The law that is common & the root of the common law

[Codee]

Originally Posted by aksis

Codee, "English common law" has nothing to do with what we are discussing in this thread. You know this. Quit with your games.

Now I see what you are talking about.

There is no common law. What ever the "majority" feels is not common to me. Niether is any other belief nessecarily common to me.

It is a big dream that everyone has the same conciense.

[aksis]

Codee, Prove it.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by aksis

Codee, Prove it.

Yeah there are laws like 1+1=2. you prove there is more.

[PANICPASS]

The common law in the courts today is Lex Mercatoria, or Law the Merchant.

The following was taken from Eustace Mullins' book The Rape of Justice.

Chapter 15
Mullins on Equity

The law merchant exists primarily to assure equitable dealings in commerce. Or so we are told. In fact, the law merchant exists to subvert all other legal systems in the world, and all governments. It is primarily an instrumentality of plunder.

[snip]

[snip]

Black's Law Dictionary defines lex mercatoria, the law merchant, as part of the common law. It may be present in our courts, but not as the common law. It is the antithesis of the common law, because it is the vehicle of equity. The pernicious presence of equity in our legal system is a horary relic of Oriental despotism, of autarchy, and of the abuses of unbridled power and the loss of individual rights. Equity is the Star Chamber of the Middle Ages, and the legal system of Babylonian absolute power; it is also the cult of Baal, and the legacy of Nimrod, and the personification of the stealthy Masonic power. It is not accidental that the law merchant is enshrined in the Masonic rites; in the Ancient and Accepted Rite, the 31st degree is closely associated with equity; as is the 16th degree, the Princes of Jerusalem.

It has been said that law looks to the past, but equity looks for the future. What this means is that law is that fixed understanding, developed by our traditions, which guides us, while equity looks to the future and a managed economy which is actually a return to the darkest period of man's history, the era of absolute despotism. Equity, or chancery, as it was known in the Middle Ages, stems from the duties of the secretaries (that is, secret emissaries) of the emperor. To give them authority to carry of his wishes, the emperor made them chancellors, that is, cancellors of sins to those who were favored by the emperor, from whence came the designation, chancery and the chancery court.

From its inception, chancery court proceedings were shrouded in secrecy and overshadowed by conspiratorial forces. Because of their dictatorial nature, they were also known as "Star Chamber" courts, a term which originated after William the Conqueror invaded England.

[aksis]

Codee, how about I just let life prove it out?

[David Merrill]

Black's Law Dictionary defines lex mercatoria, the law merchant, as part of the common law. It may be present in our courts, but not as the common law.

By virtue of its nature "common law" can morph in time. I read Eustace Mullins' book The Rape of Justice when it was hot off the press. I discussed it with his cousin. There was a definition of common law going around that made his statement correct.

Attorneys use common law. Ask any attorney. The main problem is that common law in the mind of an attorney has been fashioned into a form of federal common law since 1938. It is that common law described by the gold fringed admiralty flags in the courtrooms, churches and schools and most importantly, by keeping all non-attorney representation outside the Bar and falsely branding the defendant inside the bar his own attorney pro se, the common law has been privatized - ergo it is no longer common law.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by aksis

Codee, how about I just let life prove it out?

Ok. I still think life is too diverse for a common law aside from unified field theory.

[aksis]

'2) Honor your lawful agreements.'

From this point of origin, what couldn't be constructed via contracts? Only an agreement that would be unlawful. By unlawful, I am intending the measure of the lawfulness to be contemplated in the light of, "Do naught unto others as you would not have done to you" & "Harm no one, or their property."

I see The Law Merchent/Uniform Commercial Code as being the manifestation of a series of agreements & those drafting/signing instruments that cite these things, are porting the corpus of these constructive agreements into their contracts. There is nothing unlawful about this, unless a portion of the Merc. Law/UCC are unlawful. Then that portion is void.

David, I see that it is the common law that morphs, its the way the root principle is described, yet the root principle never changes, just how it is explained.

"the common law has been privatized - ergo it is no longer common law." I see this being true with both "english common law" and "american common law", and "US Federal Common Law". Not that the english and american common law is an unlawfully constructed agreement, yet they both have 'courts'. 'courts' & how they work are the manifestation of agreement.

Also, not to exhaust this contemplation, the descriptions of violations of the global common law, and the various ways to describe such violations also change. For example: hitting, biting, scratching, rape, spitting upon someone, etc.. being loosly described as "assult".

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by aksis

'2) Honor your lawful agreements.'

From this point of origin, what couldn't be constructed via contracts? Only an agreement that would be unlawful. By unlawful, I am intending the measure of the lawfulness to be contemplated in the light of, "Do naught unto others as you would not have done to you" & "Harm no one, or their property."

I see The Law Merchent/Uniform Commercial Code as being the manifestation of a series of agreements & those drafting/signing instruments that cite these things, are porting the corpus of these constructive agreements into their contracts. There is nothing unlawful about this, unless a portion of the Merc. Law/UCC are unlawful. Then that portion is void.

David, I see that it is the common law that morphs, its the way the root principle is described, yet the root principle never changes, just how it is explained.

"the common law has been privatized - ergo it is no longer common law." I see this being true with both "english common law" and "american common law", and "US Federal Common Law". Not that the english and american common law is an unlawfully constructed agreement, yet they both have 'courts'. 'courts' & how they work are the manifestation of agreement.

Also, not to exhaust this contemplation, the descriptions of violations of the global common law, and the various ways to describe such violations also change. For example: hitting, biting, scratching, rape, spitting upon someone, etc.. being loosly described as "assult".

I am not certain I get your point but respond by simply saying that the attorneys protect the privatization of that particular version of the common law with the Bar as a barrier.

If you cross it you have to be (pro se) or be with an attorney.

[aksis]

Codee, would you define 'unified field theory' for me, I enjoied the images that it brought to mind, yet I am not sure if that is what was in your mind.

David, I was simply tracing these 'newer' systems of law from their point of origin.

By newer, i intend that in relation to the global common law being 5,000+ years old, where as english common law is what, is like 1000 years(?) at best, and american is like 200+, and this federal crap... who cares, its far too discordant and obfuscated.