And we have the proof right here.
The author of this Affidavit is Michael Burke. Mike, for those of you that are unaware, is a constitutional expert. In this amazing document he lays out the evidence, and the remedy. His research is impeccable.
In it, you will learn why taxation, all taxation, is illegal.
You will learn why all UK courts are illegal.
You will learn that MC1215 Article 61 is in force today.
And a lot more besides.
I cannot stress how important it is that you read this document. It is an easy read even though it is 20 pages long. Grab a brew and have a read. I was fascinated from beginning to end.
Although it is not my writing I would be particularly interested in hearing from anyone connected to the judiciary. Did you know you were supporting illegal courts? What does it say about your honour and integrity if you did this knowingly? What will you do now that the cat is out of the bag?
It must pain you so much to know that we are on to you. The jig is up. Anyone facing a court hearing should read this affidavit, print it off, and take it into court. I suggest that you will be ushered out the second they finish reading through it. At least, they should usher you out, but let's not forget that this game is now over 100 years old.
They thought we would never catch on.
Guess what, folks?
My grateful thanks to Anon for leaving the link in the comment section of yesterday's post.
I noticed on twitter this morning that http://charonqc.wordpress.com/ was using one of the freeman links and saying how ridiculous it was.
It was the one where they arrested the Judge. I wonder what he would make of this!
They will do the only thing they can do: deny, deny, deny.
Although with the evidence contained in Mike's document I do not see how they can do that.
Maybe they truly didn't know?
What matters is what they do next.
Pleasure cappy(for the link i mean)You can check out the whole GICOR thing
and the whole GLOBAL SETTLEMENT FOUNDATION (especially the Finality of settlement part 2)
I personally realised the extent of the horrors after reading this:
By the way-any way i can get in contact with you?I suspect we shared common land mass at one stage down at the tip of Africa??
And thanks for the new links too. I will visit them all.
Please do write to me. I am here:
captainranty at btinternet dot com
And I seriously hope you are not referring to my stint at Robben Island...there was no need to mention that. The ostrich recovered in the end, and I returned the 16 tutu's to the rightful owners.
Jesus! I sped read through it and will need to take the time to read it properly over the coming weeks.
So Mark Stevens an American for those that don't know his name, is bang on the money when he enters the courtroom and calls the scam for what it is with his three question routine.
I too have scanned through it, I have to with these documents or else I end up getting lost in trying to make old English 'modern' and I will return to it again and again to gain a deep understanding but the top level scan makes it clear reality is just a game.
Top tip. Read and digest one section at a time and don't move on until you have it nailed.
CR as you know I'm in court soon, I haven't yet had the time to read the whole document but will do in time, if my pea sized brain can take it all in I might actually use it :o)
Hey Cap'n, just a line or two to say I am glad you are stopping on, you are most desperatly needed and if I might say so 'loved' by us your followers and compatriots in this venture.
May I ask a favour of you please, can you update the url for blogroll link you have for me please it is now
I have moved to a new web host, thanks and you will find a wee mention of yourself over there on the post about there being NO courts!
Very interesting indeed and probably why the Government is trying to implement a 'new' Bill of Rights - to supercede the one we already have and avoid the repercussions (as they must surely eventually occur).
Now, if someone can do a translation and simplification of the whole document perhaps we can actually GET the Corry-watchers interested.
Take it down to THEIR level.
As a stand-alone document it has NO X-factor appeal whatsoever and moaning that people don't pay enough attention is no excuse for 'packing it all in' when, as it is presented, barely 5% of the population could even UNDERSTAND half of what was wrote.....;)
Wicked post rantus :) shared!
It's not an affidavit. Affidavits set out matters of fact, on oath. That document merely sets out matters of argument, which are not on any form of oath.
Difficult to take it seriously when the title of the document is in error.
Post a Comment