AnOwlCalledSage wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:34 am
Good old Matthew 22:21!
1 Cor 6:1 is the usual counterexample:
St Paul wrote:Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
Now, the usual interpretation is "A community of Christians should sort out their differences among themselves, rather than going to the secular courts"; however, the more extreme version is "Christians are not subject to the secular courts, and can set any laws they want to." The secular courts, having secular power, tend not to regard this interpretation in too favourable a light, but it is popular among persons who claim to be Christian, but still want to do something illegal...
However, Mr Gilroy must be given credit for having admitted criminal contempt and unreservedly apologising to the court over the affidavit and his behaviour. Were it not for that, the correct term of imprisonment would have been six months but, giving him credit for those, the appropriate term was three months.
However, the court considered a community service order was the appropriate way to deal with the matter, the judge concluded.
The Observer wrote:
Amazing how waking up to reality and realizing that you were sold a bill of goods can lead you to making the rational decision to apologize and take responsibility.
If that were/is the case then so much the better, those kind of flashes of insight are rare and to be prized. It is to be hoped that is the case and that he won't be back to the same old same old very shortly as is more often the case.
I asked my go for an evidence of life.
Asked them to write "i dr ........... confirm that claire thompson is a living and breathing flesh and blood woman"
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it. I asked her if she said that she's told me she'd confirmed that she wrote it. But as a result of this strange request and what I've been reading about in the internet they have concerns about my mental state!
This is how they close you down. However the council have stopped demanding the 6k they alleged that I owed. The alleged judge of the alleged tribunal wasn't even registered with the law society or anything it was a farse. But as I'd served a iuv courtesy notice to the CEO of the Scottish courts and tribunals service. They've decided not to send my statement of reasons and all gone quiet! As I've got them in bloody check mate regarding the fraud!
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it.
I'm struggling to think what sort of 'tribunal' would be even slightly interested in a doctor's letter saying somebody was a living human being. Why would they question whether or not it was genuine when it has the same legal effect as a doctor's letter saying the person has brown eyes?
JULIAN: I recommend we try Per verulium ad camphorum actus injuria linctus est.
SANDY: That's your actual Latin.
HORNE: What does it mean?
JULIAN: I dunno - I got it off a bottle of horse rub, but it sounds good, doesn't it?
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it.
I'm struggling to think what sort of 'tribunal' would be even slightly interested in a doctor's letter saying somebody was a living human being. Why would they question whether or not it was genuine when it has the same legal effect as a doctor's letter saying the person has brown eyes?
Remember, footlers make a (to them) distinction between a "living, breathing, human being" and a "corporate fiction". If one is the former, they believe one can't be the latter.
And, we all know that only the latter is subject to the law and legal proceedings of the "alleged court". So, if she can get a recognized professional, such as her doctor to certify that she is the former, she's FREE!
SteveUK wrote: ↑Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:53 pm
Big fail by one of Ken's followers...
I asked my go for an evidence of life.
Asked them to write "i dr ........... confirm that claire thompson is a living and breathing flesh and blood woman"
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it. I asked her if she said that she's told me she'd confirmed that she wrote it. But as a result of this strange request and what I've been reading about in the internet they have concerns about my mental state!
This is how they close you down. However the council have stopped demanding the 6k they alleged that I owed. The alleged judge of the alleged tribunal wasn't even registered with the law society or anything it was a farse. But as I'd served a iuv courtesy notice to the CEO of the Scottish courts and tribunals service. They've decided not to send my statement of reasons and all gone quiet! As I've got them in bloody check mate regarding the fraud!
Yeah, Just tell them to call Heather, the lady in charge of the Courtesy notices....who has plenty of time on her hands in prison.
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it.
I'm struggling to think what sort of 'tribunal' would be even slightly interested in a doctor's letter saying somebody was a living human being. Why would they question whether or not it was genuine when it has the same legal effect as a doctor's letter saying the person has brown eyes?
No need for a doctor's note. The court will simply ask the exorcist on duty to pour holy water on the defendant. No smoke? Good, you're a living human being and trial will continue.
Sent it to the tribunal and they said that it was forged that the GP confirmed that she never wrote it.
I'm struggling to think what sort of 'tribunal' would be even slightly interested in a doctor's letter saying somebody was a living human being. Why would they question whether or not it was genuine when it has the same legal effect as a doctor's letter saying the person has brown eyes?
No need for a doctor's note. The court will simply ask the exorcist on duty to pour holy water on the defendant. No smoke? Good, you're a living human being and trial will continue.
There is a lot to be said for Dark Ages English style justice?
Not living? We will simply burn you at the stake then!
Honestly, can we bring back transportation? According to section 40 of BNA citizenship can be deprived. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/section/40
"able, under the law of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom, to become a national of such a country or territory."
They claim they are not British citizens, and citizens of their own. That means they have dual citizenship already.
Some of them are extreme, which is not conductive to public good, and it prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom.
They can have right of liberty and freedom there. There are no laws there. You can either choose to go to a prison here or to have freedom there.
I think someone should educate Darren on the finer points of grammar and the use of an apostrophe in possession.
Darren Sayward
Most people don't. This is what they rely on. A true summons will have, for example, 'Manchester Magistrates Court'. A fake, fraudulent summons, will have 'Manchester Magistrates' Court'. Where does this apostrophe come from LOL?
AndyPandy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:25 pm
I think someone should educate Darren on the finer points of grammar and the use of an apostrophe in possession.
Darren Sayward
Most people don't. This is what they rely on. A true summons will have, for example, 'Manchester Magistrates Court'. A fake, fraudulent summons, will have 'Manchester Magistrates' Court'. Where does this apostrophe come from LOL?
Dumber and just plain thick springs to mind !
To deal with those people, it is better to use plain and literal English, problem solved!
AndyPandy wrote: ↑Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:25 pm
I think someone should educate Darren on the finer points of grammar and the use of an apostrophe in possession.
Darren Sayward
Most people don't. This is what they rely on. A true summons will have, for example, 'Manchester Magistrates Court'. A fake, fraudulent summons, will have 'Manchester Magistrates' Court'. Where does this apostrophe come from LOL?
Dumber and just plain thick springs to mind !
To deal with those people, it is better to use plain and literal English, problem solved!
And even then it is a lost cause.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
Ms Shepherd quoted lengthy portions of the Bible, and said she was not a real person, but a “living soul”.
Judge Rose said: “You have made it perfectly clear to me and anyone else in court throughout the conduct of this trial that you, for some peculiar reason based on some strange interpretation of the Bible, think you are not bound by the laws and rules of this country that apply to everyone else.
“You think in some way you are not a person and think you are a so-called free spirit or whatever expression you used.
“Laine Shepherd, you stood before the jury and told them you are not a person who needs to live by the laws of England and Wales and the laws do not apply to you in the same way everybody else who lives in the country.
Read this piece of news today, and the first thing that I thought of was how long before this becomes the next fluoride in water conspiracy, agenda 21 and all that good stuff. Anyone care to hedge their bets.
Crap that didn't take long https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tUQmUJJJYc
