LAW & THE ENVIRONMENT:

A POSITIVE REMEDY!

Þ Law & The Environment:

The ‘Duty of Care’ - A Universal Principle of Law.

Aggravated Criminal Damage to the Earth.

Why Mortgage & Multinational Contracts are UNENFORCEABLE.

Why it is ILLEGAL to Pay Tax, and the Consequent Implications

Eco-Activism and the Police Vow of Office.

Þ On the ‘Occult Nature’ Of The Masonic Hierarchy.

Þ Fractional Reserve Banking: The FRAUDULENT Production Of Money.

Þ How the Masonic Hierarchy Has Been Corrupted since 1742.

Þ More Than Half Of Y-OUR Income is Being STOLEN by the Banks.

Þ Self Interest, Altruism, and The Environment.

Þ Eliminate Blame & Initiate Global Response-Ability - NOW!

GLOBAL PERMACULTURE: A Practical Solution!

Ó 2008 http://www.EcoTort.gn.apc.org

LAW & THE ENVIRONMENT:

A UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLE OF LAW.

There is a Law of social behaviour which has always applied, and which must always apply to any group of creatures, at any time, in any possible universe.

The Law is simply that any creatures living together in a group do not, as a general rule, injure each other.

If the members of a group injure each other as a general rule, then that group will get smaller and smaller until there is only one member left, which is not a group.

It is quite natural in many groups for the members to establish a pecking-order, and during this process some injury may be done; but once the pecking-order has been established and each group member knows hir place very little further conflict is seen.

This Law applies to any group of creatures, living at any time, in any conceivable universe. Therefore; if we are to believe in a Divine Architect who or which created the Universe, then this must be a Divine principle of Law.

If there is no Divinity, then this Law exists anyway, as a Natural Law.

Now imagine a Divinity which wishes to create a new Universe with a group of creatures living in the New Universe. In this case the Divinity has to obey the Law or there cannot be a group of creatures in the New Universe…

This Is A Law Which Any Divinity Has To Obey.

THEREFORE, ANY REASONABLE PERSON, OF ANY FAITH, INCLUDING AN ATHEIST, (SPECIFICALLY ANY RELIGIOUS, POLITICAL, INDUSTRIAL, LEGAL OR FINANCIAL LEADER…) ON THE EARTH HAS TO AGREE WITH THIS PRINCIPLE OR LOOK LIKE A FOOL.

THE DUTY OF CARE - A DIVINE PRINCIPLE.

The "Duty of Care" states that:

"YOU MUST TAKE REASONABLE CARE TO AVOID ACTS OR OMISSIONS WHICH YOU CAN REASONABLY FORESEE WOULD BE LIKELY TO INJURE YOUR NEIGHBOUR ."

In Law, the Duty of Care is applied to all persons, including the Government.

The failure to uphold the 'Duty of Care' is either:

NEGLIGENCE, which is doing something likely to injure your neighbour in circumstances when you would not reasonably be expected to know that the thing you are doing is likely to injure your neighbour.

NEGLIGENCE is a CIVIL offence, where an offender may be liable to pay damages in a civil court;

RECKLESNESS, is doing something KNOWINGLY which is likely to injure your neighbour.

RECKLESNESS is a CRIMINAL matter, and an offender may be fined and/or imprisoned and/or be liable for damages;

or INTENTIONAL INJURY, which is to INTEND by your act or onmission to injure your neighbour.

INTENTIONAL INJURY is the most serious type of criminal offence which is generally punished with the full weight of the Criminal Law.

Not only is the Duty of Care a Universal Principle of Law, it is also used to create precedent or new Law.

If a defendant can show that his behaviour is "reasonable, prudent and well-intentioned" in the circumstances he finds himself in, then he is not guilty of a crime.

There are times when it may be seen as "reasonable, prudent and well-intentioned" to disregard Statute Law "in order to serve a greater interest" (see examples below).

The ‘Duty Of Care’ Is The Most Important Principle Of Law.

The ‘Duty Of Care’ Can Over-Ride Any Statute.

The ‘Duty Of Care’ Is Used To Create New Precedents.

THE DUTY OF CARE IS THE LAW!

THE DUTY OF CARE – EXAMPLES:

The Duty of Care is used in court every day to determine the guilt or innocence of every defendant who appears in the dock. Two examples will serve to clarify the point.

EXAMPLE ONE:

(a). A person is driving a car who has no mechanical knowlege, this person has had the car serviced and maintained by qualified personnel and has the service history in the glove box of the car. The tax, mot and insurance are all up to date. This person has done all that can be reasonably expected to ensure that the car is safe, yet when stopped by the police in a routine road check, it is found that they have defective brakes. This is doing something which is likely to injure their neighbour yet having taken all reasonable steps to insure that what they were doing was not likely to cause injury. The person is still responsible in a civil court for the payment of damages should they injure someone as a result, but they have not behaved criminally.

(b). The same person is driving the same car along the same piece of road at the same speed and is stopped by the same police officer who, this time, forms the reasonably held belief that the person knew that the brakes were defective. This time the person will very likely be tried in a criminal court for doing something which is likely to injure their neighbour knowingly, if it is found that the person did know that the brakes were defective, this is reckless behaviour as such is criminal.

(c). The same person is again driving the same car along the same piece of road at the same speed and is stopped again by the same police officer who, this time, forms the reasonably held belief that the person driving was aiming to hit someone. This time the person will very likely be tried in a criminal court for doing something which is likely to injure their neighbour intentionally, if it is found that the person did intend to hit someone with the car then this is obviously a seriously criminal matter.

It may be seen from the above that not only does there have to be an unlawful act committed ….

FOR A DEFENDANT TO BE FOUND GUILTY OF A CRIME, HIS MENTAL STATE HAS TO BE OF A CRIMINAL NATURE.

EXAMPLE TWO:

The case of the “Hungerford Massacre” where a man called Micheal Ryan shot around 30 people in the streeet at Hungerford, and then shot himself:

If, after Micheal Ryan had shot say one or two people, and a reasonable prudent & well-intentioned person ‘X’ who was nearby had shot him (to prevent Ryan from shooting anyone else), then ‘X’ would not be found guilty of a crime, even if he had used reasonable force to ‘steal’ his gun from someone else or from a shop.

In ordinary circumstances a person who in a public place stole a gun and then shot someone with it, would be found guilty of assault, battery, theft of a firearm, unlawful posession and use of a firearm, endangering public life, and murder.

Such a person would receive a heavy gaol sentance (around 30 years).

THEREFORE; IF A DEFENDANT CAN SHOW THAT HE UPHELD THE DUTY OF CARE BY BEHAVING REASONABLY, PRUDENTLY & WITH GOOD INTENT, THEN HE IS NOT GUILTY OF A CRIME, REGARDLESS OF ANY STATUTE OR PREVIOUS CASE LAW.

THE DUTY OF CARE CAN OVERTURN ANY ACT OF PARLIAMENT.

THE DUTY OF CARE IS THE LAW!

The Duty Of Care Applied To UUED&D:

UN-NECESSARY & UNREASONABLE

ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE & DESTRUCTION,

There have been many cases which are relevant on the eco front; the most dramatic was that of the Ploughshares women who broke into British Aerospace and damaged combat aircraft which were to be exported to the Indonesian Government in order to subjugate the natives who were (and still are!) trying to resist the encroachment of western hotel complexes (etc etc) on the Natural Forest which is their home. Normally, to break into British Aerospace and damage combat aircraft would be a very serious offence involving interference with the defence of the Realm. However, when it was found that prior to this action the women had taken all REASONABLE steps to make their point known (they wrote petitions and staged peaceful demonstrations etc), and it was realised that the matter was genuinely felt by the women to be of sufficient urgence to justify such an action, the women (after serving seversl months remanded in custody) were found NOT GUILTY of any crime.

Another case in point is that many thousands of eco-activists have been arrested under the Criminal Justice And Public Order Acts, for damaging and destroying (Criminal Damage to..) Genetically Modified crops, yet only a very few have been found guilty of any crime, and the end result of this international campaigning has been the severe restriction of multinational corporations (Monsanto, Dupont etc) in their attempts to sell these highly dangerous products on the open market!

This is because it is unarguably the case that in the face of the threat due to UUED&D being of a similar magnitude to the threat that a war would pose, it is REASONAVLE, PRUDENT AND WELL-INTENTIONED to take NonViolentDirectAction.

Bearing in mind the huge increase in public awareness of UUED&D . over the last five or ten years, it is no longer possible for anyone in a position of responsibility to claim that they are unaware of the threat of UUED&D . to the well-being and security of society.

Any acts or omissions leading to further UUED&D are done in the full knowledge that such acts and omissions are injuring all of us, on a massive scale, physically, emotionally, mentally and spiritually; THEREFORE:

ACTS OR OMISSIONS KNOWINGLY CAUSING UN-NECESSARY OR UNREASONABLE ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION ARE RECKLESS AND CRIMINAL.

THE DUTY OF CARE APPLIED TO GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ENVIRONMENT.

Successive Governments all around the World have knowingly both acted (i.e. passed CRIMINAL acts of parliament) to allow UUED&D, and have omitted to control it.

Therefore the World’s Governments are manifestly reckless and CRIMINAL by act and omission in their Duty of Care for the Global Environment.

In Law, it is illegal to pay a servant to commit a crime (the responsibility of a master for the act of a servant ); so if the Government of a country is criminal, then it is illegal for the People of that country to pay tax to their Government until their Government stops being criminal.

It is our intention to inform the people of these facts, thereby exerting maximum political pressure upon the World’s Governments to cease their criminal behaviour.

The only way the World’s Governments can cease this environmental recklessness is to provide all reasonably available resources for sustainable environmental development, anything less being an omission which will certainly cause further physical, emotional, mental and spiritual injury to the People.

The question which then arises is “How many resources are reasonably available for this purpose?”

Most people will now agree that the threat of UUED&D is as serious as, or worse than a threat of world war.

Therefore we may assert that the global resources reasonably available to remedy this most serious threat, are of similar magnitude to those which would be made available to fight a world war.

In other words:

IT IS ILLEGAL TO PAY TAX UNTIL A ‘GLOBAL STATE OF EMERGENCY’ IS DECLARED FOR THE ENVIRONMENT; MOBILISING ALL OUR AMAZING TECHNOLOGY, AS IT WAS INTENDED BY ITS INVENTORS, FOR THE BENEFIT OF HUMANITY,IN THE CREATION OF A BEAUTIFUL PERMACULTURE GARDEN ON THE EARTH,

ON THE ‘OCCULT’ NATURE

OF THE ORIGINAL MASONIC HIERARCHY.

The word ‘OCCULT’ means ‘HIDDEN’.

In the true and original sense of the word, a Mason is an apprentice served trades-person who works with stone. Other Craft Guilds (wheelwrights, shipwrights, engineers, farmers etc…) are for the related crafts, all of which likewise necessitate the serving of an apprenticeship.

Imagine thirty people working on a building site.... they have to know what they are doing, or there will be a serious accident, (a building site is a very dangerous place with heavy pieces of metal, wood, and stone being handled, often at considerable heights).

The ONLY WAY to get to know what you are doing on a building site is to serve a craft apprenticeship.... you cannot learn it in a college, from a book, and you cannot be told, the ONLY way is through direct hands-on experience in an apprenticeship.

Back in the fifteenth century, and with roots going back at least as far as the Egyptian civilisation, the Masonic Hierarchy was composed of Masons, Master Masons, and Free Masons, all of whom would have served a Craft Apprenticeship.

Even the very top Free-Masons in those days would first have served a craft apprenticeship. Only then would anyone be admitted firstly as a practicing Mason.

The practicing Mason, if he had the required qualities, may, after considerable time serving as a Mason, be advanced to the position of Master Mason, and after considerable further time serving as a Master Mason, and with the required qualities, be advanced to the position of Free Mason.

This was a Hierarchy based on Wisdom and Experience, and it is the simple reason why, to anyone outside the Masonic Lodges, who had no served an apprenticeship, their knowledge and power was hidden, or ‘OCCULT’.

The Craft Guilds were obviously very powerful, as they included Bulders (the Primary Craft), Wheelwrights, Shipwrights, Blacksmiths, Farmers etc. If anything was to be built, grown, transported, manufactured, repaired etc, it could and would only be done by the “Masons” in the manner approved by them, according to the wind and the tide, and a good deal of common sense….

FRACTIONAL RESERVE BANKING:

THE FRAUDULENT PRODUCTION OF MONEY.

In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, certain bankers discovered that they could print ten times more paper money (promissory notes...) than they had gold. This is known as Fractional Reserve Banking, but as we shall see, it is a monstrous FRAUD!.

The Bankers lent this 'money' at interest (say ten percent per annum), meaning that they could earn 10% interest each year on each promissory note.

10 pieces of paper, each earning 10% and we have 10x10%=100%.

By the end of one year, for each piece of gold they originally owned, they now had the equivalent of two pieces of gold, (one real, and one as assets now owned by the bank).

The banks could now write ten pieces of paper for each of those 2 pieces of gold = 20 promissory notes.

20 promissory notes loaned at 10% = 200%, another two pieces of gold

2 + 2 =4

By the end of the second year, for each piece of gold they originally owned, they now had four pieces of gold.

The banks could now write ten pieces of paper for each of those 4 pieces of gold = 40 promissory notes.

40 promissory notes loaned at 10% = 400%, another four pieces of gold

4 + 4 = 8

By the end of the third year, for each piece of gold they originally owned, they now had eight pieces of gold.

The banks could now write ten pieces of paper for each of those 8 pieces of gold = 80 promissory notes.

80 promissory notes loaned at 10% = 800%, another eight pieces of gold

8 + 8 = 16

By the end of the fourth year, for each piece of gold they originally owned, they now had sixteen pieces of gold.....

THE BANKS FOUND THAT THEY COULD DOUBLE THEIR WEALTH EACH YEAR BY HAVING EVERYONE ELSE PAYING INTEREST TO THEM ON THIS PAPER 'MONEY'.....

1
2
4
8
16
32
64
128
256
512
1024,

after 11 years banking, starting with one piece of gold, the banks now had the equivalent wealth of 1024 pieces of gold, (call it 1000 for easy maths...)….

after another 11 years, or after 22 years of banking they had 1000 times 1000 = 1 million pieces of gold.

after 33 years of banking they had 1000 times 1 million = one thousand million pieces of gold.

after 44 years of banking they had 1000 times one thousand million pieces of gold = one million times a million pieces of gold.
after 44 years of banking, starting with one piece of gold, the banks now had 1,000,000,000,000 pieces of gold

that is a proper English BILLION, which is 31709 years in seconds.... (60 x 60 x 24 x 365 x 31709 = 1000 000 000 000) this is how many pieces of gold the banks had 'earned' after only 44 years of banking, and the next year it doubled!!!

the banks have been doing this for FIVE HUNDRED YEARS!!!!

THIS IS NOT ‘CAPITALISM’

-IT IS A MONSTROUS FRAUD!

HOW THE ORIGINAL MASONIC HIERARCHY HAS BEEN CORRUPTED SINCE 1742.

As shown above, the Masons included all the craft guilds, wheel wrights, ship wrights, cobblers, tailors, blacksmiths, so they were extremely powerful....

The bankers with their new-found wealth now wanted to be admitted as Free Masons without having served all the time necessary to gain the high position of response-ability which is a Practicing Free Mason.

There was a battle for 250 years between the banks and the Masonic Hierarchy.

In 1742, the banks won, and in that year, in the city of York, the first person was admitted into a Masonic Lodge as a freemason without having served an apprenticeship.

Since then, there have been two types of free-mason:

1). Practicing Free Masons, who HAVE served an apprenticeship
and
2). Accepted Free-Masons who HAVE NOT served an apprenticeship.

Probably at least 90% of Freemasons today are Accepted Freemasons who have NOT SERVED AN APPRENTICESHIP, they do not have the accrued wisdom and common sense from many years of being supervised, of practicing a Craft, and then of supervising others on the way up the ladder of promotion.

Most Accepted Freemasons of today do not even know how to boil an egg, let alone fix a slate on their roof should it need repairing......

These are the people who are now Free Masons in positions of high office and response-ability for our Western Global Culture; in Industry, Religion, Finance, Medicine, Law, and Politics.

We might call this state of affairs a response-DISability…

In view of the consequences of their actions causing AGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE AND DESTRUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, the position of many contemporary Accepted Freemasons is both Morally, Legally, and Politically untennable!

HOW MORE THAN HALF OF YOUR WAGES

IS NOW BEING STOLEN BY THE BANKS:

ROUGHLY:

one third of a person's wages goes to pay the mortgage,
one third is tax,
and the remaining third you get to spend...

Approximate Proportion of Interest paid to the Banks out of the Price of any Product Bought.

if you buy (for example) a china cup in a shop:-

a) someone has borrowed money from a bank to set up a quarry to extract the china clay from the earth: they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

b) someone has borrowed money from a bank to buy a lorry to transport the china clay to the factory which makes the cups:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

c) someone has borrowed money from a bank to set up the factory which makes the cups:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

d) someone has borrowed money from a bank to buy a lorry to transport the cups to the wholesaler:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

e) someone has borrowed money from a bank to set up the wholesale business:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

f) someone has borrowed money from a bank to buy a lorry to transport the cups to the retailer:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

g) someone has borrowed money from a bank to set up the retail business:
they are paying interest to the bank on that loan

h) all of those people from a) to g) above...
are paying  interest to the bank on their mortgages.

all these interest payments to the banks are coming out of the purchase price of the china cup....

if we add all these interest payments together we find that at least 50% of the price of ANY item we buy is interest being paid to the banks.

APPROXIMATE PROPORTION OF MONTHLY MORTGAGE OR RENT PAYMENTS

WHICH IS INTEREST PAID TO THE BANKS

if you borrow, say £100,000 @ 7.5%
over 40 years as a mortgage
to buy a house,
you will have to pay back roughly £300,000 with interest....

this means that
roughly two thirds
of the third of your wages
which is paying the mortgage
is paying interest on that loan.

APPROXIMATE PROPORTION OF TAX

WHICH IS INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT

PAID OUT OF OUR TAXES TO THE BANKS.

The Bank of England is a privately owned company.
The government has granted a license to the Bank of England to print money.
The government borrows money from the Bank of England, and the government pays interest on that loan.
That interest is paid out of the third of your wages which is paying tax to the government.

Also, almost everyone who works for the government has a mortgage (or is paying rent which is probably paying someone else’s mortgage), and the interest payments for their mortgage is paid out of their wages, which is also paid out of tax. This ammounts to something like another 10% of tax being paid as interest to the banks.

Furthermore, everyone who works for the government is spending about one third of their wages as they choose; but as shown above, roughly half of that money is also paid to the banks as interest, which probably ammounts to at least another 10% of tax going to the banks.

If we add these together, we can see that well over half of everyones’ tax is paying interest to the banks…
MORE THAN HALF OF YOUR WAGES

IS BEING STOLEN BY THE BANKS.

ROUGHLY 50% OF THE PRICE OF ANYTHING YOU BUY IS PAYING INTEREST TO THE BANK.

ABOUT 66% OF YOUR MORTGAGE IS PAYING INTEREST TO THE BANK.

AROUND 50% OF YOUR TAX IS PAYING INTEREST TO THE BANK.

ADDING THESE TOGETHER:

WE FIND THAT WELL OVER HALF OF EVERYONE'S WAGES IS PAYING INTEREST TO THE BANKS….

THEREFORE:

IF WE SIMPLY ABOLISH USURY,

WE CAN WORK LESS THAN HALF THE AMOUNT OF HOURS IN A WEEK, (AND CONSEQUENTLY DO LESS THAN HALF THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT) WHILE MAINTAINING THE SAME STANDARD OF LIVING, AND HAVE TWICE AS MUCH LEISURE TIME