UK: R. v. JAH - The Queen gets Owned by a Phony Scone Stone

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

So during my investigation of Sean Wesley Henry a.k.a. :Chief :Nanya-Shaabu: El: (viewtopic.php?f=47&t=9474) I noticed that Henry’s materials in the last year or so have strongly focused on a U.K. case that Henry seems to believe utterly unravels the whole of Commonwealth law and authority. And thoughtfully enough, Henry even provided links, specifically: http//jahtruth.net/.

After a bit of digging I discovered the “JAH” in “R. v. JAH” is John Anthony Hill, a.k.a. “Muad’Dib”. Somebody likes his Herbert! His crime? He sent an eccentric conspiracy video, “7/7 Ripple Effect”, to the judge and jury foreman in a trial that involved the July 7, 2005 London subway bombings - that’s the “7/7” in the name. JAH was arrested for jury tampering, spent five months in prison, but was then acquitted at a jury trial in May, 2011. The key point was the video sent to the court was not actually targeted to the jury – just the court as a whole.

Oh, so what? How is this possibly relevant to Henry’s claims he is immune from everything. Well, JAH made an interesting argument at the trial where he was acquitted, and that is reproduced here (http://jahtruth.net/britmon.htm#crimes). I’ll post some of his "Lawful Argument Against Jurisdiction & Sovereignty":

1. Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Battenberg’s Fraudulent Coronation.

1. The person who purports to be the queen has never, in fact, rightfully or Lawfully been crowned as the Sovereign. This knowledge stems from the fact that the Coronation Stone / The Stone of Destiny / Bethel / Jacob’s Pillar that Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Battenberg was crowned upon is a fake. The real Coronation Stone; made from Bethel porphyry, weighing more than 4cwt. (458lbs.) according to the BBC telex in the film “The Coronation Stone”, (Covenant Recordings), and Ian R. Hamilton Q.C. in three of his books: “No Stone Unturned” (pages 36, 44), “A Touch of Treason” (page 50) and “The Taking of The Stone of Destiny” (pages 27, 35); was removed from Westminster Abbey at 04:00 hrs on the 25th of December in 1950, by his group of four Scottish Nationalist students, which included and was led by Ian Robertson Hamilton himself. The other three were Alan Stuart, Gavin Vernon and Kay Matheson, as stated in his books. Further details at: http://jahtruth.net/stone.htm. Further proof, that she did not want it televised at her coronation: Youtube link.

2. The real Coronation Stone (“National Treasure No. 1”), was taken to Scotland where, in Glasgow, it was handed over to Bertie Gray to repair it, and was later hidden by industrialist and philanthropist John Rollo in his factory, under his office-floor, according to Ian R. Hamilton’s books – “No Stone Unturned” and “The Taking of The Stone of Destiny”, and the factory-manager, when I visited him.

3. A fake stone copy had previously been made in 1920 by stone-mason, Bertie Gray, for a prior plan to repatriate the Coronation Stone, and it was made of Scottish sandstone from a quarry near Scone in Perthshire, weighing 3cwt. (336lbs.). The conspirators had used it to practice with, before going to London to Westminster Abbey to remove the real Coronation Stone from the abbey. It was that fake stone copy which was placed on the High Altar Stone at Arbroath Abbey, at Midday on the 11th April of 1951, wrapped in a Scottish Saltyre (St. Andrew’s Flag – Dark blue with white diagonal cross on it) and found by the authorities, then transported to England, where it was used for the “queen’s” coronation, according to Bertie Gray’s children in a Daily Record Newspaper article.

…

Therefore, never having been Lawfully crowned, she has NO authority to put the defendant on trial and the judge has NO authority to try him, because the judge’s “authority” comes from her.

Further, and without prejudice to the above...

2. Some of Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Battenberg’s other Crimes.

Sample Crimes/Points of Law:-

1. Mrs. Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Battenberg/Mountbatten; un-Lawfully residing in Buckingham Palace, London; also known by the criminal aliases Windsor and QE2, was knowingly and willfully, with malice-aforethought, fraudulently crowned on a fake Coronation Stone / Lia Fail / Stone of Destiny / Bethel / Jacob’s Pillar on June 2nd in 1953, and has been fraudulently masquerading as the rightful British Sovereign/Crown for the last 58 years, which the Defendant can prove beyond doubt, and is a major part of why the fraudulent British so-called “crown” is attacking the Defendant with this false, malicious, frivolous, ridiculous and politically motivated charge. It is Mrs. Elizabeth A. M. Battenberg who should be arrested and charged; for her innumerable acts of high-treason against God and Christ, Whose church she falsely claims to head and in defiance of Whom she had herself fraudulently crowned, and Whom she has continued to rule in defiance of, and in opposition to, ever since; not the Defendant.

2. Allowing people to legislate in defiance of God’s Law (Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32) that she swore and affirmed, in writing, to maintain to the utmost of her power (Exhibit 1), and, in many cases, actually reversing what The Law states into being the very opposite of it. She has fraudulently imprisoned and punished people for enforcing The Law themselves as God commands them to do, and thus un-Lawfully prevented or deterred others from doing so. She has given Royal-Assent to 3,401 Acts of Parliament (as of 24/03/2011) and thus broken The Law against legislating 3,401 times. The very first time she gave “Royal-Assent” to ANY “Act of Parliament”, or any other piece of legislation, or allowed Parliament or anyone to legislate, she broke her Coronation Oath and was thus no longer the monarch, with immediate effect, even if she had been Lawfully crowned in the first-place, which she most definitely was not.

Proof that she has broken her oath and her word: Youtube link.

• Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add to the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the Commandments of the Lord your God which I COMMAND you.
  
  11:1 Therefore thou shalt love the Lord thy God, and keep His charge, and His Statutes, and His Judgments, and His Commandments, always.
  
  12:8 Ye shall not do after all the things that we do here this day, every man whatsoever is right in his own eyes.
  
  12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

A Bill MUST have Royal Assent before it can become an Act of Parliament (law).

So there you have it. It turns out that when Queen Elizabeth II was crowned she sat on a counterfeit stone, and she knew it, and that made her vow to be Queen and rule the Commonwealth with a gentle biblically appropriate hand was a fraud. And as all authority in the Commonwealth comes from the Queen, in the present post-Elizabethan Chaos there is no law, no Parliament, no judges, all oaths to the Monarchy are defective.

We are lost.

Weirdly enough, some of this narrative is true. The Stone of Scone really was stolen by Scottish Nationalists on Christmas Day in 1950 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of ... ne_in_1950). However, JAH’s claims that a counterfeit stone was in the coronation chair in which ‘Liz sat on June 2, 1953 are purely rumours.

Is that all that ‘Liz has done wrong? No. JAH goes on to document how not only has ‘Liz not been validly crowned but she also has failed in her oath to defend the faith. JAH reviews Queen Elizabeth II’s track record and its conformity to Biblical direction. I reproduce one particularly striking example:

4. Removal of the death-penalty that is prescribed as the deterrent for capital crimes in The Law that she swore to maintain to the utmost of her power; e.g. Sodomy (Deuteronomy 23:17; Leviticus 20:13); Pedophilia; Rape; Murder; Adultery; etc., thus encouraging these crimes, that are now legion.

• Deuteronomy 23:17 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.
  
  Leviticus 20:13 If a man lie also with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
  
  Etc., etc., etc.

5. Actually encouraging and promoting sodomy, by legalizing it, then further enacting un-Lawful anti-discrimination legislation, promoting it in schools, and giving knighthoods to high-profile sodomites in the music, film and fashion industries, instead of having them Lawfully executed as a deterrent to others.

• Music - Elton John
  Film - Ian McKellen of Stonewall; John Gielgud
  Fashion – Norman Hartnell knighted 1977 and Hardy Amies knighted 1989.

So, JAH takes the position that since he was acquitted and he had advanced this argument, his acquittal must have been because he was right; the Coronation Stone is a fake, Queen Elizabeth II is just an ordinary senior (with a lot of money), all post-1953 laws and Commonwealth governments are unauthorized, and the police, judges, etc. cannot touch him.

And here are some other resources on the same point:

• http://truthspress.wordpress.com/regina ... never-was/
  
  A short video entitled “Elizabeth 2 GO Ripple Effect: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s_CvhgjxF0
  
  A pro-Muad’Dib forum: http://mtrial.org/
  
  Muad’Dib Speaks! (for close to two hours): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHmDiTwSPAQ

And if you’re curious about the “7/7 Ripple Effect” movie, it exists in a basic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7PQG5weeHk) and an expanded version (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwyzpzEgUWE).

I thought it might be interesting to learn more about JAH / Muad’Dib so I visited his webpage. And hurrah, it’s another mess –

JAH: The Long-Awaited truth of ALL Things on Planet Earth
Congratulations!
You’ve just landed at the most ground-breaking and informative site on the Net.
“As The Lightening Shineth from the East even unto the West…”

So what do we have here. Let’s see, lots of traditional conspiracy and new age stuff like the Protocols of Zion, New World Order, Astral Projection, Mathematical Bible Codes stuff. Meh. We’ve seen all that before. On thing JAH does that is a little odd is he re-edits other people’s stuff – like we really need a revised draft of Nostradamus (http://jahtruth.net/nostmadd.htm)? The “King of kings’ Bible?” Oh, JAW just stuck the King James Bible and Koran together and ‘edited’ it (http://jahtruth.net/kofkad.htm).

Maybe there’s something more entertaining here. Oh dear. That’s this?

Starwars Episodes 4-6
FACT, NOT FICTION
by JAH

George Lucas quite naturally believes that he wrote "Starwars", when, in reality, he was told telepathically what to write, by the very "Force" to which the films refer, as a very important step in the preparation of mankind for the long-awaited TRUTH, about the real reasons for human life on Earth ("what on earth am I doing here?"), the meaning of life and its purpose

(http://jahtruth.net/starwar.htm)

A couple short excerpts just do not do this justice:

Unfortunately George Lucas has exercised his "Free-will"; ignored me and made Episode 1 - "The Phantom Menace"; with arrogant actors who publicly ridicule the real message and the real fans, which undermines the original theme and Divine Message; contradicts it and is mere fiction (lies), telepathically fed to him by the Dark-side force (Satan), to try to confuse everyone and undo the good (God's) message contained in the earlier three films (Episodes 4-6). This is Satan's standard-practice and very predictable. He has done it with the Old Testament; New Testament and Koran and the three major religions who claim to be based on them.

…

The "Light-sabre" symbolises a combination of the Guiding-Light ("I am the Guiding-Light of the world" - John 8 v 12), and the Two-edged Sword of TRUTH (Ephesians 6 v 17; Hebrews 4 v 12; Revelation 1 v 16 & 19 v 15) [like "Excalibre" - the Sword of Power] which guides people with "blind-faith" and cuts through the lies; deceit and evil of this evil empire (Earth) and protects you from evil attack, both mental and physical, like a suit of armour (Ephesians 6 v 10-19). "He who draws Excalibre (the TRUTH) from this 'Stone' (Christ - Genesis 49 v 24; Daniel 2 v 34; 1 Peter 2 v 4-9) shall be king" (Revelation 1 v 6) - FREE (John 8 v 32, 36; 1 Corinthians 7 v 22).

…

Han Solo, who portrays the typical human; scornful; sceptical attitude, says it is luck because he doesn't believe that there is one all-powerful (Almighty) Force controlling everything and that there is no mystical energy-field controlling his destiny. Han, like most humans, does not believe, nor has "blind-faith", in anything he cannot see or touch, so later on he gets into terrible trouble and has no "Light-sabre" with which to defend himself and Luke has to save him.

…

It should be obvious to you by now that Vader's emperor symbolises Satan and the evil empire is Earth, where we are in "the dark-times" because Satan is ruling, due to a desperate shortage of JEDI Knights. That is why the Earth is so bad and full of evil with child-molesting; raping; mugging; murdering; adultery; religious, political and commercial wars etc. etc. etc.

…

One of the emperor's governors says that the regional governors (national governments) will take control of their territories (countries - using their Tie- [collar and tie] Fighters) and that their technological terrors (military weapons) will keep the locals (you) in line.

Whew.

Close Encounters of the Gibraltar Kind by JAH (http://jahtruth.net/closeenc.htm). Yeah, that movie was true too. The animated gif where the Rock of Gibraltar is superimposed on shaving cream on Richard Dreyfuss’s hand is … uhm … unique?

The movie Dune is also secretly about Gibraltar as well (http://jahtruth.net/dune.htm).

These and other movies are also available in DVD format (http://jahtruth.net/movies.htm):

The DVDs contain edited footage, the explanation of the movie, JAH’s web-site and his radio broadcasts.

…

Please note: Due to having to avoid the “Mark of the Beast” we now only accept cash.

How about an “Armageddon Survival-Kit” (http://jahtruth.net/ask.htm). That sounds useful:

Now You Can Immediately Discover,
and begin learning, the simple plan how to
guarantee your freedom, safety and immortality;
if you follow it faithfully, without deviation.

No other plan will work!

You won’t survive these “End Times” without this!
So you can forget the rest.

Unique & Authoritative Information Library and Straight-forward
Daily-Tuition comes complete on ONE convenient CD.

Send US $50 (outside of Europe) for your personal
pocket-sized Survival-Plan on CD
(inside Europe €50 [Euros]).

Please specify whether for PC, or Mac.

This is a one-time payment with no hidden extras.

I think that's enough. The entire website is 'colourful', if you're looking for some curious distractions.

I have a modest conclusion to offer to this forum. The R. v. JAH trial and JAH / Muad’Dib’s legal reasoning marks a point where the U.K. has graduated from being a mere recipient of pseudolegal illogic, to now being a source of the same. I think this represents the first entirely British explanation for why the law does not apply to you, if of course you so choose to dismantled the entirety of the Commonwealth.

Even more, the U.K. has already exported this concept to at least one of its former colonies. A great milestone! However, I’m not certain if R. v. JAH will have much application in the U.S.

Still – who’s to say?

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

Actually I discussed this very issue, although not in respect to R. v. JAH, on page 4 of this topic;

viewtopic.php?f=46&t=7827&hilit=coronation&start=60

Where I said;

"While Elizabeth II had her Coronation on 2 June 1953 she automatically ascended to the throne over a year earlier on 6 February 1952, when her father died. The one year waiting period was standard, to get mourning out of the way. Her Coronation, for all its pomp, was actually just a ceremony confirming an existing fact."

British monarchs ascend to the throne automatically upon the death of the reigning monarch. The coronation is an unnecessary ceremony which has no effect on the monarch's status. As Wikipedia says;

In most kingdoms, a monarch succeeding hereditarily does not have to undergo a coronation to ascend the throne or exercise the prerogatives of their office. King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, for example, did not reign long enough to be crowned before he abdicated, yet he was unquestionably the King of the United Kingdom and Emperor of India during his brief reign. This is because in Britain, the law stipulates that the moment one monarch dies, the new one assumes the throne; thus, there is no point at which the throne is vacant.

So, if Elizabeth was queen without having to go through a coronation then it was irrelevant what she sat on while providing the show. A Merry-Go-Round wooden horse would, legally, have served just as well and would have made for a far more interesting ceremony.

[grixit]

“Muad’Dib” is not from Dune. Herbert appropriated it but it, under various forms, most usually "Mahdi", is a long prophesied future islamic messiah. It means, more or less, "from the west", specifically northwest Africa. You know, where the actual moors come from.

[The Observer]

So, if Elizabeth was queen without having to go through a coronation then it was irrelevant what she sat on while providing the show. A Merry-Go-Round wooden horse would, legally, have served just as well and would have made for a far more interesting ceremony.

But even if the stone was necessary to the coronation, all its absence would have signified was that she was not Queen of Scotland. The Stone of Scone was stolen by Edward I ("Longshanks") as a way to legally claim that he was the true sovereign of Scotland.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

So, if Elizabeth was queen without having to go through a coronation then it was irrelevant what she sat on while providing the show. A Merry-Go-Round wooden horse would, legally, have served just as well and would have made for a far more interesting ceremony.

But even if the stone was necessary to the coronation, all its absence would have signified was that she was not Queen of Scotland. The Stone of Scone was stolen by Edward I ("Longshanks") as a way to legally claim that he was the true sovereign of Scotland.

Well, that all may be true, but I notice neither of you have rebutted the separate argument that Queen Elizabeth II has breached her contract by failing to exterminate all homosexuals.

It just kills me that Nanya is planning to show up in a Canadian court this Thursday and actually advance this argument.

On that point, yesterday I missed a website in JAH's empire:

• V for Vendetta or J for Justice: http://jforjustice.net/

[This appears to be the successor of some earlier websites with related names, including http://jforjustice.co.uk and http://jforjustice.com, that are now occupied by web squatters. I'd followed those other links, and ended up at dead ends so I did not realize J for Justice survived at a different location.]

J for Justice is JAH's website to promote his 'immunity to the law' scheme. And lo, who do we find listed as an example in his "How to Use the Defence" topic? :Chief :Nanya-Shaabu: El: (posting.php?mode=quote&f=47&p=159962), with Canadian court documents reproduced in full.

This also clears up whether JAH is actually promoting his scheme for cash. Oh, sorry, "donations" (http://jforjustice.net/index.html):

Would you like to defend and free yourself and others by putting an end to state daylight and highway robbery and the state terrorism that THEY* perpetrate (like 9-11, 7/7/2005** and the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes) and use to keep you afraid, intimidated, compliant and in line? Want to avoid being branded a criminal by the state? Be aware that any convictions against you could have serious repercussions if you ever need to find work.

If so, I will provide you with a bullet-proof (if used properly) defence that you can use in court (if THEY* don’t immediately panic, get scared and drop all charges against you), in front of a jury of your peers, to clear yourself of all charges and bring down the evil system once and for all. Don't get mad, get determined!

You can download the challenge to the "Crown's Jurisdiction and Sovereignty" documentation for free at http://JforJustice.net/challenge to study and start defending yourself with, and if you file that with the prosecution and court that may be enough to stop them. If THEY* do proceed against you, then you will need further documentation on how to fight them in court, to back-up and prove your challenge.

To obtain this further documentation, if it proves necessary, and advice on how to fight against the evil police-state, including all necessary video and photographic evidence needed to clear yourself of all victimless charges, please send a donation of £100 sterling. We are so confident, that it works, that we will give you your donation back if it doesn't.

I wonder if JAH accepts A4V?

Here's something new - banksters are Nazis who plan to exterminate the real Jews, that is, the English people (http://jforjustice.net/tbcre/index.html):

Released: 5th of November, 2011. Muad'Dib's latest hard-hitting documentary about the innumerable crimes of the Ashke-Nazi Banksters.

From their historical origins down to their planned genocidal future, Muad'Dib tracks who THEY* are, how THEY operate, and most importantly, how to get rid of them once and for all.

It is time for millions of us, to take full responsibility for our actions & circumstances, unite and peacefully gather at the Houses of Parliament in London, England -- on the 5th of November 2012 -- to support Muad'Dib in declaring a Year of Jubilee, to cancel all debts and end the corruption and treason, making this a day that present and future generations will never forget.

And I guess the movies "V for Vendetta" and "The Matrix" are divinely inspired?

JAH also provides no less than six stirring reports of victories obtained via his technique (http://jforjustice.net/testimonials.html).

"Ricky" says:

It is clear that HMRC are using the strategy of the Emu bird and burying their head in the sand, cancelling the debt and attempting not to acknowlege receipt or make any reference to the Challenge Document. It is also clear that the Government know fine well what the implications are for them, with the Jurisdiction Challenge Document. They know that the author of the jurisdiction challenge is The Lord.

I would like to say a huge and very grateful thank-you to the Lord for giving me permission to use the challenge document to attack the Goliath of HMRC and their oppressive bullying, overbearing harrassment, obscene debt-recovery tactics. This challenge to the juristiction of the crown is a Light Sabre cutting through the wicked darkness of the Satanist Regina's Regime.

An anonymous Scot reports:

The judge, showing signs of anxiety, was shouting and shaking with fear. It was clear that he had read through the defence document and it had rather unsettled him. It was clear that he had been told by his government departmental masters, not to allow under any circumstances this challenge. Or give it life or any credibility. His eyes were bulging out of his head. He was probably warned by (DUNKY) and this was why he was shaking. In addition The I AM my Lord was helping me with what to say. I did not worry myself before hand as the Lord was going to and did speak through me.

...

Moses also teaches not to respect judges. I demanded that the notes and minutes of this case take note that the jurisdiction of the court tribunal appeal was challenged. The judge conceded to do this. By doing this he has acknowledged that the jurisdiction of himself and the court was challenged. He then decided he had jurisdiction and judged the case anyway.

They really are running scared of Muad Dib's Challenge Document. My appeal was allowed. I have had a letter from Mrs Crowley the clerk to the tribunal claiming that Mr Scobbie did not know about the DVD player. He knew just fine about them. She says as I won my appeal, so it did not matter. They are all telling lies. They are scrambling to cover their backsides incase big Dunky comes up from London and give them a boot on it.

This bullet-proof defence document by Muad'Dib has got the establishment running for cover especially the jobs for the boys' tribunal monkey courts judges. They are absolutely terrified of the consequences of this taking root in the appeals tribunal service in general and the wider court system in particular. There is a lot at stake here for the Higherarchy enslaving us because they know who it is that is chapping their door and challenging them to their face in their face.

I'm sure :Chief :El: will receive an equally 'emotive' response to his application of the JAH approach.

SMS Möwe

[The Observer]

Well, that all may be true, but I notice neither of you have rebutted the separate argument that Queen Elizabeth II has breached her contract by failing to exterminate all homosexuals.

Please. Posting a positively plurality of pleadings from the packs of pilfering phelons as you have been doing for the last several weeks has left little time for us to rebut every single idiocy they have raised. Be thankful that we have at least for the time preserved the British monarchy, if not Elizabeth Battenberg's claim to the throne.

[Burnaby49]

Well, that all may be true, but I notice neither of you have rebutted the separate argument that Queen Elizabeth II has breached her contract by failing to exterminate all homosexuals.

Isn't it implicit in my comment that she was already queen when she made the oath? Simple law of contract under British common law. A contract needs consideration to be valid. Elizabeth received nothing by making the oath because she was already queen and already owned everything and the people of Britain had already received whatever benefit they accrued by her being queen when she ascended to the throne over a year earlier. So no consideration on either side and no valid contract to breach, just a vague unenforceable statement of intent which could be breached at any time with no legal consequences.

Actually that's an argument too, void for vagueness.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Please. Posting a positively plurality of pleadings from the packs of pilfering phelons as you have been doing for the last several weeks has left little time for us to rebut every single idiocy they have raised. Be thankful that we have at least for the time preserved the British monarchy, if not Elizabeth Battenberg's claim to the throne.

And I doff my hat to you for that!

This may be a little shocking but I am actually to the point where my pool of unposted Canadian materials has dwindled to near dregs. But I've a couple nice items still in reserve.

Isn't it implicit in my comment that she was already queen when she made the oath? Simple law of contract under British common law. A contract needs consideration to be valid. Elizabeth received nothing by making the oath because she was already queen and already owned everything and the people of Britain had already received whatever benefit they accrued by her being queen when she ascended to the throne over a year earlier. So no consideration on either side and no valid contract to breach, just a vague unenforceable statement of intent which could be breached at any time with no legal consequences.

Actually that's an argument too, void for vagueness.

I like the consideration counter-argument! Though it would not save 'Liz in the case of Scotland. One of the quirks of the law of that jurisdiction is that unilateral promises can be enforced in court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_contract_law). Having watched JAH's shorter video on the subject, it is clear that 'Liz's coronation involved Scottish officials, which was apparently a novelty at the time.

Now, playing devil's advocate, I would suggest that an oath to uphold the Bible is probably not void for vagueness, but instead a contract of that kind would devolve into endless squabbles as to how to interpret that not especially internally consistent document.

Perhaps we could just initially settle for the Crown outlawing the consumption of shrimp (http://www.godhatesshrimp.com/)?

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

I like the consideration counter-argument! Though it would not save 'Liz in the case of Scotland. One of the quirks of the law of that jurisdiction is that unilateral promises can be enforced in court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_contract_law). Having watched JAH's shorter video on the subject, it is clear that 'Liz's coronation involved Scottish officials, which was apparently a novelty at the time.

Now, playing devil's advocate, I would suggest that an oath to uphold the Bible is probably not void for vagueness, but instead a contract of that kind would devolve into endless squabbles as to how to interpret that not especially internally consistent document.

Ok, how about this to rebut your argument regarding broken unilateral promises in Scotland and Nanya's arguments re breach of contract law elsewhere and the requirement that the Queen adhere to the King James bible. There is no common law remedy for a breach of the Coronation Oath by the Queen because she wasn't granted her position through common law. The rules of succession and the automatic transfer of the monarchy to Elizabeth on the death of her father are set by statutory law, specifically The Act of Settlement of 1701.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Settlement_1701

Scotland accepted the Act of Settlement in 1707 when they accepted the Acts of Union. To quote Wikipedia:

The Acts of Union were two Acts of Parliament: the Union with Scotland Act 1706 passed by the Parliament of England, and the Union with England Act passed in 1707 by the Parliament of Scotland. They put into effect the terms of the Treaty of Union that had been agreed on 22 July 1706, following negotiation between commissioners representing the parliaments of the two countries. The Acts joined the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland (previously separate states, with separate legislatures but with the same monarch) into a single, united kingdom named "Great Britain".[2]

Since statutory law takes precedence over common law it doesn't matter what Nanya, Belanger and the rest of them think about our treacherous Queen's action in violating the rules (as they see them) laid out in the King James bible.

If Nanya's taking this one to court he'll be cut off at the knees even faster than usual, if that is possible. And, given his past behaviour, there will no doubt be plenty of security on hand to take care of him if he refuses to stop babbling about him now owning Britain and Canada through liens.

[Jeffrey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC0bpFLAUiY

Let me know if this is on topic or not but my favorite flavor of SC are the Moorish/African-American, just saw this video posted and the beginning 10 minutes include a woman saying she will use the "the Queen isn't real because her stone is fake" argument in an upcoming court appearance. From what I can tell it appears she had some correspondance with JAH and probably paid him for the services.

[grixit]

This is a week argument. They just dispute the hanoveran succession and demand a hearing before the Stuart heir.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

... Let me know if this is on topic or not but my favorite flavor of SC are the Moorish/African-American, just saw this video posted and the beginning 10 minutes include a woman saying she will use the "the Queen isn't real because her stone is fake" argument in an upcoming court appearance. From what I can tell it appears she had some correspondance with JAH and probably paid him for the services.

Yikes! Is this "http://canaanlandmoors.webs.com/" outfit in Ontario? Do you know more about it?

And thanks for posting that Jeffrey - the Moorish Law domain is not one where I have spent all too much time. Their materials are fascinating in their complexity.

Interesting response to a comment about our friend :Chief :El:

Canaanland Moors
first of all.. Nanya isnt my friend..just like we told people hes dirty.. but no one wants to listen to canaanland Moors.. they just want to comment on things they dont know about.. he charged the poor woman as you call her $1000 for birthrights that she decided not to use cuz shes smart., she saw the fraud and called us, and is still in that house the bank claimed they are foreclosing on.. shes fearless.. more fearless than Moors who been on this knowldge for decades..

Do you know of instances where Nanya has been acting as a guru beyond this alleged incident?

SMS Möwe

[Jeffrey]

... Let me know if this is on topic or not but my favorite flavor of SC are the Moorish/African-American, just saw this video posted and the beginning 10 minutes include a woman saying she will use the "the Queen isn't real because her stone is fake" argument in an upcoming court appearance. From what I can tell it appears she had some correspondance with JAH and probably paid him for the services.

Yikes! Is this "http://canaanlandmoors.webs.com/" outfit in Ontario? Do you know more about it?

And thanks for posting that Jeffrey - the Moorish Law domain is not one where I have spent all too much time. Their materials are fascinating in their complexity.

Interesting response to a comment about our friend :Chief :El:

Canaanland Moors
first of all.. Nanya isnt my friend..just like we told people hes dirty.. but no one wants to listen to canaanland Moors.. they just want to comment on things they dont know about.. he charged the poor woman as you call her $1000 for birthrights that she decided not to use cuz shes smart., she saw the fraud and called us, and is still in that house the bank claimed they are foreclosing on.. shes fearless.. more fearless than Moors who been on this knowldge for decades..

Do you know of instances where Nanya has been acting as a guru beyond this alleged incident?

SMS Möwe

I know so much about this group that I'm ashamed to admit it, ask whatever you want.

[Jeffrey]

I'll give a little bit of a beefier response here, sorry if I rehash things that other people know but Mowe's question was pretty open ended.

The Moorish version of sovereign citizen goes back to the 1920's chicago where the Moorish Temple of America was founded. They follow a prophet Noble Drew Ali who put forward the theory that african americans did not come to the US on slave ships, but rather were already here before pangea split apart in a "great earthquake". They believe that prior to 1492 there was a global moorish empire that encompassed the whole globe. In their interpretation of history Moors are not arabs/berbers but rather black africans.

They had some legal issues in the 1920's, the prophet was tied to the murder of the leader of a splinter group, Ali died after a short detention by police and after his death the group shot a bunch of police officers. It doesn't tie into SC until the 1970's -1980's and this is a bit speculative because of low history.

The group had a history of recruiting in prisons, something that becomes evident after observing them long enough, you realize many of them came into the movement after going to jail. Well at some point in the 70's or 80's they combined SC ideas with the Moorish concepts of nationality and the modern groups began.

Now Canaanland Moors, is led by Kudjo, his background is fuzzy but he came into SC first through a "european sovereign" and while researching online he learned about the Moorish flavor of SC being promoted by Taj Tarik Bey and Nature El Bey (who both appear in the video I linked).

He claims to be the first Moorish Temple in Canada and that claim appears to be true. It seems to be a very small group, collects dues from the members, I believe the leader is a truancy officer at a local school. The group itself has a bit of a body count by now. The first case seems to be one involving an underweight baby, the end result was that the father was deported, the mother apparently renounced the group but I'm fuzzy on details.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2008/09 ... ailed.html

A couple other members have been jailed for random things. They are big on driving without license plates or insurance.

They put up like ten hours of video on youtube each week. Mostly inviting random speakers to give lectures on random things, including Nanya who they hosted to give a lecture where Nanya repeated the same stuff he always says.

They don't appear to be dangerous or violent, just extremely confused.

And to address your Nanya question, I believe the person who charged her the $1,000 was JAH, not Nanya. The only instances of Nanya being Guru are a handful of blogtalk radio interviews, that one street interview he gave about Dwight/Malachi York and the Canaanland lecture he gave. I really don't think he ever successfully monetized selling information as evidenced by having to live with his mom rent free.