Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Lawful Rebellion / Non Compliance / Sovereignty

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26-04-2012, 10:58 AM   #121
wiseguy
Senior Member
 
wiseguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,162
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rooibos View Post
I don't give a fuck. If I don't consent to pay tax for 'roads' what are you going to do? prevent me from leaving the house?

the 'road', i.e. the land that people travel over, and the 'road' the asphalt poured over it are two different things. I didn't ask for the asphalt and if the asphalt wasn't there I would still walk over the same road as is my right.

You can't tax walking over land. It's an absurd concept
.
Spot on.

'Road Tax', or 'vehicle excise duty' does not go to maintaining the roads however - don't be fooled. It's simply paying for the 'privilege' of using your vehicle (which isn't really yours) on their asphalt and so it is this bullshit fine that needs to go first. I'd have no problem contributing a small amount to the maintenance of the roads if they a, abolished 'vehicle ex-ercise duty' on all cars and not just the little plastic noddy cars because I don't want one of them and b, could guarantee my money was going towards that (which of course they wouldn't... or couldn't). Yet conversely, I'd also have no problem traveling over dirt paths if the government hadn't happened to have laid down some asphalt and then proceeded to charge me for the use of it...
__________________
Illuminati Agenda - Illuminati News, Occult Reviews & Secret Society Scandal.
wiseguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-04-2012, 05:05 AM   #122
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

I hate to leave a question hanging. Are the freemen here endorsing this conspiracy theory of the legal profession?
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-04-2012, 07:28 PM   #123
lesactive
Senior Member
 
lesactive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 31 (23 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moobs View Post
I hate to leave a question hanging. Are the freemen here endorsing this conspiracy theory of the legal profession?
Perhaps the board would be better served if you'd ask the more pertinent question beforehand.... are there papered "freemen" here to answer you?

indeed, it is a leading question.

Here's another.... if no answer is received is that evidence that there are no 'freemen' present or that your assumptive query stands due to non-response?

oooh and another.... what makes you believe that a 'freeman' would answer you given your past antagonism here?

I can let those hang forever cuz it keeps coming back to that.
__________________
les- not egocentric enough to be a real FMOTL-active
lesactive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-04-2012, 08:57 PM   #124
iq_145
Senior Member
 
iq_145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Trapped in a body.
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by merlincove View Post
...

You can't use the concept of not acknowledging the debt by attending the court room - i have always said this. FMOL argue that the court room exists as a ship, and wherein you enter it etc you fall into the jurisdiction of Admiralty law - this is where they fail. Once you step foot into the court house, let alone the court room, you agree to be tried, you agree to fall under jurisdictory measure for the charges levied against you. You are there, attending as per request / demand, and as such YOU are liable - not the BC, not the name, etc etc, YOU, because it is YOU that is there, whether you 'represent' or not, you offer your self as liable for the charge by agreeing to attend, by agreeing that the charge is levied at you.

And so the 'you' in that instance fails. The 'you' that attends isn't side-stepping, it is falling into step.



None compliance = not complying in any way to their charge.

FMOL are wanton to steam roll into the court room, demanding they stand under inalienable rights / common law, while all the time they are actually meeting the jurisdictory level of the court over them by attending - they are obeying an order.

None compliance, do not agree to nor accept the charge / liability, in any way whatso-ever - this seems to be a common factor that works.

All those 'failures' have been persons who have attempted to challenge the system from the inside rather than the outside.

Simples.

Someone sends you a bill, how can they send you a bill if they do not know who you are? Someone from the council knocks on your door in relation to collecting your information so that the council can bill the person for the charge, how can they bill the person if the person does not answer the door and tell them who the person is?

A bailiff attends, he knocks on the door, how can he issue his distress warrant if he can not ascertain the identity of the individual(s) within?

See where i am coming from?
Yes, I see where you are coming from and I agree with what you say. I would only add that you must be prepared for the consequences if they are determined to pursue you for whatever debt it is, or is claimed to be.

A summons can be regarded as being served even though the court officer was not able to locate you personally, for example.
__________________
The Titanic never sank, it was the Olympic that the US Navy sank in the North Atlantic in 1912.
iq_145 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-04-2012, 08:52 PM   #125
aulus agerius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lesactive View Post
Perhaps the board would be better served if you'd ask the more pertinent question beforehand.... are there papered "freemen" here to answer you?
Perhaps the board would be better served if you answered the question?

Quote:
indeed, it is a leading question.
so what? your questions are also leading. Many questions are. This is a forum, not an examination-in-chief.

Quote:
Here's another.... if no answer is received is that evidence that there are no 'freemen' present or that your assumptive query stands due to non-response?
Why is this relevant? You are saying "maybe freemen have an answer to this, but they just aren't around to give it"? I would have thought that the possibility is obvious to anyone reading this forum. Since this is a sub forum about freemen, it's hardly unreasonable to ask what freemen think on a given subject.

Quote:
oooh and another.... what makes you believe that a 'freeman' would answer you given your past antagonism here?
An interesting question. It seems that detractors are much better than freeman-proponents at answering questions, despite the antagonism between them. And yet, no freeman does the same. Many questions are left unanswered.

Quote:
I can let those hang forever cuz it keeps coming back to that.
It really doesn't. In any case, your questions have not been left hanging now, have they?
aulus agerius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-04-2012, 12:01 AM   #126
lesactive
Senior Member
 
lesactive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 1,461
Likes: 31 (23 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aulus agerius View Post
Perhaps the board would be better served if you answered the question?
I don't see how as the question requires a response from a 'freeman'. I'm sure Arayder might label my posts as 'freeman lite' but not for a couple of years have I associated my thoughts with those of the alleged freemen. Is it also your assumption that those who oppose/object to the status quo on this board necessarily be labelled freeman or are they perhaps like you and are merely interested in the topic for entertainment. Stranger things have happened. Freemen like money, yes? I don't, got it now?


Quote:
so what? your questions are also leading. Many questions are. This is a forum, not an examination-in-chief.
hmmm, the statement was written immediately following the question I posed. So, yes, however, in the normal patter(n) of linguistics the association is immediate and not referenced to something outside of the post itself. Are you a lawyer?


Quote:
Why is this relevant? You are saying "maybe freemen have an answer to this, but they just aren't around to give it"? I would have thought that the possibility is obvious to anyone reading this forum. Since this is a sub forum about freemen, it's hardly unreasonable to ask what freemen think on a given subject.
And precisely how many 'freemen' post on here on a regular basis? I can think of two offhand who would use that label and live by it and one of them has been banned. Not much of a gallery to posit questions. Besides, the question posed assumes that there is one answer with which all 'freemen' would agree. Kinda silly to think that unless the presumption is that all think the same.


Quote:
An interesting question. It seems that detractors are much better than freeman-proponents at answering questions, despite the antagonism between them. And yet, no freeman does the same. Many questions are left unanswered.
What is 'better' is rather subjective on this board, wouldn't you say? I might say that the detractors (how does one un-till a field, jk) are certainly more vociferous and likely bolstered by the idea of force which can back their opinions if called upon. Your dad is bigger and therefore better.... kinda thing. I get that from the haughty and disdainful tone I see coming from your side of the fence. I guess you and I and everyone else see as 'better' that which is more in line with our world view. I would tend to think that there are quite a few questions that go unanswered or at best, get answered unsatisfactorily in the questioners view. I know I have quite a few that can't be answered, at least not directly and without much whinging and equivocating. btw, to say that NO freeman answers questions to be just a teeny bit deceitful of you. I'm sorry, but I assumed you were more honest and precise than the average detractor. I won't make that mistake again.


Quote:
It really doesn't. In any case, your questions have not been left hanging now, have they?
Well, I think it does given the low number of papered freemen posting here. I've seen both sides use the "i didn't get a response therefore My opinion stands" routine. Pathetic from either camp. I didn't expect a response but thank you for taking the time. There are many others left hanging throughout the board if you would care to look. Of course, belief in anything is going to skew the answer.
__________________
les- not egocentric enough to be a real FMOTL-active
lesactive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-04-2012, 01:44 AM   #127
aulus agerius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lesactive View Post
I don't see how as the question requires a response from a 'freeman'. I'm sure Arayder might label my posts as 'freeman lite' but not for a couple of years have I associated my thoughts with those of the alleged freemen. Is it also your assumption that those who oppose/object to the status quo on this board necessarily be labelled freeman or are they perhaps like you and are merely interested in the topic for entertainment. Stranger things have happened. Freemen like money, yes? I don't, got it now?
So... you aren't a freeman, don't have an answer to the question and replied to it because... you didn't like the question being asked?

Quote:
hmmm, the statement was written immediately following the question I posed. So, yes, however, in the normal patter(n) of linguistics the association is immediate and not referenced to something outside of the post itself. Are you a lawyer?
Nope, not a lawyer. Legally educated yes, practicing, no. I'm a bit unclear what your problem is with a leading question in this context. More or less any question with a yes or no answer is a leading question.

Quote:
And precisely how many 'freemen' post on here on a regular basis? I can think of two offhand who would use that label and live by it and one of them has been banned. Not much of a gallery to posit questions. Besides, the question posed assumes that there is one answer with which all 'freemen' would agree. Kinda silly to think that unless the presumption is that all think the same.
Yep, looking pretty barren around here. But hey, there seems to be at least one new arrival...

Quote:
What is 'better' is rather subjective on this board, wouldn't you say? I might say that the detractors (how does one un-till a field, jk) are certainly more vociferous and likely bolstered by the idea of force which can back their opinions if called upon. Your dad is bigger and therefore better.... kinda thing.
You think that detractors are going to send the police to smash down your door if you don't believe them? Lol.
Quote:
I get that from the haughty and disdainful tone I see coming from your side of the fence. I guess you and I and everyone else see as 'better' that which is more in line with our world view. I would tend to think that there are quite a few questions that go unanswered or at best, get answered unsatisfactorily in the questioners view.
Hasn't something been said before about not all of each side being the same? I think that any answer would be "better" than no answer, and think that most people would agree.
Quote:
I know I have quite a few that can't be answered, at least not directly and without much whinging and equivocating. btw, to say that NO freeman answers questions to be just a teeny bit deceitful of you. I'm sorry, but I assumed you were more honest and precise than the average detractor. I won't make that mistake again.
You have a point about "no" freeman. As Cardinal Riechlieu would say "One should be careful what one writes" of course some freeman have answered questions.

Quote:
Well, I think it does given the low number of papered freemen posting here. I've seen both sides use the "i didn't get a response therefore My opinion stands" routine. Pathetic from either camp. I didn't expect a response but thank you for taking the time. There are many others left hanging throughout the board if you would care to look. Of course, belief in anything is going to skew the answer.
I'm not sure that moobs question carried within it the "you didn't reject it so it's right" logic (which is, as you say, bad logic). It's just a question. I guess people reading and seeing no answer might use that logic, but that's up to them.

Last edited by aulus agerius; 29-04-2012 at 01:45 AM. Reason: typo!
aulus agerius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-04-2012, 08:13 PM   #128
calvi36
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ich_dien View Post
Excellent post. I'm fed up of subsidising idle wasters. They say they don't want to be slaves to the system but the reality is that they're unemployable losers who'll happilly take the benefits offered to them by the 'evil' system.
I wrote the article over at newstruth and I joined the forums over here to correct certain misconceptions and this is the first one.

I am not an "idle waster", I actually run quite a successfull business and I employ other people, therefore I do contribute more than my fair share to society in general.

I am not unemployable, I choose not to be employed and as such I employ myself. I work 10-14 hours per day without the guarantee of a salary. I get out of my business what myself and others contribute, if the business is not a success then quite a few people will not have a wage neither.

I do not class myself as a Freeman nor a Sovereign, I do not need labels at all as I am just me! I am, however, interested in the way that Freemen and Sovereigns operate. I like their attitude and I know quite a few in real life and they are not benefit scroungers, neither am I.

On this forum thread there have been so many stereotypes used that it honestly beggars belief:

Benefits scounger
Council estate chav
Idle wasters
Freeloader

Those are just a few of the sterotypical slurs levied when someone makes a stand against something that they believe to be to be immoral. I am none of the above, I pay my own way and I rely not on the Government nor any other man to supply me with any benefits.

I firmly believe that council tax is immoral because it is not there as funding for services and this has been openly admitted by various councils. It is there to top up the shortfall in the general fund/grant issued by central government. Via Freedom Of Information requests it has also been proven that as much as 50% of council tax actually goes to pay into the pension schemes of local govt employees. Why should I have to subsidise anyone elses pension? Nobody subsidises mine!

I have never refused to pay council tax, I have used many avenues to attempt to get local council to exactly define why I should have to pay it, what I am paying for, how the amount is calculated, what the breakdown for each service is, how much from the general fund compared to the amount collected in council tax is allocated for services such as Police, Fire etc. How much from council tax has been investested overseas, such as in Iceland, how much was lost due to the collapse of banks and the crucial one is, why was there a surplus left over to invest if council tax is there to pay for services! Am I not entitled to know the answers to these questions? Or would you suggest that I just bend over and accept it all?

I have never attended a court over council tax, I have had a liability order issued against me and Bailiffs attended on numerous occassions to attempt to levy distress. They did not succeed in gaining a walking posession order let alone levying distress.

I do not use a "system" as no system is bullet proof. I have now dealt with council tax in the Scottish and also the English legal jurisdictions and not once have they managed to commence full proceedings against me.

Whilst in England a council did send the Bailiffs and yes they can be very threatening, however studying the statute regarding council tax and it's enforcability was invaluable to myself. The Bailiffs ended up handing the case file back to the council as they could enforce jack shit as they were denied entry.

I then did an FOIA request to the council asking the following:

How many households were in arrears for council tax
How many liability orders had been granted
How many times Bailiffs had been instructed
How many times walking posessions orders had been gained
Total value of all goods via walking posession orders
Number of times goods had been removed
Total value of goods sold at auction

Once I received the information I sat with my chin on the floor!

How many households were in arrears for council tax 4,709
How many liability orders had been granted 2,721
How many times Bailiffs had been instructed 1,822
How many times walking posessions orders had been gained 1.082
Total value of all goods via walking posession orders not available
Number of times goods had been removed zero
Total value of goods sold at auction zero

I then arranged a meeting with the Financial Director of said council and I brought all of this up, I had the local Tory councillor in tow (who was as much use as tits on a fish) and stated that the council was usining intimidation and threats against householders. The FD has to agree this as he said "we have no other way of collecting this tax"! I stated that I was going to go to the media with the figures and FOIA and he asked me not to do this as "something could be sorted out".

Two days later I received a council tax statement showing the £0.00 was owed!

So, I am not a freeman nor a sovereign, I just might be an awkward sod that firmly believes that he has the right to know.

Last edited by calvi36; 29-04-2012 at 09:01 PM. Reason: link added
calvi36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-04-2012, 11:08 AM   #129
jack tripper
Senior Member
 
jack tripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,290
Likes: 13 (8 Posts)
Default

Has anyone actually seen the state of these things the council tax is supposed to be going towards the upkeep of...I mean roads, public parks, subways/walkways, walk paths are an absolute mess. Where i live the council actually won't come out and replace something in a council property unless the house is actually falling down around you. To get a repair you have to chase them up endlessly. How often do they collect the bins properly? For all this council tax they're collecting to 'maintain' these things, they aren't doing a very good job are they?
jack tripper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-04-2012, 12:10 PM   #130
undeadcreature
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack tripper View Post
Has anyone actually seen the state of these things the council tax is supposed to be going towards the upkeep of...I mean roads, public parks, subways/walkways, walk paths are an absolute mess. Where i live the council actually won't come out and replace something in a council property unless the house is actually falling down around you. To get a repair you have to chase them up endlessly. How often do they collect the bins properly? For all this council tax they're collecting to 'maintain' these things, they aren't doing a very good job are they?
Repairs to council houses come out of the rent, just like any landlord is supposed to do.
__________________
The problem with a revolution is that you always end up back where you started and ultimately........ bugger all changes....
undeadcreature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 12:03 AM   #131
calvi36
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default Strange is it not?

That all of those who classed the original article's poster as a Benefits scounger
Council estate chav,Idle wasters, Freeloader.

Where are their responses now?

I mean what I say and I say what I mean. You are all welcome to bring your questions to me.
calvi36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 02:54 AM   #132
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvi36 View Post
That all of those who classed the original article's poster as a Benefits scounger
Council estate chav,Idle wasters, Freeloader.

Where are their responses now?

I mean what I say and I say what I mean. You are all welcome to bring your questions to me.
Okay, I have a question. Do you have any proof of your story being true?
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2012, 10:36 AM   #133
wiseguy
Senior Member
 
wiseguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,162
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvi36 View Post
I wrote the article over at newstruth and I joined the forums over here to correct certain misconceptions and this is the first one.

I am not an "idle waster", I actually run quite a successfull business and I employ other people, therefore I do contribute more than my fair share to society in general.

I am not unemployable, I choose not to be employed and as such I employ myself. I work 10-14 hours per day without the guarantee of a salary. I get out of my business what myself and others contribute, if the business is not a success then quite a few people will not have a wage neither.

I do not class myself as a Freeman nor a Sovereign, I do not need labels at all as I am just me! I am, however, interested in the way that Freemen and Sovereigns operate. I like their attitude and I know quite a few in real life and they are not benefit scroungers, neither am I.

On this forum thread there have been so many stereotypes used that it honestly beggars belief:

Benefits scounger
Council estate chav
Idle wasters
Freeloader

Those are just a few of the sterotypical slurs levied when someone makes a stand against something that they believe to be to be immoral. I am none of the above, I pay my own way and I rely not on the Government nor any other man to supply me with any benefits.

I firmly believe that council tax is immoral because it is not there as funding for services and this has been openly admitted by various councils. It is there to top up the shortfall in the general fund/grant issued by central government. Via Freedom Of Information requests it has also been proven that as much as 50% of council tax actually goes to pay into the pension schemes of local govt employees. Why should I have to subsidise anyone elses pension? Nobody subsidises mine!

I have never refused to pay council tax, I have used many avenues to attempt to get local council to exactly define why I should have to pay it, what I am paying for, how the amount is calculated, what the breakdown for each service is, how much from the general fund compared to the amount collected in council tax is allocated for services such as Police, Fire etc. How much from council tax has been investested overseas, such as in Iceland, how much was lost due to the collapse of banks and the crucial one is, why was there a surplus left over to invest if council tax is there to pay for services! Am I not entitled to know the answers to these questions? Or would you suggest that I just bend over and accept it all?

I have never attended a court over council tax, I have had a liability order issued against me and Bailiffs attended on numerous occassions to attempt to levy distress. They did not succeed in gaining a walking posession order let alone levying distress.

I do not use a "system" as no system is bullet proof. I have now dealt with council tax in the Scottish and also the English legal jurisdictions and not once have they managed to commence full proceedings against me.

Whilst in England a council did send the Bailiffs and yes they can be very threatening, however studying the statute regarding council tax and it's enforcability was invaluable to myself. The Bailiffs ended up handing the case file back to the council as they could enforce jack shit as they were denied entry.

I then did an FOIA request to the council asking the following:

How many households were in arrears for council tax
How many liability orders had been granted
How many times Bailiffs had been instructed
How many times walking posessions orders had been gained
Total value of all goods via walking posession orders
Number of times goods had been removed
Total value of goods sold at auction

Once I received the information I sat with my chin on the floor!

How many households were in arrears for council tax 4,709
How many liability orders had been granted 2,721
How many times Bailiffs had been instructed 1,822
How many times walking posessions orders had been gained 1.082
Total value of all goods via walking posession orders not available
Number of times goods had been removed zero
Total value of goods sold at auction zero

I then arranged a meeting with the Financial Director of said council and I brought all of this up, I had the local Tory councillor in tow (who was as much use as tits on a fish) and stated that the council was usining intimidation and threats against householders. The FD has to agree this as he said "we have no other way of collecting this tax"! I stated that I was going to go to the media with the figures and FOIA and he asked me not to do this as "something could be sorted out".

Two days later I received a council tax statement showing the £0.00 was owed!

So, I am not a freeman nor a sovereign, I just might be an awkward sod that firmly believes that he has the right to know.
Great post
__________________
Illuminati Agenda - Illuminati News, Occult Reviews & Secret Society Scandal.
wiseguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 01:09 AM   #134
calvi36
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default @moobs

Moobs, do you think that I just created all of this out of my own imagination? If so then there is no point in further discussion.
calvi36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 01:21 AM   #135
size_of_light
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,803
Likes: 6 (5 Posts)
Default

I haven't paid any taxes in five years.

I just throw the letters away unread.

I don't care. Not interested.

I don't owe 'taxes' to anyone.
size_of_light is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 02:03 AM   #136
calvi36
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default Nice

Like your style bud, starve them all! I, however like the paper battle with them!
calvi36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2012, 08:53 PM   #137
moobs
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,018
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvi36 View Post
Moobs, do you think that I just created all of this out of my own imagination? If so then there is no point in further discussion.
I don't think that you made it up, but I do think it's very likely that you misunderstood the law as it applied to your case, as well as the legal significance of the results.
moobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 07:11 PM   #138
moonflower
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotland, Land of Scots
Posts: 882
Likes: 22 (8 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bones View Post
just been announced that in ne lincs here 8000 people havnt paid it from 2011, they are concerned and asked why so many, the people responded saying they cant afford it and are spending it more on food and utilities ...
Kebabs and Blackberrys!


M
moonflower is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 07:20 PM   #139
calvi36
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 21
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moobs View Post
I don't think that you made it up, but I do think it's very likely that you misunderstood the law as it applied to your case, as well as the legal significance of the results.
Moobs, I have not misunderstood anything, they misunderstood the fact that one of Joe public would actually challenge them on it. The law as applied is infact a statute and thus has no force in law once challnged by one who does not offer consent. It is certainly interesting that you mention the law and then refer to the legal implications for my case. There was no case as it did not reach court, this was well stopped on numerous occassions, therefore legal did not apply and as such there were no ramifications apart from them leaving me well alone which is all that I aimed to achieve.

Moonflower, take the blinkers off please and read the whole thread before piping up with such inane BS!

Last edited by calvi36; 13-05-2012 at 07:24 PM. Reason: blasted typo!
calvi36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-05-2012, 07:29 PM   #140
iq_145
Senior Member
 
iq_145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Trapped in a body.
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calvi36 View Post
Moobs, I have not misunderstood anything, they misunderstood the fact that one of Joe public would actually challenge them on it. The law as applied is infact a statute and thus has no force in law once challnged by one who does not offer consent. It is certainly interesting that you mention the law and then refer to the legal implications for my case. There was no case as it did not reach court, this was well stopped on numerous occassions, therefore legal did not apply and as such there were no ramifications apart from them leaving me well alone which is all that I aimed to achieve.

Moonflower, take the blinkers off please and read the whole thread before piping up with such inane BS!
'calvi36', I thought that you had been banned?

__________________
The Titanic never sank, it was the Olympic that the US Navy sank in the North Atlantic in 1912.
iq_145 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:38 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.