Crown Dependency v Secession

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:45 am

Zaniwhoop wrote:Flags could be ok, if purely as an art form, but they do generally currently have a nation defining quality.


NO! - Flags are the 'COLOURS' - hence trooping of the colour - they define the laws, not the nation, Si.

What law are you under in any court/situation - look at the colours (the flags) and you will see, m8. One example is the US flag in courts over there - they have a gold fringe indicating the country is at war - ergo, you are under martial law in that room. They should fly the flag of the usa, but they fly the coporate US flag... tricky buggers, so watch them.

Our courts have the Royal coat of arms... what do you think this signifies? :mrgreen:
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby Zaniwhoop » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:52 am

Yep! Looks like a no brainer all round to me too.

How does Queen Veronica of the Crown Dependency of Forvik view this matter, or is the Secession of Forvik already underway?

BaldBeardyDude wrote:NO! - Flags are the 'COLOURS' - hence trooping of the colour - they define the laws, not the nation, Si
Fair point, skull and crossbones anyone? :grin:

BaldBeardyDude wrote:Our courts have the Royal coat of arms... what do you think this signifies? :mrgreen:
Well, I'd say it all goes back to the knights templar and the inns of court Illuminati set up, but that's just an educated guess. :sun:
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:57 pm

Close - very close - it's the Knights of Malta and the order of the garter (snake), lol - look them up, see where they are in the order of precedence, lol

BBD - good Job, Si :yes:
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Thu Jun 17, 2010 5:15 pm

I would say rather than thinking about money, think about how (within the boundaries of fidach) we trade with each other. In that sense we acknowledge that the living being is beyond price, priceless. Sweat equity as in 'time and effort' is the most valuable 'commodity' we can give.

Vis-ably, if one is prepared to give 'time and effort' there is no need then for 'currency' as we have been led to believe 'currency is' - or to put it another way, we ourselves are the currency. (anything you put you mind or hand to becomes currency, it's worth is begotten 'from' you, but only a portion of it)

If we pick this idea apart we can see that 'money' has no place...ref: this is discussed at length in the K-pax series of books. Do you know it?

p.s would love a flag, it will go straight on my t-shirts ( i have a vinyl cutter and heat press)

p.s a flag as a symbol/shield....**nay a polite sign. ( this is where I stand and who I stand with)

edit** ps. my vote for the national anthem :


(source irony included)

http://www.youtube.com/v/<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ys6i30o56xk&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ys6i30o56xk&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby Zaniwhoop » Fri Jun 18, 2010 10:21 pm

I dunno if it's just me, but that video doesn't want to play on my lappy :(
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby the_common_law_reverend_kenny » Sat Jun 19, 2010 8:20 am

no it wasn't just you it was my fat fingers..! should be fixed now, The Band is called 'the Stornoways and the track is called 'We are the Battery Human' the clip is on you tube.'

Absolutly bang on the nail, in my opinion, by far the best piece of music to come out of these islands this century. We all should know the words to this one so we can sing it to our childrens children. x
SOVEREIGN: not controlled by outside forces: autonomous; self-governing; independent "a sovereign people" <> "by any peaceful administritive means necessary" - the way of the order.
the_common_law_reverend_kenny
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:18 pm
Location: Fidach Diplomatic Outpost near You

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby Farmer » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:03 pm

huntingross wrote:Yup, Great Britain.....the 90 minute cop pulled me up on that one.....thought he had caught me out in a lie....they must think we're phucking stoopid.

A couple of things still in the 'to do' pile is - Flag and Money.....not sure if I'll just print some notes or mint some coins....I rather fancy melting some metal and making something.....then burying it for future treasure hunters.


Stamps are currency.
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby Zaniwhoop » Thu Jun 24, 2010 4:02 pm

the_common_law_reverend_kenny wrote:no it wasn't just you it was my fat fingers..! should be fixed now, The Band is called 'the Stornoways and the track is called 'We are the Battery Human' the clip is on you tube.'

Absolutly bang on the nail, in my opinion, by far the best piece of music to come out of these islands this century. We all should know the words to this one so we can sing it to our childrens children. x
Yep! All works fine now, and I love the lyrical content.

Farmer wrote:Stamps are currency.
An interesting and valid point there Farmer, would Fidach stamps need to be lodged or approved with the Post Office somehow for them to be able to be used in the third party state?
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby huntingross » Sun Jul 25, 2010 2:24 pm

This wiki article makes for an interesting read on the subject, especially now the ICJ opinion has been delivered.

Subject :

International Court of Justice advisory opinion on Kosovo's declaration of independence

Decision :

The International Court of Justice delivered an advisory opinion on 22 July 2010 regarding the 2008 Kosovo declaration of independence. The court opined, by a vote of 10 to 4, that "the declaration of independence of Kosovo adopted on 17 February 2008 did not violate international law."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Court_of_Justice_advisory_opinion_on_Kosovo's_declaration_of_independence

A small extract of what states had to say on the subject prior to the ICJ opinion :

The UK :

Courts do not order estranged spouses to continue in a broken marriage.


and the US :

The United States invites the International Court of Justice to leave the declaration of independence intact as an expression of the will of the people of Kosovo, either by refusing to comment on its legality, or by determining that the international law does not prohibit declarations of independence. The declaration of independence did not violate any principle of territorial integrity because under international law, only states must comply with this principle, and not internal entities.


and France :

The answer to the question about the legality of Kosovo's declaration of independence will be devoid of any practical effect. The secession is not in contradiction to international law, and the court should therefore refuse to decide on this matter.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: Crown Dependency v Secession

Postby Zaniwhoop » Fri Jul 30, 2010 12:30 pm

Yes, very interesting reading indeed.

this comment from Austria caught my mind.
The only exceptions are Northern Cyprus and Rhodesia; their independence is illegal as it was declared with the use of illegal outside force and by racist minority regimes, respectively.
I don't see why the help of outside force or being a minority racist regime would make declaring independence illegal. In fact I don't see why strength of arms or the question of minority or majority should come into it at all.

Russia rejects claims coming from those countries who support the unilateral declaration that international law "does not regulate independence declarations", and reminds that the UN Security Council declared Northern Cyprus and Rhodesia's independence to be illegal, since secession is forbidden outside the colonial context.
Better check out what the colonial context is then, I suppose, although in light of the Court's ruling/opinion I don't see it matters.

I'll have to read the rest of this later, great link though, thanks.
Shaw's principle.
"A government which robs Peter
to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul"

Sublato fundamento cadit opus The foundation being removed, the superstructure falls.
User avatar
Zaniwhoop
Administrator
Administrator
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: South West Wales

PreviousNext

Return to Land Claims

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests