Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

UK - Protestors 'arrest' county court Judge - Police blockaded by protesters (One man hospitalised

page: 9
128
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Techy
Its pathetic. They're raging at the government for a global recession, they're raging because they don't get their own way, they're raging because the government is pulling money out of their arses and handing it out to them for free. British people are pathetic, always looking for something to complain about and then crying when they don't get everything the way they want it.

And what happens if they get in power? They throw every black man out of the country, bring in the death penalty, stop all taxes and close the banks? In all honesty, the average British person wants the country ruled THEIR way, but they're too stupid to rule it themselves. God help us if they eventually overthrow the government.


British people, like Canadians, actually do the, we pay our taxes for collective civilized solutions including services OR we won't pay. We're not paying for the police state. They are very decent people. The only reason I support these protests is because they're doing it for the common good of the people including the right to not live dog eat dog social dawrinism, but with social nets, OR it would selfishness, if it was just for the wild west freedom of the toughest male. I won't protest that stuff either. I'm more interested in the rights of the elderly, the poor, the single moms, the out of work, the handicapped, and the every shrinking middle class, the lack of tuition for kids, shrinking services in general while the rich corporatations get richer, fasicsm grows, fines everywhere, the military, disease machines go into overunity, and billions starve.

At Least They're Protesting For The Right Reason, For Everyone's Wellbeing!!!!!!

In addition, they voted LABOR, and then there was a coalition with the conservatives and powers given to the right wing, they didn't vote for that or endorse it.




posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Techy
 



He is not a Judge ; he is just an impersonator only who's business is collection of revenue for the corporation .

No Justice for the people yet the clown acts like a Judge .

That is against the Law of the Land a.k.a Common Law .

There are 100's of witnesses out there shouting ' arrest the judge ' ; a simple semantic mistake to make .

Impersonator is not a Judge because he has no Oath .


Reality is that the UCC a.k.a Admiralty Law is only enforceable with the consent of the governed .

Withdraw the consent and Common Law dominates the Land , once again .

It is argueable whether this is a good thing or a bad thing .


One thing is for sure ; people are waking up to Status Quo and they are not going to be happy with the Strawman game.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Techy
 


I apologise if you felt ignored but fair do's for going and looking up some things and trying to find out about the movement !
I hope now you will do the same as regards your statement on Europe ?

www.tpuc.org...

www.tpuc.org...

Peace



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


What happens when the majority can't survive? When do we decide to take a stand? When they take my home? Force me out of work? Or when i can no longer feed myself?
People wil always want different things but when the factors that make us react apply to us all i hope we unite instead of divide.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProRipp
reply to post by Helgas2011
 


A report I caught last night though I only caught the back end of it, said something along the lines that the banks that were bailed out by the taxpayer may be forced to issue shares to every taxpayer sometime in the future ?
Don't hold me to ransom on that and besides I think the price of pork wil go up if that happens !!!


Peacei


I think all the banks should be owned collectively by the people and nations, and run AT COST with many grants and bail outs for the little guys, from special programs with sliding scales on income.

Nor do I see any excuse for private ownership of resources, expecially since in Canada, they're developed by TAX DOLLARS, and then handed away, and then we're ripped off. Nada, no way!

I also believe Norway sets the example by controlling costs of necessities such as Housing, Food, Utilities.

In short, viva la Collective, that is the only purpose for paying taxes, or even allowing government to exist. There is no other.
edit on 8-3-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Well done UK! This coming from a peace loving citizen of Canada! My hopes and wishes are with all of you whom fight against the corrupt PTB! Never give up! If more and more people from around the UK join as they have been doing, your voices will be heard globally! Time is near where it will happen in my neck of the woods.




posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Scorpitarius
 



There is a movement being called the "Freeman Movement" in which it is realized, through reading law and acts of legislation, that most countries are corporations and their laws are company policy.


Herein lies a huge issue, that is a sleeping giant, for most people are unaware of the Corporate status of many countries including Canada.

Now, its done on purpose, this sliding it under the carpet, because, its TREASON, not LEGAL in any capacity, and those who uphold this, if found out, are subject to jail if this is disclosed.
Its not legal. Its not according to the will of the people. Anyone who sells out the sovereign nation is committing treason. Doesn't matter if you are a majority or minority government, same thing.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProRipp
This from yesterday in Birkenhead !

www.youtube.com...

Can someone embed cos i'm #e at it ha ha ha !

Peace





posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 08:46 AM
link   
Who here has read an actual, unbiased book about how the English legal system works? I don’t mean a blog, Wikipedia or some polemic trying to push a conspiracy, I mean a good old fashioned educational textbook.

I’ve yet to talk to a “freeman” who has, and that to me speaks volumes!



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roguesheep
Good for them, It's nice too see a bit of lawful rebellion going on.

edit on 7-3-2011 by Roguesheep because: Typo
edit on 7-3-2011 by Roguesheep because: Brain doesn't seem to be working today.


If it's a lawful rebellion being arrested, then the police has to be arrested for treason, which can under the right circumstances carry the death penalty in the UK if I'm not mistaken!! The police made a bad mistake there if the mob get's itself organized.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 


Mike I think these people are not part of the English legal laws/system. They are free men an women and are ruled by the common laws. Which were there before the `il`legal english corperation laws. I believe english law is interpreted. The law is in latin. Not in english.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Scorpitarius
reply to post by coffeesniffer
 


To be fair, Sherlock Holmes is about 25% correct. There is a movement being called the "Freeman Movement" in which it is realized, through reading law and acts of legislation, that most countries are corporations and their laws are company policy. The Freeman Movement consist of humans who are, in essence, quitting their jobs at these corporations, and so becoming bound by the rules of common law only, not longer bound by company policy.
I have been reading law for a couple years now, in the light of what I explained above, in an attempt to disprove this theory, and have succeeded only in proving it to be true.

...

But I will say this, common law derived from the 10 commandment...so regardless of your belief in what the bible says, statute law is a direct attack against common law....common law is what is natural to humanity. If the entire world were to follow only common law, this planet would see peace and abundance.
Peace and One Love


May I ask what you were reading (in the legal sense) that caused you to reach those conclusions in the first paragraph? I'd be interested in finding any real source that legitimised these actions. I think Sherlock Holmes is far more than 25% correct and, from this and other threads, also appears to have a legal background and a sensible head on his/her shoulders.

What is a Freeman? What legal status or privilege does it have? What do you need to do or be to attain this status? What is the legal authority for that? Please don't say "common law" or "natural law" and leave it hanging in the air like some kind of legal fairydust that makes everything "right", we hear enough of that from TPUCers. I'd love to hear a real reasoned answer from someone with a background in legal research, even if it's just as an "interested amateur" - that's not meant as a slur, by the way, as some very fine ideas and research have come from people who are outside the profession and looking in, which is why I'd genuinely like to hear your answers.

The common law is not derived from the 10 commandments, in fact some of it originally pre-dated mainstream Christianity in the UK. The law of Equity is drawn from Canon law so Christianity has had some impact there, but even so it is not a clearly "Christian" set of rules by any stretch. The common law as you would see it now actually built up through a period of finding things that seemed to work, then transplanting them by sending judges on a circuit of the country making similar decisions. The Lex Mercatoria (not strictly common law but a similar principle) that so heavily influenced modern commercial law had very little to do with Christianity and lots to do with making money efficiently and effectively.

Common law is not the panacea you think it is. Did you know that spousal rape was perfectly legal under the common law until very recently? People successfully defended charges as recently as 1986 on that basis. How would you like to explain to a spousal rape victim that what happened to her is "natural to humanity"? Or that was happened was just part of the "peace and abundance" that she should be living in?



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
In english law. You must prove ``actus reus and mens rea``. These are latin terms meaning, actus reus is the actual act and mens rea, the intention to comit a crime. For instanse I have a gold watch, so I see a gold watch laying arround some where and I pick it up. The police man then arrests me. For I have picked the watch up (actus reus). or in their words ``stolen it`` How ever, if I say that I thought it was mine and I picked it up accidently by mistake. Then I dont have the `` mens rea `` ie_ the intention to steal it. So no crime has been commited.
Which is why an ordenary man in the street gos to jail for a crime, while a rich man dosnt. Its because he can afford a lawyer who will interpret the law differently. By the way, most if not all judges are free masons. As are many of the police and also many in the govt servis.
edit on 8-3-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
reply to post by Mike_A
 


Mike I think these people are not part of the English legal laws/system. They are free men an women and are ruled by the common laws. Which were there before the `il`legal english corperation laws. I believe english law is interpreted. The law is in latin. Not in english.


Seriously? What are your grounds for making that statement in bold? Æthelberht’s code of laws for Kent, one of our earliest records of "common law", was written in a Germanic language. There was far more French Norman used in law than latin and it's still found throughout the older texts.

Should we ignore the Bible because it is written in English not Latin, or Greek, or Hebrew as I am sure the earliest copies of the Old Testament would have used?



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminnaughty
 



Mike I think these people are not part of the English legal laws/system. They are free men an women and are ruled by the common laws. Which were there before the `il`legal english corperation laws. I believe english law is interpreted. The law is in latin. Not in english.


This here is exactly what I mean; this makes no god damn sense!

Have you read a book about the English legal system that doesn’t espouse a conspiracy theory?



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   
reply to post by EvillerBob
 


yes I agree with you on that point. germanic language was used before english. In fact the english are a bastard race with a bastard tongue. They invaded these isles.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
In english law. You must prove ``actus reus and mens rea``. These are latin terms meaning, actus reus is the actual act and mens rea, the intention to comit a crime. For instanse I have a gold watch, so I see a gold watch laying arround some where and I pick it up. The police man then arrests me. For I have picked the watch up (actus reus). or in their words ``stolen it`` How ever, if I say that I thought it was mine and I picked it up accidently by mistake. Then I dont have the `` mens rea `` ie_ the intention to steal it. So no crime has been commited.
Which is why an ordenary man in the street gos to jail for a crime, while a rich man dosnt. Its because he can afford a lawyer who will interpret the law differently. By the way, most if not all judges are free masons. As are many of the police and also many in the govt servis.
edit on 8-3-2011 by illuminnaughty because: (no reason given)


Actually that isn't true. Theft is defined as the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive. The mens rea would be (i) dishonesty under the Ghosh test and (ii) intention to permanently deprive. Whether or not you have the mens rea would be for the court or the jury to decide - they may or may not believe what you say.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Whoah S&F!

With whats going on in the rest of the world especially in NA and ME we should all start to do the same.
Lets kick out the Aristocratic bloodlines from power and take back our country for the people.

Is this is our chance!!?. If we all dont follow suit with the rest then maybe we will miss our only chance to grab power from the corrupt globalist elites.

All towns and cities in the UK need to start with protesters to remove corrupt councils from power and put the power back were it belongs with every day people who are in touch with the rest of the planet and not some wealthy pompus egomaniacs.

Go People!!!



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by 23432
reply to post by Techy
 

Reality is that the UCC a.k.a Admiralty Law is only enforceable with the consent of the governed .

Withdraw the consent and Common Law dominates the Land , once again .

It is argueable whether this is a good thing or a bad thing .


It's worth pointing out for clarity that (i) you are talking about a different jurisdiction - UCC and the "Admiralty Law" relate to the US, not the UK, and (ii) even there the argument is still wrong.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ezappa
All towns and cities in the UK need to start with protesters to remove corrupt councils from power and put the power back were it belongs with every day people who are in touch with the rest of the planet and not some wealthy pompus egomaniacs.


I think what the UK should have, is some form of democratic system where local people can elect council officials to their position, based on policies that the officials could outline as part of some campaign type arrangement. Then, everyone could get together on one day (let's call it "Polling day") and have a secret ballot. Whoever has the most votes could win and be elected. That would be awesome and fix a lot of the problems with council corruption, in my opinion. Power to the people!





new topics

top topics



 
128
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join