Statutes vs Law

by Roger Hayes
The following pertains to the British legal/law society; which is based around Admiralty/Maritime (shipping) laws.
Contract law. However the principles are pretty much consistent throughout the judaified world.

The main issue I have with the ‘Freeman-on-the-Land’ topics is that they never speak about the root cause of why
we have all of this perverted laws. Who is perverting them.
Please translate the following legal references, government and politicians, ruling classes to the judaic/talmudic
cabalistic laws and the people currently in authority.
I feel the freeman principles are an important element to this whole agenda, but we must be realistic about ‘what’
we are dealing with, as opposed to just ‘who’ we are dealing with. I now strongly feel these tyrants are acting under
a demonic influence and they have no boundaries whatsoever. So we can be clued up to the hilt with all this Lawful
Rebellion, but the bottom line is we are dealing with demonic/satanic entities.
However please don’t let that put you off from familiarising yourself with this important information.
I have highlighted some areas which I thought were very important, but I could have highlighted most, if not all of
these points.

Statutes
1/. All acts of Parliament are ‘statutes’ known variously as legislation, regulations or rules. They are not laws.
Statutes are often incorrectly referred to as laws by ‘trained’ barristers and solicitors, but the correct interpretation
would be ‘black letter law’ (meaning statutes) which are distinguishable from ‘law’ i.e. common law – and for a
purpose, the purpose being that statutes and laws are different.
If Acts of Parliament were laws they would be called ‘Law of Parliament.’ Parliament knows the distinction which it
quite rightly maintains. Look at any Act of Parliament and you will notice the absence of the word law – that will give
you the first clue that there is a difference. Parliament maintains the distinction between statutes and laws because
those ‘in the know’ use this knowledge for their personal benefit.
2/. A ‘statute’ is defined as a rule or regulation of society – they are edits of legislation used to govern that society.
Statues are subject to the consent of the society – and this is individual consent and not collective consent. We
belong to society as a matter of choice.
3/. The distinction between a law and a statute is that a law applies equally to us all but statutes can be made to
favour one sector of society over others, for example, people with disabilities are given preferential parking
privileges (which is fair enough) and politicians have given themselves special dispensations; re their expenses
which the rest of us do not have (which is outrageous).
4/. There is a compulsion to obey laws. Laws defend our freedoms and liberties and through them we live in peace
and harmony with our neighbours. failure to comply with laws would render an individual an outlaw. If you do not
respect the law then it can afford you no protection.
5/. Obeying statutes is voluntary i.e. with our consent Any individual can withdraw their consent to being governed
(controlled) by the statutes of a society. This might involve their exclusion from that society and the loss of benefits,
but when the imposition of the liabilities outweighs the benefits, then that might be a price worth paying. The choice
is and should be yours.
6/. Consent must be given by the individual and not by a collective on behalf of the individual – this would be
dictatorship by the majority.
There is no freedom in having to do whatever you are told.
Each individual must have the absolute right to give and withhold their consent.
This is the basis of our constitution – individual freedoms.
7/. Government is elected into ‘office’ not ‘power’ as they frequently like to claim.
8/. The ultimate constraint on the abuse of authority (office) is the people’s ability to withdraw their consent to being
governed – and at any time, not just at elections. Without consent, authority enforced becomes power and
government then becomes tyrannical. We never give ‘power’ to those we elect, we merely give them authority to act
on our behalf. Today’s governing bodies are slowing mutating into tyrannies, because they are ignoring the
principles of consent and are securing ‘power’ for themselves.
9/. The ‘divine’ right of kings’ was destroyed by rebellion – we are now living under the yoke of the ‘divine right of
politicians’ who saw fit to pass the Lisbon Treaty against the will of the people. Lawful Rebellion is a right – and the
means by which we deal with the abuse of office.
10/. A rejection of statues does not imply a rejection of the law. A rejection of statutes is a rejection of governance. It
is for those governing to make sure that the statutes they make are acceptable. The distinction between laws and
statues has been lost in the fog of time. Many long-in-the-tooth ‘legal’ practitioners will argue that statutes are laws
– but if statutes were laws they would be described as such to avoid ambiguity. The ‘legal’ profession has failed in
its duty to maintain and understand the distinction between laws and statues – through ignorance – but also
because ignorance of the distinction has given the ‘legal’ profession enhanced authority – why would they promote
knowledge of the difference? It isn’t in their interest to do so. It is after all, the legal profession that runs the court
system – with magistrates (our representatives) having been pushed to the side by statue. (The Magistrate Court
Act 1980). Magistrates having been made subservient to the decision of the legal adviser in court. This was a
power-grab statute.
11/. Statutes do not apply equally to us all. Some sectors of society are given preferable treatment under statutes.
Politicians for example have given themselves pension provisions which the rest of us can only dream of. The EU
common agriculture policy (a statute) rewards wealthy land owners – but not tenant farmers. The police can park on
double yellow lines (which we are told is dangerous) when they are on duty – we can’t when we are on duty (at
work).
Special interest groups often benefit from statutes – banks being a notable example. Politicians on leaving politics
will often be rewarded by these special interest groups by way of generous salaries, director’s fees and perks as a
‘thank you’ for passing professional legislation. A disproportionate large number of ex-Minsters of the Crown now
work (I use that word advisedly) for the banks. Some would describe this as a ‘perk’ I have another word in mind.
12/. If a statute is passed transferring their authority (to Brussels for example) – we can withdraw our consent
because such an act is unlawful.
13/. It has become the habit of the legal professional to describe statutes as laws. Habits, no matter how
entrenched do not however create facts. Statutes are not laws.
14/. If statues become overly prescriptive, restrictive, onerous and oppressive – the people not only have a right to
withdraw their consent – they have an obligation and a duty to do so in order to defend themselves against
tyrannical power.
15/. Statues are supposed to protect society and help in fair and just governance, but from time to time (over
centuries) statutes mutate to become more oppressive and work against the wider interest of the community and
invariably benefit small sections of society. During these times these groups will work hard to defend the privileges
they have accumulated for themselves – invariably at our expense.
16/. Without statues we have greater freedoms. The ruling class do not like ordinary people having too many
freedoms, it makes them nervous as it has the potential to rock their boat, thus there is always the tendency to
inflict more regulations than is necessary – in order to keep control.
17/. Statutes refer to Acts of Parliament and legislation.
18/. Statutes do not protect – they are used to keep control.
19/. Statutes are often unjust – they can be punitive, unfair, unreasonably prescriptive and authoritarian.
20/. We are all equal in the eyes of the law – we are not all equal in the eyes of statutes.
Law
1/. Law refers to common law.
2/. Law are always just – they protect our rights and freedoms.
3/. Law is based on principles – statutes are based on practicalities, albeit not always fairly assessed.
4/. Laws take time to evolve and remain for long periods of time. Statues often come and go on a whim.
5/. Laws may be taken into statutes but if repeated in statue they remain in force in law.
6/. Lawful refers to the law. legal refers to legislation.
7/. Laws are used to keep the peace.
8/. Without law we have anarchy. *
9/. The people make the law – by acceptance and validation by jury decisions.
10/. Nobody is above the law. The law applies equally to us all.
11/. Parliament does not make law – it makes legislation.
12/. Judges do not make the law – they interpret legislation and keep a record of laws.
13/. Our constitution is the foundation of our law. Most in the legal profession are not even taught about our
constitution – that should tell you all you need to know about where this is taking us.
* I don’t necessarily think anarchy is as bad as we are led to believe.