May 26, 2011

She Isn't The Monarch...

...she's a very naughty girl.



If any of you were ever a little bewildered as to why a (reasonably) sane man such as I would enter Lawful Rebellion, watch the film above and be bewildered no more.

She breached that contract within months of signing her name to it. In fact, she breached that contract 24 times in 1953 alone. (There were 26 pieces of Legislation in 1953: 24 were new Acts, and 2 Acts were repealed). Since then, of course, she has breached the contract thousands of times. (3401, to be precise). But, once was enough.

And now that we have a ruling, thanks to JAH, I am supremely comfortable about my appearance in court in the weeks ahead. I was confident before this ruling, now I am semi-delirious. Victory is mine.

Share this video with your pals. This is news they can use.

CR.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Very interesting C.R

Could this possibly mean all who ever took a oath of allegiance, are no longer protected by the office they hold?.

Therefore being able to strip away their robes. To stand equal in a court of law.

Meaning all goods taken off people by UKBA, or, any other government agency is thieft.

Morgan.

Sue said...

You watch, that video will be banned pretty soon now.

I've downloaded a copy just in case :)

They're starting to get worried I think.

Stealth said...

Superb - Can we kick the fekrs out now lol

Anonymous said...

Download it quick. Guaranteed the government will be putting pressure asap not only on YouTube to remove it but also in his Website host provider to remove JahTruth.org.

Rip the website and the video and keep it alive.

John Anthony Hill (JAH) is a very intelligent, honest, wise and brave man who deserves everyone's utmost respect for fighting against a corrupt system and very much the forces of overwhelming evil.

I take my hat off to you JAH, a true warrior.

Harbinger

Ampers Taylor said...

This could be a counter, was on the original website:

Deuteronomy? You are quoting from the old testament, we are living in the new testament, and the book of Matthew states: render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. (Caesar = The authority of the world which in the case of the Commonwealth is The Queen of England). So basically obey the laws of the land in conjunction with the laws of God, God also tells us to pray for our leaders not condemn them. The Queen has the God given right to protect her people, and this means laws.
eemoscrashed 2 hours ago

mescalito said...

the laws of our land are common law and our constitution not legislation, and any legislation that is passed that infringes or take away our rights and freedoms is null and void.

DAD said...

Ampers Taylor said...

You are quoting from the old testament, we are living in the new testament,...

Jesus was born a Jew, he lived as a Jew obeying the laws of (what we call) the old testament, and he died a Jew.

Where do you find that we have any cause to reject the old and replace it with the new testament ?

Anonymous said...

>we are living in the new testament,...

No we're not, you loon.

Christianity - the belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree. yeah. makes perfect sense.

Maverick said...

what ruling ... where is the link?

Captain Ranty said...

Mav,

There isn't one in writing yet. I am awaiting the court paperwork.

I'll let you know when I get it.

CR.

Anonymous said...

I couldn't be bothered to read all that British Israelite nonsense. But Elizabeth has broken her oath many times. She swore to govern us according to our laws and customs - not according to the laws and customs of a European state. She swore to do her best to uphold God's law and the true profession of the Gospel. Allowing people to be hanged in the 1950s and 1960s was breaking that law - especially the one which says we mustn't kill. Allowing her armed forces to go to war was also breaking that law. Modern interpretations of that law which substitute 'kill' with 'murder' or other words are wrong because Elizabeth swore on the bible which only has the word 'kill' in it. That is the word upon which her contract was signed. You can't change a contract once signed. She shouldn't have signed if she knew she couldn't keep the contract.

MTV.

English Viking said...

What a load of twaddle.

The dude you link to is deranged, and so are you if you think you are going to get your fags back.

Grow up.

Captain Ranty said...

EV,

You obviously can't read.

The "deranged" dude WON his case.

And I've already said that UKBA no longer have my fags so I don't expect to get them back.

It might help if you took an English comprehension course.

CR.

English Viking said...

CR,

You will not win your case, nor compensation.

It doesn't matter if what you are saying concerning the law IS correct (it isn't), do you really think the Queen will be brought down by a piece of paper?

She'll just write another one, as and when it suits.

I can see you having a very thorough investigation of your tax affairs and business in the not too distant future.

English Viking said...

PS,

You'll have to forgive my lack of 'comprehension', but I've looked at the link in your piece, and I cant find where it says he 'won' his case, just a load of rambling about Nostradamus and Old Testament scriptures that do not constitute British law.

Are you seriously saying that a British Court of Law had made a legal ruling that HM is not legally Queen because she was never properly coronated? Would not this news be somewhere other than on some doped-up rasta's web-site?

Have you been smoking dope, to help the trees grow?

Captain Ranty said...

EV,

I do not require compensation. At the risk of repeating myself, this is not about a few cartons of cigarettes.

We have been defeated by pieces of paper all of our lives. I am merely using the rules of engagement. The weapon of (their) choice is....bits of paper. I have already won. My paperwork is perfect.

Tax investigation? I will throw open my door to them when/if they arrive. When they leave, they will have written me a cheque for all of the taxes I have paid since 1978. I have them beat. They know that.

Your conditioning has taken over your mind. That, or you are simply terrified by the government machine.

I am not.

CR.

English Viking said...

CR,

Dude, whatever keeps you happy.

I am just saying that the Gov and HM and the machine behind it all is so utterly corrupt that it doesn't matter whether you are right or not, whether they will need to act illegally or not, whether you get your fags/compo or not. You will not be allowed to set a legal precedent that you are exempt from the rule of HMQ and her Ministers because she has illegally ascended the throne or broken her oath. Even if what you say is correct, and at the risk of repeating myself, they will simply enact another law that makes it all OK.

I don't fear the Gov, per se. But I am aware of the utter devastation they can inflict on people that annoy them.

Why paint a target on your back?

Captain Ranty said...

EV,


"Why paint a target on your back?"

I think about this an awful lot.

My answer is "Because someone has to".

The alternative is to say to yourself "Look, I know the situation is FUBAR but I'm going to keep on bending over, knowing, with every fibre of my being, that I am right".

I can't unsee what I have seen. I can't unlearn all that stuff.

For me, there is no option but to charge ahead. I know that I can "fail" because the game is stacked in their favour, but I cannot convince myself to stop.

I don't claim to be a hero, EV. I just want to stop being a zero.

CR.

English Viking said...

CR,

Fair enough.

As a matter of interest, where is the ruling that our rasta friend has obtained?

It is not in the video and not on his site.

Captain Ranty said...

EV,

I'll find the link for you.

Please note that I am not claiming that he won the ruling that Madge is an imposter/a fake/on the throne illegitimately, but that he won his case. The write up on his site is somewhat convoluted.

Stand by.

CR.

Captain Ranty said...

EV,

A link for you:

http://truthiscontagious.com/2011/05/19/jury-rejects-state-charges-against-77-ripple-effect%E2%80%99s-muad%E2%80%99dib-2

CR.

English Viking said...

CR,

Thank you.

I read the link, and all it shows is that the Crown failed to prove a case of perverting the cause of justice. The man was charged, tried, found not guilty. Nothing to do with Lizzy, the Stone of Scoon or the Ark of the Covenant.

What precedent does this set?

BTW are you a Rastafarian and do you believe in British Israelism?

Bollixed said...

English Viking? Are you receiving Danegeld for your fairly pointless contribution?

English Viking said...

Bollixed,

No, just wondering why some people are getting so excited over a dope-head and his quest to find the Ark of the Covenant, as if this is going help 'bring down the Government'.