Freeman Megamerge

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

rameire

Losty Dublin wrote: »

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.

they seem to be constantly mentioning this
Land And Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009
133.— The power of the sheriff, or of other persons entitled to exercise the sheriff’s powers, to seize a tenancy under a writ of fieri facias or other process of execution is abolished except in relation to a tenancy of land that is used wholly or partly for the purpose of carrying on a business.

that Gerry of the Family Beadie eyes is as annoying as Ben of the Family Gimproy.

Pat Mustard

rameire wrote: »

they seem to be constantly mentioning this
Land And Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009
133.— The power of the sheriff, or of other persons entitled to exercise the sheriff’s powers, to seize a tenancy under a writ of fieri facias or other process of execution is abolished except in relation to a tenancy of land that is used wholly or partly for the purpose of carrying on a business.

I don't ever remember a Sheriff seizing a tenancy, in an attempt to recover money under an Execution Order. If there were no goods to seize, they tended to mark it 'nulla bona' and call it a day. Presumably this was done once upon a time though.

These boys probably think that this section will stop the Sheriff enforcing an Order for Possession, which it won't.

ooter

what about the theory that when the sheriff and co comes a calling you close all your windows and doors and don't engage with them and they'll eventually go away.
if entry is forced they are breaching your constitutional rights?
this is one that vin throws out a lot on msi radio..

benway

ooter wrote: »

if entry is forced they are breaching your constitutional rights?

Article 40.5 of the Constitution: “The dwelling of every citizen is inviolable and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law”.

The stinger is in that last bit that I've highlighted.

And no, the official Irish version doesn't help, either.

"Is slán do gach saoránach a ionad cónaithe, agus ní cead dul isteach ann go foréigneach ach de réir dlí."

In practice, sheriffs will be reluctant to get into a confrontation, as seen in Ben™'s famous video, but they can just come back another day, as they did in that case.

Afraid Article 40.5 doesn't represent any kind of mortgage defaulter's charter, much as Vin and Ben™ like to pretend otherwise.

Robbo

That repossession in Kildare at which Gerry was "showing his support" is an odd one. For a man with a background in banking and the house supposedly worth more than the mortgage with payments of some sort being made, it seems odd that he's found himself in this situation. Odder considering that as a bank employee at the time, he most likely would have been able to avail of more favourable terms than a regular punter.

A little further digging and it seems that ACC may have had separate proceedings against him and BOI registered a Judgment Mortgage in proceedings against him. He also appears to have been involved in a kids soccer training camp that didn't end too well and ended up leaving the kids and coaches out of pocket in 2012. It's not to kick a man when he's down or hammer him for a failed business but if the journos would do *any* sort of digging...

ooter

Why do they inform people that they're coming,if they can forcibly enter the home to repossess, why don't they just do that to avoid any confrontation?

Robbo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XrPgg1ZHgU

Life's dealt you a fairly **** hand when you're a Freeman David Brent lookalike from Waterford with the usual plastic triskel cod Celtic mysticism.

benway

To be fair, at least there's a bit of craic to be had out of the "I do not consent" alternative universe crowd. On the other hand, the kinds of failures in basic reading comprehension in the likes of Jeremiah's s.133 argument or DDI's brave stance against fluoride and the arrogance with which these arguments are delivered just give me a headache, tbh.

It's funny, because if you were to look at Jerry's record before the High Court in recent years, you'd almost think he didn't have a clue and was just latching on to any and every legal sounding argument that he can get a hold of to suit himself.

Still, Beades and the Land League have clearly still got friends at the Indo, they practically smeared vaseline on the lens for that interview he did with Irelands Premier Celebrity Columnist Barry Egan a few weeks back.

Clearly misleading to heavily imply that the bank are acting unreasonably by saying that the mortgage "isn't in negative equity" - which may be true - but neglecting to mention the judgment mortgage and the other couple of High Court execution orders issued against him.

ooter wrote: »

Why do they inform people that they're coming,if they can forcibly enter the home to repossess, why don't they just do that to avoid any confrontation?

Do you think it would be better for people to head out to the shops with the kids and come back to find the locks changed? Only fair to give them the opportunity to gather their stuff and make alternative arrangements, don't you think?

Although, as in the case of Lee "there's nothing in the constitution to stop the sheriff so long as the proper legal procedures have been followed" Wellstead (above), if someone tries to obstruct a sheriff in executing an order for possession and won't take the opportunity they've been given, they can and do come back when the property is vacant and change the locks.

ooter

benway wrote: »

Do you think it would be better for people to head out to the shops with the kids and come back to find the locks changed? Only fair to give them the opportunity to gather their stuff and make alternative arrangements, don't you think?

Yes of course that would be preferable.
In that instance do people have an opportunity to get their stuff back from the locked house?
I genuinely don't know the answers to these questions,just curious.
I was just wondering if the bailiff/sheriff has to go through certain procedures before repossessing the home?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.