The Sharia Is A Model Of Utter Simplicity. It Contains A Lesson For Us.

Use the Sharie as a model of simplicity for the framing and application of laws. All seem to understand the Sharie while virtually no-one can understand English Law (Common or otherwise)

The Sharie has stood the test of time. It works and is used in the UK already, although this is denied. Banking law is increasingly based on observance of the Sharia and this will increase as we begin to see the toxic and ruinous effects of the UK banking system.

I do not advocate adopting some of the traditional and Quranic laws of the Sharia. I simply say we could learn from simplicity and effectiveness.

Why is this idea important?

Use the Sharie as a model of simplicity for the framing and application of laws. All seem to understand the Sharie while virtually no-one can understand English Law (Common or otherwise)

The Sharie has stood the test of time. It works and is used in the UK already, although this is denied. Banking law is increasingly based on observance of the Sharia and this will increase as we begin to see the toxic and ruinous effects of the UK banking system.

I do not advocate adopting some of the traditional and Quranic laws of the Sharia. I simply say we could learn from simplicity and effectiveness.

Repeal section 39 of the Prison Act 1952

Section 39 of the Prison Act 1952 creates an offence of assisting prisoners to escape. However, there are four other related common law offences that could be used instead of this statutory offence:

  • Permitting an escape
  • Rescue
  • Escaping from lawful custody without force
  • Breach of prison

Assisting a prisoner could be charge as aiding and abetting or conspiracy to commit one of the above offences.

Why is this idea important?

Section 39 of the Prison Act 1952 creates an offence of assisting prisoners to escape. However, there are four other related common law offences that could be used instead of this statutory offence:

  • Permitting an escape
  • Rescue
  • Escaping from lawful custody without force
  • Breach of prison

Assisting a prisoner could be charge as aiding and abetting or conspiracy to commit one of the above offences.

Cannabis is LAWFUL

I am just a layman, This is my UNDERSTANDING, i keep all my inalienable rights intact.

 

There is a vast difference between 'Lawful' and 'Legal' .. try to not be fooled.

Anything that requires a 'License' and subsequently  can be granted a 'license' to make something 'LEGAL'  as opposed to 'illegal' without said license IS essentially Lawful under common Law, the Law of the Land. 

For example, thru the issuance of a license from the home office to GW-Pharmacuticals a UK Cannabis Cultivation farm which enables them to legally grow over 5,000 cannabis plants 4 times per year the granting of said license is the creation of a UK MONOPOLY to become the UK's biggest drug cartel.

Its well documented on the GW Pharma finacial advisors page of the GW -Pharma web site, that the finacial overseers of this organisation is the Global elites organisation the Rothschilds ( go figure..) Shurley these financial 'giants' wouldnt endorse something that was essentially 'un-lawful' ?  So why all the fuss ? as i understand it, and i am but a Layman, if your aware of the difference between you Yourself as a free, sentient flesh human being as opposed to thinking you are a legal fiction or "Strawman", the illegality of being a cannabis user only becomes 'illegal' if you except/give consent of your own free-will to a statute/act  in the first instance, therefore .. if one does not GIVE consent to it being illegal under commercial law "NO CONSENT FOR AUTHORITIES TO CHARGE YOU WITH A STATUTE ..  well .. there is under common law, no breach of th peace, no harm injury or loss and therefore no breach of the Common Law of the land   ..  YOU ARE FREE TO GO & become enlightened ;0 )

I defy anyone to point out to me in common law, the one true law of this land where its says its unlawful to Grow, smoke, enjoy the message given freely from GOD to us.

The video below may help ? – Good luck folks ;0 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

GW-SITE

http://www.gwpharm.com/UK%20Launch.aspx

Why is this idea important?

I am just a layman, This is my UNDERSTANDING, i keep all my inalienable rights intact.

 

There is a vast difference between 'Lawful' and 'Legal' .. try to not be fooled.

Anything that requires a 'License' and subsequently  can be granted a 'license' to make something 'LEGAL'  as opposed to 'illegal' without said license IS essentially Lawful under common Law, the Law of the Land. 

For example, thru the issuance of a license from the home office to GW-Pharmacuticals a UK Cannabis Cultivation farm which enables them to legally grow over 5,000 cannabis plants 4 times per year the granting of said license is the creation of a UK MONOPOLY to become the UK's biggest drug cartel.

Its well documented on the GW Pharma finacial advisors page of the GW -Pharma web site, that the finacial overseers of this organisation is the Global elites organisation the Rothschilds ( go figure..) Shurley these financial 'giants' wouldnt endorse something that was essentially 'un-lawful' ?  So why all the fuss ? as i understand it, and i am but a Layman, if your aware of the difference between you Yourself as a free, sentient flesh human being as opposed to thinking you are a legal fiction or "Strawman", the illegality of being a cannabis user only becomes 'illegal' if you except/give consent of your own free-will to a statute/act  in the first instance, therefore .. if one does not GIVE consent to it being illegal under commercial law "NO CONSENT FOR AUTHORITIES TO CHARGE YOU WITH A STATUTE ..  well .. there is under common law, no breach of th peace, no harm injury or loss and therefore no breach of the Common Law of the land   ..  YOU ARE FREE TO GO & become enlightened ;0 )

I defy anyone to point out to me in common law, the one true law of this land where its says its unlawful to Grow, smoke, enjoy the message given freely from GOD to us.

The video below may help ? – Good luck folks ;0 )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

GW-SITE

http://www.gwpharm.com/UK%20Launch.aspx

Reinstatement of the principle of presumption of innocence

In recent years, especially during the 13 years of the last government, more and more new laws and amendments to existing legislation have come onto the statute book in a manner which requires an individual charged with, or even suspected of, committing an offence, having to prove his or her innocence, rather than retaining the fundamental right to be presumed to be innocent until such time as the reverse can be proven.

Why is this idea important?

In recent years, especially during the 13 years of the last government, more and more new laws and amendments to existing legislation have come onto the statute book in a manner which requires an individual charged with, or even suspected of, committing an offence, having to prove his or her innocence, rather than retaining the fundamental right to be presumed to be innocent until such time as the reverse can be proven.

Repeal of the 1973, Treaty of Accession, bringing the UK, into the EEC,

REPEAL THIS HENOUS ACT OF PARLIAMENT THAT SUBJEGATED BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY AND THE BRITISH PEOPLE TO A FORIEGN POWER IN BRUSSLLS.

THE TREAT OF ACCESSION IS THE CENTRAL PLANK OF EU CONTROL IN BRITAIN, REPEAL THIS AND THE OTHER EU TREATIES, LISBON, MAASTRICHT, AMSTERDAM AND OTHERS HAVE NO BASISIN UK LAW, AND ARE THEREFORE SCRAPPED ALONG WITH EU MEMBERSHIP.

THE EUROPEAN UNION IS A FEDERAL SUPER-STATE AND THAT IS NOT WHAT WAS PROPOSED OR VOTED FOR BY THE BRITISH PEOPLE.  THE ACCESSION TO THE EU BY GREAT BRITAIN WAS PERPETRATED ON A LIE AND THEREFORE HAS NO LEGITEMACY IN LAW OR ANY MORAL FOUNDATION.

BRITAIN IS AN INDEPENDENT SOVERIEGN STATE NOT A PROVINCE OF A FORIEGN EMPIRE.



 

Why is this idea important?

REPEAL THIS HENOUS ACT OF PARLIAMENT THAT SUBJEGATED BRITISH SOVEREIGNTY AND THE BRITISH PEOPLE TO A FORIEGN POWER IN BRUSSLLS.

THE TREAT OF ACCESSION IS THE CENTRAL PLANK OF EU CONTROL IN BRITAIN, REPEAL THIS AND THE OTHER EU TREATIES, LISBON, MAASTRICHT, AMSTERDAM AND OTHERS HAVE NO BASISIN UK LAW, AND ARE THEREFORE SCRAPPED ALONG WITH EU MEMBERSHIP.

THE EUROPEAN UNION IS A FEDERAL SUPER-STATE AND THAT IS NOT WHAT WAS PROPOSED OR VOTED FOR BY THE BRITISH PEOPLE.  THE ACCESSION TO THE EU BY GREAT BRITAIN WAS PERPETRATED ON A LIE AND THEREFORE HAS NO LEGITEMACY IN LAW OR ANY MORAL FOUNDATION.

BRITAIN IS AN INDEPENDENT SOVERIEGN STATE NOT A PROVINCE OF A FORIEGN EMPIRE.



 

Distinction in Law

Lets have a clear distinction between common law and corporate legislation so everyone knows where they stand in the country. A person leaves school at 16 and has absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of the law or what their rights are so how about basic law on the school curriculum?  The first thing a person does when they are caught committing a crime is to exert their rights in one way or another or to protest for rights. It is a 'no brainer' psychologically speaking that the person commiting the crime actually did it as a protest for their rights (complicated but true). Basic psychology.

One of the biggest shams in this country regarding legislation is The Courts and Legal Services Act including any related act such as the Solicitors Act etc. To think that in the year 2010, a person only has the right to audience in court and payment of their fee's if they have been deemed worthy of a roll number given by the Law Society. That makes the legal system no more than a 'golf club' where certain people are accepted or rejected from the club. The right to audience should be available to any literate person, not just the selected few who are making lots of money from this law. In the age of internet any person can research law and make a presentation and they should have the automatic right to represent themselves or others and be funded for their efforts.

Why is this idea important?

Lets have a clear distinction between common law and corporate legislation so everyone knows where they stand in the country. A person leaves school at 16 and has absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of the law or what their rights are so how about basic law on the school curriculum?  The first thing a person does when they are caught committing a crime is to exert their rights in one way or another or to protest for rights. It is a 'no brainer' psychologically speaking that the person commiting the crime actually did it as a protest for their rights (complicated but true). Basic psychology.

One of the biggest shams in this country regarding legislation is The Courts and Legal Services Act including any related act such as the Solicitors Act etc. To think that in the year 2010, a person only has the right to audience in court and payment of their fee's if they have been deemed worthy of a roll number given by the Law Society. That makes the legal system no more than a 'golf club' where certain people are accepted or rejected from the club. The right to audience should be available to any literate person, not just the selected few who are making lots of money from this law. In the age of internet any person can research law and make a presentation and they should have the automatic right to represent themselves or others and be funded for their efforts.

Dead wood collection

Restore the common peoples rights to collect dead wood to be used as firewood for free, which was taken away by the Labour government on health and safety grounds.

 

Why is this idea important?

Restore the common peoples rights to collect dead wood to be used as firewood for free, which was taken away by the Labour government on health and safety grounds.

 

Cohabitation

Do not introduce a bill that will allow a cohabiting partner, on parting, the same benefits as a married partner.

 

Background:  The Law Commission for E&W is looking at the possible legislation that would potentially see a transfer of some assets from the financially stronger partner to the financially weaker partner, after parting, on the basis of a 2 year cohabitation !!!

This is simple.   If I want to enter into a shared, in which my assets are combined with those of another in an equal partnership then there is already a framework for that to happen.  I will choose MARRIAGE.   

But I don't want to be shoehorned into giving away large amounts of the personal and hard won resources that I've built up during my lifetime to some other person that I've chosen to spend some time with.

I do not wish to give away my resources on the basis of a contract that did not enter into.

Why is this idea important?

Do not introduce a bill that will allow a cohabiting partner, on parting, the same benefits as a married partner.

 

Background:  The Law Commission for E&W is looking at the possible legislation that would potentially see a transfer of some assets from the financially stronger partner to the financially weaker partner, after parting, on the basis of a 2 year cohabitation !!!

This is simple.   If I want to enter into a shared, in which my assets are combined with those of another in an equal partnership then there is already a framework for that to happen.  I will choose MARRIAGE.   

But I don't want to be shoehorned into giving away large amounts of the personal and hard won resources that I've built up during my lifetime to some other person that I've chosen to spend some time with.

I do not wish to give away my resources on the basis of a contract that did not enter into.

Allow married couples to share their tax allowance

Non working spouses should be able to transfer their full tax allowance to their working partner. Income tax should be calculated on a joint basis for married and co-habiting couples. Non working spouses who choose not to work do not claim benefits and are financially supported by their working spouses so are not a burden to the state – if anything they free up jobs for those that need them. The government should support parents that make this choice by allowing them to Share income tax allowance.

Why is this idea important?

Non working spouses should be able to transfer their full tax allowance to their working partner. Income tax should be calculated on a joint basis for married and co-habiting couples. Non working spouses who choose not to work do not claim benefits and are financially supported by their working spouses so are not a burden to the state – if anything they free up jobs for those that need them. The government should support parents that make this choice by allowing them to Share income tax allowance.

All Legislation to Have Expiry Date

All Legislation to have expiry dates. Legislation to be broken down into differnt types each with an apprpriate validity period.

Only exceptions Common Law and Written Constituttion approved and or amended by referendum on an all or nothing basis.

Why is this idea important?

All Legislation to have expiry dates. Legislation to be broken down into differnt types each with an apprpriate validity period.

Only exceptions Common Law and Written Constituttion approved and or amended by referendum on an all or nothing basis.

Restore the Power of the Common Law

Common Law says simply that We are Free to do as we are pleased as long as we don't infringe on anyone leses right to life, liberty or property

Common Law also says that No Freeman is only responsible to the Court of his own 12 Peers                

NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor [X5 condemn him,] but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right. – Source Magna Carta 1215
 

Statutes can not replace  Common Law, its unlawful Its now more than clear that thye most of the Sattutes are unlawful and that are only a legislative rule of the Society, not the Law itself
 

Why is this idea important?

Common Law says simply that We are Free to do as we are pleased as long as we don't infringe on anyone leses right to life, liberty or property

Common Law also says that No Freeman is only responsible to the Court of his own 12 Peers                

NO Freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold, or Liberties, or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any other wise destroyed; nor will We not pass upon him, nor [X5 condemn him,] but by lawful judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right. – Source Magna Carta 1215
 

Statutes can not replace  Common Law, its unlawful Its now more than clear that thye most of the Sattutes are unlawful and that are only a legislative rule of the Society, not the Law itself