Tom Crawford failed judgment 3/9/15 Part 1 & 2

[Losleones]

Whose Rooney?

[JonnyL]

Great Halloween event for unsuspecting friends who know nothing of the Crawford's, visit 3 Ferne Chase, post a picture to Quatloos and then get lynched by a loony old man and his mental wife in the pub car park after lunch

[Pox]

I am not into cars /vehicles but what is a unimog?

Can't help but think of a cat with one leg.

ETA - just googled it - what a daf(t) name - see what I did there

Mercedes 4x4 light truck, famed for it's off-road abilities, incredible mechanical complexity and horrendous costs if, or should I say when, things go wrong. My DAF is not as able off road as the Unimog and is a bit larger and heavier but it's a damned sight more reliable and, more importantly, easier & cheaper to maintain and repair.

This isn't Top Gear you know

But still think unimog is a stupid name - the marketing team needs sacking. (I drive a unimog, what sort of a line is that!)

Anyway, back on topic,where did you say on quatloos that you would be viewing in Nottingham? I don't do Facebook so don't know what was disclosed there.
If TC has folks keeping tabs on any who view his ex property, it can only bode well for any purchasers at the forthcoming auction as I feel such behaviour would put many purchasers off, so good luck to any on here who may be interested - hope you do OK.

[Pox]

Whose Rooney?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrek

[NG3]

The story goes back to white supremacists in IIRC the early 1970s.

Thanks, now I have to type a novel.

From memory:

As with most political and ideological things in life there never really is a beginning, it's just one thing evolving into another as time rolls by.

About 180 years ago it was a turbulent time in England, and there were a lot of revolutionary political movements about. Back in those days too Nottingham was in the thick of it, so much so that we burnt down our castle and rioted in the streets, fighting pitched battles against soldiers from the local barracks.

Amongst the movements that were around at the time was one that appealed particularly to the political right wing and aristocracy, as it sought to shun the more modernist and liberal tendencies of the governments of that era and to return the country to a more historic approach based on common law that favoured land owners and the wealthy over mere peasants, who they felt were unworthy of political voice.

A return to the age of Baron's if you wish.

This campaign was taken through the court system, right to the top, in an action that challenged statutes and claimed that the only true law was common law, however the case floundered in court when not only was it ruled that statute law was not only valid, but in fact common law should be perceived to encompass statute law.

That movement pretty much died at that moment, and little was heard again of such matters.

Crossing over the Atlantic, America was itself experiencing a revolutionary period in it's history, and was a maelstrom of political ideas, from it's independence in 1776, through the formation and adoption of it's constitution in 1788, right up to the Forty-Eighters who flooded in to the new world, fleeing the consequences of the revolutions of 1848 that swept Europe, and of course the bloody and divisive civil war fought of 1861 to 1865.

You could spend a lifetime studying that period. It really was revolutionary, right down to the end when Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln were exchanging correspondence, as the former gave support to the latter in his struggles.

As there's a non-political rule here I won't get to deeply into any of the politics of that era except to say that there were certain elements of the South that were unhappy with the result.

A little bit of trivia at this juncture to inform British readers, who might not be familiar with the fact, but the infamous James brothers, Frank and Jessie James, actually have their roots in the civil war when serving alongside their cousins the Younger brothers (also notable outlaws) under William (bloody Bill) Anderson and William Clarke Quantrill, as part of The Missouri Partisan Ranger, better known as Quantrill's Raiders who were a brutal pro-Confederate guerrilla outfit.

The James brothers, and some of their supporters always maintained they were not an outlaw gang but in fact their actions were politically motivated, and that their targets, primarily banks and rail-roads targeted because of the financial support that they'd offered to the North during the war.

However I digress, the point is that there was resistance to the outcome of the war, perhaps most famously in the formation of the first incarnation of the Ku Klux Klan, lead by former Confederate Major General Nathan Bedford Forrest.

One of the things that these people were particularly opposed to was the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which outlawed slavery; the Fourteenth Amendment that guaranteed equal rights for all and citizenship for blacks; and the Fifteenth Amendment which prevented race from being used to disfranchise men.

One of the ideas pushed to counter these amendments was to register the English argument from then recently history with regards to common law v's political law.

The notion gained little traction, but it kept the idea alive, where it bounced around with little impact until the 1930's.

Up until this point the ideas had always been overtly about a return to a supremacist mentality, where power was transferred away from the many to the few, but in the confusion of the perfect storm of the 1930's, where hard working, regular communities, some already depleted by a generation lost to a combination of fatalities in the first world war, and a pandemic of Spanish influenza, before being hit by a conflagration of economic and environmental disasters, that saw millions displaced, the ideas made their first real appearances amongst the working classes, albeit in a limited way at the fringes of marginal movements.

However those glimpses were enough for it to come to the attention of opponents of the Glass–Steagall Act, from whence the modern tax protester and anti-Federal reserve movements trace their lineage.

Meanwhile our old friends the White Supremacist and racist movements were beginning to suffer some what of a decline in fortunes, from a peak of around 4 million supporters for the Ku Klux Klan, mainly in the south, and a large following for groups such as the German American Bund, in the north, falling to a much smaller following in the face of various high profile corruption cases, the commencement of war against Nazi Germany, and post-war with the slow and steady march toward the civil rights era of the 1960's.

Looking for a way to address the decline in numbers, and to perhaps co-opt members of the tax protest movement, who themselves at that time experiencing a decline in numbers, William Potter Gale and Henry Lamont Beach, fused elements of Christian Identity, an anti-Semitic religion, that see's the White race as the only true children of God, with racism, and the argument that had been shared by supremacists, racists, and tax protesters, in an attempt to overturn legislation that stood between them and their selfish goals.

From it's west coast origins it moved into Texas and the inland south west where it morphed into the township movement, before finally developing into the Freemen movement at it's peak in the 1980's.

At this point it made it's first notable return to this country when it was adopted by a Pro-paedophile political lobby group that latched onto the fact that such a movement would also change the age of sexual consent.

For obvious reasons that incarnation didn't last very long, nor attract much support.

Meanwhile state-side it began to fracture into the Freemen movement and the Sovereign Citizen movement, which in turn both kept fracturing into smaller and smaller groups, each with their own agendas.

It's at this point where the racism becomes less of a primary focus in the sales pitch, and some people from other ethnic groups became embroiled.

From there onward it's fairly well covered in many posts on this forum.

Sorry for a lack of details and citations but that's from memory.

[Losleones]

Whose Rooney?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrek

Agreed, but thought I'd go along with the topic swerve & reference Uncle Albert in OF&H as no one could be arsed identifying the quoted Steve.

[bagman]

Anyway, it should all get very interesting if I do decide to buy Fearne Chase. I'm tempted to buy it just to get up their noses but I'm really not interested in taking a loss just to annoy them. Then again, it might be worth it to leave it there in all it's battered glory for a year or two until the fuss dies down. I'll see how the auction goes. I'm sure my buddies the Crawfords will be there to see me. If they do turn up we'll know for sure who's stalking who because they have absolutely no reason to be there other than to stalk me. Craig sure as hell doesn't have 70 grand to spring for his dad's old house. I doubt he has 70p for a cup of coffee in the local greasy spoon.

Any more questions, Steve?

No thing that about covers it,,,and your comment about shit staring both sides, AND slightly snidey tone ,,,,well let me educate you,,,I do see both sides, i am not blinded by the them and us, .....FIRSTLY I never said you were stalking them,,,and if you read back youR post you my see, who is being "slighty snidey" . As for your facebook page, yes i do post, its a great page, but i dont track it 24/7 noR do i track this thread 24/7, so was unaware of the Crawford having prior notification you may be in that area of the UK,,,,,
IT IS such a shame you were not so forthcoming in the real world, as you are on line, as you say you have tracked the Crawford case, have a page all about IT,,,,,,but yet you would need a script prepared to ask him vital questions, that we have been asking each other for almost a year, like did you get the warrant, why were there no payments made after 1992, but i guess some people act differently in real life, than they do online, and the fear of a pensioner, and A not so little old lady must have got the best of you.

[NG3]

Any more questions, Steve?

I'll have a question if I can.

Buy to use, buy to let, or buy to flip?

If it's either of the last two and you're looking for any local services feel free to contact me.

[bagman]

Whose Steve?

ME ,

[bagman]

Anyway, it should all get very interesting if I do decide to buy Fearne Chase. I'm tempted to buy it just to get up their noses but I'm really not interested in taking a loss just to annoy them. Then again, it might be worth it to leave it there in all it's battered glory for a year or two until the fuss dies down. I'll see how the auction goes. I'm sure my buddies the Crawfords will be there to see me. If they do turn up we'll know for sure who's stalking who because they have absolutely no reason to be there other than to stalk me. Craig sure as hell doesn't have 70 grand to spring for his dad's old house. I doubt he has 70p for a cup of coffee in the local greasy spoon.

Any more questions, Steve?

No thing that about covers it,,,and your comment about shit staring both sides, AND slightly snidey tone ,,,,well let me educate you,,,I do see both sides, i am not blinded by the them and us, .....FIRSTLY I never said you were stalking them,,,and if you read back youR post you my see, who is being "slighty snidey" . As for your facebook page, yes i do post, its a great page, but i dont track it 24/7 noR do i track this thread 24/7, so was unaware of the Crawford having prior notification you may be in that area of the UK,,,,,
IT IS such a shame you were not so forthcoming in the real world, as you are on line, as you say you have tracked the Crawford case, have a page all about IT,,,,,,but yet you would need a script prepared to ask him vital questions, that we have been asking each other for almost a year, like did you get the warrant, why were there no payments made after 1992, but i guess some people act differently in real life, than they do online, and the fear of a pensioner, and A not so little old lady must have got the best of you.

[Pox]

Hey, please chill guys.

[timcurgenven1]

Amanda

Looking forward to seeing your old pad tommorrow , why dont you join us!, it will bring back some good memories for you!

Are you coming you onesi?, is tom coming (oh just realised he cant, nor can craig)

How about Sue does she want a look round to?

[NYGman]

Amanda

Looking forward to seeing your old pad tommorrow , why dont you join us!, it will bring back some good memories for you!

Are you coming you onesi?, is tom coming (oh just realised he cant, nor can craig)

How about Sue does she want a look round to?

Can you take photo's of the house, as some of us can't attend due to geographic restrictions. Would love to see what was done to the place by the Rooftop 6.

[ArthurWankspittle]

...right down to the end when Karl Marx and Abraham Lincoln were exchanging correspondence, as the former gave support to the latter in his struggles.

Quiet! Don't mention that sort of thing on here. They'll find out that where I am stopped buying the cotton off the south. I'll never get back into the US after that.

[YiamCross]

Anyway, it should all get very interesting if I do decide to buy Fearne Chase. I'm tempted to buy it just to get up their noses but I'm really not interested in taking a loss just to annoy them. Then again, it might be worth it to leave it there in all it's battered glory for a year or two until the fuss dies down. I'll see how the auction goes. I'm sure my buddies the Crawfords will be there to see me. If they do turn up we'll know for sure who's stalking who because they have absolutely no reason to be there other than to stalk me. Craig sure as hell doesn't have 70 grand to spring for his dad's old house. I doubt he has 70p for a cup of coffee in the local greasy spoon.

Any more questions, Steve?

No thing that about covers it,,,and your comment about shit staring both sides, AND slightly snidey tone ,,,,well let me educate you,,,I do see both sides, i am not blinded by the them and us, .....FIRSTLY I never said you were stalking them,,,and if you read back youR post you my see, who is being "slighty snidey" . As for your facebook page, yes i do post, its a great page, but i dont track it 24/7 noR do i track this thread 24/7, so was unaware of the Crawford having prior notification you may be in that area of the UK,,,,,
IT IS such a shame you were not so forthcoming in the real world, as you are on line, as you say you have tracked the Crawford case, have a page all about IT,,,,,,but yet you would need a script prepared to ask him vital questions, that we have been asking each other for almost a year, like did you get the warrant, why were there no payments made after 1992, but i guess some people act differently in real life, than they do online, and the fear of a pensioner, and A not so little old lady must have got the best of you.

I can only guess you've been watching a different video. You were active in posts on my FB page in which I made my explanations at around the time I made them, rather disingenuous to try and pretend you didn't see anything. In fact I would say you have been more active on my page recently than I have and likely as not even more so on your own page but I wouldn't know about that since your mate Badda blocked me from there. Another example of your hypocrisy in action.

Again, if you were watching the same video as the rest of us you would have noticed there was very little opportunity to ask anything of Tom Crawford since he persistently shouted me down whenever I tried to say anything. He even shouted at me not to say "Please" to him. It didn't take long to realise the conversation was going nowhere, again if you'd been watching the same video you would have seen me say that at least twice and attempt to withdraw only to be pursued by Tom and Sue. Where was the opportunity to ask any question and what makes you so omniscient as to know what I would or would not have asked if he'd been less aggressive?

If you choose once more to put a snide spin on my wish to withdraw from a pointless exchange where there was no possibility of a reasonable conversation and having no desire to engage in a public slanging match, which I again expressed calmly and politely, then go ahead. I can't see any other way to interpret your strange view that calm politeness shows fear, then again I always find it odd when people mistake politeness for weakness.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion as much as Tom is even where it's clearly in the same class as Tom's opinions, total crap. If want to align yourself with the Crawfords then go ahead but don't expect to be treated differently from any other idiot who tries to twist the perfectly obvious into something completely different.

As for the rest, I have no idea what you're trying to say. Where do I act different in real life from the way I do online? I am cogent, coherent and reasonable on line, as I think pretty much everyone else agrees the video shows me to be in real life. A little old lady got the best of me? What would you have done, nutted Sue and put Tom on his arse? About as intelligent and sensible as your recent comments here. Maybe you would have popped home to make a juvenile video about them, whatever. I see no more point in continuing to attempt to communicate with you than I did with Tom.

[IDIOT]

The calm approach to Tom's immediate (and incorrect) assessment of your mental health state was a good call. He showed his true colours much as he did at the eviction.

There's an address been posted in comments by the way. Wether that address is correct or not the person that made the comment is in breach of YouTube policy on such matters.

[bagman]

As for the rest, I have no idea what you're trying to say. Where do I act different in real life from the way I do online? I am cogent, coherent and reasonable on line, as I think pretty much everyone else agrees the video shows me to be in real life. A little old lady got the best of me? What would you have done, nutted Sue and put Tom on his arse? About as intelligent and sensible as your recent comments here. Maybe you would have popped home to make a juvenile video about them, whatever. I see no more point in continuing to attempt to communicate with you than I did with Tom.

crack on, i do have but one question,, would you dare to say what you just typed to someone's face? WHY would i lie about not seeing a post about you going to Nottingham. YOU ARE STARTING TO SOUND LIKE THE CRAWFORS, "EVERYBODY AGREES WITH ME"

[Daft Ada]

In my opinion, Yiam delt with this situation as his character dictated.

We would all like to feel that we would act like a hero in certain situations but until we face that situation, we don't really know how we would react.

We are after all animals who have a fight or flight instinct naturally and I would not blame anyone for walking away from a confrontation if that was their first thought (for whatever reason it may be)

Being able to think on your feet in a intense situation is a difficult thing after all and some people never learn the skill and will switch to instincts.

Now back to other news ........

[YiamCross]

In my opinion, Yiam delt with this situation as his character dictated.

We would all like to feel that we would act like a hero in certain situations but until we face that situation, we don't really know how we would react.

....

How would a hero have acted? Should I have decked an old man and his fat wife? I can put my hand on my heart and say that looking back at the video I would not have chosen to add or subtract any word or action from the encounter and I would behave exactly the same again in a similar situation. If that makes me appear weak and bested by an old lady then fine. If you think being a hero is laying into someone with your feet & fists or screaming into their face then you're the kind of person who belongs with the nut jobs. I don't.

The only thing I do wish I had was a dash cam to show Crawford stop and reverse up to me in an attempt to prevent me from pulling onto the road and driving off.

[Daft Ada]

Well pardon me for attempting to back up your point of view.
Apoligies if my comment came across as being critical of your actions.

To answer your question of how I would react.
That I can't answer as
a) I did not face the situation
b) I do actually have a legally recognised disability which means that I don't react to things the way people usually do any situation anyway.

Being a hero in my book would mean standing up for myself when being bullied or threatened.
Depending on the situation, that could mean standing toe to toe with someome in a verbal or physical altercation.

You know the type.
A man wakes up to find a burgular in his house and rather than let him go and then call the police, he wrestles him to the floor