Legal Legal Legal Repeal

2025-07-18

The WHO has pushed ahead with its IHR Amendments and Pandemic Treaty, allegedly despite significant errors in the processes that were relied upon when introducing these measures.

So if the correct legally prescribed processes were not followed, do these measures carry legal weight or are they void ab initio?

And if they are in fact void, then how to proceed?

"Interest of Justice Initiates Unprecedented International Legal Enforcement Action Under Peremptory Norms of International Law"

"Historic Legal Challenge Escalates to Formal Default Notice Against All WHO Member States"

"Our legal strategy seeks comprehensive remediation that goes beyond merely stopping

2025-07-17

Mark Playne assists ChatGPT 4 to put on its detective hat and provide answers to the hot questions of the "pandemic".

Was the PCR test suitable for general use?

Was the trial of Reiner Fuellmich fair and unbiased?

Dive in!

2025-07-16

"No nation is above the law"

(11 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2025-07-16

It is perhaps not a question that we ask every day, or at all, since government has been for ever ingrained in our lives that we take its impertinence for granted.

But what is it good for, really?

Well, here's a list...

• Wasting vast amounts of money on lost causes, such as the NHS, HS2, nuclear power stations, and government-mandated mega-projects in general
• Spending huge amounts of money on global hoaxes such as the Ukraine war ("Mad Bad Vlad must be stopped!") and (hopefully foreign but in extremis domestic) wars in general
• the Climate Catastrophe (made up to scare us into abandoning our standard of comfortable living)
• the Pandemic (that helped them (and helps them still) to reduce the population thus saving £squillions on old age pensions and the like, not to mention awarding their mates contracts for

2025-07-15

These interviews followed the initial hearing at Leeuwarden, the Netherlands, of the case against Bill Gates, Mark Rutte, Albert Bourla and others over whether the plaintiff's requested witnesses (Mike Yeadon, Catherine Austin Fitts, and Alexandra Latypova) should be heard in court.

The allegations include "biowarfare, genocide, mass murder, deceit and assault".

The lead lawyer for the plaintiffs was arrested prior to the trial, so the case was presented by his deputy Arno van Kessel, who was deemed to do an outstanding job.

Stand by for round two in due course after 20 August. 

(22 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video

2025-07-11

There have been a number of court cases over the Covid19 interventions, none of which seem to have been satisfactorily concluded.

So here's another one, currently wending its way through the Dutch legal system in Leeuwarden, Netherlands.

The rank of stellar witnesses listed caught my eye.

2025-07-10

In recent years the word "hate" has adopted a distinct legal persona - the persona of a false excuse useful for suppressing views and experiences that are legal and lawful, but which specific sections of society (which somehow have the willing ear of government) deem should be suppressed none the less.

This has led to the nonsensical situation that anybody who inadvertently "causes offence" to somebody else totally outside of his control (or even his knowledge) must be dealt with, regardless of the fact that offence may be taken, even when not actually offered. So a perfectly innocent remark may be adjudged offensive regardless of intent.

This places the "offender" in the hitherto unconscionable position of being considered guilty unless proven innocent.

"... a network of... organisations in the UK are abusing the law under a false belief evil is justified in the pursuit of good, and criminality is justified in the service of

2025-07-10

The Bernician has been quiet for a while (or maybe I somehow omitted to keep track... ) so here are some links to keep you updated...

"... taking part in meaningful resistance to snatch a historic victory from the jaws of almost certain defeat is not just an unequivocal exercise of free will – it’s a moral obligation"

What to Do?

What Meaningful, Lawful & Peaceful Resistance To Tyranny Would Look Like On These Ancient Isles

Sundry Opinion Pieces:

...

2025-07-10

Our National Health Service (or "National treasure" for those who have been asleep for the last 77 years) is the pride and joy of government in this country - medical treatment free at the point of use for all who need it!

What's not to like?

Well, where should I begin?

It's paid for by taxing us. And as the benefit is assumed to be so enormous, taxes to support it are correspondingly enormous. And being taxes, we don't get to choose whether we want to pay.

And being the offspring of Big Government and Big Pharma, whilst the costs are socialised the profits are privatised.

It's not as if we can choose our preferred path back to health - only drugs (ie: poisons) offered by Big Pharma can be approved for sale on the NHS, if you want anything else it's verboten. The magic word here is "protocol". Doctors are no longer educated in healthy living and natural medicine,

2025-07-04

Martin Geddes with another take on his methodology for the dismantling of fake elements of the Judicial System.

Here he is in "fireside chat" mode, running through the tools that he has identified as options to invoke.

It's a welcome change from his usual amalgam of his prose with ChatGPT's output.

(13 minutes)

Inside the "Absolute Zero Protocol"

2025-07-02

"I just wanted to share with readers how I am using AI for... a parallel FoI request for the slightly different ghost court name used at an earlier point in the prosecution"

If the "Court" which has summoned you has no legal standing, then its activities are unconstitutional and invalid, of no legal effect.

Is the whole system of UK justice actually fake? Without authority? Bogus?

He dubs his proposal "Legal antimatter for constitutional repair" utilising

"From £100 fine to £250,000 problem: the 'Absolute Zero Protocol'"

...

2025-06-29

There is a movement to recognise and ban mRNA injections as bioweapons.

You might think that banning a bioweapon isn't contentious - and you might be right, so the real question boils down to something like "is the mRNA type of injection a bioweapon"?

But what is an "mRNA" injection? We might know what the pharmaceutical companies say is in these injections, but there are plenty of suggestions that these companies are not truthful.

It seems to me that the real problem is not whether or not they should be classified as bioweapons, but whether or not they are "harmful", and that in itself now appears to be a question that can indeed be endlessly debated, despite (or maybe because of) the existence of very expensive "independent" regulators who many believe have conflicts of interest (seen and/or unseen) with those that they purport to

2025-06-28

Listen very carefully...

(7 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2025-06-27

Martin Geddes in his latest Substack addresses his (and our) legal difficulties, and how they might be addressed.

From within, or from without.

What to do when the Police, CPS and Judiciary are all shown to be merely an unconstitutional Kabuki Theatre?

There are several approaches...

The "Carlisle Doctrine": expose, don't escape

But if the whole panoply of justice is no more than a complex and deceitful performative art form with no lawful basis, then who can take it on? Even Parliament would struggle to exert any

2025-06-21

Parliament to the rescue?

"A rarely used tool in the legal toolkit could force unconstitutional acts into the open"

So says Martin Geddes, who has asked his AI to unearth the legal routes by which possible illegal or unconstitutional court cases may be challenged.

Only for use when the legality of the proceedings is disputed.

2025-06-21

"Robin Hood" asserts that all Courts in the UK have been fraudulent ever since at least the 1990s and quite possibly earlier.

When our erstwhile monarchy signed us away into the EU, it thereby lost all the authority previously enjoyed, by failing to defend us against the imposition of rule by foreigners not bound by our ancient constitution.

Some might consider that "treason". 

But he asserts that Courts are anyway no longer "Crown Courts" ever since the Crown Officers were removed.

What we have now are Corporate Courts whose only authority is to mediate differences between Corporate entities under the Law of the Sea. As individual subjects of the monarchy living on the land, we don't come under the Corporate Law of the Sea.

So they bamboozle us with

2025-06-20

John O'Looney is a funeral director from Milton Keynes, who was outspoken during the "Covid emergency" for his work in identifying novel "fibrous clots" in the bodies of the deceased that came his way.

Now he highlights some unexpected changes in the way that police handle sudden unexpected deaths, apparently (according to his local Coroner) as a result of new advice from the government about the requirements when dealing with those who have died suddenly. 

John is not impressed. See what you think:

(20 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video

2025-06-19

In past times the law was essentially Common Law, codified by judges on the simple basis that life, health, and property (roughly in that order) were to be defended, that all were equal before the law, and that justice had to be seen to be done.

This was supplemented by agreements between government and the governed, including Magna Carta's various incarnations, and the Glorious Revolution of 1688 (and its Bill of Rights 1689).

David Starkey explained these admirably here.

We have now reached the stage where MPs, displaying no obvious interest in these protections, claim to legislate for women to kill their own babies for good

2025-06-18

Our legal system is a quagmire that few care to argue with because fundamentally, the fraud is so complex that it's impossible for most to navigate through such a maze of treachery, fraud and deception.

I stand in awe of those who challenge the system.

But does it have one or two points of weakness that if exploited can bring the whole house of cards down?

And what does Roman Law have to do with all this?

"We know that you are corrupt from head to toe"

(41 minutes)

Like / dislike this video

2025-06-16

In what is widely seen as welcome U-Turn, there is to be a much-demanded national enquiry into grooming gangs.

Could there possibly be a better way of taking the heat off the government on this topic?

And given the extraordinary success of the UK Covid Enquiry in ignoring all the uncomfortable questions and sweeping the whole operation into the long grass of life-threatening tedium, who better to lead this new exercise in self-exculpation than Baroness Hallett?

The Daily Sceptic reports.