Jump to content

dont pay movement


zArk

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, CosmoGenesis said:

So how many people havent paid?

lol, there will be some idiots

 

theyll have a prepay smartmeter, a bill for a locksmith and dirty carpet before they can say 'prom note'

 

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications/latest-energy-price-cap-announced-ofgem

 

The price cap is set to rise to an annual level of £4,279 in January 2023, but bill-payers remain protected under the government’s Energy Price Guarantee (EPG). 

 

 

So in March 2023 when .Gov has the EPG finishing.. what is gonna happen?

 

Suddenly its Electricity = £0.67p a kwh and Gas will be £0.17p?

 

 

rather than the Government funded discounted rated of 0.46p and .14p

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

n.b the only thing i can see to shunt prices back down will be Putin either dying or/and being ousted

 

this will allow everyone to save face and restart trading in the insane globalist system

 

the fear of prices will be savagely used in the new year and behaviour modification pushed a bit further 

 

merry christmas ,enjoy the mild weather

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

If you think the British people are going to pay one penny off this, you must be a very special kind of stupid!!!

 

UK National Debt Surpassed £1 Trillion

 

Mainstream media headlines today are focused on Britain's record national debt, which just surpassed £1 trillion, a figure that can only exponentially increase unless the entire mechanism of Government finance is overhauled. The truth however is much worse, factoring in all liabilities including state and public sector pensions, the real national debt is closer to £4.8 trillion, some £78,000 for every person in the UK.

 

https://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

 

ukndc.webp.d57a8f2b57920b3e5c3e2911b0b37ee1.webp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Altogether now

 

📣Ulez, can't pay, won't pay📣

📣Ulez, can't pay, won't pay📣

📣Ulez, can't pay, won't pay📣

📣Ulez, can't pay, won't pay📣

 

Disgusting people celebrating their ulez victory with OUR tax money!!!

Fuk ulez, fuk the surveillance state, fuk u and fuk right off!!!

 

Handy tip when confronting authority abusers and vandalism enablers of OUR freedoms, do not introduce yourselves as 'online media', identify yourselves as 'CITIZEN JOURNALISTS!'.

 

Tim Truth

Secret UK Govt Party Celebrating Evil ULEZ Extortion Scheme EXPOSED By Outraged Brits

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Z430f1F0lGE4/

 

dftloO07lYXwP0BVOK9I0lZb_640x360.webp.e41c8d8c90aa6218eb08a1b08a60d0a4.webp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 5 months later...
On 9/13/2023 at 3:48 PM, sock muppet said:

🤣

WE WILL NOT COMPLY!!!

 

Philosophers-stone.info pureblood

Katie Hopkins has some stern words for the people who keep sabotaging London's ULEZ cameras........

Duration 00:01:45

https://www.bitchute.com/video/xttZfxSuVc9c/

 

xttZfxSuVc9c_640x360.webp.441c2071468bba4512080c1d3e117edd.webp

 

 

 

Love it!

 

Vid is restricted but can be viewed easily in Tor browser.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/3/2022 at 11:48 PM, Macnamara said:

The whole british legal system derives its authority from 'the crown'. So a big question for those of us trying to make sense of all this is: 'what is the crown?'

 

No it does not.

 

Parliament has supremacy over the Crown.

 

Parliament makes the laws, not the Crown, and the Crown as executive is obligated to follow the laws set by Parliament and Judiciary. 

 

The power of Parliament rests on the peoples consent to be governed. Nothing to do with the Crown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pi3141 said:

 

No it does not.

 

Parliament has supremacy over the Crown.

 

Parliament makes the laws, not the Crown, and the Crown as executive is obligated to follow the laws set by Parliament and Judiciary. 

 

The power of Parliament rests on the peoples consent to be governed. Nothing to do with the Crown.

 

Parliament might claim on its website that it is 'sovereign' but it is not as it is bound by the british constitution. If however the masses remain in ignorance then of course the parliament can get away with pretending whatever it likes

 

I personally don't equate 'the crown' with the monarch which is what you seem to be doing but if for arguments sake we do equate the two then the monarch has the power of royal assent to refuse to pass any statutes put forward by parliament. The entire point of this was to create a check and balance on the power of parliament and to enable british people to petition the monarch

 

Parliament is supposed to be constrained by common law and by the constitution and if they acted beyond these then the monarch was supposed to refuse assent

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webtrekker said:

 

Love it!

 

Vid is restricted but can be viewed easily in Tor browser.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the info, surprisingly it is available on screw u tube and an account on tiktok, could not find it on Katies channel on tiktok, 👍

 

 

 

On tiktok

https://www.tiktok.com/@opticalturnkey/video/7297742324229049633?q=Katie Hopkins ulez&t=1708010904884

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

Parliament is supposed to be constrained by common law and by the constitution and if they acted beyond these then the monarch was supposed to refuse assent

 

No it is not, that is the point of Parliament. 

 

There is only 1 clause from Magna Carta still somewhat in force and our common law has been replaced with parliamentary law which is voted on in our democratic system.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

No it does not.

 

Parliament has supremacy over the Crown.

 

Parliament makes the laws, not the Crown, and the Crown as executive is obligated to follow the laws set by Parliament and Judiciary. 

 

The power of Parliament rests on the peoples consent to be governed. Nothing to do with the Crown.

 

43 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

Parliament might claim on its website that it is 'sovereign' but it is not as it is bound by the british constitution. If however the masses remain in ignorance then of course the parliament can get away with pretending whatever it likes

 

I personally don't equate 'the crown' with the monarch which is what you seem to be doing but if for arguments sake we do equate the two then the monarch has the power of royal assent to refuse to pass any statutes put forward by parliament. The entire point of this was to create a check and balance on the power of parliament and to enable british people to petition the monarch

 

Parliament is supposed to be constrained by common law and by the constitution and if they acted beyond these then the monarch was supposed to refuse assent

 

From wikipedia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

 

Quote:

'The constitution of the United Kingdom or British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body. Unlike in most countries, no official attempt has been made to codify such arrangements into a single document, thus it is known as an uncodified constitution. This enables the constitution to be easily changed as no provisions are formally entrenched.[2]

The UK Supreme Court recognises a number of constitutional principles including parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law, democracy, and upholding international law.[3] It also recognises that some Acts of Parliament have special constitutional status.[4] These include Magna Carta, which in 1215 required the King to call a "common counsel" (now called Parliament) to represent the people, to hold courts in a fixed place, to guarantee fair trials, to guarantee free movement of people, to free the church from the state, and to guarantee rights of "common" people to use the land.[5] After the Glorious Revolution, the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Claim of Right Act 1689 cemented Parliament's position as the supreme law-making body, and said that the "election of members of Parliament ought to be free".'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

parliamentary law

 

If i have this correctly, parliamentary law only applies to Parliament and not the people in the form of an act, such as the corona virus act, the people are governed by Law and not parliament, parliament or the presiding scumbags of the day can say and do whatever they feel like within the constitution but none of it has any authority over the people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sock muppet said:

 

 

From wikipedia

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_Kingdom

 

Quote:

'The constitution of the United Kingdom or British constitution comprises the written and unwritten arrangements that establish the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland as a political body. Unlike in most countries, no official attempt has been made to codify such arrangements into a single document, thus it is known as an uncodified constitution. This enables the constitution to be easily changed as no provisions are formally entrenched.[2]

The UK Supreme Court recognises a number of constitutional principles including parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law, democracy, and upholding international law.[3] It also recognises that some Acts of Parliament have special constitutional status.[4] These include Magna Carta, which in 1215 required the King to call a "common counsel" (now called Parliament) to represent the people, to hold courts in a fixed place, to guarantee fair trials, to guarantee free movement of people, to free the church from the state, and to guarantee rights of "common" people to use the land.[5] After the Glorious Revolution, the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Claim of Right Act 1689 cemented Parliament's position as the supreme law-making body, and said that the "election of members of Parliament ought to be free".'

 

Yes I know all that.

 

Which is why it can be said our laws are based on common law.

 

But Parliament codified common law into statute and parliamentary law, because they were voted in by the people.

 

They rule by consent and where possible follow our traditions from natural law into our new democratic laws.

 

Hence parliamentary law overrules common law where a statute exists.

 

As for constitution, yes it is largely unwritten, based on Rousseau's social contract and comprises a whole load of articles and statutes etc.

 

I don't completely understand it but I know Parliament does not get its authority from the Crown.

 

That was dealt with centuries ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sock muppet said:

 

If i have this correctly, parliamentary law only applies to Parliament and not the people in the form of an act, such as the corona virus act, the people are governed by Law and not parliament, parliament or the presiding scumbags of the day can say and do whatever they feel like within the constitution but none of it has any authority over the people.

 

Yeah I'm speaking about the laws passed by Parliament.

 

There are more than one form isn't there - statutes etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

You can see I don't speak legalese and I only have a small understanding of the law and constitution etc

 

Neither do i, which is why i feel it is imperative to have our rights as people written precisely in a document called the Constitution, started with Magna Carter and refined with the US bill of rights to act as restraint upon the governing scumbags of the day and to resist unbridled tyranny, fraud, theft, robbery and a killing against We, The People.

It's funny because the last four years has revealed to us just how murderous a bunch of thugs can be when elected into office and to find there is no shame amongst any of them, save a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

No it is not, that is the point of Parliament. 

 

There is only 1 clause from Magna Carta still somewhat in force and our common law has been replaced with parliamentary law which is voted on in our democratic system.

 

 

no magna carta is still in effect. magna carta is the constitution because it PREDATES legislation and therefore isn't legislation. It is a promise or as some might describe it a 'treaty'. Magna carta raises the people above government through jury nullification. This power of the people over the law is the true meaning of democracy not voting for political parties.

 

Under the constitution the british government may create law as long as it aligns with common law

 

later versions were created by parliament and therefore are not constitutional ie declaration of rights and bill of rights 1688. Legislation can be repealed and therefore can't be constitutional.

 

Bagehot and Dicey tried to claim that a switch from the divine right of kings to the absolutism of parliament had occurred. Dicey used the term 'parliamentary sovereignty' in the victorian era. In effect a kind of coup was going on where the commons neutered the lords and sidelined the monarch

 

Absolutism of parliament would mean that the parliament could round up sections of the public, put them on railcars and then take them off to extermination camps. The constitution and the common law say that there are limits to parliaments power and that parliament cannot do those kind of things. If parliament acts out of the bounds of the common law or constitution then it is illigitimate.

 

The evil people who wish to do harm to others don't want us to know or understand or defend that but TREASON is the attempted destruction or conspiracy to destroy a nations sovereignty and its people and that is why the conspirators should be called out and put on trial

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, sock muppet said:

 

The Crown being the City of London, a state within a state set up by bill the bastard.

 

i would say that is getting closer to the mark. I think its basically the top of the freemasonic hierarchy but as the monarchs are freemasons and the duke of kent is the head of english freemasonry effectively the monarch and the freemasonic hierarchy are essentially one and the same

 

the 'crown' is itself a kabbalistic term for kether on the tree of life which is the crown chakra. Kabbalah is what is at the core of freemasonry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...