"Ceylon" the UK's top Goodfer nothing

[PeanutGallery]

We can’t avoid doing a thread on him for any longer. He’s in charge of one of the more influential websites in the UK’s sovrunsphere, Mark “Ceylon” Laining. Now Mark is a true believer, he seems to have fallen for every conspiracy theory whackjob argument that is out there.

Watching one of his videos, such as this documentary on ‘gang’ crime in Nottingham reveals shows the struggle he has to get random drunks to swallow his beliefs. Well done to the drunkard for the win.

Of course far from being just another nut with a video camera and the mandatory “JooTube” account. Mark also runs a website, and what a website it is. Get Out Of Debt Free. The spiritual home of the UK (and other places) run of Common Law financial planning and advice. This in my mind is an exceptionally dangerous website. First and foremost it looks professional, this helps to suck people in down this rabbit hole of the usual redemption schemes, A4V and the three letter scam. It promises that a person can be debt free in 30 days by applying the ‘lawful’ techniques on offer. This is, as we know, rather misleading.

The current scams being promoted on GOODF include Simon “Spaniard” Goldberg’s Direct Debit clawback (as described in this excellent thread by new forumer littleFred) as well as promoting the eviction protest group “Response”. This has lead GOODF to be involved with just about every UK sovrun and to ingratiate themselves with every failed cause. They were there when Guy Taylor retook Bodenham, they were present when Paula Campbell lost at court. They wailed and gnashed their teeth at these failures of law and offered sympathy and promoted these pointless fights.

Of course the second most dangerous thing is that GOODF has adverts on it’s forum pages. Some of these are from Financial Organisations. I wrote to one asking them if they were aware that they were advertising on this site and if they knew that they were endorsing it’s policies. They did not. I have asked them to stop advertising on GOODF (although I have not had a response addressing if they would or would not I have not seen an advert from them on that website since I drew it to their attention). I certainly feel that financial organisations shouldn’t be paying a site like GOODF and supporting it to pass on it’s message.

Of course the main avenue of GOODF is it’s forums, which can be described as a passive aggressive little circlejerk in which the ‘awake’ try to justify their morally questionable attitude to debt and attack anyone who asks a question like “how does this work?” or “can I get advice or help with my mortgage” in both the asker is normally taken to task and told to do their own research because those fine folks at GOODF aren’t there to help solve problems. In fact usually they make problems much much worse. I am glad that they take this attitude as it should help to force people away from their theories (and generally turns any thread where someone asks for advice (on a website that proposes to give debt advice) into a flaming festival of attacks about how dare someone expect to get knowledge on getting out of debt for free on a website that proposes to give exactly that).

Of course Ceylon couldn’t care less that his forum is little more than a coven of those who agree with him. Not when he’s got YouTube video’s to put up in which he and a another Sovrun take role play what they imagine to be conversations between bankers and police in order to expose the system for what it is or random groups of people to accuse of peadophilia (why is this the go to insult for anyone associated with the “system”). He also needs to spread the word that 9/11 was an inside job (a view that seems to have recently been taken on by the new enfant terrible of the Sovrunsphere - the failed comic, failed actor, failed husband of Katy Perry, Russel Brand) and continue promoting court action even though the courts are inherently corrupt.

GOODF is rightly infamous in UK sov circles and it strikes me that it is time of us to have a thread dedicated to looking at, highlighting and exposing their dangerous brand of stupidity.

[littleFred]

Ceylon and Jon Witterick expounded their ideas in an Edge TV interview, October 2011. In this interview, Jon is whackiest: legal/lawful, statute=law of the sea, court dock=dry land, berth certificate, fictitious strawmen, fictitious entities (ie companies) can't contract with living breathing souls and so on. Ceylon's body language seems very uncomfortable with all this but Jon seemed to believe what he was saying.

Their forum on GOODF seems to be the only active forum for UK SovCits, FOTLers and associated nutjobs. Ceylon's public activity there now seems limited to (a) congratulating debtors who achieve "success" when their debts are referred to a debt collector, or referred back from a debt collector to the debt owner and (b) plugging his own prolific and tedious videos.

(They used to have a counter of successes. If a £2000 debt was passed to a collector, this incremented the total by £2000. If it was then passed back, it again increased by £2000. If the £2000 was eventually paid, it might have incremented the "success" total by £10,000. Even the die-hards realised this was spurious, and the counter seems to have been quietly dropped.)

A few posters heavily promote "lose the name". The theory is that a person with no name can't be chased for a debt or taken to court. I suspect the promoters realise the theory is false and merely a diversionary tactic. The website http://losethename.com/ run by "Brand Newman" in Canada is often cited, though the website has been down for a week or so. Success stories given there have included people spending time in cells after refusing to identify themselves at routine traffic stops. Some people have strange definitions of "success", or indeed "free".

Keith Thompson/Kate of Gaia's handy PDF brochure explains the badness of a legal name, and how losing it solves all problems.

Some forumers post legal advice that is frequently wrong and would create trouble for anyone who followed it. Ceylon himself? Frankly, I'm surprised the die-hards haven't denounced him as Controlled Opposition (ie someone put in place by TPTB to create and focus opposition in a controlled manner). His videos make no assertions of any significance beyond vague claims that authority figures are paedophiles. He says almost nothing on the forums. Certainly he is a mischief-maker who tries to sow discontent, but without the smart articulation of Simon the Spaniard or the sex appeal of Hannah Rose, I think his influence is limited.

[PeanutGallery]

Admittedly he's not the most influential figure, but he does show up at several events protests albeit normally wielding a camera and interjecting. However I think he is a bit more important because of the web forum and it's prominence in the alternative idiotic community, that and the disturbing fact that the website looks somewhat professional (when compared to some of the other efforts).

Certainly he was present for Paula Campbell's court case and for Guy Taylors retaking squatting at Bodenham manor and I doubt that Tom Crawford would have achieved the same turnout had it not been promoted on GOODF so heavily.

While he may not be a guru in the Menardian or Clifford frame, he certainly provides a medium through which they babble and promote their individual fallacies and erroneous methods of dealing with financial obligations. I tend to keep an eye on him because, he much like a bad penny, has a habit of turning up, promoting and ingratiating himself with more influential figures who are better and more capable orators.

[littleFred]

... and I doubt that Tom Crawford would have achieved the same turnout had it not been promoted on GOODF so heavily.

Agreed. The forum provides a shout-out for gatherings at evictions.

The website (and Ceylon himself) promote the three magic letters and estoppel. They have no legal force, of course, and any spanner-in-the-works effect they may once have had seems to have faded, judging by the posters who receive scathing rebuttals from debt collectors.

I often ask myself: do promoters such as Ceylon still believe this junk?

Ben Lowrey (mentioned on Quatloos a couple of times) used to promote junk (eg Ben's interviews with Jon Witterick, Feb 2011, and with Ceylon, March 2011) but also questioned the junk concepts (eg A4V rant, Nov 2011 and Common Law, the myth which has wasted enough of our time, May 2012) and successfully pulled himself out of the rabbit hole (eg Video to Hannah shotbolt, July 2014).

Promoting junk is bad. GOODF newbies believe the junk then exclaim horror that their estoppel letters have zero effect: debt collectors continue to chase debts. This false-hope aspect is certainly dangerous. Many people turn to GOODF when they are in trouble, and the last thing they need is bad advice that will fail to relieve the trouble and may create more.

For as long as some people believe junk, it will be propagated. I suppose there is a conveyor belt: a person starts by believing, makes some YouTube videos saying how wonderful it all is, and eventually discovers it isn't. But the videos hang around forever, sucking in more believers.

Ceylon does seem to have morphed from keyboard warrior to activist. "I've got a camera. Wouldn't it be fun to film myself poking a hornets' nest?" I can't see that ending well.

[Normal Wisdom]

I had been thinking about raising the subject of "Ceylon" myself but hadn't done so to date because I was wrestling with the very debate that is rehearsed in the preceding posts. On the one hand, he appears to be a leading and influential figure on numerous websites, at speaking engagements and with a multitude of Youtube videos as well as being physically present at many of the "events". On the other hand he appears to me at least to be something of a moron without the capacity for any cogent or original thought or even the duplicitous guile needed to establish him as a true "guru".

He clearly gets some credit from the sovrun community for being Jon Witterick's bag man and I guess the breadth and volume of his outpourings makes it seem as if he has some leadership role. As has been said there is no limit to the lunacy he is willing to espouse; GOODF, the curative properties of cannabis for all diseases, every known conspiracy theory from ISIS to free energy to parochial campaigns against Nottingham Council and a willingness to brand every person in a position of power or notoriety as a paedophile.

However, I have come to the conclusion that his only ability is simply to absorb and regurgitate all of this nonsense ad nauseum (as it were). He is a facilitator of sovrun and conspiracy ideas without exposing himself in anything but a minor way. I think that does make him dangerous although one might have thought that given the abject failure of most cases with which he has been involved then anyone with an impending court case wouldn't want anything to do with him. His recent involvement with Mickey Summers who is alleging historic child abuse is a particular case in point. Although I'm not questioning the validity of his allegations, his involvement with "friends" such as Ceylon has coincided with increasingly outrageous publicity stunts which have led him to the point of civil or criminal action.

I haven't been able to find much history for "Ceylon" which would explain his involvement with the sovruns. He appears to have run a travel business with his wife but this is long defunct (insolvent?) and there is some minor suggestions of outstanding utility bills. It is interesting to note that in 2011 Kirk Haining (who appears to be his son) was convicted of cultivating 48 cannabis plants after attempting to defend himself in court using well worn sovrun "your laws don't apply to me" theory. He was sentenced to 9 months suspended.

Ceylon's main partners in Nottingham are KingAbdullahKey with whom he has until recently made a regular Youtube videos under the by-line "The Artists Mental Patients" - an homage to Chunky Mark, The Artist Taxi driver but without any of the wit. KingAbdullahKey shares Cyelon's love of a vast range of theories top which he adds his own impenetrable veneer of mysticism and cosmology often referring to our world as an electric, electrical, electrical planetary game sphere where the bad things are done by our "negative other selves". He seems to have disappeared recently with all his Youtube videos (usually identical to the ones Ceylon posts) having been deleted.

Ceylon's other colleague is "Master Jonathan Christian" (Jonathan Allington) a Dr Who obsessed creep who reserves his activities for the promotion of cannabis oil and a vendetta against Nottingham Council who it appears had the temerity to give him a parking fine. Although he is a relatively minor player there is a smugness about his video appearances that makes me disposed to violence.

[PeanutGallery]

There was an interesting new video which was up yesterday, but seems to have been pulled, which featured Ceylon with Jon in the place normally occupied by KingAbdullahKey discussing a letter sent to Mickey Summers in regard to his involvement in their recent stunts and of course the uploading of this to YouTube. In the video they remarked on the absence of KaK although the reasons were a bit "off to space camp" and likely not credible. It seems that something has happened that has made him question his commitment to the movement.

Like I said it was there yesterday and it seems to have been pulled (likely due to a harassment complaint by Nottingham council - the content of the letter described in the video rather suggests that this was a possibility) edited to add, I found it and it's no longer available due to a defamation complaint. It would certainly seem that Nottingham County Council have taken an interest in monitoring his channel (again likely because of his promotional work for Mickey Summers).

Does he actually believe in the woo? I think so. I don't see him doing this for mischief or for profit. He also doesn't seem to have a vested interest in any campaign, certainly he doesn't post about his methods having worked for him and is quite happy to engage in pointless protestations when they fail for others. However he'll happily ditch those failures and move on to the next cause celebre when it suits. I feel that is what makes him most dangerous, he's not an active player but he influences the bad decisions of others.

[littleFred]

I think the OP contains a typo. Ceylon's last name is Haining, not Laining. The first three copyright notices at ThinkFree are by Ceylon, in the names of MARK JOHN HAINING, ELLEN PATRICIA HAINING and KIRK MARK HAINING. Each of them can now sue me for 10,000,000 Gold Sovereigns. I'd better start saving.

[PeanutGallery]

Oh blast so it does, please substitute all references to Laining with Haining. My bad. I apologise unreservedly to any person by the name of Mark Laining who may now be unfortunately associated with the idiocy of Mark John Haining. If you are reading this Mark L you aren't an idiot. If on the other hand it's Mark H, well

That copyright notice is something special though isn't it.

[Arthur Rubin]

Is "Mark Laining" then a derivative work?

[littleFred]

Is "Mark Laining" then a derivative work?

To answer that, we'd have to pretend that the copyright notice has any legal effect. (For the avoidance of doubt: it doesn't. No court would ever enforce it.)

So let's pretend, and let's enter fantasy-land.

In that notice, Ceylon uses his name in two ways: "MARK JOHN HAINING" and "Mark-John: Haining", and he asserts copyright in both. In the context of FOTLers, GOOFers and associated nutters, these refer to two different entities: a person and a man. He uses the phrase "and all derivatives thereof" with the former but not the latter.

"MARK JOHN HAINING" is always accompanied by the phrase "and all derivatives thereof" or equivalent, where "Mark-John: Haining" never is.

If the matter came before a court, it might reasonably rule that the intention of the notice was that "Mark-John: Haining" was not considered a derivative of "MARK JOHN HAINING". Moreover, the intent of the notice is not to copyright any derivatives of "Mark-John: Haining". "Mark Laining" is clearly closer to "Mark-John: Haining" than it is to "MARK JOHN HAINING". Thus, the court might rule that "Mark Laining" is not a derivative of "MARK JOHN HAINING" and can be used freely without violating copyright.

Trade marks are a different matter, of course. If "MARK JOHN HAINING" was a registered trade mark of a business that offered guru services in (say) scams, welching, theft and trouble-making, then another business in the same trade couldn't use the same name. I know even less about trade marks than I do about copyright, and I don't know how close one name can be to another without being considered the same or "passing off" (ie a consumer might consider them to be the same).

I have asked promoters of this copyright scheme what happens when another person happens to share the same name. Is that other person breaching copyright when they use their own name? I have never been given an answer let alone an answer that made any sense.


Alternative copyright schemes are available. One asserts that the crown has claimed copyright on the name, and that this was done at birth registration, and this is evidenced by the copyright notice on some birth certificates. Apparently there are two possible remedies. The first is to simply claim copyright. (Oh, so if a work is copyright, anyone can simply come along and claim the copyright for themselves? I think not.) The other is to request the crown to release or assign the copyright.

The "crown owns my name" theory has some attractions. There is no need for a person to claim copyright on a name; it already is copyrighted. Thus anyone (especially a debt collector) who uses that name is breaching copyright. A copyright breach is somehow a fraud. (Huh? I've never worked out why.) So the debt collector is committing fraud by addressing a letter to the name. Moreover, the person with that name has also been unknowingly committing fraud, by using his own name that was copyrighted to the crown.(Huh? Doesn't fraud require intent? So fraud can't be unknowingly committed?) The person was tricked into fraud, and this makes the trickster liable.

Okay, let's retreat from fantasy land and clamber out of this rabbit hole. Given that these theories are junk, what is their point?

I think there are two points. The first is to convince the newbie that the guru is smart and well worth the £7 donation or whatever. The second is to convince the debt collector that the debtor is insane and incapable of rational thought or common sense, and the chances of the debt being repaid is zero.

[Burnaby49]

Oh blast so it does, please substitute all references to Laining with Haining. My bad. I apologise unreservedly to any person by the name of Mark Laining who may now be unfortunately associated with the idiocy of Mark John Haining. If you are reading this Mark L you aren't an idiot. If on the other hand it's Mark H, well

That copyright notice is something special though isn't it.

Nothing special at all about it. Pretending that your name is copyright is a standard Freeman/Sovereign tactic. As I quoted in this discussion;

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=6922&start=20#p176300

Any woman or mangina lackey who uses my name, my calling or my image without my written consent signed in red ink by my hand only is violating my copyright.

The cost of copyright violation PER VIOLATION is 1,000 troy ounces of 99.99% pure gold. So all of you women and mangina lackeys might want to consider that before you write your lies about me. I will pursue copyright violations ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD so as to collect gold to be able to re-distribute to those I perceive as in need. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to take gold off women and their mangina lackeys and give it to men who are struggling to raise their boys because of the oppressive nature of the western ‘legal’ system today.

Any slander of me will be pursued ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. So if you women tell lies about me and try and[sic] slander me to damage my business you will be pursued. I will take your property off you as a point of honour.

If any woman wishes to make a rebuttal for anything I have said they are welcome to do so directly to me at peter@peternolan.com on an Affidavit with a Notice of Intent and Proposed Remedy signed under penalty of perjury and full commercial liability.”

[grixit]

Has any stopped criticizing him since he posted it? If not, did he sue them? If he didn't, what does that make him-- in his own terminology?

[PeanutGallery]

I should possibly clarify that when I wrote special, I did not think it was unique, I did think it was stupid.

[rogfulton]

I should possibly clarify that when I wrote special, I did not think it was unique, I did think it was stupid.

I took it in a 'Church Lady' way.

[Hercule Parrot]

Ceylon's main partners in Nottingham are KingAbdullahKey with whom he has until recently made a regular Youtube videos under the by-line "The Artists Mental Patients" - an homage to Chunky Mark, The Artist Taxi driver but without any of the wit. KingAbdullahKey shares Cyelon's love of a vast range of theories top which he adds his own impenetrable veneer of mysticism and cosmology often referring to our world as an electric, electrical, electrical planetary game sphere where the bad things are done by our "negative other selves". He seems to have disappeared recently with all his Youtube videos (usually identical to the ones Ceylon posts) having been deleted.

Ceylon's other colleague is "Master Jonathan Christian" (Jonathan Allington) a Dr Who obsessed creep who reserves his activities for the promotion of cannabis oil and a vendetta against Nottingham Council who it appears had the temerity to give him a parking fine. Although he is a relatively minor player there is a smugness about his video appearances that makes me disposed to violence.

Interesting. There are quite a few sovereign-esque loonies in that city -
http://roguemale.org/blog/ & http://self-realisation.com/ link to the Thinkfree site and "Universal Community Trust".

Perhaps we didn't put enough flouride in the local water supply?

[Burnaby49]

Nottingham seems to have a significant alternate lifestyle community, last time I was there (to visit the Old Trip to Jerusalem pub) tattoos and Goths everywhere. The friend I was travelling with went into one of the Goth stores to look for jewelry for his wife while I waited outside. A burly bald tattooed guy with a nose ring was waiting too, but with a bicycle. He quite politely asked if I'd mind watching his bike for just a minute because his girlfriend was in the store "nicking" some clothes and she'd been a while so he wanted to go in and see if she'd been caught. He came back a minute later, thanked me, and said that she was just trying to make up her mind what to steal. My friend came out and we left so I didn't find out how the story ended.

[grixit]

Burnaby49: Looks honest enough for a stranger to ask him to guard a bicycle, dishonest enough to confide in about an ongoing crime.

If i could reword that to make it shorter, he could use it as a slogan to run for office on.

[Burnaby49]

Burnaby49: Looks honest enough for a stranger to ask him to guard a bicycle, dishonest enough to confide in about an ongoing crime.

If i could reword that to make it shorter, he could use it as a slogan to run for office on.

I already have my political slogan;

"He won't steal as much as he could from you!"

[PeanutGallery]

That's the most honest thing I think a politician I think I've ever heard a politician say.

You've got my vote.

[PeanutGallery]

The latest action being promoted on the GOOFer site is a protest at the eviction of one Mr Ebert. This would be the same Mr Ebert who has helped Guy Taylor, Paula Campbell and anybody who can't face up to the reality of their financial situation with his extensive lack of knowledge of the law in regard to eviction. This can be proved by the simple fact that Mr Ebert is apparently being evicted and he's meant to be their expert at stopping people being evicted. Physician heal thyself?

Now of course over on GOODF the GOOFers are busy stirring up some good old fashioned paranoia by claiming that:

the dark forces know of his importance to us and if they can stop him it will be a victory for them.

They really are concerned about what is happening just now and a lot has to do with his efforts.

Of course we don't know the circumstances of this eviction, if it's for mortgage arrears or rental issues. Given what I believe to be the financial history of Mr Ebert (Which was detailed in an excellent post in this thread by Normal Wisdom in that he has previously lost a property and has fought a long, hard and pointless battle using his legal research and theories to get absolutely nowhere and when that failed took more drastic action that led to police involvement) it would therefore be unlikely that any bank would be willing to let him ride the mortgage merry-go-round again.

Ceylon pipes up to instigate with a claim that they need to arrest the bailiffs and police if they turn up and try to prevent a breach of the peace by arresting people. He also optimistically describes the property as being the one with all the people outside of it.

While I doubt that they will attract as many travelling nutters to this sideshow as they did for Tom Crawfords first eviction, they may well get enough to frustrate the eviction attempt. In those circumstances I would again recommend simply getting the writ enforced by the High Court as that would be the most expedient way of dealing with evicting Mr Ebert.