I.C.H.O.R. Trust

(I)nfinite (C)ovenant for (H)uman rights, (O)bligations and (R)eparation




Back    Next    Statment's


Only a corrupted capitalist terrorist attempting to damage proprietary rights could disagree that a terrorist is one who either threatens to seriously damage property or actually seriously damages property.

Those same corrupted members of society might also try to disagree with the fact that Common Law rights are obviously the property and possessions of the person to whom they belong unless an Act of Parliament given full and proper Royal Assent states in mandatory words which when given a strict and literal meaning state exactly what must be done and or in the alternative must be suffered AT MY OWN EXPENSE.

It is obviously serious damage to property and disreputable to deny a person their tradable rights because rights are the property and possessions of those to whom they belong and those who attempt to steal rights by deception of authority are now finding they are being criminalised and quite rightly too because they are criminals committing theft and terrorism by fraud and or in the alternative deception of authority.

There is also the question of a fraud on a duty of care being practised against ordinary people contrary to their tradable rights.

We exercise a duty of care by giving everyone we consider to be an honourable truth seeker and sharer automatic beneficiary status of the ICHOR Trust even without their knowledge. The deployment of deception technology linked to Artificial Intelligence will prove beyond reasonable doubt that we are not attempting to deceive anyone whilst corrupt and selfish people may attempt to claim that deception technology does not work because they are too brain damaged to know when they have been beaten, medical science confirms telling lies causes brain damage, and so the corrupt members of national and international institutions and organisations of government are either incapable of thinking straight or are knowingly and deliberately corrupt.

The police can not have an honest belief in their authority to prosecute an individual for exceeding speed limits when they know from experience that they cannot prove the accuracy of the calibration of their equipment on each and every occasion that an individual is purported to have exceeded a legally enforceable speed limit and will find it impossible to show they have an honest belief that the relevant Highways authority have an obligatory authority ordering the deployment of safety/speed/traffic cameras of sufficient authority to make me suffer them at my own expense.

Subordinate legislation, rules, regulations and orders do not override the sanctity of contract only Primary Legislation in the form of an Enabling Act of Parliament given full and proper royal assent with financial provision for its execution that clearly states who must suffer what AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE is sufficient to take away private tradable rights and no one has shown any such authority even though it has been asked for via the Prime Ministers Office and

Back    Next    Statment's

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |







Home | Law of contractThe CovenantStatementsLetters to | Letters from | Links | Contact Us |
You can contact the trustee at trustee@ichortrust.co.uk or
Aabbex© Computers WebMaster on 0870 803 1720 or click here