"practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

[AndyPandy]

Yes because even if everything in that newspaper article is an outright lie it does not alter the fact that Robinson's method does not work.

Sorry, I didn't mean to appear to support PLD, nor did I mean to infer it is a lie. Simply highlighting some newspapers do report inaccurate information- see the sun on page 2 almost everyday.

It was technically inaccurate in a couple of areas

1. He wasn't jailed, he was sentenced but not actually imprisoned.

2. Lawful Dissent / Article 61 isn't about not contracting for CT (as both papers reported) their idiotic argument is that they are in lawful rebellion and are therefore, required to 'Distrait the Crown', so nothing to do with contracts.

I know, arguing semantics, but these sorts of inaccuracies are what this type of mob latch onto in an attempt to debunk the whole article.

[JimUk1]

Yes because even if everything in that newspaper article is an outright lie it does not alter the fact that Robinson's method does not work.

Sorry, I didn't mean to appear to support PLD, nor did I mean to infer it is a lie. Simply highlighting some newspapers do report inaccurate information- see the sun on page 2 almost everyday.

It was technically inaccurate in a couple of areas

1. He wasn't jailed, he was sentenced but not actually imprisoned.

2. Lawful Dissent / Article 61 isn't about not contracting for CT (as both papers reported) their idiotic argument is that they are in lawful rebellion and are therefore, required to 'Distrait the Crown', so nothing to do with contracts.

I know, arguing semantics, but these sorts of inaccuracies are what this type of mob latch onto in an attempt to debunk the whole article.

Yes, I think you are a bit more dynamic at explaining than me Andy. That's sort of what I was trying to write.

[rumpelstilzchen]

The important part in all of this is not what the paper says but what the court says. That is what the idiots at Practising Legal Dysentery are forgetting.

[longdog]

Somebody else telling porkies about council tax...

Michael James Bodger

I work nights so I miss all the days goings on. My son left a message for me to ring him. He missed "ONE" £35 PAYMENT on his inhuman council tax because it was a bank holiday last week. WITHIN 3 WORKING DAYS! A laughable "Warrant" was issued, 3 automatons arrived at his house while he was at work issued threats to destrain goods and frightened the life out of his girlfriend with their show of 'power and authority'. They do not want the 35 quid, they want 1100 quid a years worth of tax IN ADVANCE. Still, people in this country sit at home too afraid not to argue with ths inhuman corporate system. It is time people but you will not know what that means unless you are ready.

There are a few things wrong with this tale of woe...

Firstly there's the fact that we are only about six weeks into the 2017 pay-your-council-tax-in-monthly-installments season means he would at best have only defaulted on two payments and that assumes he didn't pay April's instalment. To the best of my knowledge councils don't even start sending out 'reminders' until several weeks after the missed instalment and you are allowed two reminders per year before the whole sum becomes due. On that basis the timescale simply doesn't add up.

The second glaring porkie is that he says " They do not want the 35 quid, they want 1100 quid a years worth of tax IN ADVANCE.". Back of a fag packet sums gives a monthly payment on £1100 of just under £100 not £35 or if the £35 figure is correct then the years CT would be £420 not £1100.

Thirdly the 'automatons' don't suddenly appear out of the blue days after a late payment. The council have to send a demand for the full amount (usually giving 14 days to pay), then issue a summons, then get a liability order, then ask for payment again, then and only then can they even think about sending in the 'automatons'.

I call "Bullshit!"

What's the betting this is another case of getting behind with previous years' payments, offering a payment which doesn't even cover the ongoing liability and then defaulting on that?

[rumpelstilzchen]

I like this response from Matt Wray:

Why don't the council members go and get a real fucking job !!!

How ironic that is when you consider the employment status of David Robinson.

[longdog]

Michael James Bodger

It has become the monster in the darkness just waiting for you to fck up even once and your screwed. No one fights back, 97% of this country will just fall to their knees and cry 'oh well if you must, just do it quickly'

As I said above, this isn't a case of 'fck up even once'.

Anthony Indigo Tornado Perkins

Even when you do contest the unlawful council tax the do to you what they did to Ollie pinnock and lie about the story in the press.

I seem to recall it was the 'rebels' themselves who managed to get Ollie 'me mum's paying' Pillock in the press. If they hadn't bought it to the attention of the local rag I doubt they would've even noticed him.

Michael James Bodger

Yes and thats why it is time. There are a few uninhabited smallish islands that have been 'put aside for wildlife', humans not allowed. I personally think its time to start a new small community that is prepared to remove themselves from the totalitarian system and fight tooth and nail to stay independant and free but the system will try to claim you violently as they own your ass ........

Now this is something I can give my whole-hearted support to. I think it's a wonderful idea for these morons to fuck off to an uninhabited 'put aside for wildlife' island somewhere. No electricity, no gas, no mains water, no telephones, no sewerage system, no interwebs, no state benefits, no health services, no shops and no police to sort out their petty (or major) squabbles. It'd be like Lord of the Flies only more vastly more entertaining.

ETA: I'd feel very sorry for the wildlife though

[NYGman]

Michael James Bodger

Yes and thats why it is time. There are a few uninhabited smallish islands that have been 'put aside for wildlife', humans not allowed. I personally think its time to start a new small community that is prepared to remove themselves from the totalitarian system and fight tooth and nail to stay independant and free but the system will try to claim you violently as they own your ass ........

Now this is something I can give my whole-hearted support to. I think it's a wonderful idea for these morons to fuck off to an uninhabited 'put aside for wildlife' island somewhere. No electricity, no gas, no mains water, no telephones, no sewerage system, no interwebs, no state benefits, no health services, no shops and no police to sort out their petty (or major) squabbles. It'd be like Lord of the Flies only more vastly more entertaining.

ETA: I'd feel very sorry for the wildlife though

I would watch that show, should put it on TV and call it "Sovereign Island"

[rumpelstilzchen]

As soon as their mobile phone batteries were flat they would be making their way back to Blighty.

[longdog]

I would watch that show, should put it on TV and call it "Sovereign Island"

It wouldn't be a long series. They'd be missing the 'totalitarian system' as soon as the Pot Noodles they'd bought with them ran out and be back home by the end of the week.

[aesmith]

Somebody else telling porkies about council tax...

At least his son has a realistic attitude to all the lawful dissent rubbish ...

Robert White
Michael is your son in this group?

Michael James Bodger
No mate he works his ass of to pay his living costs and has not the time.

Is that as good as an admission that the group is only for freeloaders?

[JimUk1]

https://m.facebook.com/comment/replies/ ... 8&__tn__=R

Open invitation to Conor Jason Wilkinson- I've not seen you on here like you claim. But please come on here and explain why you think your thesis is correct.

[The Observer]

I would watch that show, should put it on TV and call it "Sovereign Island"

It wouldn't be a long series. They'd be missing the 'totalitarian system' as soon as the Pot Noodles they'd bought with them ran out and be back home by the end of the week.

But that would be the beauty of the series: they would not be allowed to come back just because they wanted to. They would either have to sign a document that states that they agree they were wrong about their views on the illegitimacy of the government, the Magna Carta, unlawful rebellion, not paying mortgages and council tax.

The only other event I would suggest is that once they get enough of the chaos and strife they will generate among themselves and start setting up anything that resembles government in order to survive, we send in a second wave of FOTL/sovruns that they have to deal with.

[ArthurWankspittle]

What's the betting this is another case of getting behind with previous years' payments, offering a payment which doesn't even cover the ongoing liability and then defaulting on that?

Absolutely agree. This has to be an arrears collection where he's agreed a repayment plan (possibly again), defaulted on it and the council have got fed up with him and taken action.
Also why would he have missed a payment because of a Bank Holiday? It would be claimed one working day earlier or later. Him not having the money in the bank is another matter but even then they would re-apply for the payment before taking action normally.
This is only part of the story, we are missing a lot of info.

[AndyPandy]

Wally Pillock has had his say in the local Echo, just makes himself out to be an even bigger prat - just love the comments section!!

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/1527425 ... our_rights___/

[exiledscouser]

Michael James Bodger

Yes and thats why it is time. There are a few uninhabited smallish islands that have been 'put aside for wildlife', humans not allowed. I personally think its time to start a new small community that is prepared to remove themselves from the totalitarian system and fight tooth and nail to stay independant and free but the system will try to claim you violently as they own your ass ........

Now this is something I can give my whole-hearted support to. I think it's a wonderful idea for these morons to fuck off to an uninhabited 'put aside for wildlife' island somewhere. No electricity, no gas, no mains water, no telephones, no sewerage system, no interwebs, no state benefits, no health services, no shops and no police to sort out their petty (or major) squabbles. It'd be like Lord of the Flies only more vastly more entertaining.

ETA: I'd feel very sorry for the wildlife though

I would watch that show, should put it on TV and call it "Sovereign Island"

Can I heartily recommend South Georgia a British Overseas Territory with no permanent population (right now). The currency is the pound, off you go chaps, hope you like penguin soup.

Or perhaps Gruinard Island just off the Scottish coast, completely uninhabited and probably completely free of the anthrax problem the island had 50 years ago.

But sadly the only island this lot belong on is this one.

Meanwhile, back to the Glorious CT Rebellion and more unfair reporting i.e. it ignores the bollocks.

The Echo News in Essex ran the story

Speaking exclusively to the Echo after his release, Mr Pinnock said: “I did a lot of research into the constitution and how our land is being taken over by corporations.

“In 2001, a group of peers invoked Article 61 of the Magna Carta, demanding the rights of the British people had to be defended.”

Mr Pinnock is a member of national group Lawful Rebellion - Practical Lawful Dissent. He believes that by withholding council tax, members are able to “distress the tyrannical system.”

He added: “We knew that council tax is the hardest way to do this but I wanted to take up the biggest challenge because I’m a fighter.

“I never refused to pay. I simply asked them to explain what it was spent on. They couldn’t tell me what central Government use it for so I said I would pay when they could answer that.

“I’m happy to pay for local services but not fund central government.

“I wouldn’t have paid if it wasn’t for my family but I can’t just think about myself. All I was trying to do was protect our rights and let people know we have to use them or lose them.”

A council spokesman said: “Action was taken under section 47 of the Council tax administration and enforcement regulations 1992, and supported by the decision of the magistrates court, after Mr Pinnock failed to pay his council tax debt.

“In reference to comments about our budgets and spending, we produce a Statement of Accounts annually giving a detailed explanation of the financial position of the Council.

Needless to say the fearless LR warriors cite this article as yet another example of bias reporting but I thought the piece quite balanced. Far more interesting though are the comments, here's a flavour;

Suburban Knight
Mr Pinnock said: “I did a lot of research into the constitution and how our land is being taken over by corporations."

The most guaranteed way of ensuring more of our land is taken over by corporations is by not paying your tax and making the government need to raise more money by selling off land and assets. I hope this gentleman never has to use the NHS, police, schools, roads, bin collections or pavements - all examples of things tax pays for!

Toby_Lerone
"“I never refused to pay. I simply asked them to explain what it was spent on. They couldn’t tell me what central Government use it for so I said I would pay when they could answer that."

Try reading the breakdown that comes with your Council Tax bill each year that says very clearly what its spent on.

“I’m happy to pay for local services but not fund central government."

Apparently not, considering council tax pays for services in your local area.

One too many blows to the head methinks.

and I'll leave the last comment to this chap who cuts straight to the chase;

Lee Chapel
Lost his bottle after two days in chokey.

[exiledscouser]

Wally Pillock has had his say in the local Echo, just makes himself out to be an even bigger prat - just love the comments section!!

http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/1527425 ... our_rights___/

Apologies - you beat me to it!

[NYGman]

Let's just say they do succeed, and everyone is exempt from CT, then what? How will the local Council get teh money to provide the services they do now, my guess would be a rise in National tax. You are essentially taking from Paul to pay Peter. However, if you do manage to do this, then the NAtional government has control over the money it allocates back to the local government to provide all those services CT is paying for now.

I venture to guess, this was the system prior to Council Tax. I am also willing to take an educated guess, that CT was put in place to give to local councils more power to directly collect revenue, and allocate it as they see fit, rather than having central government control. So I would think that repealing the CT, would not result in less tax, however, it may result in less services as the central government will decide where to allocate dollars back, and not all localities will get back the amount they are paying. Therefore, even if they do succeed, I doubt they will prefer the result.

Happy to be corrected, this is just my semi-literate guess, as I am not learned in A61

[Footloose52]

In the UK prior to council tax we paid the community charge (aka poll tax) and prior to that we paid rates. All of these were paid to the local council.

Council tax and rates are similar in that they are a sum charged on the size and therefore value of a property (rental value in the case of rates, market value for Council Tax) assessed at a specific date even if that property did not exist at that date(!). They are, in that case, worked out by extrapolating the values based on those of similar properties in similar areas. Council tax payers, if alone in a property, can get a 25% discount.

Poll tax was a failed attempt to get away from a link to property and to being registered on the electoral roll. It worked out cheaper on a per capita basis but was deeply unpopular as it, for many households, increased the total bill quite drastically.

[NYGman]

Ah, but before CT, poll tax, rates, what was there?

[Footloose52]

Rates go back to 1601 in terms of legislation (the Poor Relief Act 1601) and have their foundation in the charging of tithes in medieval times. So it's not exactly a modern concept.

The Tithe, or charging of 1/10th of a persons income, is mentioned in the Bible - is that far enough back in time for you?