Cures for Societal Cancer
In Revelation 13:1–10, the first beast (interpreted as the Antichrist) rises “out of the sea” and is given authority and power by the dragon…”
Who is the Dragon? &
What has this got to do with Cancer?
“The Beast from The Sea”
Maritime Admiralty Law is a form of societal Cancer. It subjugates as a way of control without us even knowing. We are fooled by our own language and tricked into thinking that we are that which we are not. It eats away at our life in every way possible. BUT….we have now got a cure for this cancer also:
A Corporation is a: ‘Corps-Orating’ or a Dead Entity speaking.
Maritime Admiralty Law is the reason that we are all trapped in a cycle of perpetual debt, and it is also the reason that you are unable to get effective medical treatment for issues such as Cancer, and instead are given toxic options such as Chemotherapy & Radiotherapy that will only shorten your life, even if they do remove cancer. Strangely, these topics are all inextricably woven into the very fabric of our civilization.
A quick example of the trickery we have been subjected to:
Being born in the UK, for instance, we learn our language, English. We have a dictionary that’s generally accepted & recognized globally for this language, it’s known as ‘The Oxford English Dictionary’ and explains what all our words mean so there is no confusion when interacting with others verbally, or in the written language.
ALL Courtrooms, whether Magistrates Court or Crown Court (Maritime Admiralty Law’) have their own dictionary. ‘Blacks Law Dictionary’ is the gold standard of Court-Room dialog, globally.
It’s also a broad topic, so let’s have a look at this and see where this jig-saw piece fits in with the larger picture..
‘Cestui Que Vie’ – “For the good of the people.”
In 1666 there was a great fire in London. It wasn’t an accident, and it did not start in a Bakery. In the 2 years prior to the fire, the Government were keen to introduce the Birth Certificate. The populace of England at that time were vehemently against the idea of Birth Certificates for several reasons and rejected it at every option.
So the Government decided a good idea to ‘shoe-horn’ the public into the birth certificate scam, because without a Birth certificate, they can not carry-out the fraud that they intend, was to create a situation where the public demanded a Birth Certificate
It all rests on a bit of paper – this bit of paper is used to generate vast amounts of money on your behalf, and you never get to know a single thing about it. Until now.
Lots of people are aware of this now thanks to the LEGENGS like Bill Turner, Morton William Cooper (Bill Cooper), Ian Stuart Stuart (not his real name but you can search Facebook or YouTube, for him with this name) David Adleman (https://thepeopleslawyeruk.com/), plus many more. These heroes have spent rather a long time researching all this in ‘Archbold’s’ & Blacks Law plus a plethora of other sources etc. They demystified the entire scam into layman’s-lingo…..I couldn’t research this out of Archbold’s,…..it would take forever, and its supposed to be hard to research, so you can’t conclude a step forward.
The reason was that with this document, you were then ‘registered’ and assigned you weight in gold, your family didnt recieve this, it was held ‘on your behalf’ .
After all, ‘They’ do not want you to know any of this:
An artists representation of ‘They’
I’m going to try and address a lot of ‘Lawful’ recourse here in this pdf – you will need to find the relevant part for your issue i.e. a speeding fine, copy and paste what you need, and add your own names and addresses – you will likely need to change a few words to make it ‘fit’ your issue as no two issues are identical. However, the way we deal with these issues, is all very similar, its not complicated whatsoever, it’s actually quite easy.
There are whats called a “3-letter process” which is a lawful requirement for instances such as debt, for instance a Bailiff will send you a letter, 30 days later they will send you another letter, and 30 days later they will send you another letter – these can be 7 days, 14, 28 or 31 days apart – the police like to use 7days as they will write to you using 2nd class postage, making it take 4 days for you to receive the letter, you then have only 3 days in which to reply and if you miss the deadline, you’re paying by default. Its just one of their many tricks in the joinder ‘game’
NEVER ignore a bailiff letter, always reply to stay ‘In Honour’. If you ignore a letter from a bailiff or the bank, you will find that the rule of “Tacit Acquiescence” comes into play – ‘Tacit Acquiescence’ is agreeing with your silence, so the fact that you ignored the bailiffs and didn’t even open the letter, you are tacitly agreeing to everything inside that letter, by your silence.
These are not in any particular order, just as I think of them. I will do a bit of explaining between the templates as that’s important for you to understand this process as it seem so daunting at 1st….we ‘feel’ we are being bad or letting our society down in some way by not paying these unlawful demands, And that’s how the Stockholm Syndrome keeps us in check.
GAS Electricity & water:
Energy Companies DO NOT own your meters.
Let’s get out of the habit also of calling energy companies suppliers, when they aren’t any such thing. There BROKERS! Selling you debt. Which is fraud.
ABOUT ENERGY COMPANIES
Let me explain about energy companies and what they can and CANNOT do.
The electric and gas supply to the house or company cannot be cut off ever. Well, not in the UK.
The world of the movies is different. Once installed that supply of Gas or Elec or Water will be maintained because the National grid is not the energy billing company.
It’s a separate company called the National Grid who have a contract with the government and they will not breach that contract and the judge has no authority to override that contract.
So not even a court order can have that Gas/Elec/Water feed cut off. This is why they want to get in your house and fit a prepay meter.
Now this is Civil and in the world of Civil, the Judge CANNOT give that order, and he won’t.
WHY? The contempt of court reporting restriction does restrain the Judge and if he breaches this it’s a Judicial review at the Royal Courts of Justice and he gets fired.
So in brief there is no chance in hell that the feed supply will ever be cut off.
This may not be the same in every single country, but if it’s a commonwealth country that issues a Birth Certificate your pretty safe to assume that this will all work.
They have to dig a hole in the street to get that done. I’m not saying that it can’t be done but the National grid will tell the Judge to fuck off.
The Bureaucratic red tape for digging a hole in the street alone can take months.
The Billing Company is just that. It’s a metering and Billing service also licensed by the criminal cabal / Government / deep-state, Which also means in economic terms the Gas/Elec is 92% Tax the same as fuel.
A Billing company does not provide any Gas/Elec. It’s just an extension of government by the licensed Billing company.
The Gas/Elec meter is NOT owned by the Billing company either and all they have is the serial number of the meter on record.
So without that serial number on record which gets moved from Billing company to billing company when you change billing company, they have no reason to Bill you or enter your home.
I am now using the words Billing company because they do not provide the Gas/Elec. Can you see how the language they use is also fraud??
The very contract is Fraud and there can never be that full disclosure of the fact that they are just a Billing Company under license from the government OFGEM office.
The Government does not have the legal authority to sign that OFGEM Billing company license because the people have never signed that Legal Consent. NONE of the Acts and Statutes are legally enforceable without the consent of the governed.
So it’s end-to-end fraud and the unsigned paper they never sign is the proof of that fact. Companies Act 2006 section 44. Please go read it.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44
Everything has to be signed by an authorized person. Well the Billing Company itself is not the authorized person, is it?
This is why nothing is ever signed.
Fraud Act 2006 section 4(2) Fraud by abuse of position when it is an act of omission. It’s not signed. And they can’t legally sign it so they don’t. It’s all about the Paper evidence and they send that to you.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/4
It is in your hand. Material evidence of fraud sent by the fraudsters, This brings us once again back to the Claim and the MAXIM…
“He who makes a claim carries the OBLIGATION to provide the Material substance of the Claim. Otherwise, the claim is fraudulent and it is also a known CHARGEABLE, Criminal offence. “
The signed authorization does not exist.
You don’t need to go to court.
After I will add some templates that I have done for this, just knowing the above should set you up for some interesting research online.
IF YOU ARE ON TELEGRAM: join ‘Stacey’s World Rocks’ it is AWESOME there are many many templates on there and she is really good with advice not charging – There is a company on her telegram who will come and remove your Smart meter and fit an old meter for just £100 GBP (Gas or electricity) they travel everywhere in the country and you can book a slot with them – or you can do it yourself if your that way inclined.
In Australia, there is a fantastic guy named ‘Bill Turner’ his info is super-expert and iv learned a lot from him – in the UK we have ‘Ian Stuart Stuart’ who is also a super-expert in common law, and an ex-barrister named David Adleman who wrote a great book “School, No Place for Children” iv been to a lecture of Davids he’s fukin awesome! I’d go along to one when he is in your area if you are UK based, he only asks for donations. Fucking legend.
3rd letter to Scottish Power regarding the contract….use this or build your own, be creative:
An examaple if the 2nd letter for speeding in the “3-Letter” process, download and use as you wish:
Administrative courts
The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is NO authority for administrative courts in this country and no Act can be passed to legitimize them because of the constitutional restraints placed upon Her Majesty at Her coronation. You will find this applies in ANY Commonwealth Country.
The collection of revenue by such means is extortion, and extortion has been found reprehensible since ancient times. Separation of powers Today, in the year 2023, we find for example, that in the council tax regulations, the billing authority, the prosecuting authority, and the enforcement authority are all vested in the same body. The same bodies even purport to issue their own legal documents, by tacit agreement with the Courts. In our system of Common Law, the rule of law demands that we have a separation of powers. Today, the powers are not separated. The executive is not a distinct, freestanding leg of the tripod. The executive now emerges directly from within the elected Chamber of the legislature where previously it emanated directly from the Monarch. That leads to constitutional confusion—because the executive has seized and misused Parliament’s democratic credentials for its own, destructive, purposes. Fortunately, we have something to which we can turn to preserve our ancient laws and freedoms. We have the Oath that Her Majesty The Queen took at her coronation by which she is solemnly bound and from which no one in England, Wales, and Scotland has released her. At Her Coronation, the Queen swore to govern us, “according to [our] respective laws and customs”. Certainly, among our reputed “customs”, is precisely that invaluable and widely admired tripartite division of the powers. The judiciary is part and parcel of our customary system of internal sovereignty—“the Queen in Parliament”. It is one of the three separate but symbiotic powers, and it is a capricious and self-serving contention that it should not have the power to preserve the authority of the legislature over the executive. It is a constitutional principle that the assent of the Queen & Parliament is a prerequisite to the establishment of a Court which can operate a system of administrative law in Her Majesty’s Courts in England. This was confirmed by Lord Denning during the debates on the European Communities Amendment Bill, HL Deb 08 October 1986 vol 480 cc246-95 246 at 250: “There is our judicial system deriving from the Crown as the source and fountain of justice. No court can be set up in England, no court can exist in England, except by the authority of the Queen and Parliament. That has been so ever since the Bill of Rights.” 08 -10 – 1986 vol 480 cc246-95 246 at 250. [15/12/2011 22:30:58] catherine.crossan1: Halsbury’s Laws of England/ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (VOLUME 1(1) (2001 REISSUE))/1. INTRODUCTION/(1) SCOPE AND NATURE OF THE SUBJECT/1. Scope.
’Cease & Desist’
Is a document that you prepare yourself, the one below is my own, I created to serve the local Housing Benefits department – they disagreed with my GP over a broken ankle – the benefits said that I was fit to work after a 5-minute phone call, whereas my GP said I should refrain from walking let-alone working. So I didn’t have a clue as to even what a cease & desist actually was…..??? I googled it and found some lame attempts, I say lame, being a total novice myself not even knowing what the words meant, but I knew in my head that my wording needed to stand out, it needed to be air-tight before I go in and serve it – I spent 2 weeks and about 15 hours per day researching this next document below before making it.
When I went into the office, I walked in with no crutches or walking aid, I sat down at the desk and spoke to my representative ‘Nelson’ (a nice guy I must say, I didn’t have a problem with Nelson, he’s a great guy, but unfortunately for Nelson, he was my point of contact at the Benefits Agency…..this is how this system works, I need to explain this so people understand – it’s one thing knowing that striking a match on a matchbox will ignite the phosphorus on the match-head, but it’s no good holding a box of matches and expecting fire if you duno the process of ignition. It’s the same with this common-law stuff:
Nelson, being my only adviser in the Building, could be a secretary at a builder’s yard or a dentist, or a car mechanic, or a teacher or a vet, or a ‘peeping-tom’ its all the same process – Its not Nelson’s fault that my benefits were sanctioned…. he’s just doing his job so he carries on getting paid, he said “I’m sorry Leon but they do not agree with your GP”….so I gave him a ‘Notice of impending action’ it was one side of A4 paper just outlining my concerns, explaining that it is incorrect for a person on the phone to decide if I can walk or not without even seeing me physically, I added that I am happy to see their GP or a GP of their choice? But I will not accept a bloke on the phone telling me I’m fine, when I am not. So poor Nelson actually laughed at me! He said “Ha! What’s this?” And threw it back on the table – I picked it up and said you will need to hang on to this mate, you’ll need it for court, and I gave it back to him apologizing in advance for his house going on the market soon to pay me.
The following day I sent the document below, knowing full well that they will try and refute it…..but I did my homework. Knowing that Nelson will refute it, I hold Nelson himself personally responsible in his personal capacity, so he could not hide behind his employers or say ‘I was just doing my job’ because the cease & desist is worded to climb-the-ladder, so it says that if nelson is forced to make stupid decisions then he has 14 days to tell me who is forcing his decisions?…..so then I write that person a cease & desist as well……and then higher and higher if need be? Iv never needed to go higher than person-1 as when people realize what Chancery Court actually is, they shit themselves big time because it is a fast process and its really cut-&-dried by the time you are sending a cease & desist to the troublemaker, they are already fucked if you had to do that and they ignore you again.
Because: “Those who seek equity, must do equity” therefore, In a court room scenario, in Chancery Court which is a division of The High Courts, ‘Honour’ and ‘clean hands’ are essential – if you enter a court room about something like this, and you have sent a cease and desist and backed it up with the 3-letter process, which would just be a reiteration of the original cease & desist – then you will win the case as you have ‘Clean Hands’ a clear consciousness and you remained ‘In Honour’ at all times……the claimant, having had this pointed out and an offer made to remedy the situation (me offering to see a GP of their own choosing), the benefits agency for instance, will have dirty hands and their honour removed – they cannot win a case like this as their methods are fraudulent, asking a bloke on the phone to tell me im fit for work when my surgeon and GP disagree????….naaaaa bruv, more like we are going to court and you will need to sell your house to pay me the damages for ‘mental anguish’ ‘cohersed Financial bullying’ ‘stress’ etc etc etc it gets very expensive to pursue a case like this, its cost you nothing but a 1st class stamp, but now ‘they’ (whoever they are) are going to need to put time into you, research and time while they build a case that they cannot possible win…..by the time they get to the bottom of the cease and desist…..everything has changed and you will get nice phone calls apologising for any stress and they will start bending over backwards to help you…..
It costs 10% of the asking price in advance to go to Chancery Court, I was suing the Benefits for 200K so I would have needed 20k to start the ball rolling – being on benefits I don’t have 20K knocking about…..but I told them I could borrow the 20k if need be as I will win the case and pay the loan back out of my 200k 😊 they can’t prove I can’t borrow the money, and I couldn’t borrow it 🙂
Needless to say, they over-rode the stupid decision the day the Cease & desist arrived on their desk lol. Send it 1st Class post, ‘Signed-For, or Tracked and signed-for’ / ‘special delivery’ because you need the proof they received it which is ‘Signature on Delivery is proof of receipt’ – so it doesn’t matter if they don’t open it…the fact you have a signed-for receipt on the delivery, is all you need 🙂
Below is a Cease & Desist that I made myself – copy and past, take out what you do not require and add that which you do, to meld these words with you’re situation:
Getting ‘nicked’ for any reason whatsoever
If you are pulled up by the police whilst *‘Driving’ DO NOT EVER OPEN THE DOOR – opening the door of your car is the same as opening the door of your house, and by doing this you are creating ‘JOINDER’ – Joinder is all they need to rip-you-right-off and therefore you will open the window an ‘inch’ and talk to the thru the ajar window of your home, or car. If I were you I would also start recording them on your phone camera – it’s not illegal and they are filming you also, so fairs-fair – if they ask why you are recording? Say “For my personal safety, you’re filming me for your personal safety, so I am doing the same constable”.
Never call them “Officer” always call them “Constable” as this places them ‘BELOW’ you whereas calling them ‘Officer’ places them in a standing higher than yourself. They are all ‘Public Servants’ and they are not there to enforce fraudulent Acts, Statutes and policy’s, they are there to uphold the Queens peace and common law. They even swore an Oath to this effect….so the 1st thing you will ask a Police Constable when they pull you over, is:
“Hello constable are you in need of my assistance?”
(said thru a slightly opened window whils hopefully recording them)
They reply with whatever shit they have in mind
(tail light, tyre tread, headlights etc etc)
You then ask:
“can I ask if you are acting under Oath today please Constable?”
If they reply “no” they are fucked, as ‘Impersonating a Police Officer’ carries 7yrs in jail, so they have to reply “Yes, of course”
So now we have established the fact that they are actually acting under the parameters of their oath, we can now remind them that enforcing Acts, statutes & policies is actually against their Oath, and the LAW itself.
At this point you need to ‘remind’ them that:
The “Road Traffic Act 1988” is NULL AND VOID since the 1st of January 1973 when Heath & Thatcher took us into the EEC. This was an Act Of Treason and in doing so The Queen was no longer the Monarch, she became the Head of a Corporation. So now by default, every Act of Parliament, Statute or Policy is NULL & VOID, and every court in the UK is acting in Treason. Treason is STILL punishable by Death. See Government document ‘FCO 30/1048’ you say that the magistrates (who I will have arrested in court) have the power to impose a “mandatory victim surcharge”….. ‘Mandatory’ in Blacks Law ‘court-lingo’ means ‘May’ i.e. it’s ‘optional’. ‘Mandatory Face Covering’ is also an option, as is Mandatory Vaccination…..all optional. So il opt out of any optional payments thanks.
The problem for them, at this point is that you are aware (now) that “asking a person to lay claim to a Legal person’s name, is called ‘Personage’ otherwise known as ‘Legal Entrapment’, which is unlawful, and a crime. A ‘Legal Persons’ name is a name IN BLOCK CAPITIOL LETTERS otherwise known as “Capitus Demutia Maxima” is a dead script that counts as a non-language in a courtroom scenario – ‘Dog Latin’ – if you wrote a confession for murder, in BLOCK CAPITOLS it would not count as a confession because BLOCK CAPITOL letters are ‘DEAD TEXT’ – what this means is that when a constable or police person as you for your name….”Excuse me sir, can I have your name?” ask “am I obliged constable?” they will reply “no” because they know full well that you are not obliged to give your name, but they work on the fact that no one knows this. When they ask for your name, they are asking for your NAME IN BLOCK CAPITOLS only, they are not interested in your name in ‘lower case text’ but they will not let you know that there is a big difference between the two – some police constables know about this, some don’t – all the younger ones are clueless about it
They are trying to create ‘Joinder’ by getting YOU to associate yourself with a ‘DEAD LEGAL FICTION’ because they are not asking for your name e.g. Leon George Sinclair….no no, they are asking for you to say your name so that in their corrupt brains it will transform into LEON GEORGE SINCLAIR who died at sea age 15yrs and 9 months of, when MR SINCLAIR received his N.I number, he was, that same day declared “Died, lost at sea”…..
So knowing this, have a look at your letters and bills when you receive them…..do they have your name in BLOCK CAPITIOLS above your address? Not always, sometimes only half your name will be in ‘Maxima’ (Capitals) so any bill that you receive with your name in BLOCK CAPITOLS is not mail addressed to you unless you lay claim to that mail by associating yourself with the dead legal fiction.
For a start……when you get pulled over for ‘whatever’ the copper will ask your name, if he says you are obliged to answer, he may be correct in that instance, BUT say to them “am i obliged constable?” they will likely say “no”, so you dont give them your name, but you cant just refuse to give them your name if you want an easy ride, it depends on the copper you get – but you will need to show the constable how your name is written:
Mx :Leon-George: Sinclair complete with pronoun, hyphen and colons. This is your ‘Compound-fact’ name as concluded by :David-Wynn: Miller in 1980 who invented C.S.S.C.P.S.G (Correct Sentence Structure Communication Parse Syntax Grammar) which is a way of writing a document/contract in a mathematical structure preordained in CSSCPSG which is part of the Universal Postal Union – this is your ‘Living’ sovereign name. Make sure the constable gets it correct, let them know that the pronoun of Mx is genderless for a man or woman who do not wish to identify as a ‘Mr’ or ‘Mrs’ and is gender neutral. The Hyphen and colons are part of the CSSCPSG structure of writing – a document in CSSCPSG can be read from the top down, or from the bottom up and it will read exactly the same – CSSCPSG takes out all the ambiguity of a contract or document, stripping language back to a mathematical formulae that can actually be validated on a calculator. :David-Wynn: Miller invented this system of communication to get his kids back from social services in America – he proved the validity of his documentation in court by disqualifying all the other documents that were not written in CSSCPSG. The problem with Correct Sentence Structure Communication Parse Syntax Grammar is that it is too complex to fit-into the legal framework……you would need a whole new department at the police station and every solicitor’s, to process these documents as it is not straightforward even reading them, let-alone writing them…..BUT….for the ‘Blockchain’ this would be a perfect way of conducting business, flawless perfection. I wanted to produce an ‘app’ to translate CSSCPSG into Oxford English with the same ease that you scan a document with your i-Phone, but that’s another story, please feel free to take my impeccable idea and run with it, because no one else is!!! I haven’t got the time, that’s a full-time job just learning CSSPCSG, but I do have a coder who could pull-off the coding for it and actually make the App itself…..if anyone is interested let me know.
so then you hit them with the ‘Acts / Statutes & Policys’ lecture:
Since the 1st January 1973 when Heath & Thatcher took us into the EEC. This was an Act Of Treason and in doing so The Queen was no longer the Monarch, she became the Head of a Corporation. So now by default, every Act of Parliament, Statute or Policy is NULL & VOID, and every court in the UK is acting in Treason. Treason is STILL punishable by Death. See Government document ‘FCO 30/1048’.
*’DRIVING’ is a commercial activity DRIVER. “One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car. A person actually doing driving, whether employed by owner to drive or driving his own vehicle. Wallace v. Woods, 340 Mo. 452, 102 S.W.2d 91, 97.”
So how can I possibly give you the name of someone who was NOT DRIVING?
G-5C1YK2DLWF