Freeman Megamerge

the world wonders

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Des at the CLS has sent out another missive. This one asks:

This is great, if the freeman start getting into the whole tax protestor area then that opens up a whole new vein of hilarious lunacy.

MilanPan!c

the world wonders wrote: »

This is great, if the freeman start getting into the whole tax protestor area then that opens up a whole new vein of hilarious lunacy.

If you dig back through this thread you'll find a lot of info in the Common Law Society. It's all pretty entertaining.

johnnyskeleton

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Des at the CLS has sent out another missive. This one asks:

Id love to see this play out in court:

"My lord, if you simply ignore the word "employment" from the section, then it is clear that you don't have to pay tax on employment".

Elegant in its simplicity.

whippet

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Des at the CLS has sent out another missive. This one asks:

That man that he refers to won't get to continue his discussion as he has blocked me from his Facebook page and deleted all my posts ... Conveniently just as I had posted a firm explanation as to why his notions were rubbish !!! Maybe someone could post on the page asking why my posts were deleted and why I can't post on his page anymore!!!

Tom Young

Wingnuttery was used further up this thread. It is rampant.

Borrow money / pay it back;

Fail, omit, neglect, refuse to pay / face the consequences;

Earn money / pay tax.

Mob rule and legal mythology being spun by the terra firma sultans of spin ... is not a good idea.

If it seems to good to be true, it usually is.

ezra_pound

Ben tm claims that judge McGovern's ring in the Indo photo is a free mason ring. Looks like the same standard gold wedding band that I have and that my father had before me.

If Ben tm is right then I am of the illuminati. Now I know how my dad got a life membership of the RDS.

MilanPan!c

whippet wrote: »

That man that he refers to won't get to continue his discussion as he has blocked me from his Facebook page and deleted all my posts ... Conveniently just as I had posted a firm explanation as to why his notions were rubbish !!! Maybe someone could post on the page asking why my posts were deleted and why I can't post on his page anymore!!!

Nice!

I'm blocked from multiple Facebook groups related to this nonsense for the same reason. It's good to stick your nose in and speak some truth.

Grolschevik

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Nice!

I'm blocked from multiple Facebook groups related to this nonsense for the same reason. It's good to stick your nose in and speak some truth.

Jesus, I don't know how you can stick it. I can barely go into After Hours without my blood pressure skyrocketing...

whippet

Grolschevik wrote: »

Jesus, I don't know how you can stick it. I can barely go into After Hours without my blood pressure skyrocketing...

to be fair .. sometimes sitting in airports you'd be bored to tears and you can waste a good half hour or so.

The problem with this is that social media extends the range of these nutters .... especially as there is a massive cohort of people who believe anything they read on the inter web!!!

MilanPan!c

Grolschevik wrote: »

Jesus, I don't know how you can stick it. I can barely go into After Hours without my blood pressure skyrocketing...

Scamming people really annoys me. It's a kind of inspiration I guess.

Losty Dublin

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Des at the CLS has sent out another missive. This one asks:

Is it too obvious to ask them but one very small thing; if legally avoiding income tax is as simple as this then why have countless thousands of accountants, lawyers, taxation experts, barristers, politicians and laymen not noticed this in over the 90 years that tax law and policy have existed in our noble State?

I know that it will spoil the party and all of that but lads, please

johnnyskeleton

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Is it too obvious to ask them but one very small thing; if legally avoiding income tax is as simple as this then why have countless thousands of accountants, lawyers, taxation experts, barristers, politicians and laymen not noticed this in over the 90 years that tax law and policy have existed in our noble State?

I know that it will spoil the party and all of that but lads, please

They're all in on the scam, dontchaknow!

Losty Dublin

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

They're all in on the scam, dontchaknow!

Is that not a conspiracy?

johnnyskeleton

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Is that not a conspiracy?

No because Conspiracy really means "Con's-piracy", so unless you are a seafaring scallywag named Connor or maybe Conleth, then you cannot commit conspiracy.

Anyone with an ounce of freeman traning can see right through that crazy trap set up by the british accordian registry.

MilanPan!c

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No because Conspiracy really means "Con's-piracy", so unless you are a seafaring scallywag named Connor or maybe Conleth, then you cannot commit conspiracy.

Anyone with an ounce of freeman traning can see right through that crazy trap set up by the british accordian registry.

Con of the family O'Spiracy

Losty Dublin

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No because Conspiracy really means "Con's-piracy", so unless you are a seafaring scallywag named Connor or maybe Conleth, then you cannot commit conspiracy..

Con's-Piracy? The Law is an arrrrrrrrr-se :pac:

Calina

whippet wrote: »

. especially as there is a massive cohort of people who believe anything they read on the inter web!!!

I beg to disagree.

If it was a simple as all that, simply pointing people to relevant pages of revenue.ie would deal with the tax thing.

No, the issue is the deep desire to believe in a conspiracy or secret knowledge in the first place, that someone on the internet has, despite, for example, not going through 4 years of training in tax law.

Put simply, I think it's more that people don't want to accept certain work required to acquire certain knowledge so try to pretend there's a heuristic they can use.

In this case, there almost certainly isn't.

MilanPan!c

Calina wrote: »

I beg to disagree.

If it was a simple as all that, simply pointing people to relevant pages of revenue.ie would deal with the tax thing.

No, the issue is the deep desire to believe in a conspiracy or secret knowledge in the first place, that someone on the internet has, despite, for example, not going through 4 years of training in tax law.

Put simply, I think it's more that people don't want to accept certain work required to acquire certain knowledge so try to pretend there's a heuristic they can use.

In this case, there almost certainly isn't.

It's probably somewhere in between and certainly there's no one reason for every conspiracy theorists behaviour.

What's most frequently true, I'd suggest, is a general and increasing distrust of "government".

Many of the core concepts of society are under threat from various groups and worse still government is paradoxically too small and too big to deal with many of our modern problems. This leads to people looking for other solutions.

And of course corruption, which is not a new problem, is seen as endemic and amplified by social media.

And social media does have another effect; it treats all theories and ideas as equally valid. This has led to the rise of things like "Snopes," etc., but that in turn has led to conspiracies ABOUT the debunkers.

At this point, people know they can lie, and the lie - especially if it's popular - will be spread and believed and defended, all for free, by social media.

Just ask that secret Kenyan Muslim Obama.

Grolschevik

Calina wrote: »

No, the issue is the deep desire to believe in a conspiracy or secret knowledge in the first place, that someone on the internet has, despite, for example, not going through 4 years of training in tax law.

True, but the net has exacerbated (or at least accelerated) this.

MilanPan!c

Grolschevik wrote: »

True, but the net has exacerbated (or at least accelerated) this.

Back in the pre-internet day the mainstream media was reserved for mainstream ideas. JFK conspiracies and NWO conspiracies were most typically found on mimeographed flyers handed out on street corners - appropriately.

Now the most insane conspiracies are floated on professional looking websites and frequently spread as fact on the largest social media sites on the planet.

Suddenly these insane ideas are in front of millions of eyes instead of thousands or in many cares, a few hundred.

Who knows really if people have dramatically changed or if the prevalence of these ideas has simply made them more popular.

dloob

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Des at the CLS has sent out another missive. This one asks:

Poor Des seems to have problems with the word 'or'
I wonder if you offered him a tea or a coffee would he expect to get both?

ezra_pound

Apparently about 30 protesters holding up traffic along the quays.

Could it be our friends again I wonder?

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057162719/1/#post89333166

johnnyskeleton

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Con's-Piracy? The Law is an arrrrrrrrr-se :pac:

You should a-polly-gise for that one

Losty Dublin

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You should a-polly-gise for that one

Jolly Roger that

Robbo

I was on my travels today and passed the "office" of Lay Litigation Ireland. "The Hub" is daubed onto the windowboards and there's a sign giving their contact details to gain entry, a landline and a mobile number.

I have pics if anyone's interested.

Losty Dublin

Robbo wrote: »

I was on my travels today and passed the "office" of Lay Litigation Ireland. "The Hub" is daubed onto the windowboards and there's a sign giving their contact details to gain entry, a landline and a mobile number.

I have pics if anyone's interested.

Ah go on

MilanPan!c

DDI seems to be collapsing.

First Interstellar Van took over for Ben ™,JR has resigned, and now their website is offline.

LOL.

MilanPan!c

Des is at it again

We have written extensively on this subject matter in the past. We feel it is time now to broaden the scope of the discussion some more, and get a few more People engaged in it. Therefore we would appreciate it, if you the reader would/could share this article with as many People as possible. We have a quick question set out on the facebook page “The Common Law Society”, wherein you can decide to answer a simple (yet complex) question, and/or engage in the discussion set out below the posting.

The question posed is:

If there was a "Referendum", to make Income Tax Mandatory ... Would you vote Yes or No?

The question posed takes the position that “Income Tax” is not Mandatory. In other words, if you chose NOT to pay Income Tax you can. You can opt out of paying Income Tax in the morning if you so choose.

It is a fact that Josephine Feehily the “Revenue Commissioner” admits this fact herself, in her speech at “33rd. Annual MacGill Summer School” a session entitled “Envisioning a Republic of Justice, Equality and Fairness”. http://www.revenue.ie/en/press/speeches/macgill-paper-2013.html

Josephine Feehily states: “In a representative democracy such as Ireland, the State rules by consent and, by extension, taxes by consent and so to the concept of no taxation without representation with which everyone is familiar”.

In other words, and by the words of Josephine Feehily … People pay Income Tax because of a thing called “Voluntary Compliance”. Because you VOLUNTEER to Comply to pay Income Tax … You Consent. Obviously if more People decided to opt out of Volunteering to pay income Tax, then the State and Revenue would not be happy. How would they generate the vast sums of revenue that they generate, if every Paddy, Mick and Mary were to decide in the morning, that they could no longer afford to pay the State and Revenue the ever increasing proportion of your labour, as in wages, salaries, earnings, tips etc?

The State and the Government of the day would be in a bit of a tizzy. They would probably have to go and ask the People (aka via a referendum), if it was ok to make Income Tax on their labours Mandatory. Even then they would probably come unstuck, because they could not seek to enforce a Mandatory Income Tax on those that did not vote, and/or those that did not vote in favour of it becoming Mandatory.

In examining this question we also need to consider the meanings of certain terms and words. What is Labour … and how is it defined?

At law Labour is defined as one of Mans most precious property, therefore the (fair) exchange of ones labour for wages, salary, commission or tips etc. (which are also property), is considered in law to be the exchange of properties of EQUAL value. So if you are exchanging property of equal value, no profits can be or are derived from this activity. As they say a fair exchange is no robbery. So in essence if you exchange your time, energy or effort in return for wages, salary, commissions, tips etc. then you are not liable for the thing they call “Income Tax”. This makes logical sense of course, unless you are speaking to someone who has paid “Income Tax” all their lives without checking out its validity, and/or to someone who works for/with the Revenue Commissioners.

The next thing is; who/m or what is Income Tax applicable to, if it does not apply to People who/m equitably exchange their time, energy or effort in return for wages, salary, commissions, tips etc.? In the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, Part 2 – The Charge to Tax, Chapter 1 – Income Tax: The charge to income tax Section 12.— Income tax shall, subject to the Income Tax Acts, be charged in respect of all property, profits or gains respectively described or comprised in the Schedules contained in the sections enumerated below.

NOWHERE in the sections enumerated in the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, does it mention that Peoples Income from the fair, equal or equitable exchange of their labour, time, energy or effort for wages, salary, commissions, tips etc. is treated as Income for the purpose of TAXATION. It does clearly state in unambiguous terms and language that “Tax under this Schedule shall be charged in respect of ALL PROFITS/GAINS arising from PUBLIC Revenue dividends payable in the State in any year of assessment”.

So what we are talking about here is PROFITS/GAINS, which are over, above and beyond anything that you fairly exchange your labour, time, energy or efforts for.

The main aspects of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997, is concerned mainly with Public Bodies, Businesses and Corporations and NOT Private individuals and People. We would challenge you to do your own independent research on this, and come back with your own findings to us, on and about anything that would or could contradict what we have stated.
Go to: http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/act/pub/0039/index.html

The other wording that you will find very common in this said act, is the word or term “EMOLUMENT”. It is used extensively as an ancillary or replacement word or term for Income. EMOLUMENT: “Any advantage, profit or gain received as a result of one’s employment or one’s holding of office”. This word is NOT defined by Revenue in their respective Act(s), and if it is, it is buried and kept well hidden.

At first glance this does not like a significant find. Until you think critically about it.

If you agree to do a job for me …
Let’s say you agree to change the tyre on my car. The agreement might be that all the tools and materials you require for the job would be provided by me. For your end of the agreement you are providing the time, energy and skills etc. In other words, you are doing the graft. We agree that as a fair exchange (price) for your graft you will get Twenty Euro (€20). As they say “a fair exchange is no robbery”. You are getting Twenty Euro (€20) as a fair exchange for your time, energy, effort and skills etc.

The question is therefore:
Where is the advantage, profit or gain in this exchange for you? Clearly there is none … If you EXCHANGE like for like, where is the Advantage, Profit or Gain in that? Clearly there is none, as you have received something as a fair exchange for your time, energy, effort or skill etc. i.e. the twenty (€20) euro.

What Advantage, Profit or Gain?
If you are fairly EXCHANGING eight (8) hours of your time per day, five (5) days a week, for forty (40) weeks in the year, what Advantage, Profit or Gain do you make, get or receive? That is correct … you get no Advantage, Profit or Gain.

Would You Pay Income Tax?
Therefore, what right has anyone to tax you, on something that you do not get, over and above the FAIR EXCHANGE of your time, energy, effort or skill? The fact is that no one has the right to tax you; because you are NOT receiving an Advantage, Profit or Gain. Although we should remember, we are living in a world where Income Tax (Emoluments) depended upon your Voluntary Compliance … in other words; you are Volunteering to comply with paying Emoluments/Income Tax. Revenue and the State depend upon you NOT knowing and or NOT understanding the meaning of these terms and words that they use interchangeably.

The old question then arises:
If you had a choice, would you pay Income Tax/Emoluments?

The Choice is Yours.
Information, knowledge and critical thinking can give you those choices, we think. Check this out for yourself, and we will leave it to you to decide for yourself to pay or not pay Income Tax/Emoluments, or to voluntarily comply or not.

FINALLY: We are reading every day of the discontent that is out there with the way the State and their current Government are hammering the weak, the vulnerable, the needy and the sick. They are creating a “New Poor” through incumbent taxes derived through direct and indirect (old and new) sources.

The so called middle-classes are fast becoming the new-poor. In the same measure we see and hear People marching, protecting and complaining and giving out. New Campaigns, Organisations, Protest Groups and Movements are beginning to sprout from everywhere, and might we add, seemingly getting nowhere.

That fella Ghandi (whatever you might think of him), threw out the Great British Empire with focusing that Microcosm called Salt. With a grain of Salt he took down an empire. He realised that without Salt (in India) life was unsustainable. Equally, the British Empire at that time relied very heavily on the Tax Revenue derived from the harvesting, buying, selling and trading of Salt. When he asked the People of India to harvest and exchange the Salt for and amongst themselves, without paying the Income Tax/Revenue to the British Empire, this sent a wave of fear through the Empire. This act alone was the beginning of the end for the Empire. It hit the Empire where it hurted the most … in the pocket. When the Income Tax/Revenue dried up, so too did the appetite of the British Empire to stay in India.

It is this writers view, that if we all critically considered Opting out of “Voluntary Compliance” and the Paying of “Income Tax”, this act alone would shake the very foundation of the State and their Puppet Government. Just give it some critical though, and some serious consideration. In the coming weeks we will be opening up this topic for further discussion.

Here is a call to Revenue to whet your appetite:
http://youtu.be/tnscXlxPhSA

All the best for now,
Des: of The Common Law Society

Robbo

Something I read on the weekend about what to do with professional McKenzie friends in the UK. It seems the Law Society over there have identified that there are fee charging enterprises who are offering their services, unregulated and uninsured. Sound familiar?

Marve

This little gem is doing the rounds, a CLS promoter on a junk account enlightens us.




The comments are informing people because of this wonderful find, the Gardai can no longer seize your vehicle if you refuse to tax it.

If you get brought to court for no tax on said vehicle, they can all go as the shepherd said to the sheep when the dog died, go flock yourselves. :rolleyes:

MilanPan!c

Marve wrote: »

This little gem is doing the rounds, a CLS promoter on a junk account enlightens us.




The comments are informing people because of this wonderful find, the Gardai can no longer seize your vehicle if you refuse to tax it.

If you get brought to court for no tax on said vehicle, they can all go as the shepherd said to the sheep when the dog died, go flock yourselves. :rolleyes:

www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/downloads/Bill_of_Rights_Act_1689.pdf

This was tried - and of course it failed - back in 2005.

Robbo

Word reaches me from the central office that lis pendens are being created at a rate by hordes of lay litigants. I'd imagine this is related to the promises that Gerry Beades coaxed out of Alllsops so that he'd leave the building.

benway

Robbo wrote: »

Something I read on the weekend about what to do with professional McKenzie friends in the UK. It seems the Law Society over there have identified that there are fee charging enterprises who are offering their services, unregulated and uninsured. Sound familiar?

In my view, the best way to deal with this would be to fix a McKenzie friend or lay advisor personally with costs if they advise someone to make entirely frivolous, vexatious or OPCA submission. Precedent for joining a non-party to proceedings for costs purposes in circumstances where the court was displeased with their role in the litigation in Clarke J's judgment re one of the many Mooreview applications.

Of course, there's always the possibility that one of the "clients" will eventually have a moment of clarity and report their legal advisors to the Gardaí for fraud, but other than that I'm not sure that a court will get any joy trying to get the "client" to admit that they've been charged money for the lay party's services.

Robbo wrote: »

Word reaches me from the central office that lis pendens are being created at a rate by hordes of lay litigants. I'd imagine this is related to the promises that Gerry Beades coaxed out of Alllsops so that he'd leave the building.

Say Jerry et al. are soon to become very familiar with the terms res judicata, issue estoppel, abuse of process and Isaac Wunder.

Tom Young

There is a fear of a perceived denial of access to justice with such approaches. Despite my utter agreement with you Benway.

benway

Personally I'm of the view that there's more of a denial of access to justice inherent people going in to court with their heads filled with pseudolaw by charlatans and the road to attachment and committal opening before them than in holding these guys accountable in costs for leading people astray.

I suppose there is an argument that if the conduct of the hearing has been such as to warrant a personal costs order against the McKenzie friend, then surely any order must be tainted and the matter should be re-heard sans woo, but that's another question.

The McKenzie friend system has its merits when it's not being abused, and I don't think the courts should take an active role in screening or regulating who can act. People should be free to choose whoever they like to assist them, but this situation where guys can waltz around the courts setting up people in desperate situations for more pain really can't go on.

MilanPan!c

This just in from Des.... The thing to note is the people involved:

STAND UP FOR HUMANITY!

Hi Folks ...

Our friend “King” Aidan Killan has offered us two complimentary tickets to offer to our contacts, for his “Stand Up for Humanity!” comedy show at Whelans, Dublin on Monday 24th. March.
To be in with a chance to win a ticket, answer a very simply question and email your answer by the Wednesday before the event to: aidankillian@hotmail.com

The Question: Where is the “Stand Up for Humanity!” event being held?

Aidan will pick two winners from the correct answers, and inform ye via email etc.

Stand Up for Humanity!

Activists do Stand Up Comedy for Charity

8 pm Monday 24th March, Whelans, Dublin
5 euros in advance, 7 euros on the door

“If you want to tell people the truth, make
them laugh, otherwise they’ll kill you.” – Oscar Wilde.

With Stand Up for Humanity, activists from around the country create insurgency humour for a live Whelans audience. Donning stand-up hats for the first time, these activists will make the audience laugh over real issues, such as corporate capitalism, gay rights, police brutality, pro choice politics, water fluoridation, professional protesting, sovereignty, disability, and more.

The activists may be comedy first-timers, but they're not being thrown completely unprepared into the ring. They'll have spent the previous weekend being trained for stand-up by revolutionary comedian, Aidan Killian, and spoken-word genius, Dave Rock.

Join these brave warriors of laughter as they put their egos on the line to speak their truths through humour. Prepare yourself for passion, fun and laughter with soul, from people who give a s**t. As Aidan says; "It will be beautiful to see hundreds of people who care all laughing together"

Event host is Aidan Killian. All proceeds go to The Caoimh Connolly Trust – providing therapy and care for an intensely autistic ten-year-old boy from Dublin. Watch a 3-minute film about Caoimh and why he needs help here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zg2s31zmxIo

The participants are:

Adrienne Murphy: Hot Press journalist and autism activist
Thomas Sheridan: artist and author of Puzzling People: The Labyrinth of the Psychopath
Aisling C FitzGibbon: aka The Girl Against Fluoride
Kevin Flanagan / Tír Na Saor: Land of the Free: law + freedom
Tony Rochford: hunger strike
Cathie Doherty: pro-choice activist
Gerry Bourke: Corrib local farmer
Uisce: police brutality

Facebook Link: https://www.facebook.com/events/819213701437660/

ezra_pound

MilanPan!c wrote: »

This just in from Des.... The thing to note is the people involved:

It says it's for charity.

I wonder what charities.

Edit : Oops sorry. It does say the caoim connolly trust.

Losty Dublin

ezra_pound wrote: »

It says it's for charity.

I wonder what charities.

Edit : Oops sorry. It does say the caoim connolly trust.

I'm actually going to this gig as one of my friends is performing at it.

No tin hat will be worn by myself on the night

MilanPan!c

Wonder how long it will take before the claim that vaccines cause autism is brought up.

10 mins?

Less?

MilanPan!c

Ben Gilroy has a "TV show"??

Via the DDI Split thread.

MilanPan!c

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Ben Gilroy has a "TV show"??

Via the DDI Split thread.

The last few minutes are worth noting. Ben™ claims, "there's many people that come on here and try and 'shamozle' me".

Which is interesting.

Especially considering it's the first episode, and he's had thee guests, two from his current political party, which he used to "lead" and a third, an independent candidate who he is saying this to.

Poor Ben™.

donvito99

Ha, looks like a between two ferns type programme...

Statutes Apply!

Highly entertaining independent journalism claiming from the outset that while Ben may on occasion play Devil's Advocate, the BG Show doesn't have any agenda to follow. This is followed by the DDI agenda/interview.

Sponsored by ATA Security and also Lispopple Studios, both owned by a Paul Flanagan.

Just wondering if anyone knows much about this man or what his interest in this venture might be?

ooter

He said on the radio the other night that the owner offered him the use of the studios after a chance meeting while on holiday,he recognised BG from his YouTube videos.

benway

Seems legit. The big man weighed in on the comments:

Ben&#8482 wrote:

The idea of this channel is to give a voice to the unheard, and cover topics rarely discussed on RTE such as, Fluoride, banking, the legal system and courts, repossessions, the freemen, the freemasons, fracking, oil and gas, turf cutting, shell to sea, and anything that the people want to discuss. Please don’t go too hard on me for the pilot show and claim it’s a DDI propaganda machine I promise it isn’t and wont be, but as it’s a pilot show and nobody has heard about it yet its difficult to get guests for the first show.

Waiting with bated breath for the parade of skeptics and rationalists that are going to turn up between the ferns to discuss these wonderful ideas.

But, worse, the latest piece of pseudolegal woo woo from the DDI site:

This is clever legal speak that tricks the water authorities into choosing to add fluoride themselves. Thus getting the government off the hook. There is no way that a government could actually mandate the adding of medication to a water supply against the will of the people. It is against the Nuremberg Code and the Charter of Human rights to be force-medicated. By clever language they didn’t ever mandate it. It just looked like they did to everyone else who doesn’t understand legalese.

Hence, would I be right in saying there appears to be nothing preventing Cork County Council and any other authority ordering the end of fluoridation forthwith? If so we would urge them to act on the will of the people they represent and take the first steps towards people taking back control of their lives and of their government.

Let’s hope Cork will be the first to do the will of the people and stand up against this kind of legal corruption. When they do and others follow we will want to know by whom at government level this was perpetrated upon us, why it was done, and they must be held accountable for the deliberate continuation of this poisoning in the face of all the evidence and appeals to the contrary.

It's funny how statutory and constitutional interpretation à la Ben™ unerringly finds that the law supports his subsisting position.

Losty Dublin

A few links I found on the FB page of Lay Litigation Ireland.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/archives/2014/0318/ireland/judges-aposnot-up-to-speed-on-home-lawsapos-262362.html

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/leeson-60-of-loans-lack-security-262377.html

:rolleyes:

Robbo

It's been a while since we've heard from our good buddies in Ireland's main chakra, Ballyphehane. They haven't been standing still however, they've discovered that there's a connection between Irish and the Maori languages, which leads us to Pacific Island based freemen who appear to have stolen the hair of former WWF wrestler Bret "The Hitman" Hart. Possibly through some king of Pirate King related activity.

Oh, and they're still at war with UCC, which they now call "You Sissy". I would pay good money to see a passing off action take place between the real Banksy and Gearoid, the scourge of District Court counter staff.

Losty Dublin

I see tonight on FB that some of the usual suspect pages need a mob to help prevent an eviction in Naas tomorrow.

Separate yet connected to the eviction is this link. You can expect some of this lads lines to be roared out with gusto tomorrow.

blueythebear

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/high-court-judge-orders-arrest-of-former-wexford-hurler-paul-codd-30120767.html

Seems that Mr Paul Codd's luck has run out (or certainly the patience of the High Court has run out).

Unfortunately, it appears that none of this would have been necessary had he just cooperated even a little with the liquidator.

The sad part is that a stint in jail is unlikely to have much of an effect, considering he's already been there over this...

MilanPan!c

Des is totally not paranoid. Totally. He swears like. So. This is a completely reasonable thing to email to people:

DO YOU THINK; YOU CAN YOU ANSWER THIS QUESTION?:
What defensive weapon is it, the State do not wish or want to you have knowledge of or access to, or the ability to use or wield?

ANSWER:
The State do not want or wish me to have the ability to _ _ _ for myself.

We would like to think, that you would think deeply about this question, and when you think you know the answer (and there is only one), send us on a quick email, confirming that you think you have the answer, and what you think it is.

As the saying goes; “ignorance is the weapon of mass destruction”. An ability to think for ones-self is an ability that not everyone possesses. Ignorance is what the State rely upon to keep People in toe. If you are in-toe with the State, you may perhaps perceive that you are, what they say you are … which is a, Citizen of the State.

If you are a “Citizen of the State”, then you may be interested in who/m is in politics, who/m the party of the day are, or might be. Who/m might be able to take the place of the current government; that might get us our rights, and/or truly represent our interests as Citizens of the State. You may as a “Citizen of the State” be interested in voting in, or voting out the local, regional and/or national representatives. In voting for change and/or voting for reform etc. In a nutshell, by being a “Citizen of the State”, you are handing over the responsibility and/or authority that you already wield and/or possess as a People, (albeit the word People is both singular and plural), to the politicians.

To be clear and unambiguous, ALL Politicians that are Council members, TD’s, MEP’s etc., are controlled in no uncertain terms, and are subsumed by the State. Some of them will jump up and down once in a while and some will give out and call for others to resign etc., stating things like “he/you must go”, “your position is untenable” or “you’re a disgrace to the office/position etc.”. In the mean-time, while those that presume to represent you, complain, moan, blame and berate each-other, you as a “Citizen of the State” will still get rode and financially raped.

Every once in a while a “Yes Man” or “Yes Woman” will appear. They will say ALL the right things, and make all the right promises. They will outwardly be seen to take all the right steps. They will appear at the right time, at the right rallies, the right protests. They will say the right thing, and perceivably do the right thing, and many will listen to them and applaud their words and sometimes their actions. Eventually most, if not all these “Yes People”, will announce, that in order to affect and/or make change, you can only do it from the inside, and from a “Political Platform”, and so they run for local/area/national elections etc.

In recent months and years we have seen a plethora of “Yes People” appear for brief periods of time, only to be subsumed by Politics and the State.

What constructive or progressive change has this affected? --- NONE!
What impact had it upon their alleged supporters? --- It has pacified most!
What has it done to the People who were rallying in solidarity?
--- It has divided and splintered them!

The State need the “Yes Men” and the “Yes Women”, that will go out and rally People under one campaign, one cause or one umbrella. The State need the “Yes Men” and the “Yes Women” that perceive of themselves as being leaders of the People, leaders of the Cause, heads of the Campaign, holders of the Umbrella. In that way the People do not have to THINK for, or act for and on behalf of themselves. They will become pacified as they look to and under leadership. They will be become divided and splintered under differing and different causes. Then the State can, will and do subsume these “Yes Men” and “Yes Women” … “the leaders” into Politics and the State, where they can be controlled and whipped into shape.

While there are still these “Yes Wo/Men” and you follow them, you will not have to think for yourself and/or act for yourself, as they will be doing the thinking and acting for you. In the end, you will not have clarity of thought, and you will not have solidarity amongst People. You will end up with what we currently have, passive, splintered and divided sets of “Citizens of the State”, that look to the “Yes Wo/Men” for the answers and the leadership, that are subsumed by the State, and will never-ever seek or look to divest themselves of the State. Same-old, same-old.

This article might seem a little on the pejorative side, bet perhaps it might start some People to think?

All the best for now;

Des: of The Common Law Society