PANNONE's PLAYER
"Predatory Guardian"

He has took control of 300 clients money and spends it, mainly upon himself.

A claim made under common law, a claim made under GOD, a claim that GOD is my witness to the truth!! A claim made without any rebuttal! Read the debt & read LIENS RECOGNISED BY PANNONES & where it is clear that PANNONE s partner Richard Drinkwater, whom is one of our endebted partners within our own Commercial Lien above, against themselves at PANNONE s and his recognition of holders of liens where creditors such as us, "are authentic", where PANNONE s have openly claimed no recognition of "our commercial lien" against them or the Commercial Affidavit Process claiming its of no value. Can one clearly see the contradictions that are riddled in the company Pannone s, that is so called award winning, are the awards for contradiction. see the picture! Isn't it funny the minute a commercial lien is served upon them that they do not recognise it, so why did they fraudulently use harassement laws to try to curtail it! Probably spending, according to them in excess of £50,000. Was this action in effect recognition, of a perfected commercial lien? Seeing as this is turning out to be a trial by internet we will let you the public be the judge of this!

Appointed by judge DENZIL LUSH, against the direct wishes of the patient, Hugh Jones of PANNONE & Co solicitors Manchester took his position in charge of mums damages awarded to pay for care in 2001 the sum of £775,000, as her deputy/receiver. It has to be said and noted that his first years charges, expected to be £2500 as laid down by judge Denzil LUSH, actually came out at £26,371.77p! Take note that in his first year of office whilst he gave me and my mother £200 per week to live off he deducted from the damages £507 per week charges just to say NO! every time his phone rang. The problems, having been astronomic to the point of writing a book, started from day 1 with the words from Mr Hugh Jones's "broad brush approach" that suddenly turned very narrow! Since that first year of 2001 he has refused to supply any details of the subsequent 9 years of charges that remain a secret to this day ON 311011. If it was your relative would you consider this theft!

Judge Denzil Lush

Whom in our opinion, has no idea of the family decimation that he is causing or if he does he is certainly turning a blind eye to the reality of the lies, ignorance, discrimination, corruption, theft, absolute breaches in human rights and the complete lack of equality that is the cornerstone of THE COURT OF PROTECTION / NEGLECTION / CORRUPTION!

We are members of the
British Constitution Group of

Back to top

Blackpool MP - Gordon Marsden

Our Labour MP representative for Blackpool South area, Mr Gordon Marsden. upon writing my concerns to him in November 09 it took him 3 months to send an unsatisfactory reply. I then wrote to the party office. On the 29th November 2010 I wrote to Gordon Marsden but to date no reply! Today 14.01.2011 I wrote to his party office complaining and sent a copy of the email back to Gordon of the 29th Nov 2010.

OPG- Chief - Alan Eccles

link1 & link2 To Martin John Ex: Chief Executive of the OPG. Five statutory principles that underpin the MCA 2005: • it should be assumed that everyone over 16 has the capacity to make their own decision, unless it can be shown they lack capacity • a patient should not be regarded as unable to make a decision until all practicable steps to help them make it have been taken, without success • a person should not viewed as someone lacking the capacity to make a decision, simply because the decision is unwise • practitioners must ensure that any act done or decision made on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be in their best interests • any decision made must also be the least restrictive of their basic rights and freedoms.

SO AM I A NUTTER & WHAT IS A SOVEREIGN?
So, what is lawful rebellion? (or being a freemen on the land)
I’ll try to give a little basic background to it.
(Please note it’s not comprehensive it’s just a rough guide)
In the year 1215 the first of our constitutional rights were set down on paper, it was called the Magna Carta, this was basically an oath from the crown (King or Queen) to uphold the rights of the people set down in it and to look after the peoples best interests, in return for the crowns promise to the people they agreed to be ruled by the crown, so it was a contract between crown and people basically, and it became the law.
The crown had to uphold the rights and common law as did the people, not to cause death, harm, or loss to another, or be fraudulent in your contracts (in other words be honest and true).
In 1689 the bill of rights was set down on paper, this basically sealed all the rights given in the Magna Carta plus a few more, both documents contain our UK common law written down and formed our law.
These two documents are the main fundamental parts of our UK constitution, yes we do actually have one, many claim that the UK has no written constitution, this is not true. We have the most respected constitution in the world, it is the basis of the constitutions of the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India.
Rather than being one written document we have several that make up the UK constitution, the primary of which is the Magna Carta and the 1689 bill of rights. (the freeman movement in Canada seems to be gaining respect from some Canadian policemen) Part of both the Magna Carta and the 1689 bill of rights states that they cannot be repealed because they are such well-made laws and rights!
“”Lord Justice Laws on 18th February 2002: "The special status of constitutional statutes follows the special status of constitutional rights. Examples are the Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights 1689…Ordinary statutes may be impliedly repealed. Constitutional statutes may not…." “
Now our ancestors were not daft, they knew there could be a problem one day if the crown became unjust, or turned into some sort of dictatorship, or parliament was acting against the people, or was full of corruption, or was not allowing the crown to keep its oath.
So in article 61 of the Magna Carta it was written that if this ever happened you could petition the crown to sort out the crowns problem (or parliaments if it was them), the crown had 40 days to fix it or dissolve parliament. If in the 40 days nothing was fixed the petitioner could go into rebellion against the crown and parliament lawfully until the problem was resolved.
Because this was lawful and the petitioner had a right to do it he would go into “lawful rebellion”, he would no longer have allegiance to the crown or parliament because they had become corrupt etc, he would be a hindrance and a rebel, and fight to end the corruption or injustice within the system, it was law that he could do this, and he was actually obeying the law by doing it, because it is the peoples duty to fight corruption and uphold the law.
So that’s the basics of it.
Because our constitution cannot be repealed it is still valid law.
Now, to do this today you first send an affidavit (a sworn oath of truth, the most powerful lawful and legal document you can get) to our Queen, stating that the crown or in this case our government acting for the crown and its MPs are breaking the constitutional contract (and they really are breaking it), and ask for it to be fixed within 40 days, this is witnessed and counter signed and sealed by a credible witness (I used a solicitor).
I did not make my oath lightly, I took an oath to defend the crown when I joined the army, I was now withdrawing my oath of allegiance, it may sound strange to some but I had a lump in my throat doing it, it was made in good faith.
It is then sent to the queen, then if in 40 days the problem is not fixed a second affidavit is then sent to the Queen, this time saying that the problem is not fixed and therefore the crown or government acting for the crown has broken the contract with the people, and you are therefore no longer going to obey or be ruled by a corrupt crown or government, you are now in lawful rebellion.
Now contrary to what any government officials may tell you this is lawful, and it is a binding oath sworn before God (and the witness), it is my right, your right, everyone’s right to do this, but only if there is a genuine breach of the contract.
The powers that be want you to believe that we have no constitution and anything we do have has been repealed, or 90% of it anyway, it’s in their interests to have you believe this so they can get away with anything they want without the people stopping them.
As you can see from the statement by Lord Justice Laws it is our constitution and cannot just be scrapped by parliament or our self-serving MPs and politicians, it is still valid law no matter what our politicians say, they have never ever had the right to repeal any of it.
Some of the breaches we are using for entering lawful rebellion are, corruption in parliament and our government, we all know this is happening, It’s not just one party its them all.
Our past and present government has allowed and is allowing foreign powers (the EU) to rule over us. The European Union, this is a hugely corrupt system and its not working in anyone’s best interests except the EU politicians and their powerful business associates, the EU is a dictatorship, run by un elected leaders, look into it and you will see this is true.
When our government handed over our sovereignty to the EU they committed treason!
This is 100% true, they really have committed treason, take a look at the Ukip website for some very interesting facts and figures etc., it is beyond belief what the EU gets up to (I’m just using Ukip as they have collected a lot of info, not because they are the exception to any other party).
The EU is our peoples greatest enemy, second to that is our own government and most of the mainstream parties, I know that the police are supposed to be non-political but you all have freedom of thought and I am sure you must realise what a corrupt bunch of leaders we have (done worry I’m not looking for comments on this! lol)
When our government does something wrong they just pretend they haven’t done it, if it gets to hot a subject they stick a gagging order on it (D notice I think is the correct term?).
Lawful and Legal? What's the difference?
There’s lots of talk on the freeman sites (and other sites) about being Lawful and legal and the difference between the two, but there’s not much in the way of a basic guide so it ends up confusing, some will know the difference but for those who don’t here we go. Basically anything in our constitution including common law is lawful (true law).
Any acts that parliament have passed are legal, these will be in the form of acts or statute laws, these “legal” acts should not contradict common law or what’s in our constitution, some of them do but we won’t go into that.
We had a system in place that could not be changed (common law and our constitution), so if parliament wanted to pass new legal acts etc. it had to find a way of doing it and making it enforceable. The Royal navy already used a legal system called Admiral law to keep its sailors in check and make sure its members obeyed officers and the navy rules, all navy members had to swear an oath to obey it etc. it became a legal contract and so it was enforceable. It was only used on ships and within the navy but it worked and was ready made so parliament adopted it (or a version of it), now parliament had a system to use to make new “legal” laws.
For it to work people had to think it was lawful, we did not know any different so we just took it as being right and obeyed, but none of us have ever sworn an oath to parliament or the crown to be in the navy and obey admiralty law (unless you have been in the navy I guess), so there is no binding contract between legal acts or statutes and the people, we have been getting duped into obeying them.
A statute law or act is in legal terms is defined as “ an act given the force of law by the consent of the governed”, note it says consent, so if you don’t consent to it and there is no contract between yourself and the other party it is not law. So now you see why freemen (and those claiming to be freemen) will say I do not consent, and there is no contract between us, I have broken no law when you are going to arrest them or make them obey an act or statute legislation.
I have served my lawful affidavits to the crown and I am not in the Navy or under admiralty law, so I am a freeman on the land.
When the queen made her coronation oath it was to uphold the people’s rights and common law and do her duty for our country and its people.
When you made your oaths to the queen it was to her so she could uphold her oaths and the law.
When I swore my oath I did it lawfully and honourably in good faith, and for the right reasons, so please don’t write us all off as nutters, I urge you all to please give us the benefit of the doubt when dealing with freemen.
If the person you are dealing with has filed their affidavits and is genuinely in lawful rebellion under article 61 of the Magna Carta (they should be able to show you proof), I urge you to please follow common law when dealing with them, they are truly under the jurisdiction of common law only, not acts of parliament or statue law.
By trying to hold a genuine freeman on anything other than a breach of common law you would truly be breaking common law yourself, and your oaths were to uphold our queen and common law.
I genuinely hope this has given you a little better understanding of what we are doing and why.
Thanks go to Rebel Leader http://www.freedomrebels.co.uk for allowing me to use this article to explain what a freeman/woman on the land is.
http://www.commonlawcollege.co.uk/
EDUCATE YOURSELF

BOOKS

SO THEY SAY YOU HAVE BROKEN THE LAW

FREEDOM IS MORE THAN A SEVEN LETTER WORD

UK LAW AND YOUR RIGHTS FOR DUMMIES

DECEMBER 5 2012 594808

DECEMBER 6 2012 594888 80

DECEMBER 7 2012 595001 113

DECEMBER 14 2012 595361 113

DECEMBER 10 2012
Read my affidavit to the Queen

COURTS OF EQUITY

A court of equity is a court which can apply equitable remedies to disputes. Courts of equity operate within the legal system, but rather than focusing on the application of law, they look at cases and determine outcomes based on fairness. Also known as chancery courts, courts of equity can be found in many regions of the world. In some areas, they operate entirely separately from courts of law, and in others, a court of law is empowered to handle both legal and equitable remedies.
The concept of a chancery court arose in England when citizens began to express dissatisfaction with legal judgments handed down by the courts. They argued that the law was sometimes unfair, and that some situations were not covered by the law, making it impossible for the courts to respond. Courts of equity arose to handle legal situations in which people might want damages beyond monetary damages, with the judge empowered to act on discretion, rather than following the rule of the law.
A court of equity still has some legal responsibilities, but it has more leeway when it comes to judging cases. It can hand down a judgment which includes an equitable remedy such as an injunction, as opposed to simple monetary damages. Courts of equity can be used for things like specific performance, for example, in which someone is asked to make good on a breach of contract.
Notice to the High Court: Delivered by hand – at the Manchester Justice Centre: 14th January 2013. CASE 2MA90015 Notice is given to ‘the court’ of the following: - In the matter of MICHAEL CLARKE (legal fiction). · Challenge of jurisdiction: · Challenge of the legitimacy of the judge: · The Queen is no longer sovereign: · All prior orders are void: · There is no case to answer: This notice is delivered in writing prior to the commencement of any hearing in recognition of the fact that in the past when reasonable approach has been made to ‘the court’ to deal with the issues presented below… the court has adopted a position of abandonment – and has resorted to secret hearings to declare judgment in an effort to retain its authority… we can no longer tolerate avoidance of the facts and we thus challenge the court to address these issue or be condemned by its own acquiescence through silence. No court can make judgment in its own cause… it is anathema to justice. We claim that the High Court has no legitimacy… because it fails to uphold the rule-of-law and has resorted instead to the rule-of-force (coercion) to impose its claimed authority. Legitimate authority derives from consent not coercion. The court must address the issues raised or the authority of the court evaporates. The issues are not going to go away and more and more people will challenge the court until addressed. Challenging the authority of government and the legitimacy of the judiciary is a democratic right where questions of propriety arise Challenge to Jurisdiction: In the matter of MICHAEL CLARKE (legal fiction): MICHAEL CLARKE is a legal fiction - summonsed by High Court order to ‘appear’ today and is presented to the court as ordered – in recognition of the authority of the court and its jurisdiction over the legal fiction The legal fiction appears by way of a copy of the birth certificate… as the ‘original’ certificate is not available. MICHALE CLARKE as referred to in the High court document is not a living sentient being… i.e. a man – this is self-evident - as no man is subject to the authority of any other without his consent - we are all born equal. This is not a romantic notion it is a statement of cold hard fact. Neither the denial or bluster of the legal profession in any capacity will suppress the authority of logic – and we present to the court the logic that ‘no man has authority over any other without their consent’ – if the court claims so to have… show the law. The authority of statutes are imposed legally upon ‘persons’ which are corporations. The legal fiction MICHAEL CLARKE is a corporate entity. ‘Person’ is not defined in statute law as ‘a man’ and therefore it isn’t ‘a man.’ The authority imposed upon the legal fiction the ‘person’ transfers to the man upon consent – upon using ‘the name’ of ‘the person.’ No consent = no authority. Imposed authority is coercion. Coercion is unlawful. The name MICHEAL CLARKE does not attach itself to a man as a compulsion… is happens only by consent. No authority exist that permits one man to impose his will on another man without his consent… this is unlawful. The government can however claim authority over the legal fiction, created by government. The court repeatedly avoids this issue… because the legal fiction is the foundation of its authority and with this revealed… the true authority of the court i.e. ‘the consent of the people’ is exposed. The courts paranoia – that it will lose its authority if the legal fiction is exposed is unfounded… the reverse is now the case… the legal fiction (115 million pages on Google) is well and truly established as a fact and the continued denial by the High Court only serves to diminish its authority… by diminishing trust in it. It must surely be the case that Judges who continue to deny the legal fiction will attract cynicism and distrust to all judgments of the court, thus bringing it into disrepute. No group of men can write regulations (Acts of parliament) to subject other men to their arbitrary authority – we are governed by consent – this is not a hollow claim – it is a maxim and is the very foundation of our governance. Statutes have only equal authority of government, they do not exceed that authority – thus statutes must also be subject to our consent and the withdrawal of same. We know fully how that consent has been secured through the legal fiction… High Court judges know how consent is secured through the legal fiction and through presumptions, in the absence of the denial of consent. Let it be made clear… consent is and has been denied consistently – all presumptions and assumptions are denied. The jurisdiction of the court is subject to the consent of all parties to a dispute. If the ‘High Court’ insists on asserting that it has authority beyond consent over the man (not the legal fiction) then show the law that authorises it. If the court insists on imposing its claimed authority - in the face of the denial of consent then a claim is raised that a tort has been committed against the man and the liability falls to the administrator of the court. If the High Court will not give way to the demands of the people that it respect and uphold our laws - then its authority evaporates… and its relevance diminished to nought. All that remains is tyranny. The jurisdiction of the court is challenged on several levels… even under its own rules. No case to answer: There is no subject matter. Late delivery by the Pannone. Hearsay (written affidavits) inadmissible – due to ‘Notice of intention to rely on such evidence’ not given. The court claims to control who can and cannot address the court. ‘No right of audience’ this is a patently bias in favour of the legal profession – bias is unlawful. A judge who imposes the restriction of ‘No right of audience’ must recuse themselves for bias. [Barristers are servants of the court – this is a conflict of interest where the ‘defendant’ is challenging the authority of the court.] Representation in court by individuals who are not servants of the court will be more robust in their challenges of the court. The exposure of the legal fiction is testament to this. Challenge to the legitimacy of the judge: · The authority of the High Court judge is challenged - where there is no evidence of the authority so claimed then none exists. We have moved beyond ‘authority by assumption.’ Authority by one can only be imposed on another with their consent… if no consent is given then the imposition of authority implies a master slave relationship… slavery is repugnant and goes against the basic principles of a civil society – those who insist on the imposition of their authority without consent are tyrants – and tyrants are a threat to the peaceful coexistence of all free people – they must be vanquished. · Tyrants have been dealt with before – Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights is the legacy of that struggle and these laws are at our disposal today to strike down any new attempts at tyranny – even when it comes dressed up as law. · Acts of Parliament are not laws… if they were, they would be called Laws of Parliament. Acts of Parliament are merely statutes, they are referred to as statutes … and statutes gain the authority of law when they are consented to. We are not adverse to consenting to statutes – but those designed to impose overbearing control will be opposed – and rightly so. · The constant imposition of unreasonable statutes is the flint to the dry grass… and the judiciary may be the first bale to burn. · The authority of the judge derives from the sovereignty of the people on whose behalf they administer justice… they do not impose their decisions on their own created authority. The people’s authority is represented by our Sovereign Monarch… to whom the judiciary give sworn allegiance that they will uphold our laws. · If there is any diminishment of the standing of the Monarch then the authority of the judge fails because he/she too would lose standing. · Where the Monarch’s authority fails… the people’s authority remains intact… because the people’s sovereignty is supreme. · Where the Monarch’s authority fails – so does the judges – who must then seek a new authority from the people… not from politician’s as this would destroy the fundamental principle of the separation of powers – and judges cannot create their own arbitrary authority. · The Monarch’s authority has failed… brought about by the duplicity of parliament which has surrendered its own authority contrary to our constitution. Her majesty did not prevent the surrender of parliament to a foreign power by refusing the Royal Assent – despite over a million signatories in petition. Parliament may well have surrendered its sovereignty to a foreign power… but the people’s sovereignty remains intact. · The people’s sovereignty is secure and our constitution defends it through its various elements such as Magna Carta. · Magna Carta is the law and judges of the High Court must submit to it – or suffer the consequences of the law. · Nobody is above the law – and that includes High Court judges. · Lord Scarman said… “A government above the law is a menace to be defeated” · It is undeniably the case that a judiciary above the law is a tyranny to be defeated………. our law is unequivocal and it is this: - “No man shall be imprisoned without a jury of his peers” · It seems that today’s judges have been ‘trained’ beyond the capacity to understand this basic and simple logic. · Those judges who step over that mark and act in defiance of our law must be held to account and striped of their duties – and their pensions. · If this court does not concede to the demand of a trial by jury then that demand will go to the highest court in the land… the people’s grand jury – to settle this matter once and for all. · If it is necessary for the people’s grand jury to be called upon… and it finds in favour of trial by jury as it surely will because it is the unquestionable right of the people, then the full body of High Court judges will have to be dismissed and replaced. It is not beyond the powers of the people to do this. NO SOVEREIGNTY: · The sovereignty of the people is not in question – but the sovereignty of Her Majesty must be seen to be in doubt – if the claim made by John Major (Ex Premier) has any validity. Major said of the Queen “ The Queen is a citizen of the European Union” – this claim is to imagine the death of the Queen. The Prime Minister would not make that statement without legal advice because of the constitutional significance. · The implications are that the Queen has accepted mediatisation. i.e. she is no longer sovereign. · If the Queen is no longer sovereign – where do the courts and judges claim to have secured their authority? · The political establishment have devised a wheeze to avoid this vital question… they obfuscate with the phrase ‘shared sovereignty’ which is an oxymoron and can be discounted as nonsense. · We either have sovereignty or we do not. If we have sovereignty then the authority of the court is not in question… only its actions. Its actions to deny trial by jury are unlawful. There may be some ‘legal’ provision to deny a trial by jury (it is doubtful) but even if there were -‘legal’ is not ‘lawful’ and where they are in conflict then ‘the legal’ provision would not stand because it would be defeated by our common law (supreme law). · If the Queen is no longer sovereign, then the authority of the High Court falls on this reality. If the Queen is still Sovereign then there should be no problem getting confirmation of this fact from Her Majesty… there are channels to secure this written confirmation by Her Majesty’s Private Secretary. This is not beyond the capability of the High Court for Her Majesty’s Sovereignty to be confirmed in writing. Silence will tell all. Re: Constitutional Monarchy · The United Kingdom is defined as a constitutional monarchy because we have both a constitution and our Head of State is a Monarch. Our constitution defines our form of government – the government does not define our form of constitution – in recent times this principle has been unlawfully reversed without the consent of the people and has been carried out by unscrupulous politicians, aided and abetted by members of the legal profession. The courts to date have made no contribution to stopping this process of change that has diminished the people’s sovereignty whilst enhancing authority elsewhere including with foreign institutions. · If the sovereignty of the people has been compromised and the reversal is not challenged, then we are clearly culpable through our own apathy. · The constitution is the foundation of our freedoms and our liberties and MUST be upheld by the courts… or the courts must be abandoned. · We now have a government that seeks to rewrite our constitution and by so doing empower itself – at our expense. · A demand for jury trial is exercising our constitutional rights, which if denied gives evidence of collusion by the courts with unlawful governance – we cannot be allowed to stand. This is treason. Void Orders. · No order made by a court that lacks jurisdiction has any authority – it is void. · A void order cannot be breached – the order does not exist. Does the court claim that MICHAEL CLARKE is a man? – then let the court provide the proof. The evidence of logic to the contrary overrides any such claim. Does the court claim authority over the man? – Then Let the court provide the proof. Can ‘the judge’ give evidence of his authority… his oath of office? His Warrant from the Queen? Is the Queen still Sovereign? The evidence suggest not. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. We understand that the judiciary take oath amongst themselves not to engage in any discussion in court re the legal fiction entity and under pressure to do so they are instructed to abandon the court… suppression of the fact re the legal fiction being paramount. There is recurring evidence to support this claim… the judiciary will not discuss this matter – which gives rise to the certainly of the legal fiction. There are in excess of 115 million web sites on Google which overwhelming support the concept of the legal fiction… this is quite staggering - there is random but sparse opposition to the idea… logic dominates. To reinforce the position… the judiciary will not engage. If the judiciary serve another master… then they must recuse themselves. We understand that the court order stipulated that MICHEAL CLARKE should appear before the court – and this order has been complied with. If the court dissents – then the court should give evidence as to who the name is. A judicial determination. The man is prepared to present himself to a court of law… he is not adverse to justifying his actions… but he will not respond to coercion and the threat of violence against him made BY THE COURT – coercion is unlawful – the courts themselves are not above the law. The man will make himself available to a common law court. Show the law where the court claims the authority to imprison a man without a jury of his peers. We present Magna Carta as the law – well established… that says he must have a jury trial. The CPR may not provide for a jury trial – but nor does it provide for its exclusion. Nor does it claim the right to suppress our constitution… it seems to leave this to individual judges… if they are bold enough to do so. Surely the CPR rules are a trap for unwitting judges. The matter to hand: Contempt of Court. · Honestly held belief: Freemen have an honestly held belief that they have a right to a fair trial… which means a jury trial – and that statute courts are subject to consent. Where there is no jury trial facilitated by the court and no consent given by the man then there is a legitimate challenge that orders of the court are void. · The denial of a jury trial is bias. · No contempt of court can be claimed to exist where no jurisdiction exists… and where no order has been breached because the order is void. · If the court does not have jurisdiction… on subject matter… then its order is void… and ignoring those orders is therefore not a contempt of the court. · Any denial of due process would warrant a claim of a void order. The rule-of-force. · The threat of force is coercion: · THE JUDGE may take it upon himself to engage force to demonstrate his unproven authority… this would be deemed a criminal act in the eyes of the man - the man reserves the right to use all lawful means to defend his rights, freedoms and liberties… and he reserves the right to pursue justice beyond the court system if this fails in its duty to preserve impartiality. · The people’s authority must prevail – through the rule of law – not the rule-of-force. · If the ‘High Court’ threatens us with violence to secure its claimed authority – we have no option but to concede under duress. But there should be no doubt about the dynamics of the situation thus created. Our concession should not be construed as an act of weakness – we will be pragmatic in the face of adversity – and bide our time. Lawful Rebellion: The people of Britain have a right to rebel against arbitrary and unjust governance… that this exists is demonstrable. The Lawful Rebellion movement gathers momentum and the underlying demand is that the government and the judiciary respect our common law right of which Magna Carta is a foundation. Where the judiciary will not recognise Magna Carta… we will not recognise them. The ball is in the court. What game shall we play? The Real issue- The real purpose of the harassment claim – it is an attempt to gag. The man has claimed that ‘in his view’ one of the partners, also a plaintiff - Hugh Jones - is a crook who has stolen his mother’s money. He has called on the partners in Pannones to investigate and provide a thorough and transparent investigation… which they have refused to do. Pannones defer their responsibility to an external body… the secretive ‘Court of Protection’ which according to the accounts of many… is protecting criminality, not vulnerable people. The man has good cause to claim that there is collusion between Hugh Jones, the Court of Protection and their ombudsman… again these impressive sounding ‘bodies’ of so called authority are always represented by a single individual, all of whom hail from the same profession… the opportunity for collusion and corruption is not unimaginable… and hence why the man has pursued the common law process of a commercial lien. The man has a lawfully obtained and fully perfected commercial lien against the Pannone Partners to the value of Nine Million pounds. The man has every right to pursue payment of this debt and no court has the right to deny this. Another single member of the legal profession (a judge) tried to declare this illegal… which is fine because the commercial lien process claims no ‘legal’ status… it is entirely an animal of the common law process and is thus ‘lawful’ and derives it legitimacy through common law and irrefutable logic. It is telling that Pannones have done everything in their power to avoid the simple process of an internal inquiry into the allegations of corruption of one of their partners… it raises serious questions as to WHY? What have they got to hide. Pannones get their business from the Court of Protection… the Court of Protection have appointed Hugh Jones… and the Court of Protection cannot be investigated. Hugh Jones and Pannones could ‘thank’ the Court of Protection and nobody would know…. The ‘set-up’ is protected… this is probably why it is called the Court of Protection Pannones are desperate to gag the man… using the harassment Act and the man is determined to expose the alleged corruption, using the pressure of persistence – because there is no remedy in the legal system. The man has a duty to prevent crime when he sees it happening… and this is precisely what he is doing. The man has declared war on Pannones… despite all the pressure he has brought to bear, they have still not investigated Hugh Jones – ONE HAS TO ASK – WHY? On the balance of probability… it seems that there is more to Pannone’s refusal to provide a proper and meaningful explanation of where the man’s mother’s money has gone… in their robustness to avoid answering some simple questions Pannones have preferred to subjected themselves to a ‘sustained pressure’ to expose the truth. Pannones would obviously like the pressure to stop… and it is so easily achieved. Provide the answers re the alleged corruption by Hugh Jones and the problem will disappear. Sustained pressure… is not harassment. It is a legitimate method to prevent crime when the ‘appropriate bodies’ refuse to do so. The Great Irony. One of the plaintiffs in this matter a Mr Paul Jonson –titles himself as HEAD OF CORPORATE RESOLUTIONS - an offer was made to Paul Jonson for mediation in an attempt to ‘resolve’ the matter – which was declined by him. It seems that the Pannones crew are a strange bunch - simple not what they claim to be… with a resolutions department that avoids resolution and a protection department allegedly not protecting - and with some very important issues about alleged corruption in their ranks to still to address. The claim of harassment is a gagging ploy. The exposure of Pannones as a direct consequence of the man’s probing may reveal that there is more to this than meets the eye. We should applaud the man for his persistence – and condemn Pannones for their evasion of the truth.T Pannones had the choice of going the very easy route - by providing transparency and answers to easy questions… or the enormously hard route of prevarication and dodging the issue - subjecting themselves to a barrage of pressure (all is fair in love and war… and it is Pannones after all who declared war on the man). Why did they choose the hard route if they had nothing to hide? This issue is not going to go away… Pannones need to face up to the reality that they will either settle this matter by resolution or they are going to spend the next few years fighting more claims… the commercial lien of nine million pounds is lawfully enforceable… no Statute judge has the authority to defeat a common law process. They are acting beyond their authority – probably due to ignorance. Conclusion: The man has made a statutory declaration that he is NOT the legal fiction Michael Clarke. The court order that MICHAEL CLARKE appear – has been complied with. The order if it is claimed to be against the man – is void.
------------
19.02.2013

Hi, Anyone got a friend who works for a National paper.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: The silent majority
This letter says it all......
Subject: The silent majority
Its sad but true, It is difficult not to agree with the 72 year old man who wrote this letter, I notice there isnt a reply.
This is one of the best letters I have read for a long time, it puts it ALL into perspective. PLEASE PASS IT ON to everyone you can, its time BOTH parties stood up and listened.
This is our country and its being destroyed.
To David Cameron (Prime Minister) & Ed Milliband (Leader of the Opposition) ...
You BOTH Worry me ! ( In fact both of your Political parties worry the hell out of me !!!)
Over the last three years, I find myself becoming more and more fearful of the pair of you, and between you, you are turning this country into a place that I no longer feel at home in, or feel a part of! I watch you in parliament, and no, not just the two of you, but every politician that I see, stand up in parliament sneering at each other, and acting like children !!! (..and if you were my children, I would be ashamed of you all ... What an example to set!)
Although you would like us all to believe that you are putting the needs of this country at the forefront, NEITHER of you are doing that, you seem more interested in "one-up-manship ", in scoring off each other, & denigrating each other, to the detriment of this country & its people !!! It seems to be all about YOU as individuals, and not about what you can DO for this country ! It is fast becoming a place that I do not recognize, as the place I always thought, was the best place in the world to be !!! But no longer !!!
You are not listening to the people of this country !!! I am watching the deterioration of living standards in this country, (and according to you, on a world stage we are doing better than most countries ... REALLY ???) ... And yet the gap is widening between the "haves" and the "have-nots" . I see our homeless on the streets, our hospitals under-funded, and understaffed, our health system is an absolute mess and a disgrace .. And yet I see multi-millions of dollars being sent offshore, in aid to other countries, before attending to this country's needs !
I see the "selling off of water rights to foreign interests, WHY...? Especially when you go to great lengths to tell us that water is a finite resource, & supposedly, we must ALL be careful with how we use it, so that we ensure we have it for the future ? A Carbon Tax,( which you KNOW is just another tax ) which will make NO appreciable difference, to carbon emissions, AT ALL! A tax, which in spite of all your arguments FOR it, you are doing alone, when other major countries will NOT & DO NOT embrace it, or believe in it !
All that it will do for this country is put working families and small businesses behind the eight ball, .....what planet are you on, if you think that the tax we must pay will make even a scrap of difference to the effect of the carbon tax on people? Anyone can see the holes in that argument !!! Do you really think we are that dumb ???
Let's talk about Multiculturalism .....People have come here from other countries, for a better life, for more years than I have been alive ( I am 72 years old !)
Pre & Post war immigrants came for a better life, and settled in and became wonderful contributors to this country, ... All have contributed to the rich diversity of this country, and some descendants have even fought FOR this country, and they have become U.K.citizens and were glad to be ..and they had NO handouts from our Government either, ...they worked hard for everything! I have never before had a problem with all, or any, race of immigrants coming here. However, I DO NOW !!!
Please tell me why we have areas in towns and on large estates all over the country, where police do NOT, & will NOT go, for fear of their life ? Please tell me why we can no longer have religion in schools for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ? (The latest little gem is that they are not having or being funded, for chaplains any more, but Counsellors!) Please tell me why religious Christmas observances are no longer allowed in some schools for fear of OFFENDING someone ? Please tell me HOW Christmas decorations in some stores might OFFEND someone ? Please tell me why we have to have segregated days in some swimming centres for fear of "OFFENDING" someone ? Please tell me why we have some RADICAL clerics demanding Sharia Law in this country when if we were in THEIR country, this would NEVER be allowed? Please tell me why our laws need to be changed, so as not to OFFEND someone ? Please tell me why we are fast becoming a MINORITY voice, in our own country, because of POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ? Please tell me WHY Britons cannot legally wear a bike helmet covering their head in a bank and yet it is ok to wear a Burqa which covers the whole of the face ? And please tell me WHY, when those people who want asylum here can wreck our detention centres and STILL be accepted here ?
What does that say about just who and what are this government's priorities ? The British people that I speak to have genuine concerns about becoming a second class minority in our own country, and the reasons for it are some of the above. Are you so blind that you cannot see this ? And no, I am NOT racist !!! If I did not like Catholics or Protestants would I be considered racist ? Of course not!
Why is it, that if we object to what is happening in our country we are immediately labelled RACIST, in an attempt to shut us up ?
We are fighting Radical Muslims in Afghanistan , are we not ? I hear you say, yes but the Muslims we have here are "Not like that " . Well how would we know ? Do we hear ANY of them coming out & speaking AGAINST radicals ? I haven't, have you ? Islam is not compatible with ANY of the values that we hold here in Britain ! Are not the experiences of France and the Netherlands a examples of that? Why do you think it would be any different here ? We even have a British born "radical ", whose message is that Britain WILL become a Muslim country, under Sharia Law, & that we had "better get used to it ".
Will both of you grow some "balls", and start sticking up for this country and its people ? We are the people who put you where you are and PAY you to look after our interests ! And you are NOT doing that by any stretch of the imagination !!! I would appreciate an answer from both of you, if only to convince me that once again I am not talking to a brick wall ! In case it has escaped both of you I would like to remind you that, in the U.K. Government is FOR THE PEOPLE ... OF THE PEOPLE ... & BY THE PEOPLE ... Never forget that because you sure have up till now !
Let us get this out to all - please keep forwarding and if you have people in the press or if you know Politicians - let them know we are dis-satisfied with their behaviour !
PLEASE SEND THIS GREAT LETTER TO AS MANY PEOPLE IN THE U.K. AS YOU CAN, AND IF YOU HAVE CONTACTS OVERSEAS DO THE SAME.

THE British Constitution Group

STATEMENT
With the exception of a few thousand very powerful people, the entire world’s population, all seven billion of us, are trapped ... trapped into a criminal debt creating banking ‘system’ that has taken hundreds of years to perfect and to come to fruition. This ‘system’ results in enslavement and servitude. It creates dreadful unhappiness amongst ordinary decent people and causes wars, debt, starvation, pollution and environmental destruction. It feeds on greed, fear and division. It forces people onto the corporate treadmills of mass mindless production and mass mindless consumption. It uses lies, deception, intimidation and entrapment at all times. It is a system that is so clever and so cunning that most of the world is completely oblivious to its existence. It is a system that allows a few winners at the expense of a huge number of losers. It is a system that considers itself to be unbeatable and indestructible and is now so arrogant that it believes it can control everything and everyone on its terms. It is a system where psychopaths and sociopaths can flourish. And without question the centre of this system, the heart of this global corporate beast is the innocent sounding Square Mile known as the City of London.

Put very simply, the banking dynasties, such as the House of Rothschild, control the political processes around the world to such an extent that their network of private central banks have the right to create money completely out of thin air and then charge interest on that ‘nothingness’. The polite term is ‘Fractional Reserve Lending’ but in reality it is just simple fraud. The result is that the whole world is currently drowning in a sea of fraudulent debt.

The USA now has a National Debt of over 16 trillion dollars, whilst the UK owes its creditors over one trillion pounds. The planned contagion of spiralling and unlawful debt is now sweeping over Europe with a renewed vigour. Greece and Spain are being torn apart by appalling austerity measures to the point that civil war or military intervention are now being openly talked about on the streets. Italy is giving all the signs that its economy is now entering into very stormy waters indeed. Ireland, Portugal, France and Belgium are already in a mess and are unlikely to see their debts become more manageable. Tens of millions of people have experienced a major downturn in their quality of life, along with their prospects for a more secure and better future, as unlawful austerity measures brought in by corrupt politicians begin to bite. Even the stronger economies of Germany, The Netherlands and Luxembourg have now been downgraded by Moody’s, the Rothschild controlled credit rating agency.

A Simple Solution To End This Madness – The Greenback:

What is happening to all of us is criminal. However, there is a very simple solution that the banking dynasties do not want you to know about.

At the height of the American Civil War, the US Treasury warned President Lincoln that further funding would be needed if the Federal North was to have the resources needed to defeat the Confederate South. The President initially went to the Rothschilds and the private banks who wanted between 24 and 36 per cent interest. Lincoln knew that if he agreed to take loans from the bankers that he would be putting his country into a debt noose that would strangle the economic prosperity out of his country and which would be almost impossible to pay off.

On the advice of a businessman with proven integrity, Colonel Dick Taylor from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln made the decision to print debt-free and interest-free paper money based on nothing more than the honour of the American Government. Called ‘Greenbacks’ because they were coloured green on one side only, the US Treasury issued 450 million dollars worth of these notes and they were immediately accepted as legal tender by a willing and grateful nation. The war was eventually won and this very popular new paper currency seemed set to continue. In the words of Lincoln himself:

"The government should create issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers..... The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles, the long-felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprises, the maintenance of stable government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own government. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power

Senate document 23, Page 91. 1865

$5 Greenback

However, the response by the private bankers to this sudden threat to their banking empire was swift and brutal as this extract from The Times of London in 1865 shows:

" If that mischievous financial policy, which had its origin in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedence in the history of the civilised governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

On Good Friday, April 14th 1865, a lone gunman ended the presidency of Abraham Lincoln. Sadly, his Greenback legacy died with him as the private bankers managed to ‘persuade’ Congress to revoke this successful initiative in favour of the debt creating National Banking Act which eventually led to the formation of the privately run Federal Reserve in 1913. Since then, America’s unlawful debt has risen to over 16 trillion dollars.

"I have two enemies; the Southern army in front of me and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in the rear is my greatest foe." Abraham Lincoln

The solution for dealing with private debt-creating bankers is simple. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to stop any sovereign government from issuing through its treasury its own interest-free money based on nothing more than the wealth and integrity of the nation. This is the big secret that the City of London would rather keep to itself. If this simple fact were to become mainstream then people everywhere would simply walk away and the entire banking system would completely collapse.

And now we come to a very little known historical episode that I alluded to at the beginning that takes this concept of the debt-free ‘Greenback’ from America to Britain ... and in so doing exposes the truly appalling values that are prevalent even today within the City of London.

The Great War And The Debt-free Bradbury Treasury Note:

Three weeks ago, as part of my ongoing research into the banking elite, I came across a fascinating book entitled The Financiers and the Nation by the Rt. Hon. Thomas Johnston, P.C., ex-Lord Privy Seal. It was written in 1934 and republished in 1994 by Ossian Publishers Ltd.

The text of this quite remarkable and rare book is available here.

In Chapter 6, entitled ‘Usury on the Great War’, I’ve selected the following paragraphs which I believe are both shocking and self-explanatory:

" WHEN the whistle blew for the start of the Great War in August 1914 the Bank of England possessed only nine millions sterling of a gold reserve, and, as the Bank of England was the Bankers' Bank, this sum constituted the effective reserve of all the other Banking Institutions in Great Britain.

The bank managers at the outbreak of War were seriously afraid that the depositing public, in a panic, would demand the return of their money. And, inasmuch as the deposits and savings left in the hands of the bankers by the depositing public had very largely been sunk by the bankers in enterprises which, at the best, could not repay the borrowed capital quickly, and which in several and large-scale instances were likely to be submerged altogether in the stress of war and in the collapse of great areas of international trade, it followed that if there were a widespread panicky run upon the banks, the banks would be unable to pay and the whole credit system would collapse, to the ruin of millions of people.

Private enterprise banking thus being on the verge of collapse, the Government (Mr. Lloyd George at the time was Chancellor of the Exchequer) hurriedly declared a moratorium, i.e. it authorized the banks not to pay out (which in any event the banks could not do), and it extended the August Bank Holiday for another three days. During these three or four days when the banks and stock exchanges were closed, the bankers held anxious negotiation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. And one of them has placed upon record the fact that 'he (Mr. George) did everything that we asked him to do.' When the banks reopened, the public discovered that, instead of getting their money back in gold, they were paid in a new legal tender of Treasury notes (the £1 notes in black and the 10s. notes in red colours). This new currency had been issued by the State, was backed by the credit of the State, and was issued to the banks to prevent the banks from utter collapse. The public cheerfully accepted the new notes; and nobody talked about inflation.

To return, however, to the early war period, no sooner had Mr. Lloyd George got the bankers out of their difficulties in the autumn of 1914 by the issue of the Treasury money, than they were round again at the Treasury door explaining forcibly that the State must, upon no account, issue any more money on this interest free basis; if the war was to be run, it must be run with borrowed money, money upon which interest must be paid, and they were the gentlemen who would see to the proper financing of a good, juicy War Loan at 31/2 per cent, interest, and to that last proposition the Treasury yielded. The War was not to be fought with interest-free money, and/or/with conscription of wealth; though it was to be fought with conscription of life. Many small businesses were to be closed and their proprietors sent overseas as redundant, and without any compensation for their losses, while Finance, as we shall see, was to be heavily and progressively remunerated

Emergency Bradbury Treasury Notes (printed only on one side)

The real values of the private bankers and the City of London have been exposed for all to see. Whilst hundreds of thousands of British soldiers were dying on the killing fields of Flanders and elsewhere doing what they saw as their patriotic duty, British bankers, safely out of danger and not sharing the appalling conditions on the Western Front, were only interested in one thing – how to make obscene profits from Britain’s desperate efforts to win the war. To say that the private bankers and the City of London have the morals of sewer rats is to be extremely unkind to our little rodent friends. But this is the clincher. As a direct result of the greed and treason of the British private bankers in preventing the continuance of the Bradbury Treasury Notes, Britain’s National Debt went up from £650 million in 1914 to a staggering £7,500 million in 1919.

And this is where it all gets particularly interesting. The following is an extract from the official and current HM Treasury’s Debt Management Office website ... and it appears to be completely at odds with the account given by the Rt. Hon. Thomas Johnston.

"The threat of World War One pushed British banks into crisis; exacerbated further as half the world's trade was financed by British banks and as a consequence international payments dried up. In response to this crisis, John Maynard Keynes (the renowned economist), persuaded the Chancellor Lloyd George to use the Bank of England's gold reserves to support the banks, which ended the immediate crisis. Keynes stayed with the Treasury until 1919. The war years of 1914-18 had seen an increase in the National Debt from £650 million at the start of the war to £7,500 million by 1919. This ensured that the Treasury developed new expertise in foreign exchange, currency, credit and price control skills and were put to use in the management of the post-war economy. The slump of the 1930s necessitated the restructuring of the economy following World War II (the national debt stood at £21 billion by its end) and the emphasis was placed on economic planning and financial relations.

Why is there is no mention whatsoever of the £300 million of Bradbury debt-free paper Treasury Notes issued in 1914? Instead, it says Lloyd George, on the advice of John Maynard Keynes, used the Bank of England’s gold reserves which, according to Johnston, only amounted to £9 million. What is going on here? Who is telling the truth? Could it be that HM Government, the puppets of the City of London, don’t want you to know about the simple but effective concept of debt-free and interest-free Treasury Notes?

What Do The System-serving Politicians And "Economists" Say About The issuance Of Treasury Notes? As soon as the concept of the debt-free and interest-free Greenback Dollar (and now the Bradbury Pound) is raised in polite conversation with either a politician or an economist, two immediate knee jerk verbal reactions occur from these system-servers.

The first is to say that if a government suddenly starts printing its own money through its treasury based on the credit and wealth of the country, instead of going through its central bank, we would be heading towards what happened in the Weimar Republic in Germany in the early 1920s where hyperinflation spiralled out of control and a loaf of bread was bought with a barrow load of almost worthless paper money.

To this I just say look again at what actually happened in Germany at that time. It was not the Weimar’s treasury but it was the privately controlled central bank, the Reichsbank, who was printing the money, coupled with the extreme actions of currency speculators and foreign investors that caused all of the problems.

Hyperinflation could not happen as a result of the Bradbury Pound, because the democratically elected government would actually ‘govern’ ... now that is novel! Speculation would be prevented, and most importantly, the newly created money would be spent on a productive economy, rather than bankers bonuses.

The second reaction from system-servers is that the country is already printing its own money – it is called Quantative Easing, that mysterious cash injection into the economy which only seems to get as far as the banks and not to where it is actually needed. Only trouble is, it is the Bank of England doing the printing and not HM Treasury. Based around government issued Bonds (promissory notes based on the wealth of the nation), this complex process only increases the National Debt and it certainly doesn’t solve anything.

The simple truth is that people who serve the system and who have been ‘educated’ by such organisations as the Fabian inspired London School of Economics (LSE), are not suddenly going to bite the hand that gives them a very good living.

So what does all of this mean for us, the people? Before looking at this, let’s just consider for a moment what ‘money’ actually is. It is simply a convenient unit of exchange for goods and services that people have COMPLETE CONFIDENCE in. Now if HM Government were to issue debt-free and interest-free treasury notes through HM Treasury rather than the Bank of England in order to meet the needs and happiness of all the people whilst getting them out of unlawful debt, my guess is that people might have a lot of confidence in such a benign and benevolent financial system.

There is absolutely no defence for the present system whereby private bankers create money completely out of thin air for themselves to lend and then charge interest on that ‘nothingness’. The Bank of England, with its hidden controller the Bank for International Settlements based in Basel, Switzerland (often described as the Central Bank of Central Banks), dictate behind the scenes the fiscal policies and direction that our supposed sovereign and independent government must take. We are all prisoners of this utterly corrupt system and it’s time to confront it head on to collapse it.

If our government were to go down the path of a new Bradbury Treasury Note (as well as pursuing the banksters with Common Law for their crimes against humanity) then our debt burden would be removed overnight – there would be no deficit and no national debt. Under Common Law, all debts involving the use of fractional reserve lending by the central and private banks will be written off as they were arrived at by the use of fraud. Money would be immediately made available by HM Treasury to meet the essential needs of the country. The nation’s happiness, well-being and security would be taken care of without the need for an invasive and complex tax system. We would have Gross Domestic Happiness instead of Gross Domestic Product dictating humanity’s future.

None of this is rocket science – if the Spanish and Greek governments genuinely wanted to put right overnight the economic woes of their countries, they would immediately start printing and supplying interest-free and debt-free treasury notes based on the wealth and integrity of their respective countries. They would also tell the IMF, the EU and the Bank for International Settlements to go and whistle for their ‘money’! Why? Because it was created out of thin air, it didn’t exist in the first place, and the whole banking system is fraudulent ... in other words, see you in a common law court in front of a jury!!!! Banks, money and finance must exist to serve humanity, not the other way round. Our enslavement by unlawful debt can be ended overnight with one signature by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It really is that simple! ---------------

30.06.2013 THE STATE OF BRITAIN
The People Vs The Government, DWP and Atos
a FRIEND had to walk past the city magistrates court & there is a queue of about at least 300 people all queuing for non payment of council tax OMG if I could take a photo (I won't to protect people's identity) you would never believe how many people there is. Kids are crying, people are getting stressed waiting & the queue goes round the block.
Welcome to Tory Britain 2013
There was a guy telling everyone about there rights outside the court & handing out a leaflet it said the following: 'this is retrospective action against me & the aforementioned bill is not be finalised before march 2014. This action is a waste of the courts time, the peoples time & more importantly the peoples money. I urge you to dismiss this case'.
Does anyone know what this means? Some solicitors in the queue also stated that they DO NOT have to pay something that is not yet law! Oh & a friend that was there said that when all those hundreds finally got in the doors they was told they didn't even have to attend court even though they'd all got letters to say they had to go & they was all told to go to the council tax dept instead to make payment arrangements!

-------------

An elderly, frail couple were charged a swingeing £44,400 by lawyers who handled their simple finances for four years when they were no longer capable of looking after themselves. Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski Overcharged: Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski Their case exposes a gaping loophole in the legal system, which leaves the elderly at the mercy of greedy solicitors who, relatives fear, can charge what they liked, while the family is powerless to intervene. Feliks and Rosemary Zakrzewski developed Alzheimer's disease in 2005. They went to live with their daughter Antoinette Tricker and her family in Suffolk. But because there was no Power of Attorney set up allowing her to act for them, the Court of Protection appointed a solicitor as their receiver to take charge of their financial affairs. The family was then helpless because the solicitor is answerable only to their client - in this case, a couple with Alzheimer's - who did not understand what was happening. There are 22,000 deputies (the new name for receivers) looking after the affairs of those who lack the mental capacity to act for themselves. They don't have to be solicitors; they can be family members, friends or the local authority. In the Zakrzewskis' case, the solicitor's first act was to take away their savings book, leaving them with only £100 each as spending money for four months. Mrs Tricker, 58, says: 'The loss of independence nearly drove my father over the edge. He took to offering his asthma nebuliser to passing strangers to raise cash.' Meanwhile, for handling their simple affairs, the solicitor ran up charges of nearly £19,000 in just ten months, charging £200 an hour, while giving Mrs Tricker just £70 a week to pay for her parents' living costs. All they had were their savings and a flat in Dorset to sell. Guidance on Court of Protection costs states that general management costs are 'unlikely to exceed' £3,000 a year. Since Mrs Tricker was not the client, her complaints to the solicitor and requests to see the bill could be ignored, while her parents' estate was being drained. 'After ten months, I had to beg the Office of the Public Guardian, which oversees receivers, to intervene,' she says. A new solicitor was appointed as the receiver in 2006, bringing the final total to £44,400. Her father died in 2007 aged 88 and her mother died last year aged 89. Although families can complain to the Court of Protection if they feel someone is abusing their powers, it is difficult to gather evidence without access to bills and bank statements. Caroline Bielanska, chairman of Solicitors for the Elderly, says: 'Without evidence, the only way is to go to the Office of the Public Guardian. They do an immediate risk-assessment to work out if there is cause for complaint and then examine the case. The majority of complaints arise because of sibling rivalry.' Deputies' bills are assessed by the Supreme Court Costs Office. Mrs Tricker finally received a copy of her parents' bills from the court last month. A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice, which oversees the Court of Protection, says: ' Anyone appointed to look after the affairs of a person who lacks capacity must always act in their best interests, and put their needs first and foremost. 'Since the Mental Capacity Act came into force in 2007, all deputies are supervised by the Office of the Public Guardian and must follow a comprehensive code of practice, which provides guidance on how to act and make decisions on behalf of people who lack capacity.' It costs more than £1,000 to have a deputy appointed, plus an annual charge for a security bond which can run into thousands. To avoid this route, you should draw up a Lasting Power of Attorney stating who you want to run your affairs if you become unable to handle them. There are two types: one for your finances and the other for your health and welfare. They cost £120 each and can't be used until they have been registered by the Office of the Public Guardian. The lengthy forms are complicated and readers have told us about long delays in processing them. Before October 2007, a simpler Enduring Power of Attorney was used. These are still valid. 'Dementia can strike at any time. Plan ahead and get a Lasting Power of Attorney before you, too, are sucked into this costly world,' says Mrs Tricker. Having reviewed the bill, Mrs Tricker has asked the court to rescind and reassess the first solicitor's costs. The hearing is set for June 3. READ more

READ about

Back to top

Under the Fraud Act 2006. Section 2 of the Act specifically states:
2 Fraud by false representation
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and (b) intends, by making the representation— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A representation is false if— (a) it is untrue or misleading, and (b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading. (3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of— (a) the person making the representation, or (b) any other person. (4) A representation may be express or implied. (5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention). 3 Fraud by failing to disclose information A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is under a legal duty to disclose, and (b) intends, by failing to disclose the information— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. 4 Fraud by abuse of position (1) A person is in breach of this section if he— (a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of another person, (b) dishonestly abuses that position, and (c) intends, by means of the abuse of that position— (i) to make a gain for himself or another, or (ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss. (2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

Warning to Government
This is not a request that requires an answer, it does however require a response – by way of action on your part that demonstrates that you understand its substance and the seriousness of our intent. The national collective political establishment has betrayed the ‘People’ by hijacking our sovereignty and engaging in criminal activities in a subservient role to a foreign power without our consent.  This is in defiance of our constitution and an act of treason. You do not need to know how many people we represent today, only how many we might represent tomorrow and you should know that our numbers grow daily.  This letter thus serves as your window of opportunity to make amends and give remedy for the crimes committed against us.  We will show compassion for those who recant and we will be ruthless with those who do not concede to the wishes of the people. Ignoring this letter is not an option… if you think it is, then this serves only to demonstrate that your intellect is subservient to your arrogance.  You may feel that you can ignore it because you are too powerful, but to do so is to underestimate the seething resentment that the people feel for the political establishment in general. You have acted in contempt of the principles of democracy and shown total disregard for our right to govern ourselves. For the past several decades the ‘People’ have been treated with extraordinary and total contempt by the collective political establishment.  It has not mattered which political party has been in office or “power” as you insist on calling it, nothing ever changes.  We are continually subjected to the same global agenda.  We have been used and abused like pawns in your game of supremacy in which a dynastic ruling class see themselves as ordained to rule as masters – with impunity, whilst we the people, as virtual slaves, are supposedly destined to obey – without question.  You have persistently and consistently undermined our democracy by agreeing to treaties with foreign political elites who have no business in our affairs. You have rewarded yourselves with the trappings of office – high salaries, luxuries denied most of us, privileges, bonuses, pensions, prestige and benefits that we can only dream of… whilst burdening us with ever-higher taxes, derisory pensions and declining standards of public services.  It is we who pay the price for your malfeasance. The story of our ‘People’ over the past several decades that will be told in the history books of tomorrow is the story of betrayal, greed, corruption, nepotism, treason and modern-day fascism – the latter of which manifests itself in the global agenda being imposed upon us against our will. The United Nations – a step process towards TOTAL global governance is now fully exposed.  Built on lies and deceit is being hoisted by its own petard – the edifice is crumbling but still the political elite like demented fools, continue to feed on their own delusions.  The docile masses, mesmerized by trivia, propaganda, complacency and ignorance have still somehow managed to grasp some basic elements of the truth, alerted almost certainly by the blatant and arrogant refusal of the political elite to tell the truth even when it stands proud in the rubble of political deceit and betrayal. The political classes are discredited at every level.  They rant about the benefits of our subjugation to a foreign enterprise, peace, prosperity and democracy where in reality chaos, dictatorship and corruption reign supreme.  Western economies are on the brink of collapse because of the corrupt banking cartels, there is visible resistance on the streets and people call for lawful rebellion.  But less known, there is clandestine resistance behind closed doors.  Whilst the majorities advocate a peaceful uprising, the extremes will always be in the mix and when passion and anger are fused and those aggrieved can find no remedy… violent resistance is as understandable as the passion for life itself. The police and militia that you currently rely on to defend yourselves against the people’s retribution… are made up of our own, they are not your people – and when they learn about your betrayal and your intent… AND THEY WILL – they will turn against you.  Their awakening, which you cannot stop, is your Achilles heel.  Your greatest fear must be that we will impose upon you the regimes and repression that you had planned for us. People are meeting in groups across the country, talking across oceans… they are disparate, disorganized and without an effective plan to repel the global agenda…as yet.  BUT a leadership is emerging… organizers are coordinating and small groups are linking to form larger groups.  The dichotomies of left v right, Christian v Muslim, black v white, Catholic v Protestant, which have been used to great effect to divide and conquer in the past, will find no favour in this war.  The call to arms that will unite us will be ‘the people v the global elite’ – the cry will cascade street to street and find easy passage and universal support – for our common purpose has greater value and strength than yours. We have a constitution – which you ignore.  We have been denied our democratic rights, regardless, we have clearly expressed our wishes, in one opinion poll after another, that we do not want to be governed by a foreign un-elected officialdom, but still you disregard us.  We are promised a referendum on our future, but then you ignore the results or recant.  You speak in support of our views when in opposition, but act to the contrary when we elect you. You consult with corporate executives, international bankers, non-government organizations, international charities, academia, foreign dignitaries, political elites, think tanks and lobbyist – collectively a tiny minority, who do not represent us.  These groups all emanate from the same social strata, with their own agendas to satisfy and all funded by the same cartel.  You take note of their every whim, but you care not a jot for what we think or what we want.  Your children are given jobs, with big salaries fresh from university and then rapidly climb the corporate ladder as a reward by the same corporate bodies who you have favoured with your decisions.  Our children must make their own way in an increasingly desperate world.  Your corporatism suppresses our freedoms with deliberate and malicious intent. You accommodate tyrants, dictators, arms dealers and all manner of dubious characters, with whom you are happy to keep company.  You turn a blind eye when the smell of money wafts your nostrils… it suppresses the stink of corruption and evil.  Your moral compasses are defunct… your values deplorable and motives despicable.  Our soldiers die to service your corporate agenda – their blood is on your hands. You are educated at the same elite schools and members of the same elite clubs and you allow these influences to override the consideration which should be paramount in service of the people.  You have adopted the “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” philosophy… because you have learnt from your predecessors that corruption and deception do indeed pay.  The United Nations Security Council is awash with it and you have determined to get your snout in the same trough.  You take comfort from the fact that you control those who have the authority to indict you for your criminality… because they too have fallen prey to the corruption.  You have sold off our national resources to your friends, divided communities, deprived villages and towns, undermined, destroyed and bulldozed indigenous communities. You have laid waste where once prosperity was enjoyed.  But you have not suffered… you have remained aloof, disengaged, uninvolved – removed from the debris and the misery that you have wreaked upon the rest of us. Our farms no longer feed us with the nutrients we require to sustain healthy lives, crippled by regulations, supranational mining contracts made to favour foreign farmers or ‘Coal Seam Gas Fracking’ that is destroying the once fertile soils of our landscape. Our armed forces are forced to commit crimes against humanity by the requirement to adhere to the unlawful and communist manifesto of the United Nations Charter and we see foreign troops being trained on our own soil on the pretence that they may be needed to protect us… when the reality is they are being trained to subdue us… to protect you from our vengeance.  Our children are victims of social engineering in the schools and declining standards of education.  They are being sexualized by explicit exposures before they have the emotional maturity to be able to cope.  You are destroying their minds and their childhoods. You have engineered a police state with legislation that empowers you at our expense and you have been blatant in your contempt for our democratic and constitution rights and our common law, which have been known to us for centuries.  You deny us our rights and our freedoms and contemptuously imply that you can provide us with a Bill of Rights.  Would we seriously trust a thief with our wallets?  You have corrupted our courts by appointing judges who are contemptuous of our common law and installed a law society that disperses Maritime/Admiralty Law through the peoples courts . You have dissected our nation and sold off our infrastructure.  We are forced to buy our own water from foreign corporations which grow rich on the back of our suffering.  You are then rewarded by them with lucrative directorships when you slip quietly from office with your bulging pensions.  You remain oblivious, unconcerned… disconnected.  We will no longer be ignored as you go about your globalist agenda.  We will resist your controlling and petty rules and regulations… we will resist your fines and penalty charges and challenge your corrupt and biased judges, we will defy the over-zealous police, and your oppressive and unlawful taxes. It is our intention to govern ourselves… we do not seek your permission – this is our right.  You have had your opportunity and you have failed.  We will take control of our own lives in stages, as and when it suits us.  Our numbers will grow as we show by example that prosperity is the natural consequence of honest and fair governance.  We will expose you for the parasites you are. This country has a constitution – which you ignore.  We have Magna Carta, we have trial by jury and habeas corpus.  We have our customs, traditions and common law.  We have the right of petition, free speech, and free movement and above all… we have the right to govern ourselves.  These are our inalienable rights – they are not privileges granted to us by you or your ilk.  They cannot be taken away or extinguished at the whim of political diktat or through corrupt judicial process and certainly not at the behest of foreign undemocratic institutions.  You have no authority to dictate… your duty is to serve. We are a sovereign nation… a proud people.  We have watched our country slowly destroyed… by you – we now see clearly what you have done… your purpose and your betrayal.  We will honour our inheritance – the freedoms fought for and secured for us, and we will ensure that we will pass this on to the next generation, to our children and theirs. You have been sent this letter by a constituent.  On sending a copy to you, they have also registered your name with our coordinators.  This will remain with us as evidence for your trial… for treason, when necessary.  It’s your choice. We The People - WE ARE SOVEREIGN

----------

The two richest most evil families in the world are the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Join us below and please like our page and share. facebook.com/KilluminatiSoldiersII They control the central banks of the world, the finance and supply both sides of all wars and control the finances of the Vatican and Occult. Rock-a-fella records artist Jay Z says he is in the la familia and long live the king. What he means by the la familia is that he is a Rockefeller puppet and made man inside of the Vatican controlled SINdicate. The roman priests that killed Christ are still the priests in Rome and the money changing families, kings, queens and pharaohs of the past have brought down their bloodlines and most are intermarried into these families. The Rockefeller Family Fortunes http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Illuminati/rockefeller_fortunes.htm Murder by Injection- The Rockefeller Syndicate http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/emullins.htm The Creature From Jekyll Island http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20Government/Federal%20Reserve%20Scam/jekyll_island.htm Standard Oil and the Rise of Hitler http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/ The Bush Family and the Rockefellers http://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/ How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html The Rothschilds and Rockefellers Join Forces in Multi-Billion Dollar Deal http://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/the-rothschilds-and-rockefellers-join-forces-in-multi-billion-dollar-deal/ The Rothschilds Exposed 1/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F4IGwuKdUQ The Rothschilds Exposed 2/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2Yjoi2_5pw The Rothschilds Exposed 3/3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47WM2BhklmM The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time, their tentacles reaching into many aspects of our daily lives, as is documented in the following timeline. However, before you jump to the timeline, please read this invaluable introduction which will tell you who the Rothschilds are as oppose to who they claim to be. The Rothschilds claim that they are Jewish, when in fact they are Khazars. They are from a country called Khazaria, which occupied the land locked between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea which is now predominantly occupied by Georgia. The reason the Rothschilds claim to be Jewish is that the Khazars under the instruction of the King, converted to the Jewish faith in 740 A.D., but of course that did not include converting their Asiatic Mongolian genes to the genes of the Jewish people. You will find that approximately 90% of people in the world today who call themselves Jews are actually Khazars, or as they like to be known, Ashkenazi Jews. These people knowingly lie to the world with their claims that the land of Israel is theirs by birthright, when in actual fact their real homeland is over 800 miles away in Georgia. So, next time you hear an Israeli Prime Minister bleating about the so-called persecution of the Jews, consider this, every Prime Minister of Israel has been an Ashkenazi Jew. Therefore when all these Prime Ministers have curried favour with the West for their re-establishment of a Jewish homeland, they have knowingly and deliberately lied to you, as they were never from that region, and they well know it, because it is they who call themselves Ashkenazi Jews. The Book of Revelation, Chapter 2, Verse 9, states the following which would appear to be about these Ashkenazi Jews: "I know thy works, and tribulation and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan." The most wealthy bloodline in the world bar none and the leader of the Ashkenazi Jews in the world today is the Rothschild family. As you will see in the timeline, the Rothschilds have obtained this position through lies, manipulation and murder. Their bloodline also extends into the Royal Families of Europe, and the following family names: Astor; Bundy; Collins; duPont; Freeman; Kennedy; Morgan; Oppenheimer; Rockefeller; Sassoon; Schiff; Taft; and Van Duyn. However, these are not the only bloodlines to worry about. You are probably aware of the centuries old pratice undertaken by many Ashkenazi Jews whereby they would change their name, in order for them to appear part of the dominant race of the country in which they lived, so as they could obtain influential positions in that country, which they would then exploit to serve their real masters elsewhere. There is plenty of evidence to prove the Rothschilds continue that deceptive tradition. Furthermore the Rothschilds are known to sire many children secretly that they can put into positions of power when required. This started with the very first man who took the name Rothschild, who had a secret sixth son. Finally, remember the world is a diverse place, I could if I wanted change my name to Rothschild, or any of the names listed above, and that would not make me part of this family anymore than converting to Judaism in 740 A.D. will make these Ashkenazis Jewish. Please, therefore, do not automatically assume someone you see with the name Rothschild or any of the names listed above are part of the Rothschild criminal network. Furthermore and most importantly, the majority of Ashkenazi Jews are innocent and not part of this network. Check the facts out for yourself first, this article is designed to inform people who the enemy is, not single out people of a particular race or people with a particular surname, who may have nothing to do with this Rothschild criminal network. 1743: Mayer Amschel Bauer, an Ashkenazi Jew, is born in Frankfurt, Germany, the son of Moses Amschel Bauer, a money lender and the proprietor of a counting house. Moses Amschel Bauer places a red sign above the entrance door to his counting house. This sign is a red hexagram (which geometrically and numerically translates into the number 666) which under Rothschild instruction will end up on the Israeli flag some two centuries later. 1753: Gutle Schnaper, an Ashkenazi Jew (future wife of Mayer Amschel Bauer), born to respected merchant, Wolf Salomon Schnaper. 1760: During this decade Mayer Amschel Bauer works for a bank owned by the Oppenheimers' in Hanover, Germany. He is highly successful and becomes a junior partner. Whilst working at the bank he becomes acquainted with General von Estorff. Following his father's death, Bauer returns to Frankfurt to take over his father's business. Bauer recognises the significance of the red hexagram and changes his name from Bauer to Rothschild, after the red hexagram or sign signifying 666 hanging over the entrance door ("Rot," is German for, "Red," "Schild," is German for, "Sign"). Now Mayer Amschel Rothschild, he discovers that General von Estorff is now attached to the court of Prince William IX of Hesse-Hanau, one of the richest royal houses in Europe, which gained its' wealth by the hiring out of Hessian soldiers to foreign countries for vast profits (a practice that continues today in the form of exporting, "peacekeeping," troops throughout the world). He therefore makes the General's re-acquaintance on the pretext of selling him valuable coins and trinkets at discounted prices. As he plans, Rothschild is subsequently introduced to Prince William himself who is more than pleased with discounted prices he charges for his rare coins and trinkets, and Rothschild offers him a bonus for any other business the Prince can direct his way. Rothschild subsequently becomes close associates with Prince William, and ends up doing business with him and members of the court. He soon discovers that loaning money to governments and royalty is more profitable than loaning to individuals, as the loans are bigger and are secured by the nation's taxes. 1769: Mayer Amschel Rothschild is given permission by Prince William to hang a sign on the front of his business premises declaring that he is, "M. A. Rothschild, by appointment court factor to his serene highness, Prince William of Hanau." 1770: Mayer Amschel Rothschild draws up plans for the creation of the Illuminati and entrusts Ashkenazi Jew, Adam Weishaupt, a Crypto-Jew who was outwardly Roman Catholic, with its organization and development. The Illuminati is to be based upon the teachings of the Talmud, which is in turn, the teachings of Rabbinical Jews. It was to be called the Illuminati as this is a Luciferian term which means, keepers of the light. Mayer Amschel Rothschild marries Gutle Schnaper. 1773: Amschel Mayer Rothschild born, the first of Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s sons. He like all his brothers who follow him, will enter the family business at the age of 12. 1774: Salomon Mayer Rothschild born. 1776: Adam Weishaupt officially completes his organisation of the Illuminati on May 1 of this year. The purpose of the Illuminati is to divide the goyim (all non-Jews) through political, economic, social, and religious means. The opposing sides were to be armed and incidents were to be provided in order for them to: fight amongst themselves; destroy national governments; destroy religious institutions; and eventually destroy each other. Weishaupt soon infiltrates the Continental Order of Freemasons with this Illuminati doctrine and establishes lodges of the Grand Orient to be their secret headquarters. This was all under the orders and finance of Mayer Amschel Rothschild and the concept has spread and is followed within Masonic Lodges worldwide to the present day. Weishaupt also recruits 2,000 paid followers including the most intelligent men in the field of arts and letters, education, science, finance,and industry. They were instructed to follow the following methods in order to control people. 1) Use monetary and sex bri Share

We are now asking for
donations to our cause

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSw-H5ZiOI8

talkshoe with karl lentz

Kevin Annett‎David Compan Hi everyone: Considering my upcoming journey to Europe, I thought it appropriate to share (below) what I wrote after being unlawfully incarcerated in a British prison and then deported, in May of 2011. This is especially made relevant with our criminal conviction of the traitorous Elizabeth Windsor and the nullification of the authority of the British "crown". So take heart! And enjoy. ........... No bomb that ever bursts shatters the crystal spirit: With Farid and others in a British prison by Kevin Annett May 31, 2011 I wear as a badge of honor my deportation from a country of liars and cut throats. - Big Bill Haywood, IWW leader and revolutionary, 1920 The filthy fiction calling itself the Crown of England finally vomited me from its midst this week, only five days before I was to speak of its crimes at the annual Against Child Abuse Rally in London's Trafalgar Square. I am proud to have shared a British prison with many freedom fighters over time, including my own free thinking ancestor Peter Annett, who was jailed and pilloried in London at the age of 70, in the year 1763, for writing "seditious blasphemy" against the Church of England. And that repression continues today, against innocent men and women still caught in the claws of the police state known as England. Here is what happened: The room is small, unventilated, and foul-smelling, and crammed with ten of us. I am the only white person there. A Malaysian mother with her four year old daughter sits in one corner, sobbing uncontrollably. Incarcerated for half a day, she’s one of the luckier ones: a young Turkish man called Farid has languished in here for nearly three days, isolated from his four children. Farid has lived in England for eleven years, doing sweat jobs for shit wages and loyally paying his taxes, but tomorrow he’ll be deported over a technicality in his work visa. There is no appeal allowed. His children will not accompany him. This is the Immigration Prison in Stansted airport, outside London. The time is the early hours of May 30, 2011. The net fell on me suddenly the night before, as I made my way through the border control desk after disembarking from the Netherlands. After asking me why I was coming to England, a banal twit in a uniform scanned my passport through his computer, and quickly looked shocked as he peered through thick lenses at the screen. He scuttled off to speak to his supervisor, who I watched through the glass window of his office as he looked at his own computer, nodded his head and said something to his crony. Triumphantly – I guess that as an employee of the private company Reliance Ltd. that runs British immigration services now, he gets extra points for deporting someone – The Twit returned and informed me with a whine of condescension that my giving public lectures was “unusual” for a tourist, that I was "suspect", and would therefore be barred from entering England. "What exactly am I suspected of doing?" I asked the guy. “But first you are to come this way” he motioned, ignoring my question like I hadn't said anything, and we walked to a tiny holding cell. The Twit left me alone in there for a half hour, I guess to make me sweat, but when he returned I was calmly whistling an Irish melody that seemed to annoy him to no end. “I bet you find your job difficult, you know, putting people through all this” I ventured to The Twit as he fiddled with his papers. Attempting a smile, he answered, “No, I enjoy it, actually. One meets very fascinating people in this line of work”. If only you knew, I thought, but said nothing. The Twit refused to give me his name when I asked, nor could I know the name of his supervisor. He also wasn’t wearing a badge number, although later he made a gaff when he donned another coat and I saw his number: 6676. “You’ll be in here tonight, until we can send you back from whence you came” The Twit informed me, gesturing to a white door. He knocked, and a stern young guy answered and glared at me like I was yesterday's trash. Then I was locked in with a whole crowd of dark skinned people. Despair gazed back at me from the sad eyes of my fellow prisoners who lay or sat around the room. They were all deflated, tired and beaten. A TV was blaring mindless crap at them so I walked over and switched it off. The young Turkish guy whose name was Farid looked surprised, and then he smiled at me weakly, and nodded. After my obligatory finger printing and photographing – I asked the Reliance goon if I could have a copy of the picture, since I looked pretty good, but he said no – I was locked back into the sparse room with my fellow detainees, and was told not to speak to any of them since that was against the rules. I just smiled at the goon, and ignored him. Most of the detainees didn’t want to talk. It was nearly midnight by then, and like prisoners tend to do, they had adapted to their incarceration and were mired in themselves. But Farid was too filled with grief about being robbed of his children to settle into apathy. “I will never see them again. They will be put with other families and then anything can happen to them. My youngest son is only a baby.” I remembered reading the day before how 586 children placed in the foster care system in England had somehow disappeared over the past year. Local child welfare officials had no explanation, apparently. To ride out his pain and the dull hours, Farid taught me some Turkish words that night, starting with “I love you” – it sounded like “selly sev yurum”. He laughed for the first time when he commented how the phrase might come in handy if I ever came to his country, but not if I said it to another man. “That’s not what I hear” I replied, and he laughed even harder. We held back the demons together during those slow and weary hours, as the others tried to sleep, and didn’t, and the Malaysian woman sang to her daughter while the Reliance thugs stared at us through a thick pane of glass. It ended for me at 9 am, when I was taken to a plane that would fly me back to Eindhoven. I said goodbye to Farid and wished him luck. The man took my hand gently and said “Allah”, pressing his other hand against his chest, and then pointing to my heart. I recalled then the last words in George Orwell's book Homage to Catalonia, in which he describes briefly meeting an Italian militia man who like Orwell was fighting Franco and his fascists during the Spanish civil war. They couldn't speak one another's language, but they shook hands and departed in different directions for the front lines, and Orwell never saw the Italian man again. In memory to this unknown stranger who had briefly taken his hand in comradeship, and who had probably died, Orwell wrote a poem to him that concluded, But the look I saw in your eyes, no power can disinherit. No bomb that ever burst shatters the crystal spirit. The night after my deportation, I stood in a crowd of singing and laughing revellers in a Dublin pub, tasting my freedom like a soothing ale, and thinking of where Farid might be, and grieving for him and his children in that part of me that never rests. I never felt unfree in jail; nor did Farid's own imprisonment and agony stop him from taking my hand in his, and blessing us. I've learned from so many Farids that the more they repress us, the sharper and stronger we get, like a gift. And what happened to me is simply boomeranging back now on the British government and its clumsy attempts to stop our Tribunal this fall. So be of good cheer, and let that hope propel your body and your life to continue to accompany your words. But never forget Farid, and his children ... and that Thing which is trying to imprison all of us through fear, and its other illusions. www.KevinAnnett.com

Back to top ROTHCHILDS CENTRAL BANK
OMG~! I SEE the BIG PICTURE. I just found out that China's money is debt and interest free because they issue their own money and have locked out the Rothschild Central Bankers. So has Putin and Russia. They Rothschilds think they are the Kings on the Chessboard and are planning to take out both Russia AND China to regain financial control over their markets.
The Rothschilds Elite are Psychopathic Control Freaks and whomever they cannot control they will seek to destroy, as if they have some kind of Divine Claim upon all flesh to pay tribute to them, or maybe to their Master, Lucifer, for whom they are the Earthly and Human Representatives.
The Rothschilds are the Vatican's Bankers and the Vatican is the visible Institution of the Antichrist- or that which is against the Divine Order. The Antagonist of Life Itself.
Now, the Zionist Rothschilds are following their Luciferian marching orders, having helped to established a Jewish State in Palestine in 1948 according to the Balfour Declaration, supposedly as reparations to the Jews after the Nazi atrocities- but in fact, it was a way for the Luciferians to create a Zionist State, co-opt the Jewish Homeland Movement and to round up and gather all Jews into one central location for the next phase of their Luciferian Plan.
Now, since China and Russia have essentially regained total control their own financial markets and have said "Go F*ck Yourselves" to the Vatican/Babylonian Banksters, the Rothschilds now intend to incite a fiery conflagration in the Middle East which will accomplish 2 of Lucifer's primary objectives:
1) The destruction of the Jews
2) The submission of China and Russia to the Rothschilds Banking Elite- that is, to the Luciferian Vatican.
First, they will create a False Flag scenario that incites Israel to strike against Iran- another country without a single Rothschilds-owned Bank.
Since Russia is a strong ally of Iran, they will rush to assist. The US will then get involved to stand with it's ally, Israel, against Russia.
China, as a major ally of Russia will then get involved to stand with them against the US.
The resulting conflagration will deplete and make weak all 3 Superpowers and Israel will likely be reduced to rubble.
Then the Rothschilds step in with the final implementation of their Globalist NWO Agenda- Full Spectrum Dominance, Panopticon Surveillance and Total Control through a micro-chipped population.
You see, we are the only ones that can prevent this nightmare scenario from unfolding. We must expose the Central Bankster Elite and all their wicked works.
I for one deny "Satan", and all his "wicked works".
I affirm the Reality that has been gifted to us by the Creator and swear my love and allegiance to the Creator, and to Our Lady Earth, who has suffered terribly at the hands of these corrupted beings known as the Central Banking Elite and their minions.
By exposing their innumerable atrocities, we will emancipate humanity from it's mental slavery and move into the greatest period of freedom and happiness that humanity has ever experienced.
The Whole World is waiting on us.
If not us, who? If not now, when?



*************

FOR REFERENCE

Hello chaps and lassies. My friend got a parking ticket in a hospital car park (£70) and i have told him DO NOT PAY. Can anybody help me with some links for the net and good solid info please. I am merely a white belt in being free and my knowledge is limited. Any help would be very greatly appreciated.

It is my understanding from Halsbury’s Laws of England that the Oath does not authorize any Judge or Magistrate in the Common Law Jurisdiction of England and Wales to adjudicate any Hearing in which the matter is to be decided in any way other than by a Jury. Furthermore, in the Hearing in question held at the Magistrates Court in TOWN on DATE there was no Injured Party, no corpus delecti, and no Defendant. Therefore the Common Law Oath under which the Judge/Magistrate claimed authority is unlawful and constitutes an offence contrary to Section 13 of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. The fact that the Judge/Magistrate sat is considered to be prima facie evidence of the offence. It is my understanding from reading Halsbury’s Laws of England that no MAGISTRATES or COUNTY COURT should exist, and when someone is summoned it is an ADMINISTRATIVE meeting without ANY lawful existence. If this has transpired it is in breach of the Fraud Act 2006 (see 4, 5 and 6 below) as the Judge/Magistrate, Clerk and Prosecutor step outside their lawful remit, and become personally liable. It is my understanding that demanding monies by false representation is in breach of the Fraud Act 2006, Section 2 It is my understanding that demanding monies without providing full disclosure is in breach of The Fraud Act 2006, Section 3 It is my understanding that demanding monies without providing evidence of authority or jurisdiction is in breach of The Fraud Act 2006, Section 4 It is my understanding that Halsbury’s on Administrative Law 20-11: “The law is absolutely clear on this subject. There is no authority for administrative courts in this country and no act can be passed to legitimise them.” It is my understanding that according to Observance of due Process of Law 1368 section 3: “None shall be put to answer without due Process of Law. At the Request of the Commons by their Petitions put forth in this Parliament, to eschew the Mischiefs and Damages done to divers of his Commons by false Accusers, which oftentimes have made their Accusations more for Revenge and singular Benefit, than for the Profit of the King, or of his People, which accused Persons, some have been taken, and sometime caused to come before the King’s Council by Writ, and otherwise upon grievous Pain against the Law: It is assented and accorded, for the good Governance of the Commons, that no Man be put to answer without Presentment before Justices, or Matter of Record, or by due Process and Writ original, according to the old Law of the Land: And if any Thing from henceforth be done to the contrary, it shall be void in the Law, and holden for Error.”

Back to top