(b) the term “Spain” means the Spanish State and, when used in a geographical sense, Peninsular Spain, the Balearic and Canary Islands, and the Spanish towns and territories in Africa, including any area outside the territorial sea of Spain which in accordance with international law has been or may hereafter be designated, under the laws of Spain concerning the Continental Shelf, as an area within which the rights of Spain with respect to the sea bed and sub-soil and their natural resources may be exercised;
ANALYSIS
Consider that:
Spain the Spanish State is separate from Spain in a geographical sense.
Spain in a geographical sense has nothing to do with Spain the Spanish State.
When speaking of Spain the Spanish State (a body politic, and therefore in line with the definition of a fictional noun), you must ignore the extra information that has no relevance to Spain the Spanish State and that is added to simply confuse the unwary and inattentive. This extra information, is given as Spain in the geographical sense and is provided to the reader in the following terms, ‘and, when used in a geographical sense… ‘.
This is a legal trap to make you think that Spain the Spanish State is one and the same with Spain in a geographical sense.
Spain in a geographical sense is commonly thought of as actual ‘land’. However, this is also doubtful as no mention of land is made. What is given are labels; Peninsular Spain, the Balearic and Canary Islands, and the Spanish towns and territories in Africa; and not labels that tell us to expect actual ‘land’ that is being spoken about , for example,
‘and, when used in a geographical sense, the lands of Peninsular Spain, the lands of the Balearic and Canary Islands, and the lands of the Spanish towns and territories in Africa’.
Nevertheless, we can say that the ‘body-politic’ of the Spanish State as Spain is indeed entirely a separate entity from the ‘geography’ of Spain commonly thought of as land, and must not in any way be construed to mean the same thing. One is most definitely a fictional noun that refers to something which can have no independent existence of its own in fact, as in a ghost; while the other at best maybe referring to ‘actual land’ as a word that is a real noun that points to and indicates things that do have an independent existence of their own as fact.
Now, when the Spanish State as Spain and in particular the geographical sense of Spain is spoken of, it is made finally clear where this geography and therefore jurisdictional authority of the Spanish State is to be found. It is to be found after the word ‘including’.
So, with that term ‘including’ we can now think finally of Peninsular Spain to mean ‘that part of Peninsular Spain made up of…’; the Balearic and Canary Islands to mean ‘that part of the Balearic and Canary Islands made up of…’; etc.
In so far as what the Spanish State is made up of…well, it’s a fictional noun defined on paper to be found most probably within the constitution as well as most definitely in Article 3(b) of The Double Taxation Treaty between the U.K. and Spain.
The Spanish States is quite literally made up of ‘a piece of paper’ and any jurisdictional claims it has to the subsoil and seabed.
Thousands of police march in Spain austerity protest [Note.- See paragraph 3 – “Citizens! Forgive us for not arresting those truly responsible for this crisis: bankers and politicians,” read one banner held aloft by a line of officers as they marched to the interior ministry.] http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/17/thousands-of-police-march-in-spain-austerity-protest/
Comment.- It’s difficult to make arrests when you don’t understand the nature of the wrong-doing or crime
The Church says nothing to expose the real deceit of banking. It’s also amazing to see The Church extolling the virtues of ‘centralisation’ in, of course, the context of a beneficial almost philanthropic global public authority, which ‘centralisation’ used to be plainly called and known for what it was, ‘communism’. Since the days when school boys were told how to recognise communism, by using their eyes and common sense where they saw clear evidence demonstrating greater centralisation of power to so-called public authority in whatever guise (more for themselves in telling you what to do and less for us in deciding for ourselves what we care to do), we certainly have indeed fallen a long way in our general standards of education. The quick, simple and easy definition of communism or any other -ism with tyrannical ambitions will always be, ‘more excuses to centralise the power and authority of individual free-willed people into the hands of a few – to tell the people what they can and cannot do and whose life is of value’; welcome to the ‘common good’, welcome to slavery. Communism, a tool of the private international banking elite, as is known, has as well high ideals towards the ‘common good’ in the context of a central or global authority which funnily enough is not too dissimilar to this grand scheme ‘towards reforming the international financial and monetary systems in the context of global public authority’ that we see the church extolling. Coincidences abound, how fascinating. Oh well, nothing to see here and certainly there’s no cause for concern. Others ought to be trusted in ensuring your future, simply because they tell us we can trust them and say the ‘most’ clever things. So, it’s a good thing that we each consent to give them our power of authority as individual free-willed people because they are sure to do a better job of looking after our individual interests. Far better than we could do in ‘taking responsibility’ for looking after our own interests. Don’t you think? Besides, they have God on their side.
UNITED STATES BISHOPS: THAT’S WHY WE CARE ABOUT INTERNATIONAL DEBT
How irrelevant: A call for debt-relief and a ‘jubilee’ on debt is just skirting the issue – There simply is no debt that is owed to the banks; whether individual debt or, ‘so-called’ national or sovereign debt that you have to pay as taxes. So long as you and your actions through your ‘correct title’ (LIVE birth certificate name) remain outside of the ‘jurisdiction of the fictional-country’ where those debts and numerous other liabilities operate, you cannot be subject to them. It remains for ‘you’ to understand that contracting to and remaining within the ‘jurisdiction of a fictional-country’ using an incorrect title (A GOVERNMENT OR STATE SIGNED birth certificate), a title owned by and in the jurisdiction of the fictional-government or the fictional-state, means that you will be subject to that governments or states ‘fictional-countries’ jurisdiction and those who oversee that jurisdiction. You will then become liable for ALL the rules that apply to the ‘incorrect title name’ you are contracting through within the fictional-countries jurisdiction and where all these other entities also operate, for example, government, judiciary, banks, etc. Of course, all of this is nonsense, nevertheless, that’s the position as it is found today and as it has been for eons. When you don’t pay attention to what nature or nature’s God has provided for you in ‘freewill’, then there will be those who will have you contract your very soul away. The ‘freewill’ that is of our nature and is ‘true law’, means that a ‘pretended authority’ cannot have you do something without your consent, otherwise it would be clearly slavery. So, you need to be blinded into thinking that ‘democracy’ in their fictional-world has somehow a greater standing than ‘freewill’. This is in order to enslave, by weight of numbers, the individual not ‘contracted’ to this fiction for, of course, the common good. A most ingenious and subtle system of tyranny that at once has the great mass of people contract their ‘freewill’ away to a make believe fictional-state whose advocates will promise you the world. But, more than that. The people actually believe and think that it is the score-card of this tyranny, as a ‘majority’ government, that makes-up ‘their law’ and not the individuals ‘freewill to decide to consent or not’ that actually IS – the law . By this means, they enslave themselves all at once to their ‘state’, and force those that say otherwise to submit to the puppet masters urgings. Now, one can understand why the true definition of politics has been said to be the ‘art of deceit’.
It now becomes apparent that both, a countries existence and the government or state of whose jurisdiction it is under, or whose government or state operates in the countries jurisdiction, amount to just fictions. Those who reside in such a country are subject to its jurisdiction. This is because such a country and its rules exist only on paper as a ‘definition’ to be agreed to. As a consequence, anything that emanates from such a countries jurisdiction, must be taken as a choice to either ‘contract’ with it or not. As would also be the case were you to be presented with what effectively would be ‘a presentation of an offer to contract defined on paper’ to join the jurisdiction of any other corporate body with an employee policy for its workers or agents, and where also that policy could alter during your tenure as an employee. Government or State being in the same position as such a corporate body making presentments to contract as its ‘business’, must be necessarily in that same position, in order for there not to be slavery, for all men are born with ‘freewill’ to make choices in their own lives as they so wish and see fit, in so far as they cause no harm or injury to others. Taken in this light, it can be seen that this ‘fictional construct of a country’ clearly is not a place where people exist. Therefore, people have to be convinced, without fully being made aware of the true nature of what is going on, into accepting contracts under the jurisdiction of a countries government or state. Such contracts attach when you admit to being in the jurisdiction of a governments or states country in which they operate. Admission of being in a countries jurisdiction is made when you choose to use the name given in the governments birth-certificate document that mimics your own name. These names are employee legal titles of the government and are owned by the government because they have a government agents signature on them. Using birth certificate title names, places you in a position of being a government agent or worker agreeing to the jurisdiction and therefore the contractual terms of any legislative, regulatory or policy document of government, whether it be central or local government. Such names are subject to a host of legislative liabilities, whether they be traffic fines, licenses, taxes etc., and are also subject to accepting being controlled and made to pay for some spurious requirement in their everyday fictional world by the other agents of government agencies who work for government in the jurisdiction of their fictional country. With regards to generating revenue to pay for the artificial national debt to the banks, government will and does ply for trade, or generates business or revenue, by finding someone to admit to being the governments birth certificate name which is under the jurisdiction of the country in which the government operates that name, since it is owned by government in that jurisdiction. Admitting to using the government birth certificate title, puts you in the jurisdiction of the fictional country the government operates in and having to accept any liabilities that attach to that titles use. You literally become an employee of a vast fictional corporation, with its fictional country, subject to its many fictional franchises variously known as, municipal authorities, local or regional authorities, judicial authorities, provinces, states, nation and so on. As an employee you are to follow company policy, unless of course you quit. You are to be liable for breaking company policy, unless of course you quit. From this it can be clearly seen that statutes and any other public regulations are company policy and only apply to those who admit to being government agents or employees. The other documented fictional legal title in place of the government birth certificate, which you could instead use, to contract through to other fictions that ‘can not see’ the real world outside their jurisdictional fictional world, and which is a document that also lies outside of the jurisdiction of a fictional country and government, is your ‘LIVE’ birth certificate title. That simply would mean the name on your LIVE birth certificate. This ‘particular name’ would be truly outside of the jurisdiction of a fictional country and government, since it would be without a government agents signature. This use of a fictional legal title is necessary to be able to do business with other fictions, because fictions cannot speak to ‘reality’ only to other fictions; just in the same way as ‘ghosts’ cannot speak to a man, since they occupy ‘a different world’ than a man’s. To obtain a clearer grasp of the concepts involved, see the links to the heading ‘Your Role and Standing’ to be found towards the bottom of the article, ‘POLAND A CASE IN POINT’.
Were people not willing to contract or do business with government, they would need to ensure that their standing with government would be understood not to be in its jurisdiction or its jurisdictional territory. This would allow them to maintain a jurisdiction outside of a countries jurisdiction. An example of people describing where they are to be found, or not admitting of government jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction of an instrument or agency of State, would be to use ‘negative averments’ in the form of questions that place the burden of proof of evidence on government and their agents. This is done in order that the burden of having to prove a negative, which is impossible, is firmly placed where it belongs; on those attempting to meddle in your private affairs. An example of people having to prove the impossible or a negative question is, ‘prove that you did not make x amount of income on such and such a tax year’. Well, you cannot prove a negative. How on earth are you supposed to prove you didn’t do something when you just didn’t do something. Where on earth are you supposed to get concrete evidence to show that something was not done. Evidence can obviously be made available by you for something that was done, but, for something that was not done!…well, that is next to impossible. Rather than fall for this ploy of questioning, it is better that you use the same questioning approach and ask the ‘meddler’ a question that can be used in the form of a negative averment to rebut their intrusions into your private affairs, for example, ‘can you provide any facts or factual evidence or anyone as a witness with first hand knowledge to say, that I am a tax-payer with income that is taxable’. In this way, the burden of proof lies firmly with them.
All this chicanery stems from trying to position people away from the reality of Natural Law Common To All People under which jurisdiction ‘free will’ operates, in so far as it does no injury, into one of positioning people into dependency on a host of ‘fictions’ designed to slowly but surely confiscate true wealth by making people personally and individually liable for ‘make-believe’ transgressions to which no sane man would admit to. To admit to such transgressions would mean that he failed to see, realise, or was not shown the underlying deceit of the true picture the ‘actions’ of history unravel, to finally and clearly reveal the patient designs of those who will enslave you. It all adds up to trying to get you to think that somehow these ‘confiscations’ of your wealth are legitimate. This amounts to simply legitimising theft, using what is a very subtle approach; an approach that convinces its victims of the validity of this ‘absurd’ mechanism of confiscation, knowing that an understanding of this diabolical schemes destructive nature with, as always, the banking system at its helm, is not appreciated. The cruel cosmic joke for its practitioners, is that each of the people become the means to their own destruction and at the same time each of them hand over their property and lands, with the able assistance of government, on a gold platter to these very same practitioners, without ever truly understanding and knowing how all this confiscation of real wealth happened. In this way, you are indeed made helpless from a lack of understanding the underlying hidden theme stripping you of your prosperity and leaving you confused. Worst of all, this cruel joke continues with you left dependent on Impostors of every description for answers and solutions. Impostors who always end up pointing the finger of blame away from the true picture of deceit to ‘some-other’ cause that distracts and evolves into further chaos. Their solutions invariably end with the further stripping of free-will through any suitable rousing -ism that always pronounces the beginnings of yet another tyranny towards degradation and enslavement. Anything to keep you away from understanding the ‘underlying-theme’. Absolutely anything. Your Chaos leads to Their Order.
FICTIONAL NOUNS
Fictional nouns are those things that DO NOT EXIST in reality and that we can experience with our bodily senses. They are spoken of as though they have substance but clearly do not, and therefore need first to be described and understood by others before they can be communicated. Real nouns need not be described since they are simply ‘there’ to be immediately understood through man’s bodily senses. For example, ghosts come under the category of fictions, as do corporations, constitutions, association etc, which all only exist on paper and are not admitting of independent reality. They exist in the imaginings of the mind and may ‘mimic the names of things’ in the real world but certainly do not indicate, point to, or allude to real things that ‘exist’. An understanding of them is taught, which is unlike the understanding of real things that self-evidently exist and are perceived with our bodily senses without having to be taught what they are or having to have them described. Therefore, fictional nouns amount to a nonsense if you do not wish to recognise them or contract to them.
MARC STEVENS ADVENTURES IN LEGAL LAND FULL VERSION
When reading any of this material, always repeatedly ask questions, as you are reading, that are in the nature of – ‘have they mentioned the word ‘land’ at all or spoken of land?’, ‘what land are they speaking of?’, ‘where is this land?’, ‘where do they define this land?’, ‘what does ‘territory’ mean to them?’ etc. DO NOT ASSUME THAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE ASSUMING TO BE LAND AS ‘YOU’ KNOW AND SEE IT. For example, do not assume that the “Land” they refer to is the land surface, known as top-soil, that you commonly occupy.
LANDLOCKED STATES:
united Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982: A Commentary
Read as follows:
LANDLOCKED STATES – page 393
Article I
Definitions
For the purpose of this Convention,
(a) the term “land-locked State” means any Contracting State which has no sea-coast;
(b) the term “traffic in transit” means the passage of goods including unaccompanied baggage across the territory of a Contracting State between a land-locked State and the sea when the passage is a portion of a complete journey which begins or terminates within the territory of that land-locked State and which includes sea transport directly preceding or following such passage…;
(c) the term “transit State” means any Contracting State with or without a sea-coast, situated between a land-locked State and the sea, through whose territory “traffic in transit” passes;
The sovereignty of a state is confined to a defined piece of territory, which is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and is protected by international law from violation by other states. Although frontier disputes do not detract from the sovereignty or independence of a particular state, it is inherent in statehood that there should be a core territory that is subject to the effective control of the authorities of the state. Additional territory may be acquired by states through cession from other states (the Island of Palmas case in 1928); by the occupation of territory that is terra nullius (Latin: “the land of no one”)—i.e., land not under the sovereignty or control of any other state or socially or politically organized grouping; or by prescription, where a state acquires territory through a continued period of uncontested sovereignty.
The sovereign territory of a state extends to its recognized land boundaries and to the border of airspace and outer space above them. A state that has a coastal boundary also possesses certain areas of the sea. Sovereignty over bodies of water is regulated by four separate 1958 conventions—the Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, the Convention on the Continental Shelf, the Convention on the High Seas, and the Geneva Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas—and by the comprehensive Law of the Sea treaty (1982), which entered into force in 1994.
(Paragraph 2)
The territory of states includes internal waters (i.e., harbours, lakes, and rivers that are on the landward side of the baselines from which the territorial sea and other maritime zones are measured), over which the state has full and complete sovereignty and exclusive jurisdiction. Through the Law of the Sea treaty and now under customary international law, a state may claim a territorial sea of up to 12 nautical miles from the baselines (essentially the low-water mark around the coasts of the state concerned), though, in cases where a coast is heavily indented, a series of straight baselines from projecting points may be drawn. A state has sovereignty over its territorial seas, but they are subject to the right of innocent passage—i.e., the right of all shipping to pass through the territorial waters of states, provided that the passage is not prejudicial. Examples of prejudicial conduct include the threat or use of force, spying, willful and serious pollution, breaches of customs, sanitary, fiscal, and immigration regulations, and fishing. Coastal states may exercise a limited degree of criminal jurisdiction with regard to foreign ships that are engaged in innocent passage through their territorial seas (e.g., in cases where the consequences of the crime alleged extend to the coastal state or where such measures are necessary for the suppression of the traffic of illicit drugs).
(Paragraph 4)
A series of other maritime zones extend beyond territorial seas. A contiguous zone—which must be claimed and, unlike territorial seas, does not exist automatically—allows coastal states to exercise the control necessary to prevent and punish infringements of customs, sanitary, fiscal, and immigration regulations within and beyond its territory or territorial sea. The zone originally extended 12 nautical miles from the baselines but was doubled by the 1982 treaty. The exclusive economic zone developed out of claims to fishing zones. The 1982 treaty allowed states to claim such a zone, extending 200 nautical miles from the baselines, in which they would possess sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve, and manage the natural resources of the seas and seabed; to exercise jurisdiction over artificial installations and scientific research; and to protect and preserve the marine environment. The zone was accepted as part of customary international law in the ICJ’s 1985 decision in the dispute between Libya and Malta, which concerned the delimitation of the continental shelf between them.
*(Paragraph 5)
A state is automatically entitled to exercise sovereign rights to explore and exploit the natural resources in an adjacent continental shelf (i.e., the ledges projecting from the land into and under the sea). The shelf may extend either to the outer edge of the continental margin or to 200 miles from the baselines where the outer edge of the continental margin does not reach that distance. Thus, the continental shelf as a concept in international law becomes a legal fiction where the shelf does not in fact extend as far as 200 miles.
(Paragraph 6)
Problems have arisen over the delimitation of the various maritime zones between adjacent and opposing states. International law generally requires equitable resolutions of maritime territorial disputes. Although the definition of equity is unclear, relevant factors include the impact of natural prolongation of the land territory (i.e., the basic principle that the continental shelf is a continuation of the land territory into the sea), proportionality between the length of a disputing party’s coastline and the extent of continental shelf it controls, the principle of equidistance (i.e., a line of equal distance from the two shores in question), and the existence (if any) of islands between the coastlines.
Jurisdiction refers to the power of a state to affect persons, property, and circumstances within its territory. It may be exercised through legislative, executive, or judicial actions. International law particularly addresses questions of criminal law and essentially leaves civil jurisdiction to national control. According to the territorial principle, states have exclusive authority to deal with criminal issues arising within their territories; this principle has been modified to permit officials from one state to act within another state in certain circumstances (e.g., the Channel Tunnel arrangements between the United Kingdom and France and the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan). The nationality principle permits a country to exercise criminal jurisdiction over any of its nationals accused of criminal offenses in another state. Historically, this principle has been associated more closely with civil-law systems than with common-law ones, though its use in common-law systems increased in the late 20th century (e.g., the adoption in Britain of the War Crimes Act in 1991 and the Sex Offenders Act in 1997). Ships and aircraft have the nationality of the state whose flag they fly or in which they are registered and are subject to its jurisdiction.
(Paragraph 2)
The passive personality principle allows states, in limited cases, to claim jurisdiction to try a foreign national for offenses committed abroad that affect its own citizens. This principle has been used by the United States to prosecute terrorists and even to arrest (in 1989–90) the de facto leader of Panama, Manuel Noriega, who was subsequently convicted by an American court of cocaine trafficking, racketeering, and money laundering. The principle appears in a number of conventions, including the International Convention Against the Taking of Hostages (1979), the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons (1973), and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984). The protective principle, which is included in the hostages and aircraft-hijacking conventions and the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (1994), can be invoked by a state in cases where an alien has committed an act abroad deemed prejudicial to that state’s interests, as distinct from harming the interests of nationals (the passive personality principle). Finally, the universality principle allows for the assertion of jurisdiction in cases where the alleged crime may be prosecuted by all states (e.g., war crimes, crimes against the peace, crimes against humanity, slavery, and piracy).
(Paragraph 3)
Jurisdictional immunity exists in certain contexts. Diplomatic personnel, for example, have immunity from prosecution in the state in which they operate. In the 1960s, however, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations stipulated that the level of immunity varies according to the official’s rank. Immunity is generally more extensive in criminal than in civil matters. A country’s diplomatic mission and archives also are protected. International organizations possess immunity from local jurisdiction in accordance with international conventions (e.g., the General Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations of 1946) and agreements signed with the state in which they are based. Certain immunities also extend to the judges of international courts and to visiting armed forces.
States have opted to cooperate in a number of areas beyond merely the allocation and regulation of sovereign rights.
HIGH SEAS AND SEABED
Traditionally, the high seas beyond the territorial waters of states have been regarded as open to all and incapable of appropriation. The definition of the high seas has changed somewhat since the creation of the various maritime zones, so that they now are considered to be those waters not included in the exclusive economic zone, territorial sea, or internal waters of states or in the archipelagic waters of archipelagic states.
The high seas are open to all states, with each state possessing the freedoms of navigation and overflight and the freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, to conduct scientific research, and to fish. On ships on the high seas, jurisdiction is exercised by the flag state (i.e., the state whose flag is flown by the particular ship). Nevertheless, warships have the right to board a ship that is suspected of engaging in piracy, the slave trade, or unauthorized broadcasting. There also is a right of “hot pursuit,” provided that the pursuit itself is continuous, onto the high seas from the territorial sea or economic zone of the pursuing state in order to detain a vessel suspected of violating the laws of the coastal state in question.
The international seabed (i.e., the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction), parts of which are believed to be rich in minerals, is not subject to national appropriation and has been designated a “common heritage of mankind” by the Declaration of Principles Governing the Seabed (1970) and the Law of the Sea treaty. Activities in the international seabed, also known as “the Area,” are expected to be carried out in the collective interests of all states, and benefits are expected to be shared equitably.
Encyclopaedia Britannica
International Law
Bibliography
General treatises
The leading English-language treatise is Robert Jennings and Arthur Watts, Oppenheim’s International Law, 9th ed. (1992, reissued 1996). Wide-ranging treatises include D.P. O’Connell, International Law, 2nd ed., 2 vol. (1970); and Charles E. Rousseau, Droit international public, 5 vol. (1970–83). An interesting view of international law on the basis of historical practice is J.H.W. Verzijl, International Law in Historical Perspective, 12 vol. (1968–98). Other treatises are Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law, 5th ed. (1998); Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law, 5th ed. (2003); and Dinh Quoc Nguyen (Quoc Dinh Nguyen), Patrick Daillier, and Alain Pellet, Droit international public, 7th ed. (2002). Stimulating introductions are provided by Rosalyn Higgins, Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It (1994, reissued 1998); and Louis Henkin, International Law: Politics and Values (1995). An authoritative view of international law from the Soviet perspective is G.I. Tunkin, Theory of International Law (1974; originally published in Russian, 1970).
Source materials
Basic documents
Good collections of basic documents include Ian Brownlie (ed.), Basic Documents in International Law, 5th ed. (2002); Malcolm D. Evans, Blackstone’s International Law Documents, 5th ed. (2001); and Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Les Grands Textes de droit international public, 2nd ed. (2000).
Treaties
Treaties are collected in Clive Parry (ed.), The Consolidated Treaty Series, 231 vol. (1969–81); League of Nations, League of Nations Treaty Series: Publications of Treaties and International Engagements Registered with the Secretariat of the League, 205 vol. (1920–46); United Nations, Treaty Series (1947– ); Manley O. Hudson (ed.), International Legislation: A Collection of Texts of Multipartite International Instruments of General Interest Beginning with the Covenant of the League of Nations, 9 vol. (1931–50, reprinted 1970-72); and M.J. Bowman and D.J. Harris, Multilateral Treaties: Index and Current Status (1984), updated by annual cumulative supplements.
Case law
nternational case law can be found in International Court of Justice, Publications (1946); James Brown Scott (ed.), The Hague Court Reports, 2 vol. (1916–32); Vincent Coussirat-Coustère and Pierre Michel Eisemann, Repertory of International Arbitral Jurisprudence (1989–91); Reports of International Arbitral Awards (irregular), published by the United Nations; International Law Reports (annual); and A.M. Stuyt (ed.), Survey of International Arbitrations, 1794–1989, 3rd, updated ed. (1990).
Digests of practice in international law
Digests of state practice include Alexandre-Charles Kiss, Répertoire de la pratique française en matière de droit international public, 7 vol. (1962–72); British Practice in International Law (annual), published by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law; John Bassett Moore, A Digest of International Law, 8 vol. (1906, reprinted 1970); Green Haywood Hackworth, Digest of International Law, 8 vol. (1940–44, reprinted 1973); Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest of International Law, 15 vol. (1963–73); Digest of United States Practice in International Law (annual; 1973–1980; resumed publication in 2000); and Marion Lloyd Nash, Cumulative Digest, 1981–88 (1993–95). Surveys of current national practice may be found in most yearbooks and periodicals.
Journals and periodicals
Annuals
Yearbooks on international law include The British Yearbook of International Law; The Indian Year Book of International Affairs (irregular); The Japanese Annual of International Law; Annuaire Français de droit international; The Canadian Yearbook of International Law; Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International; Schweizerisches Jahrbuch für internationales Recht (1944–90); German Yearbook of International Law; Netherlands Yearbook of International Law; and The Italian Yearbook of International Law.
Periodicals
Useful periodicals include The American Journal of International Law (quarterly); Archiv des Völkerrechts (quarterly); The International and Comparative Law Quarterly; Revue générale de droit international public (quarterly); International Business Law Journal (8/yr.); European Journal of International Law (quarterly); Netherlands International Law Review (3/yr.); Revue belge de droit international (semiannual); and Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht (quarterly).
Reference works
Reference works include Rudolf Berhardt (ed.), Encyclopedia of Public International Law, 12 vol. (1981–90); Clive Parry et al. (eds.), Parry and Grant Encyclopaedic Dictionary of International Law (1986, reissued 1988); Karl Strupp (ed.), Wörterbuch des Völkerrechts, 2nd ed., edited by Hans-Jürgen Schlochauer et al., 4 vol. (1960–62); Union Académique Internationale, Dictionnaire de la terminologie du droit international (1960); James R. Fox, Dictionary of International and Comparative Law, 2nd ed. (1997); and American Law Institute, Third Restatement of the Law: The Foreign Relations Law of the United States, rev. and enlarged ed., 2 vol. (1987; reissued in 1 vol., 1990).
It may be very difficult to find the legislative definition of a country.
TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Well, when we’re dealing with something as serious as money, and from where and from whom it is being taken and then shipped to, the best place to find out the definition of a country would be the Tax Authorities. Since they’re in the business of going to where they can ‘validly’ obtain money, they will know most precisely where they can and cannot extend their reach. This means YOU and WHERE YOU ARE TO BE FOUND. Quite simply put, ‘Territory’. Have fun.
Right click on – ‘Double Taxation Treaties’ and open in new tab
This link may have undergone some changes. Click on, ‘ HM Revenue and Customs website’, and from there the documents for each country providing for the legislative definition of a country, generally in article 3 within the pdf, can be read. Nevertheless, the rest of the links provide for the logic of how these definitions were previously found, and therefore it is advised that they should be explored as being useful, in that as an exercise it may provide clues in the way of going about finding these definitions in other government websites of countries
Scroll down to country of choice and select, and then open pdf document and read legislative-legal definition for a country, to be found generally in ‘Article 3’.
Proceed to number 3) below
OR
1) Click on, ‘ National Archives website’, and then, ‘Statutory Instruments’, and finally, ‘Statutory Instruments – tax treaties’.
If ‘Opening Options’ menu for choosing which part of the document to open is available then click on – ‘Open whole instrument’
otherwise first select the instrument named – ‘The Double Taxation…’ or similar terms in use, and then click on ‘Opening Options’ menu – ‘Open whole instrument’
3) Scroll down to – ARTICLE 3 General Definitions
(This is where you will find the definition of a country defined through its territories and the extent or reach of a states or governments jurisdiction)
For example, the country Poland as a definition exists on paper and that is where you ‘reside’ if you agree to contract to its jurisdiction. You are also in its jurisdiction if you are found to dwell in its ‘claimed’ geographic territories. These territories are the waterways, the subsoil, the seabed of the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone which is out to sea, and where ever else people do not ordinarily dwell:
Note. Terms or wording surrounding tax are always framed in such a way as to make it seem an ‘unnatural act’ to not to want to pay taxes. This is simply a childish ploy to make people feel guilty and rightly deserves to be ignored as a strategy of misdirection –
Remember, a government or state is the body-politic and its origins cannot be found to exist naturally in the physical world. Put another way, it does not ‘independently’ exist naturally in the physical world as fact but only as a ‘fictional idea’ people come to ‘learn’ to understand and therefore it is a fiction to which people may individually consent to recognise or ‘contract’ with. Because of this fictional idea of a state or country being created only within the minds imaginings you will often see that a country is simply defined by its name. This is a ‘circular definition’ that does not tell you what something is or even where something is on the actual physical land, simply because countries of governments or states are entirely fictions of the mind. For example, a country ABC may be defined as, ‘ABC may be taken to mean ABC’.
As a consequence of a country being a construct of the mind and therefore a fiction, countries are found on pieces of paper. When a country is spoken of as being the territory of that country, for example, ‘Canada is the territory of Canada’, the territory referred to is ‘the piece of paper’ on which Canada is defined. In all cases this will be the piece or pieces of paper on which the constitution of that country is found and which makes up the countries definition; or some other piece or pieces of paper. The ‘territory’ of a country will quite literally mean ‘a piece of paper’.
The definition of a country using the terms ‘include, includes, including’ – means that these terms are used to exclude everything that is not listed after them and as such are exclusionary terms. The terms ‘include, includes and including’ can all be taken to mean ‘to be made up of’, and the description that follows these terms would make up the entirety of what would be considered and only what would be considered the territory of the country mentioned and where the states or governments jurisdiction could only operate. This means if you were not residing in that territory and jurisdiction, the states or governments legislative laws would have no impact on you. The only law that could apply to you would then be ‘Natural Law Common To All People’.
The term Land Territory – means the land and waters under the jurisdiction of a government
Land – means coastal land areas limited in dimension and the land made up of the subsoil
Jurisdiction can be loosely described as that which comes under a states or governments control by virtue of its positioning in relation to the sphere of influence a state or government claims to have over territory and the objects therein if such claims remain unchallenged by not rebutting them, whether geographically described or contractually agreed to in being within such a jurisdiction or sphere of influence.
Other terms such as ‘an area outside the territorial sea’ or ‘Continental Shelf’ or ‘Subsoil’ etc., need only be searched for using a browser such as Opera or Firefox to be able to come to appreciate what they mean.
Sampled Randomly As Being Of Interest –
The Civil Jurisdiction (Offshore Activities) Order 1987 – 1987 No. 2197
The icelandic people have failed to eradicate thebuilt-in mechanism of confiscation siphoning off their wealth to the international banking mafia and which inevitably collapses their country’s economy, for the benefit of the same international banking mafia. In this way the banking mafia get to keep the ‘real assets’ (land, property and people) of the country, while the people get to keep what will inevitably become ‘worthless’ paper. They’ve merely secured themselves a future which will end in the same cycle of confiscation of wealth and collapse through the international banking mafia’s corrupting methods of obfuscation and misrepresentation of promises into falsification of ‘debt’ for the bankers, further aggravated by interest.
There can be no possible reason or explanation for the icelandic people to have a central bank, unless of course the principal business of obfuscation and misrepresentation of promissory notes or obligations into falsified debts, and the further secondary misrepresentation of charging interest on these falsified debts, is still in place and necessarily in the hands of the private international banking mafia.
That can only mean the Icelandic Central Bank is still in privately owned international banking mafia hands, or, at the very least under their control and that they, the icelandic people, have not understood the misappropriation of their work or economic activity through obfuscating and misrepresenting promissory notes or obligations into the wrong hands as falsified debt.
The people of iceland have been deceived into thinking that they’ve thrown off the shackles of ‘interest based debt’ slavery that operates through – the obfuscation and misrepresentation of promissory obligations into falsified debt for the bankers and the further wrongdoing of imposing interest on those falsified debts.
They have been well and truly played like a fiddle; duped. How? They’ve been simply pacified with superficial arrests of so-called prominent people and a few bankers. Nothing has changed, because the mechanism which created the mess in the first place is still functioning.
The language of non-sense the article presents from so-called ‘Officials’ is there, as always, to confuse people and cast ‘a spell of idiocy’ over them. This is done so that people are directed away from a real understanding of true economy, to be inevitably presented only with the lie of false economy; which, as you can see when ‘Officials’ attempt the deceit of explanation, these explanations become simply vomit spewing forth as regurgitated words and terms that are obviousnonsense (as plain as the nose on your face) in their attempts to provide an air of sophistication and veneer of legitimacy to the ‘lie’ of false economy. This mirage of words that is directed at you, the victim, is intended to hypnotise, the message clearly pronouncing , ‘that only so-called experts would be capable of appreciating how economics works – as these things are much too complicated for the common man’.
The ordained ‘High Priests of Experts’ with their cult of ‘Expertology’ offering thought-out spoonful measures of specially formulated ‘dosages of expertise’ to maintain the health of their flock or make them all well again, are just simply to be laughed at and not at all taken seriously. The Expertologists are a bunch of laughable quacks, just another group of snake-oil salesmen uttering total and absolute gibberish, that’s all.
‘Trust us, we’re experts’ are surely the reassuring words of prescription they would like to have us swallow. What utter balderdash. The people of iceland have been well and truly duped by simply drawing their attention away from the knowledge and understanding of the one and ‘one only’ true solution to economy. The lesson to take away from this is don’tget distracted, no matter who it is distracting you or what it is distracting you.
IGNORING THIRD PARTY IMPOSTOR MEDDLING THAT DISTORTS A SINGLE INDIVIDUALS PRIVATE AFFAIRS AND THAT MAKES CLAIMS ON THE OWNERSHIP OF A SINGLE INDIVIDUALS REPRESENTATIONS
SPELLS DISASTER FOR THE ENTIRE WORLD
POLAND: A CASE IN POINT
(ALONGSIDE ALL THE OTHER ECONOMIES OF THE WORLD)
A Natural Law Contract of Nature or Nature’s God
for the
Expression of Freewill Economic Activity Amongst People
___
Or Understanding
that money is a manifestation and ‘a direct representation of individual natural freewill’ that reflects the private affairs of individual people concerning their own wishes over their own performances they wish to have towards each other regarding their own property, for which they themselves produced through their own individual efforts of performance;
that these individual performances and their outcome, of whatever description, be they property, productive services or otherwise, are owned absolutely and without condition and are not admitting of claim by anyone whomsoever or any ‘pretended authority’ whatsoever for reasons of they themselves having not contributed a performance towards them and also having not the explicit consent of the sole contributing individual who provided for them and to whom they attach;
that any and all performances and their outcome are therefore in the sole ownership of, or are owned solely by, their contributing performer as objects of ‘valuable consideration’, which similarly are those objects as property, ‘things’ or otherwise, that are to be considered and construed as personally owned and valued by whomsoever obtained and made a final contribution of performance towards them and that can, in turn, also be used in bargaining, or used as bargaining objects, for exchanges in private dealings with others as desired by the sole owner as contributing performer or contributor;
that there is no obligation to honour or show tribute to, a third party impostor as false-creditor or any other third party pretended authority claiming an interest over an individuals private affairs, for which the impostor or pretended authority provided no performance and therefore true valuable consideration to make such claim on property or any aspect of an individuals private affairs accorded to them by their natural freewill in choosing to consent or not to dealings with others;
that all such impostors and pretended authorities, through simple enquiry, can show no real and true validity of authority over an individuals natural freewill unless an individual chooses to believe those presumptions of authority or fails to properly clarify and rebut those presumptions of authority that have been assumed over the individual regarding the individuals standing in relation to an individuals status, position and name:
A Partial Illustration of A Step Towards Rebutting Presumptions Through Simple Enquiry From An Understanding of the Simple Hidden Principles of Law That Permit For Such An Operation
[See links below under ‘Your Role and Standing’]
It is my understanding that the title,{your name as it appears on your LIVE birth certificate}, as property is owned fee simple absolute – free of condition.
I understand that your {request, requirement, demand or otherwise} is/are a condition of use on ownership.
What is your standing to put a condition/conditions of use on the title {your name as it appears on your LIVE birth certificate}?
Have you a witness that can provide first-hand knowledge of the facts as to {name the organisation corresponding with you – do not put down anybodies name from that organisation} standing in relation to the title {your name as it appears on your LIVE birth certificate}.
that people are at ‘true liberty of natural freewill’ to deny their consent for the shackles of ‘meddling dependency’ in their private affairs;
that, were people not at ‘true liberty of natural freewill’ to deny their consent of authority for the shackles of ‘meddling dependency’ in their private affairs, they would exist in a condition of slavery;
that without fundamentally appreciating these understandings enumerated, the freewill of people that provides for true liberty will fall victim to many and varied deceptions and distortions;
that it is an individuals natural freewill choice to advocate and implement what has been described here as being simply the prescription given by Mathematically Perfected Economy™ as the one and one only prescription for recognising the imposed lie of economy and the solutions for it as being true economy, which is in its totality a prescription that recognises and identifies the faults of the imposed lie of economy, resolves the faults of the imposed lie of economy into that that provides the one and one only solutions for the imposed lie of economy automatically and without cost, while at the same time replaces the imposed lie of economy with true economy that immediately compensates the people for all the injustices committed to them by correcting their economic status as it truly stands without further undue distress.
It’s your freewill, you make the choice.
___
BANKERS ADMISSION
Categorical Proof of Bankers Scheme To Advance Feudalism
Through The Lie of Economy
Banker Admits “We Engineered the Global Financial Crisis” 1
(“We engineered the world financial crisis” 2:09 minutes into video)
Banker Admits “We Engineered the Global Financial Crisis” 2
Banker Admits “We Engineered the Global Financial Crisis” 3
Banker Admits “We Engineered the Global Financial Crisis”
Sample Notes for Suggested Interpretation:
“Reinvesting in Treasury Bonds to Keep on Spending” – that is spoken of, means creating more and greater debt burdens to use for spending, by further ‘misrepresenting the true economy’ with ‘the imposed lie of economy’ in its place.
“Growth” – that is spoken of, is the growth of debt that results from the distortions of ‘the imposed lie of economy’ and that will inevitable result in the destruction of the lives of people together with the confiscation of their property in ‘the real economy’.
“Solution” – that is spoken of, to cure the financial crisis is a ‘solution’ that increases liquidity substantially for the benefit of the banks and that at the same time does not provide liquidity to ‘the real economy’ but takes it away from the people at their expense. What the bankers are doing is calling-in all their falsified loans using the pretext of a deliberately created or engineered banking crises, otherwise known as a financial crisis, and which is not meant to be known was deliberately engineered. In this way money or liquidity is withdrawn from circulation without putting it back into circulation through more falsified debt lending. This withdrawal of money from circulation would happen automatically even without a manufactured or engineered crisis, since the level of economic activity would be insufficient to meet falsified debt repayments to service falsified exponentially growing debt once it reached a critical point, making it therefore impossible to pay it back.
Liquidity is the ‘money supply in circulation’ created through ‘debt falsification’ for use in economic activity. The withdrawal of ‘liquidity’, which would at any rate automatically happen even without an engineered crisis, collapses ‘the true economy’ because people are without the money with which to continue the economic activities they are engaged in. It is as a consequence of these ‘falsified debt repayments’ for ‘falsified debts’, which are mistakenly thought to be owed to the bankers, that people are finding that their economies are collapsing. Even with the entire circulation of the money supply or liquidity withdrawn by reducing it to zero, it would still be not enough to repay all the falsified debt to the bankers since their ‘misrepresenting debt based imposed lie of economy’ is designed to make that impossible. What people would then find is next required by the bankers, is the seizure of all real ‘capital’ in the form of land, property and assets of a people, as well as the total and complete obedience and unquestioning servitude of people forever, as a way of paying for this impossibly designed to pay ‘falsified debt’.
‘The lie of economy’ is the banking systems mechanism that stealthily misrepresents the debt owed to the ‘true creditor’ as a benefit for the very same banking system as ‘false creditor’. Under the subterfuge of a ‘creditor’, the banking system wrongly claims this ‘misrepresented debt’ as genuine debt owed to them in exchange for a ‘risk of performance’ that they provided to the real economy as a loan. Clearly, the banking system provided no ‘risk of performance’ whatsoever for any such claim to be made, except that they only performed the service of ‘publishing’, on the request of the debtor, ‘the evidence of the promises of performance’ made by the debtor, who owes those performances to the true creditor, for an exchange that was made between them. The ‘evidences of performance’ rightly belong to the debtor and not the publisher since they directly represent the debtors work or promise to perform. It is the debtor who does the work to provide for his own promises to perform, and no one else. Not especially just a publisher who provides no work for those promises and therefore risks nothing. The debtor does the work for those promises, and therefore the evidence that represents those promises belongs to the debtor. Consequently, it is the ‘true creditor’ that is entitled to make a claim against the debtor for those ‘evidences’ that represent promises made as performances owed, and not the publisher as ‘false creditor’ using the subterfuge of the title ‘creditor’ – who is but, and only adds up to, a creditor for the service of ‘publishing’ evidences for other people. How convenient this publisher as ‘false creditor’, commonly known to many as a banker, has the benefit of the facts misrepresented to his advantage.
These ‘evidences’ are knowingly misrepresented by the banking system as debts to themselves. This of course is impossible since the banking system made no performance to be owed a debt, they merely published the evidence of promises to perform for others and that ‘property of evidence’ belongs to those others whose work it represents and not the banking systems.
The banking system is ‘a false creditor’ claiming something that is not theirs to claim, and as such automatically and inevitably takes the very same misrepresented falsified debt liquidity, which they are not owed, out of the real economy as an astronomically increasing debt, which they have never been entitled to as false creditors, but nevertheless, still claim falsely that it is owed to them and that they also know is impossible to repay.
All this turmoil in the lives of people regarding economy only happens because people fail to understand that the banking system as ‘a false creditor’ does and will destroy real economic activity, since by design of ‘the banking systems imposed lie of economy’, a critical point would be reached where it would be impossible to create enough economic activity to meet and service the ever greater and astronomically increasing false debt repayments for the ever greater and astronomically increasing imposed false debt.
Since the real economy is represented by the lie of this imposed debt based mechanism of the banking systems that is designed to confiscate real wealth, people will find themselves dispossessed of land and property which automatically and by default would place them in the position of a ‘serf’ in what would become a de facto feudalistic system as a consequence.
By using the deliberately created imposed lie of economy, to provide for spurious excuses for solving problems it creates in the first place, and having governments put into place schemes created for its rescue that amount to more debt misrepresentation for the benefit of those who oversee the very same imposed lie of economy, what is then produced is the successful ‘accelerated’ engineering of a world economic collapse through which feudalism is introduced.
It is this ‘acceleration’ in collapsing the financial system, otherwise known as ‘the imposed lie of economy’, which at any rate would happen but at a more proportionately slower rate had ‘the imposed lie of economy’ been left alone, that is talked of as being ‘successfully engineered’.
To avert disaster people must understand that the banking system does not provide loans but only publishes the ‘evidence’ of others promised property as money. This published paper clearly is not the banking systems to loan since it is obviously not the banking systems property. It is the property of the owner of whose property it represents when he, the owner, engages in an exchange with ‘the true creditor’ and for whom it is being published as instructed. The only reward that the banking system should receive where it to be in private hands, as it has always been, is that of a small fee for its service of publishing. That is all.
The videos of bankers admitting, and none objecting, that ‘We Engineered The Global Financial Crisis’ are a rare admission that clearly reveal and show what ‘the imposed lie of economy’ through the banking system is designed to do.
“Post Crisis Rebalancing” – that is spoken of, is the rebalancing of the bankers balance sheets by not only withdrawing falsified liquidity from the true economy as payment for falsified debts, which are just not only the liabilities of the lie of economy and its engineered schemes to create impossible sums of liability which the people are expected to take responsibility for as genuine debts which they owe – the derivatives markets being just one example as a case in point; but also knowing these pretended debts are designed not to be able to be honoured, and consequently, to then demand all land, property, and assets (real capital) to be signed over to the banks as payment for these falsified debts. In exchange for falsified debts, the bankers receive the earth as their prize. Having stripped the people of everything and the very earth itself, the people than become permanent serfs generation after generation.
It must be understood that a ‘falsification’ is unearned reward which does not belong to a ‘false creditor’. Unearned reward must be returned to those who were dispossessed of their property. That then is ‘the true solution’ for the lie of economy, after which, true and natural economy must be justly taken-up to prevent a recurrence of this attempted cosmic injustice. Without true economy that Mathematical Perfected Economy provides for, all people everywhere will face the destruction of their aspirations for a better future now and in endless generations to come, to be mere slaves for the perpetrators and inheritors of this diabolical and long planned for scheme . This is the inevitable consequence of ‘the lie of economy’ – impoverishment and slavery. Simply put, feudalism.
A Further Consideration – Whenever it is said that an “economy is stabilising” under the conditions of the lie of economy, it simply means we will all be made as equally poor as the poorest third world country. When that happens we will have reached ‘a position of stability’ without being able to become any poorer. Welcome to the imposed lie of economy and the “stability” under it.
___
POLAND UNDER THE IMPOSED LIE OF ECONOMY
AN OVERVIEW
A Letter Revealing The Truth of Economic Reality for the People of Poland
I said I’d send you graphs which encapsulate the problem everyone is faced with.
Well, the first link below is for the graphs and the rest are supporting evidence with a short explanatory note that follows:
The first link quite clearly demonstrates, using graphs, the horrendous problems the vast majority of people will face as a result of what is shown by these graphs. These horrendous problems, which are ongoing, are evidenced by just a few sample stories from the other links. It doesn’t take a great deal of imagination to understand how the vast majority of people everywhere are going to be affected by what’s happening.
The first chart in that link shows overall debt continually increasing and the second chart shows that the supply of money in circulation that is available to pay the debt is shrinking and continues to shrink at an alarming rate.
As you will note, the two positions on the graphs are moving away from each other and will never meet. As you can see from the second chart, the supply of money (circulation) that is available to pay the debt, continues to shrink. How can a continually shrinking money supply pay for a continually escalating debt? Answer, it can’t.
As a consequence, the supply of money everywhere will be completely used up without still being able to meet the ever escalating debt. It’s an impossible situation and nothing on this earth will remedy it except people understanding ‘true economy’.
You will also note, that the money supply is almost down to zero, meaning that there will not be any money for people to do anything with. Money at the moment is rapidly disappearing. Whatever money anyone had saved, would disappear as soon as they spent it on necessary consumption.
That is because businesses as well as individuals are servicing debt continuously, which reduces the money supply so that it is not avialable for anything else. As you can see from the second chart, the money supply is not being replaced or replenished through renewed loans or credit, otherwise the graph or trend would begin to move upwards.
The banks ‘controlling credit’ for their own benefit by misrepresenting it away from individuals who own it, means that any attempt to meet debt repayments withdraws money from circulation leaving people without money to use. So, to provide for money to use again, it needs to be borrowed back into circulation as ever greater or increasing debt owed to the banks to cover previously withdrawn debt payments and the interest on them. This process continues until a critical point is reached, that regardless of the amount of economic activity, debt servicing becomes impossible and the inevitable collapse of the economy ensues. This is why the money supply in the second chart continues to fall and is fast approaching zero; money is being withdrawn from the economy to meet debt repayments which can never be paid back and which will still be owed even though there would be no money to pay them. As you can see from the charts, this is exactly what is happening.
This absurd situation of the money supply shrinking is further aggravated and accelerated by taxes for the payment of the national debt, which doesn’t decline because government needs to take on more debt by borrowing more to just service their previous debts and then reintroduce money back into circulation as even more debt to maintain circulation for economic activity, which only helps to increase future debt even further.
Government then, is forced to borrow even more frantically to stave of collapse, which is just more debt being added on top of previous debt.
And since tax revenues would be far to small to even probably service the interest on all this debt, it becomes clear that even if you taxed everyone to the full extent of their income, further frantic borrowing by government is what you would see to cover debt servicing which everyone is expected to pay towards, as taxes. This frantic borrowing is mistakenly thought of as government ‘printing money’ and devaluing the currency.
The truth is, it is the government having no alternative but to borrow meaninglessly in a desperate attempt to delay the inevitable collapse under this present system of distortion which is ‘the imposed lie of economy’.
To summarise all of this, a point is reached in the economic activity of a country where no matter how much economic activity exits, it won’t be enough to service the ever increasing debt never mind even trying to pay it all off. And even if it did pay it all off it would have to borrow it all over again for there to be money in the economy that people could use for their various activities. At any rate, a countries credit rating or ability to service its debt is compromised and as a consequence it is unable to borrow in order to keep up with its debt repayments, further creating a diminishing of the money supply.
Its credit rating is downgraded to junk status, while in the meantime debt repayments still have to be made without anywhere to borrow from. What’s left of the existing money supply rapidly diminishes as taxes are increased to meet debt repayments. Cuts or austerity measures are called for everywhere, and still there’s no hope in sight. Everywhere becomes like Greece sooner or later.
We’re fast approaching zero in the money supply for Europe as a whole. To demonstrate this for each individual country one need only present similar charts for each countries total debt and money supply in circulation over a period of time.
From the second link given above, it looks as though Poland is anticipating that it will reach zero money supply very soon (2013), and has made futile provisions to delay the inevitable just a little longer with what can only exacerbate Poland’s demise, and that is, more debt. Ask yourself the question – is Poland replacing its money supply with enough debt borrowing or has it reached its limit to be able to service existing debt? To have insight into this question its worth reading the International Monetary Fund (imf) report at the link given.
The key to the whole thing is about replacing the money supply. But since countries have surpassed their ability to service debt even at minimum levels, as a consequence their credit rating is such that they can no longer borrow so that the whole thing comes tumbling down. Hence the special measures under different institutional names to ‘rescue’ countries. All nonsense of course, because it amounts to just increasing countries falsified debt burdens which so called taxpayers are expected to pay and can’t pay.
When all of this happens, the banking network, and you can be sure it is one continuous network, can claim the assets of a country as theirs – that includes the land, all property and as well as the people – for a ‘falsified debt’ which can never be paid back.
___
The Effects of The Lie of Economy (Worldwide)
Wealth Inequality in America
John Williams Exposes Government Lies | McAlvany Commentary
there is no debt 