"practical lawful dissent" fmotl advisory group

[TheNewSaint]

Which is a shame as Crabby is probably of great interest to the shrinks, probably enough for an entire conference.

I love a good Fawlty Towers reference.

[SteveUK]

Rise & shine Quatloosians. Today is Crab Bait's big day. Bankruptcy looming which he's kind of accepted, and its chapter 2. He's about to find out that if there's one certain thing in life, it's more taxes.id also suggest he starts thinking about alternative accommodation, but that seems to have escaped him.

B day tomorrow. I can’t wait to get my bankruptcy certificate, I think it means I won’t have to pay any more taxes (not that I would anyway). I look at it as a new chapter in the book of life. I’ll call the next chapter ‘Dealing with the OFFICIAL RECEIVER and the other SCUM’. Yes Darren I am under oath and using Article 61 as my weapon.

[Hercule Parrot]

13. You have the screaming eebee geebees when you realise the Receiver's fees have doubled the original debt to £60k+ and your Park Road, Sheerness property is about to be possessed and sold to pay double what you originally owed due to your own sheer idiocy.

This is the crux of it, for Krabby. Houses on Park Road seem to sell for around £200-250,000. If the Bankruptcy Receiver sells his house to pay off the creditors, the remaining surplus will not be sufficient to buy a remotely comparable home.

Robert White is not an intelligent man, but he has the low cunning of a 'Criminaloid' as Lombroso would have readily observed. I predict evasion and obstruction, eventually stubborn and violent resistance. As the local Police already know him well, and he's taken care to alienate them further with silly A61 'notices', it is unlikely that they will hesitate to keep the peace and facilitate the lawful execution of court orders....

[ArthurWankspittle]

I'm adding:

12. Your wife has a dicky fit when they seize their bank account / credit cards and they have no means of paying for anything.

13. You have the screaming eebee geebees when you realise the Receiver's fees have doubled the original debt to £60k+ and your Park Road, Sheerness property is about to be possessed and sold to pay double what you originally owed due to your own sheer idiocy.

This is a Jimmy and Tom Crawford redux. If his house is the only sizeable asset he has, the only additional complication is his wife (assuming there is a legal wife). Now, I don't know the law in this area but I don't think the following scenario is unreasonable: House sells for £180k after costs (and maybe the mortgage needs deducting too). Wife
says I'm outta here and wants half the assets. That's £90k. It's not her fault he is bankrupt. So, before divorce solicitors' fees, he's got £90k less what he owes in bankruptcy £30k, plus additional costs and fees, which will be whatever he runs up with his antics before he realises he's just losing his own money. If he tries hard he could come out with nothing.

[notorial dissent]

Not an impossible nor even unexpected exit scenario to this sordid saga.

[SteveUK]

Radio silence from Mr Bait. Maybe it wasn't the amazing win he was hoping for !!!1!!

[Burnaby49]

Radio silence from Mr Bait. Maybe it wasn't the amazing win he was hoping for !!!1!!

Think positively. They're too busy celebrating to bother updating about the historic victory. Pubs are open and the day is young.

[TheNewSaint]

I see Mr White has paused celebrating long enough to advise another one of the Article 61 idiots:

Debbie Sherwood
1 hr

In reply to my notice of Conditional Acceptance sent to Manchester City Council on 26 June. Today I received a Hand Delivered Letter marked "Do Not Ignore". Copy of this is below. This is not written by the person who i addressed my original notice to, they have completely ignored that. So i have now put this person on notice. Last year I just kept returning the bailiffs letters unopened, so this year they are trying a different tactic by threatening me with prison.

Robert White Just carry on with the process Debbie, don't take any notice of hand delivered letters.
· 2 mins

Here's the letter Debbie got, which is admirably to the point:

[longdog]

On a thread about a child's poor attendance at school....

David Robinson

Everything that is supposed to be a SERVICE to the people has or is becoming corporate. The miseducation system is also supposed to be a service and not mandatory. Who better knows your childs needs other than the parents, at least in most cases?....

There is no legal requirement for a contract to exist and in fact it would be aiding and abetting a criminal administration to contract with it. If the teachers or any other person is not standing under the invocaton of Magna Carta 1215 Article 61 then they are living outside of the law and cannot possibly be trusted to take care of your child.....If they publicy deny Article 61's invocation when it is completely evidential then they will be committing the serious crime of sedition. It then becomes a police matter if the law is strictly observed by us.



Jenny Sammut

The next time they piss me off in a meeting I'm going to recite that to them and watch them shit themselves!

For fuck's sake... Do these morons have an inflated sense of their own importance or what? I wonder who's going to be accused of sedition next? The bin-man for not collecting their bins? A postman who's 10 minutes late?

[Gregg]

Meter Maids, the evil treasonous pedophile meter maids.

[AndyPandy]

On a thread about a child's poor attendance at school....

David Robinson

Everything that is supposed to be a SERVICE to the people has or is becoming corporate. The miseducation system is also supposed to be a service and not mandatory. Who better knows your childs needs other than the parents, at least in most cases?....

There is no legal requirement for a contract to exist and in fact it would be aiding and abetting a criminal administration to contract with it. If the teachers or any other person is not standing under the invocaton of Magna Carta 1215 Article 61 then they are living outside of the law and cannot possibly be trusted to take care of your child.....If they publicy deny Article 61's invocation when it is completely evidential then they will be committing the serious crime of sedition. It then becomes a police matter if the law is strictly observed by us.



Jenny Sammut

The next time they piss me off in a meeting I'm going to recite that to them and watch them shit themselves!

Quote that in a school meeting Jenny and the next thing Social Services will be round serving you with a child protection order as you're obviously insane!

[Chaos]

On a thread about a child's poor attendance at school....

David Robinson

Everything that is supposed to be a SERVICE to the people has or is becoming corporate. The miseducation system is also supposed to be a service and not mandatory. Who better knows your childs needs other than the parents, at least in most cases?....

There is no legal requirement for a contract to exist and in fact it would be aiding and abetting a criminal administration to contract with it. If the teachers or any other person is not standing under the invocaton of Magna Carta 1215 Article 61 then they are living outside of the law and cannot possibly be trusted to take care of your child.....If they publicy deny Article 61's invocation when it is completely evidential then they will be committing the serious crime of sedition. It then becomes a police matter if the law is strictly observed by us.



Jenny Sammut

The next time they piss me off in a meeting I'm going to recite that to them and watch them shit themselves!

For fuck's sake... Do these morons have an inflated sense of their own importance or what? I wonder who's going to be accused of sedition next? The bin-man for not collecting their bins? A postman who's 10 minutes late?

is she referencing a meeting at a school? If so and she feels he's right, why would she be there in the first place?

[Siegfried Shrink]

My partner is a retired teacher. I asked her about article 61 and she said it meant nothing to her. Clearly treason, so I was just preparing to have a quasi-judicial execution when she pointed out that her pension paid for most of out household expenses, etc.
This gave me pause because it would surely be a bigger blow to the treasonous corporate paymasters to keep claiming £30,000 pa for the next 20 years or so?

I am conflicted here. My bible says do not permit a witch to live, but not even the most uncharitable would describe her as that, merely a traitor to the Barons or whoever.
Yet I am comitting misprison of felony by not reporting here to the nearest court leet, great moot or whatever.
I have no idea what I should do, things were never so complicated when I earned a simple living as a drug dealer.

[longdog]

Is she well insured? If so could you make it look like an accident?

[Siegfried Shrink]

I could not stand in Honour if I did that. Besides, I don't think there is any useful life insurance, that would be a contract and therefore something or other for reasons.

[Burnaby49]

My partner is a retired teacher. I asked her about article 61 and she said it meant nothing to her. Clearly treason, so I was just preparing to have a quasi-judicial execution when she pointed out that her pension paid for most of out household expenses, etc.
This gave me pause because it would surely be a bigger blow to the treasonous corporate paymasters to keep claiming £30,000 pa for the next 20 years or so?

I am conflicted here. My bible says do not permit a witch to live, but not even the most uncharitable would describe her as that, merely a traitor to the Barons or whoever.
Yet I am comitting misprison of felony by not reporting here to the nearest court leet, great moot or whatever.
I have no idea what I should do, things were never so complicated when I earned a simple living as a drug dealer.

The only reason I'm still alive is that my wife has concluded, because of pension issues, that, on balance, I'm worth slightly more to her alive than dead. It's a very close call however and I think she's constantly reappraising it. I'm careful not to precede her going down stairs.

[notorial dissent]

And who says with age doesn't come wisdom? But yes...

[Gregg]

I could not stand in Honour if I did that. Besides, I don't think there is any useful life insurance, that would be a contract and therefore something or other for reasons.

Pack her in a box (don't forget the air holes), and ship her to the USA.

[SteveUK]

Oh the irony

Good morning family of rebels.....

Yesterday myself, Danial Daniel Daykin and Pauline Robinson met with Jolyon Jenkins a radio producer for BBC radio 4.

After he had accepted and signed an agreement that we had drawn up we proceeded with the risky venture of being interviewed.

Now Jolyon appears to be an honourable chap, and if what he told us is truth (we recorded the entire meeting) then he should be presenting the lawful rebellion movement to a million people providing them with the facts and intent of the movement without bias.

The agreement he signed is as follows.....

04-07-2017

I, Jolyon Jenkins whilst doing business as a producer for BBC radio 4, solemnly swear to uphold the constitutional laws of the land and to act honourably and truthfully wit regard to publicly reporting on the invocation of Article 61 of the 1215 Magna Carta. I understand that to denounce the British Constitution in any way would be the crime of sedition at common law.

I hereby promise to report on the evidenced facts without bias nor intent to deceive the public in any way whatsoever.

I also agree in full to the following terms that;

1. All comments made by those being interviewed shall be presented to the public in the correct context as said comments were intended to portray;

2. The lawful rebellion movement is NOT to be portrayed as the Freeman on the land movement in any way whatsoever, nor shall the movement be aligned with any other movement i.e., The Sovereign Citizen movement in the United States of America.

3. The lawful rebellion movement shall be correctly introduced as a totally peaceful and legal movement, with its sole intent on reasserting the constitutional law within British and Commonwealth courts, so that treason at common law can be heard by the people, NOT the corporations who now own and run all British and Commonwealth courts.

4. All interviews recorded are not permitted to be distributed to ANY third party agents without the interviewee's expressed written consent.

I Jolyon Jenkins do agree to be personally liable for any default of the above agreement, without exception.

Signed.

..........the risky bit is that there are no courts of law to get remedy within if he breaches the agreement and portrays the movement in a negative way. Since we have no choice but to attempt to reach a wider audience it wasn't too difficult a choice to make....he seemed genuine in having the intent to report the facts unbiasely but they all do of course.

Channel 4 used some footage back in 2015 after I had refused to sign the release form for them using the footage....It was obviously a set up job and my intent was to record them recording me so that I had evidence against the lot of them having been informed that article 61 was in effect....sadly the Glastonbury group (at the time) didn't assist in the endeavour and it went without being recorded...I still did the interview knowing that I would not provide them with consent to use my footage but of course they did anyway, and made the lawful rebellion movement seem like a joke or crackpot idea....(within a brief clip in an episode of 'Rich man Poor man').since there was nowhere to get remedy against their criminality at the time, nor at the moment, then i'll keep it on ice until we do....

it has been explained to Jolyon that if he does the same then the movement can and will take legal action against him, which may not involve a trial by jury (until a later date) but the seizure of properties and a citizens arrest for sedition (possibly)....sedition is a very serious crime indeed.

We as a movement would have no option but to direct our action against him personally and the BBC in general, as the law demands that we must and, especially under the circumstances. Having said that he seems a likeable chap and showed no indication of having the intent of doing us any injustice. We shall see.

[JimUk1]

What are they going to take legal action against him for

If he asks for a qualified opinion from an Historian or Barrister, how is that misrepresentation of the idiots on PLD?

Sounds like Dave is shitting as their about to be made look the fools they are!