The only ?rational(e)? or facts are the evidence provided by both parties involved in the controversy, to prove the truth or falsity of any claim. The ?legal? system uses ?case precedent? in similar cases without regard to the true issues at hand. I personally know of several cases with evidence to prove the innocence of the accused is denied as inadmissible because it has not been used in similar cases, and the ?legal? system relies on ?self confession? or to give it the ?legal? name, plea bargaining. And the defendants OWN lawyers never stand up for the defendant!

What is your suggestion for consistency of decision in all courts?

How about following the TRUE rule of LAW

?subordinate and higher court etc, million of legal institutions and statutory laws, and billions of subjects or issues. .

The more statutes there are, the less RULE of LAW there is.

As long as the Bank of England pays the wages of all civil servants, there can never be any impartialality in any court!

Gary

Sorry for the delay in responding,

All Wo/Man are flesh and blood creations of the Divine Creator, therefore each is free to live the way they wish and make use of the land and anything from the land without causing any harm, injury or loss to any other Wo/Man as decreed by the Divine Creator.

All are answerable to the Law, so any Wo/Man can accuse another, with proof, of any injury or harm, and the one defending is always innocent until proved guilty.

According to the ?civil law? system covering most of the world today, all Wo/Men are ?persons? and according to Blackstone?s commentaries ? a person is born from the belly of a statute?. The problem is that not all ?persons? are Wo/men, so in ?civil? society we have, flesh and blood can be accused and found guilty by a ?person? who is a fiction and can not be fined or jailed for wrongful prosecution.

The only thing ?common? about the law is it applies to all Wo/Men, and ALL cases are unique and can NEVER be compared to a previous case decision.

Only the participants, accusations and judgement are recorded as a record of that particular case and NOT to predetermine the outcome of any future case.

Government today is controlled by the banking system set up in 1694 by the members of the English Parliament declaring them ?legal? by creating eternal corporations for profit.

Therefore today the ?legal?, ?parliament? and ?executive? of the UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND is all controlled by the BANK OF ENGLAND and so is every ?private? business, which has to register by act of parliament!

So we have NO law here only a ?legal? system designed for corporate use and to reward those who obey blindly by ?following orders?

LAW is EXPRESSED, legal is implied and self confession!

Gary

Thank you to all who have replied to me.

First let me explain that I believe in a Divine Creator, One who gives all Man and Woman the free will to believe or not to varying degrees.

That NO man or woman stands between one?s self and their choice of belief.

That NO one is above the LAW and ALL are equal to the LAW.

That the rule of LAW is open and can be remembered by simple maxims

Do unto others?etc
Do not do anything you would not like done unto yourself?

The list is endless and all comes down to, love thy neighbour as a brother.

Thank you Jafar for the link here is a link to the pdf of the book

https//archive.org/details/outlinesromanhi03moregoog

To answer muslims, yes there is great confusion over the words ?common law? and that is the crux of the problem. The Roman cult led ?civil? law is all about ?common? case law where similar cases have been heard before and so the outcome has been decided no matter what defence is offered up by the defendant, that is why ?civil? law depends on ?technical? points to ?win? or ?lose? on appeal.

Frank does talk about civil law as, the way that I comprehend it; he is describing what is ?True? law as opposed to ?civil? law. He also lays out the foundation that ?civil? law rests on fictions (persons) not on flesh and blood Wo/Man.

?Civil? ?Common? law is recorded so that the so-called ?authorities? can keep track of web of lies they weave to deceive the many!

True Law is never written except as a record of the decisions in each case, because each case is unique to the participants.

True Law is based on harm and/or injury or loss to one caused by another.

?Civil? law is based on confession to an imagined sin (summary justice)(The film Minority Report is a good example of ?civil law? in action).

Everyone is guilty of breaking many ?civil laws? (speeding doing 36 mph in a 30mph, J walking etc) but unless you cause harm or loss to a Wo/Man you have not broken The Law.

Which brings us to ?policing by consent?, ?courts?, ?parliament? and what exactly is a ?country? and their respective roles? Which are all part of the deception and need separate explanations.

The World works by language and the exchange of ideas by means of words, but, the words have different meanings in context between science, legal, medical, art and everyday use. The word idiot means two different things when used in court and out on the street, nice is another one.

I have found that the best dictionaries to use are pre 1900?s, Webster?s 1828 http//webstersdictionary1828.com/and etymonline http//www.etymonline.com/ as all others have been corrupted to hide the real definitions.

Gary

And to you.

I have come to learn that LAW is expressed and legal is implied.

Gary

More than happy to do that, thank you.

gary

Hello, i am 57 born in a country i was taught to believe was england and have discovered in the past 2 years that the history i learned at school has no relation to the true history of the world. i have been reading and listening to Frank O'Collins http//blog.ucadia.com/ and just lately Marcus at Servant King http//www.servantking.info/index2.html

Yesterday i came across Abdun Nur and his website Servant of the light i copied a lot of the information about the subject i am researching, True Law, and have verified to my own satisfaction much of what i have read on his site that also ties up with the previous information i gleaned from the previous sites i mentioned. I also found quite a lot of new information that i have been searching for.

As i found his style of writing easy to read i went to look at the other information, but sadly the site seems to have disappeared.

If there are others here who have similar sites or ideas to his or if he is still around, i would very much like to exchange ideas

Gary