fantastic and improbable in terms of describing the capabilities of hypnosis with certain very suggestible subjects, but his arguments and examples remain valid to this day. Estabrooks admitted in 1971 to creating hypnotic couriers and programmed multiple personalities for Military Intelligence purposes.
The commencement of the Cold War and the Korean War in particular saw an upsurge in mind control research and also the emergence of the term 'brain-washing'. Supposedly a development of the Chinese communists, the term was actually coined by a magazine writer later found to be on the CIA payroll as an agent of influence. In postulating a 'brainwashing gap', the CIA were given permission to undertake research into countering communist mind-control efforts and developing their own as an aid in the espionage wars that were a prominent feature of the second half of the twentieth century.
