UPDATED: Protestors storm court and 'arrest' judge in chaotic scenes, watch video here

Wirral Globe: UPDATED: Protestors storm court and 'arrest' judge in chaotic scenes UPDATED: Protestors storm court and 'arrest' judge in chaotic scenes

HUNDREDS of anti-establishment protestors stormed a Wirral court today and "arrested" a judge.

In chaotic scenes, police rescued Judge Michael Peake from their clutches and escorted him safely from the building.

Protestors from the public gallery charged at Mr Peake to make a civil arrest chanting “arrest that judge”.

Police scrambled over court benches to control the near-riot and one protestor shouted “seal the court.”

Another sat in the judge’s chair at the head of the court and declared Mr Hayes as “released”.

Around 600 chanting demonstrators massed around the County Court in Birkenhead.

Deafening cheers and chants could be heard from the crowd outside and protestors used mobile phones to film arrests being made.

Roads were blockaded and dozens of police officers deployed to keep order.

A stand-off followed with several demonstrators staging a sit-down protest in front of police vehicles, refusing to let them pass.

Six arrests were made - two for assaulting officers.

The protestors were from the anti-establishment "British Constitution Group."

The demonstration was sparked when one of the prominent voices in the BCG, Wirral man Roger Hayes, faced a hearing for non-payment of council tax.

In 1997, Mr Hayes, a former member of UKIP, stood for election in Wallasey representing the Referendum Party against sitting Labour MP Angela Eagle. He polled 1,490 votes and finished fourth.

As he emerged from the court surrounded by his supporters, Mr Hayes said: "The judges are breaking the law in their own courts.

"I asked him (Mr Peake) if he was serving under his oath of office.

"I asked three times for him to confirm this and he refused.

"So I civilly arrested the judge and I called upon some people in the court to assist me in this.

"They were acting lawfully and the police should not have arrested them."

The hearing was abandoned and will need to be re-arranged at a date to be fixed.

Raymond Saintclair, who organised the Birkenhead protest, said: "Today was day-one.

"This is going to happen again and again and again.

"We have sent a message to this court as one nation and one voice until change comes."

The BCG's main aim is a rallying call for "lawful rebellion."

Leaflets handed out by the crowd said: "We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves.

"That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service."

A Merseyside Police spokesman said six men, whose ages range from 20 to 41, were arrested - two for assaulting officers and four for breach of peace and obstructing police.

They have been taken to police stations around Wirral where they will be questioned.

A statement from the force said: "Officers are committed to facilitating peaceful protests but will not tolerate criminal behaviour, disorder or anti-social behaviour during any demonstrations within Merseyside."

Wirral Council leader, Cllr Jeff Green, said: "Have these people given any thought to what happens to the likes of Sure Start, public libraries or other services that people depend on? Not many people like paying tax but we accept the need for tax.

"I am disappointed that this case has been adjourned, but in the light of the events that took place, understand the court’s decision.

"However, before anyone else gets any ideas about not paying their Council Tax, let me assure everyone that Wirral Council is stepping up its activity to ensure that everyone pays their fair share. Nobody is above the law."

Comments (61)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

says...

  • Score: 1

6:57pm Mon 7 Mar 11

chas says...

If the judge was serving under his oath of office, why did he refuse to confirm this three times?
If the judge was serving under his oath of office, why did he refuse to confirm this three times? chas
  • Score: -1

7:34pm Mon 7 Mar 11

hugo2008 says...

Is this the start of the public taking action, Direct Action, as more and more they feel they are not listened to by the so called political classes.

What a dreadful state of affairs our so called democracy is getting into.

Take the issue about membership in Europe, why could not the authorities just add one small tick box to National Census forms we must complete by law. A simple yes or no, In or Out response is all that is needed.

Or add the question about Europe Membership to the referendum about our out dated voting system.

Either way this simple act would produce a definitive decision by the population with little or no extra cost.

That is what democracy is all about, why have we not got it.
Is this the start of the public taking action, Direct Action, as more and more they feel they are not listened to by the so called political classes. What a dreadful state of affairs our so called democracy is getting into. Take the issue about membership in Europe, why could not the authorities just add one small tick box to National Census forms we must complete by law. A simple yes or no, In or Out response is all that is needed. Or add the question about Europe Membership to the referendum about our out dated voting system. Either way this simple act would produce a definitive decision by the population with little or no extra cost. That is what democracy is all about, why have we not got it. hugo2008
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Mon 7 Mar 11

Tom_Roberts says...

This is the beginning of Direct Action by intelligent people who are sick to the back teeth of having their rights removed by a political elite who have no mandate.

People MUST take action like this to get their voices heard and restore PROPER democracy, instead of a political, judicial and policing system that is now dominated by self-interested charlatans bent on their career and financial advancement.
This is the beginning of Direct Action by intelligent people who are sick to the back teeth of having their rights removed by a political elite who have no mandate. People MUST take action like this to get their voices heard and restore PROPER democracy, instead of a political, judicial and policing system that is now dominated by self-interested charlatans bent on their career and financial advancement. Tom_Roberts
  • Score: 3

9:41pm Mon 7 Mar 11

lendusaquid says...

If a Judge is not acting under his oath of office then he is not a judge. In fact he is impersonating a judge which is a criminal offense and he should be arrested.
If a Judge is not acting under his oath of office then he is not a judge. In fact he is impersonating a judge which is a criminal offense and he should be arrested. lendusaquid
  • Score: 5

1:25am Tue 8 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

I thought this was about someone from UKIP taken court for refusing to pay their council tax?
I thought this was about someone from UKIP taken court for refusing to pay their council tax? slumdogg
  • Score: 0

5:12am Tue 8 Mar 11

arthurC says...

Lets hope that NEXT time it will be 6000!

Well done Mr Hayes and friends. It's about time someone stood up to these treacherous tyrants and bullies.
Lets hope that NEXT time it will be 6000! Well done Mr Hayes and friends. It's about time someone stood up to these treacherous tyrants and bullies. arthurC
  • Score: 4

9:32am Tue 8 Mar 11

bickyboy says...

I hadnt heard of this group until I read the article. Providing they arent affiliated to tediously knee-jerk single issue organisations such as UAF, Searchlight or the EDL, I think they may have a bright future. For too long weve been led by our noses down the road of supine acceptance which the political establishment would prefer us to travel. Our politicians make pretty speeches and call themselves by different labels; ultimately they pursue not the interests of the electorate, but their own fiscal advantage. It may only have been a humble court case around which the protest was focused; but its still interesting, perhaps even encouraging to see people fighting back against the system instead of lying down in the road, seemingly content to be crushed by the wheels of political and judicial expediency. The only ones I feel sorry for here are the police; caught as usual between rock of the stupidity and selfishness of the Establishment and hard place of the frustrations of the people.
I hadnt heard of this group until I read the article. Providing they arent affiliated to tediously knee-jerk single issue organisations such as UAF, Searchlight or the EDL, I think they may have a bright future. For too long weve been led by our noses down the road of supine acceptance which the political establishment would prefer us to travel. Our politicians make pretty speeches and call themselves by different labels; ultimately they pursue not the interests of the electorate, but their own fiscal advantage. It may only have been a humble court case around which the protest was focused; but its still interesting, perhaps even encouraging to see people fighting back against the system instead of lying down in the road, seemingly content to be crushed by the wheels of political and judicial expediency. The only ones I feel sorry for here are the police; caught as usual between rock of the stupidity and selfishness of the Establishment and hard place of the frustrations of the people. bickyboy
  • Score: 1

9:58am Tue 8 Mar 11

WAT says...

Well done those protesters .
We want our country back by peaceful means but the LiblabCon will not give up their stranglehold on our throats without a fight . THEY ARE NOW TRYING TO FOB US OFF WITH A REFERENDUM ON THE USELESS FPTP OR THE PATHETIC AV.
A VOTE ON THE EUSSR IS WHAT WE WANT . ROGER HAYES HAS GOT COURAGE. I take my hat off to him.
Well done those protesters . We want our country back by peaceful means but the LiblabCon will not give up their stranglehold on our throats without a fight . THEY ARE NOW TRYING TO FOB US OFF WITH A REFERENDUM ON THE USELESS FPTP OR THE PATHETIC AV. A VOTE ON THE EUSSR IS WHAT WE WANT . ROGER HAYES HAS GOT COURAGE. I take my hat off to him. WAT
  • Score: 0

11:12am Tue 8 Mar 11

Dantealighieri says...

WAT, London- National, council elections just vote UKIP, it's that easy.
WAT, London- National, council elections just vote UKIP, it's that easy. Dantealighieri
  • Score: 0

11:28am Tue 8 Mar 11

johnbrace says...

Personally I have always found judges at Birkenhead County Court to be fair, even when a government barrister in a low cut top is fluttering her eyelashes at them.

Each time I've arrived for a case, I've been dealt with professionally by staff, even if the security seems more in keeping with a maximum security prison.

However those who don't come from a legal background and are aware of their rights or have access to expert legal advice can get intimidated by lawsuits and court cases.

In this case it is reminiscent of the poll tax protests (and imprisonment of councillors) for non-payment in the 1990s.

It is very odd that other unpaid debts don't lead to a custodial sentence, but unpaid Council Tax can!

The truth of the matter is I am against Council Tax at all. Despite a dazzling array of exemptions, discounts, council tax benefit and other things it's not a fair tax and should be axed.

The public can "arrest" a judge, however it has to be for a criminal matter. Judges are used to dealing with the public, but on the whole are used to being treated with a certain level of deference.

There are ways in which justice needs to be opened up though. County court cases are recorded on tape. Yet those involved in a case aren't given access to the tapes unless you pay a third party to transcribe them. This often denies justice to litigants who can't afford it or can't find a legal aid lawyer to represent them.

The restrictions vary from criminal to civil court, but the ban on photography (circumvented by newspapers employing court artists) and other arcane rules make it difficult for the public and press to understand what goes on in court.

The protest seems to have been planned though in order to generate this kind of media exposure and cause the case to be adjourned.

I've seen politicians play to the public gallery in the Town Hall, this seems to be something similar but using a courtroom as a way of making political points.
Personally I have always found judges at Birkenhead County Court to be fair, even when a government barrister in a low cut top is fluttering her eyelashes at them. Each time I've arrived for a case, I've been dealt with professionally by staff, even if the security seems more in keeping with a maximum security prison. However those who don't come from a legal background and are aware of their rights or have access to expert legal advice can get intimidated by lawsuits and court cases. In this case it is reminiscent of the poll tax protests (and imprisonment of councillors) for non-payment in the 1990s. It is very odd that other unpaid debts don't lead to a custodial sentence, but unpaid Council Tax can! The truth of the matter is I am against Council Tax at all. Despite a dazzling array of exemptions, discounts, council tax benefit and other things it's not a fair tax and should be axed. The public can "arrest" a judge, however it has to be for a criminal matter. Judges are used to dealing with the public, but on the whole are used to being treated with a certain level of deference. There are ways in which justice needs to be opened up though. County court cases are recorded on tape. Yet those involved in a case aren't given access to the tapes unless you pay a third party to transcribe them. This often denies justice to litigants who can't afford it or can't find a legal aid lawyer to represent them. The restrictions vary from criminal to civil court, but the ban on photography (circumvented by newspapers employing court artists) and other arcane rules make it difficult for the public and press to understand what goes on in court. The protest seems to have been planned though in order to generate this kind of media exposure and cause the case to be adjourned. I've seen politicians play to the public gallery in the Town Hall, this seems to be something similar but using a courtroom as a way of making political points. johnbrace
  • Score: 0

12:56pm Tue 8 Mar 11

johnbrace says...

@JeffGreen

I note your views and you are the Cabinet member for Finance and Best Value. I know what Wirral Council's policies are regarding non-council tax payment and that a lawsuit is basically used as a last resort.

The truth is though that whatever money could've been recovered from this person is costing the Wirral taxpayer more because of the police used for this protest, all the legal costs associated with arresting people (in criminal cases the taxpayer pays both sides), costs of imprisoning people before bail etc.

All that has got to amount to more than most people's yearly council tax bill.

Protests happen because people are angry. You came into office stating that you would change the political culture and listen to the Wirral public. That includes listening to people who's viewpoints you don't agree with. Unless the Con-Lib Dem coalition listens to the public, takes on board their views, represents the people and shows they are representatives of local people the anger of the disenfranchised will continue to boil over in protests like this and the one at the last full Council meeting about the budget.

The cold, hard fact of the matter is that Council Tax represents a small fraction of Wirral Council's yearly budget. The Council Tax collection rate (as a result of the drive towards Direct Debit) is high in the region of the high 90s when expressed as a %. Some poor people are even being incorrectly overcharged Council Tax. However getting money back from Wirral Council is as difficult for people as getting blood out of a stone and whereas Wirral Council quickly takes money it often takes many hours and multiple requests to pay it back.

Some of the services (in fact all you mentioned) use borrowed money as part of their budget. This money doesn't come from Council Tax.

It'd be nice if Wirral Council didn't have to charge its residents Council Tax. As a small business owner, you have to set aside (from time to time) amounts to cover bad debts.

Even if you take people to court and send the bailiffs round they have ways of avoiding their creditors. Lawsuits should be used as a last resort when all other forms of mediation have failed.
@JeffGreen I note your views and you are the Cabinet member for Finance and Best Value. I know what Wirral Council's policies are regarding non-council tax payment and that a lawsuit is basically used as a last resort. The truth is though that whatever money could've been recovered from this person is costing the Wirral taxpayer more because of the police used for this protest, all the legal costs associated with arresting people (in criminal cases the taxpayer pays both sides), costs of imprisoning people before bail etc. All that has got to amount to more than most people's yearly council tax bill. Protests happen because people are angry. You came into office stating that you would change the political culture and listen to the Wirral public. That includes listening to people who's viewpoints you don't agree with. Unless the Con-Lib Dem coalition listens to the public, takes on board their views, represents the people and shows they are representatives of local people the anger of the disenfranchised will continue to boil over in protests like this and the one at the last full Council meeting about the budget. The cold, hard fact of the matter is that Council Tax represents a small fraction of Wirral Council's yearly budget. The Council Tax collection rate (as a result of the drive towards Direct Debit) is high in the region of the high 90s when expressed as a %. Some poor people are even being incorrectly overcharged Council Tax. However getting money back from Wirral Council is as difficult for people as getting blood out of a stone and whereas Wirral Council quickly takes money it often takes many hours and multiple requests to pay it back. Some of the services (in fact all you mentioned) use borrowed money as part of their budget. This money doesn't come from Council Tax. It'd be nice if Wirral Council didn't have to charge its residents Council Tax. As a small business owner, you have to set aside (from time to time) amounts to cover bad debts. Even if you take people to court and send the bailiffs round they have ways of avoiding their creditors. Lawsuits should be used as a last resort when all other forms of mediation have failed. johnbrace
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Tue 8 Mar 11

tonupkid says...

Wirral Council leader, Cllr Jeff Green, said: Wirral Council is stepping up its activity to ensure that everyone pays their fair share. Nobody is above the law."
Sounds like a bully boy threat to me.
Wirral Council leader, Cllr Jeff Green, said: Wirral Council is stepping up its activity to ensure that everyone pays their fair share. Nobody is above the law." Sounds like a bully boy threat to me. tonupkid
  • Score: 0

8:04pm Tue 8 Mar 11

tonupkid says...

Anyone got an exact transcript of the Oath of Office?
Anyone got an exact transcript of the Oath of Office? tonupkid
  • Score: 0

8:26pm Tue 8 Mar 11

Spiffy says...

tonupkid: http://www.judiciary
.gov.uk/
...
Put Oath of office in the search box and click the first result. Too much to repost here and there are variations according to religion.
tonupkid: http://www.judiciary .gov.uk/ ... Put Oath of office in the search box and click the first result. Too much to repost here and there are variations according to religion. Spiffy
  • Score: 1

9:19pm Tue 8 Mar 11

230therapy says...

It's good to see some British subjects *finally* growing some cajones. It's about time!!
It's good to see some British subjects *finally* growing some cajones. It's about time!! 230therapy
  • Score: 0

5:33am Wed 9 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

What about John Lilburne then?
What about John Lilburne then? slumdogg
  • Score: 0

8:03am Wed 9 Mar 11

bobwillis says...

Well done those brave people.

So Mr Jeff Green. No one is above the law eh? Is that a threat?Sounds like. Thing is no ones scared anymore, just angry! Above the law? Certainly the judge thought he was!

The Lion is waking. In twelve months time this country will be unrecognisable from the one we presently see.
Well done those brave people. So Mr Jeff Green. No one is above the law eh? Is that a threat?Sounds like. Thing is no ones scared anymore, just angry! Above the law? Certainly the judge thought he was! The Lion is waking. In twelve months time this country will be unrecognisable from the one we presently see. bobwillis
  • Score: 0

10:09am Wed 9 Mar 11

jubilee9r says...

Whenever a government official operates outside his or her authority, whether it is a judicial decision, a legislative act or the enforcement of said act they are in rebellion against the people and government they represent. Therefore there are lawful grounds for their arrest and trial in a lawful court of law.
Whenever a government official operates outside his or her authority, whether it is a judicial decision, a legislative act or the enforcement of said act they are in rebellion against the people and government they represent. Therefore there are lawful grounds for their arrest and trial in a lawful court of law. jubilee9r
  • Score: 0

11:50am Wed 9 Mar 11

johnbrace says...

jubilee9r wrote:
Whenever a government official operates outside his or her authority, whether it is a judicial decision, a legislative act or the enforcement of said act they are in rebellion against the people and government they represent. Therefore there are lawful grounds for their arrest and trial in a lawful court of law.
You pretty much always have a right of appeal against a court decision. Also government official's decisions (and politicians) are subject to judicial review (the care home closure judicial review being an example).

However there are only lawful grounds for their arrest if they've broken the criminal law. Many of the laws on our statute book are matters of civil, not criminal law.

Generally the usual methods are time consuming, sometimes expensive and put people off.

I myself have taken a government department previously to court and a judge agreed I had been unfairly treated. The fact their "expert witness" lied through their teeth, lied in their witness statement and got their facts wrong didn't help their case, the judge agreed with me but let them claim one of the statutory defences (it'd cost too much) as it would've meant they'd have lost out on charging people £thousands/year.

From filing the case in January to the time a decision was made took eight months. They spent about £7500 on a barrister defending it who insisted costs would be awarded against me. This was a barrister who had to have legal terms explained to her by the judge.

As I'd proved my case and they'd lied to the court and done everything in their power not to be cooperative they had to pay their own costs. However lawyers do their best to drag things out as much as possible.
[quote][p][bold]jubilee9r[/bold] wrote: Whenever a government official operates outside his or her authority, whether it is a judicial decision, a legislative act or the enforcement of said act they are in rebellion against the people and government they represent. Therefore there are lawful grounds for their arrest and trial in a lawful court of law.[/p][/quote]You pretty much always have a right of appeal against a court decision. Also government official's decisions (and politicians) are subject to judicial review (the care home closure judicial review being an example). However there are only lawful grounds for their arrest if they've broken the criminal law. Many of the laws on our statute book are matters of civil, not criminal law. Generally the usual methods are time consuming, sometimes expensive and put people off. I myself have taken a government department previously to court and a judge agreed I had been unfairly treated. The fact their "expert witness" lied through their teeth, lied in their witness statement and got their facts wrong didn't help their case, the judge agreed with me but let them claim one of the statutory defences (it'd cost too much) as it would've meant they'd have lost out on charging people £thousands/year. From filing the case in January to the time a decision was made took eight months. They spent about £7500 on a barrister defending it who insisted costs would be awarded against me. This was a barrister who had to have legal terms explained to her by the judge. As I'd proved my case and they'd lied to the court and done everything in their power not to be cooperative they had to pay their own costs. However lawyers do their best to drag things out as much as possible. johnbrace
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Wed 9 Mar 11

mapscope says...

I like the last line - "nobody is above the law" The police, strangely, are never prosecuted when their behaviour is suspect - murder in G20; kettling etc. Our politicians steal our money and yet never see the inside of a court of law and if they do the "judge" lets them off. Of course, NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW EXCEPT FOR ALL THE EU AND POLITICIANS
I like the last line - "nobody is above the law" The police, strangely, are never prosecuted when their behaviour is suspect - murder in G20; kettling etc. Our politicians steal our money and yet never see the inside of a court of law and if they do the "judge" lets them off. Of course, NOBODY IS ABOVE THE LAW EXCEPT FOR ALL THE EU AND POLITICIANS mapscope
  • Score: 0

9:42pm Wed 9 Mar 11

Mr Bollo says...

Ah, it makes sense now...the paper didn't mention the UKIP, but I thought it might be something to do with that particular band of nutters.

I've just had a look at the British Constitution Group website, and it's hilarious. To quote from their declaration...

We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service.

Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State.

Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends.

A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed.

...so they seem to want to live in a self governing democracy, but they also want the queen to rule over us all. Not a very coherent declaration, if you ask me.

The lion is waking indeed. Pathetic bunch of small minded little englanders dribbling into their porridge more like.
Ah, it makes sense now...the paper didn't mention the UKIP, but I thought it might be something to do with that particular band of nutters. I've just had a look at the British Constitution Group website, and it's hilarious. To quote from their declaration... We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service. Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State. Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends. A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed. ...so they seem to want to live in a self governing democracy, but they also want the queen to rule over us all. Not a very coherent declaration, if you ask me. The lion is waking indeed. Pathetic bunch of small minded little englanders dribbling into their porridge more like. Mr Bollo
  • Score: 0

4:14pm Thu 10 Mar 11

pompeyroll says...

Mr Bollo wrote:
Ah, it makes sense now...the paper didn't mention the UKIP, but I thought it might be something to do with that particular band of nutters. I've just had a look at the British Constitution Group website, and it's hilarious. To quote from their declaration... We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service. Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State. Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends. A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed. ...so they seem to want to live in a self governing democracy, but they also want the queen to rule over us all. Not a very coherent declaration, if you ask me. The lion is waking indeed. Pathetic bunch of small minded little englanders dribbling into their porridge more like.
Mr Bollo,
They wish to live under Common Law,
which the Queen in her Coronation Oath, stated that she would uphold,
and in return she received our allegiance. In swearing her Oath, she gave her Allegiance to us, collectively known as "Ligeance" between both parties.
Should the Queen renege upon, or be forced to withdraw that allegiance, the Sovereignty returns to the citizen.
A quick perusal of Blackstone's Commentaries, Coke's Judicial findings,
will enlighten you.
The B.C.G. is not a pathetic bunch, but rather more loyal to this nation than those presently attempting to rule us unlawfully.
[quote][p][bold]Mr Bollo[/bold] wrote: Ah, it makes sense now...the paper didn't mention the UKIP, but I thought it might be something to do with that particular band of nutters. I've just had a look at the British Constitution Group website, and it's hilarious. To quote from their declaration... We, the British People have a right to govern ourselves. That right has been subjugated as a consequence of acts of treason having been committed by the collective political establishment, aided and abetted by corrupt segments of the judiciary, the police, the Church and the civil service. Furthermore, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose position has been usurped by a corrupt House of Commons and who has been forced into the destruction of her Kingdom and the breaking of her coronation oath, no longer governs us in accordance with our laws and customs, as was the situation when she was elected by the people as our Sovereign and our Head of State. Why Her Majesty has failed in her duty is not for us to judge at this point in time - Her Majesty has however been made aware of the situation and is now duty bound to make amends. A political elite has for some time manipulated the electoral system to deprive the people of true democratic representation by constructing a party political system that has allowed, indeed encouraged, acts of treason to have been committed. ...so they seem to want to live in a self governing democracy, but they also want the queen to rule over us all. Not a very coherent declaration, if you ask me. The lion is waking indeed. Pathetic bunch of small minded little englanders dribbling into their porridge more like.[/p][/quote]Mr Bollo, They wish to live under Common Law, which the Queen in her Coronation Oath, stated that she would uphold, and in return she received our allegiance. In swearing her Oath, she gave her Allegiance to us, collectively known as "Ligeance" between both parties. Should the Queen renege upon, or be forced to withdraw that allegiance, the Sovereignty returns to the citizen. A quick perusal of Blackstone's Commentaries, Coke's Judicial findings, will enlighten you. The B.C.G. is not a pathetic bunch, but rather more loyal to this nation than those presently attempting to rule us unlawfully. pompeyroll
  • Score: 0

5:36pm Thu 10 Mar 11

Mr Bollo says...

The sooner we get rid of the royal family and those who support it, the better. Vive La Republique!
The sooner we get rid of the royal family and those who support it, the better. Vive La Republique! Mr Bollo
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Thu 10 Mar 11

Positive thinker says...

Did all the protestors take a day
off work?
Did all the protestors take a day off work? Positive thinker
  • Score: 0

7:57am Fri 11 Mar 11

Toryman says...

He was just a normal person going to work, earning his daily bread, and you all chose to chastise and castigate him. Shame on all of you. You should hang your heads in shame and be thoroughly disgusted with yourselves.
He was just a normal person going to work, earning his daily bread, and you all chose to chastise and castigate him. Shame on all of you. You should hang your heads in shame and be thoroughly disgusted with yourselves. Toryman
  • Score: 0

9:04am Fri 11 Mar 11

Positive thinker says...

Empty vessels make the most noise!
Empty vessels make the most noise! Positive thinker
  • Score: 0

9:32am Fri 11 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

Barking! They must have had a recruitment campaign in mental health units up and down the country.
Barking! They must have had a recruitment campaign in mental health units up and down the country. slumdogg
  • Score: 0

6:58pm Fri 11 Mar 11

Positive thinker says...

No one has answered my question,they
Must be hard at work,or planing who's
Next to be arrested
No one has answered my question,they Must be hard at work,or planing who's Next to be arrested Positive thinker
  • Score: 0

6:24pm Sat 12 Mar 11

bickyboy says...

slumdogg wrote:
Barking! They must have had a recruitment campaign in mental health units up and down the country.
Not very PC, nor very nice to have a go at people with mental health issues, Slumdog.
Shame on you.
[quote][p][bold]slumdogg[/bold] wrote: Barking! They must have had a recruitment campaign in mental health units up and down the country.[/p][/quote]Not very PC, nor very nice to have a go at people with mental health issues, Slumdog. Shame on you. bickyboy
  • Score: -1

8:40pm Sat 12 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

As readers might gather from my user name... I am the Roger Hayes who is refusing to pay my council tax - because it is unlawful.

I do not hide behind a false name - I am proud to stand up for what I believe to be right.

I note that Jeff Green, leader of the council is big on rhetoric i.e. 'Nobody is above the law' - but seems to conveniently omit to mention that the core of this issue is that the council themselves are breaking the law... the word hypocrisy springs to mind.

I also note the Jeff Green jumps to the age old political tactic of pulling at the heart-strings - i.e. 'what about Surestart' - Indeed Mr Green what about Surestart ? Why are we paying a corporate executive £250 000 ? WHO voted for him?
And what about the junkets... the expenses, the waste... I could go on. In fact Mr Green not only could I go on... but I WILL go on to expose the lies deceit and corruption... until the people of the Wirral get a fair system of taxation that more correctly reflects the services that they receive.
Let's talk about waste and corruptiuon... MR GREEN.

The vast majority of council workers are good hard working peoiple who are worth every penny they get paid... but my gripe is not with them... it is with the corrupt party political system that has dominated our system of governance for far too long and who have, in a collective fashion, feathered their nests at our expense.

I am giving a presentation on the 22nd April at the Hollins Hey Hotel - New Brighton 7pm. If you want to find out the truth about why I am not paying my council tax... and why you should LAWFULLY withhold your tax... all are welcome. INCLUDING Mr Green, who I would suggest take his head out of his sanctimonious and patronising bottom and come and find out just why we are all so angry.

Come and listen to the people Mr Green - I dare you.

I regret that I am charging £10 for the evening - to cover costs, but I can promise the best £10 you will spend in a long time. Please call 0781 352 9383 to book a seat.

By not paying your council tax... you will force them to listen to your views... keep paying and they will ignore you.
As readers might gather from my user name... I am the Roger Hayes who is refusing to pay my council tax - because it is unlawful. I do not hide behind a false name - I am proud to stand up for what I believe to be right. I note that Jeff Green, leader of the council is big on rhetoric i.e. 'Nobody is above the law' - but seems to conveniently omit to mention that the core of this issue is that the council themselves are breaking the law... the word hypocrisy springs to mind. I also note the Jeff Green jumps to the age old political tactic of pulling at the heart-strings - i.e. 'what about Surestart' - Indeed Mr Green what about Surestart ? Why are we paying a corporate executive £250 000 ? WHO voted for him? And what about the junkets... the expenses, the waste... I could go on. In fact Mr Green not only could I go on... but I WILL go on to expose the lies deceit and corruption... until the people of the Wirral get a fair system of taxation that more correctly reflects the services that they receive. Let's talk about waste and corruptiuon... MR GREEN. The vast majority of council workers are good hard working peoiple who are worth every penny they get paid... but my gripe is not with them... it is with the corrupt party political system that has dominated our system of governance for far too long and who have, in a collective fashion, feathered their nests at our expense. I am giving a presentation on the 22nd April at the Hollins Hey Hotel - New Brighton 7pm. If you want to find out the truth about why I am not paying my council tax... and why you should LAWFULLY withhold your tax... all are welcome. INCLUDING Mr Green, who I would suggest take his head out of his sanctimonious and patronising bottom and come and find out just why we are all so angry. Come and listen to the people Mr Green - I dare you. I regret that I am charging £10 for the evening - to cover costs, but I can promise the best £10 you will spend in a long time. Please call 0781 352 9383 to book a seat. By not paying your council tax... you will force them to listen to your views... keep paying and they will ignore you. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

9:20pm Sat 12 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

CORRECTION

My presentation is on the 22nd MARCH (not April)
CORRECTION My presentation is on the 22nd MARCH (not April) Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

9:33pm Sat 12 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

It seems that 96% of Wirral people agree that there are times when lawfully withholding taxes is justified...
but 4% think it is NEVER justified... These people with an obvious slave mentality might like to consider their position when the EU introduces the proposed carbon tax... would £1000 a year get you thinking? £2000...? £3000 ? - Never say never. Well done the 96%
It seems that 96% of Wirral people agree that there are times when lawfully withholding taxes is justified... but 4% think it is NEVER justified... These people with an obvious slave mentality might like to consider their position when the EU introduces the proposed carbon tax... would £1000 a year get you thinking? £2000...? £3000 ? - Never say never. Well done the 96% Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Sat 12 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

Oh and one final point... if I may, I am not a member of any political party. I have come to realise that the political process has become far too rigged to ever hope that we will ever get change by voting. Over 84% of the people did not want our politicians to sign up to the Lisbon Treaty... and what did we get? - The Lisbon Treaty - courtesy of a collective political establishment stitch-up.
Oh and one final point... if I may, I am not a member of any political party. I have come to realise that the political process has become far too rigged to ever hope that we will ever get change by voting. Over 84% of the people did not want our politicians to sign up to the Lisbon Treaty... and what did we get? - The Lisbon Treaty - courtesy of a collective political establishment stitch-up. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

1:45am Sun 13 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

NUURSE!!
.
Just pointing out a possible explanation bicky. Not 'having a go' at anyone.
NUURSE!! . Just pointing out a possible explanation bicky. Not 'having a go' at anyone. slumdogg
  • Score: 0

10:36am Sun 13 Mar 11

bickyboy says...

Righto, Slumdog.
I assume that youve never had a close relative or friend who suffers from serious mental health issues? If you had, you'd know that your "explanation" is a long way from being either appropriate or "possible", believe you me.
Righto, Slumdog. I assume that youve never had a close relative or friend who suffers from serious mental health issues? If you had, you'd know that your "explanation" is a long way from being either appropriate or "possible", believe you me. bickyboy
  • Score: 0

10:51am Sun 13 Mar 11

bickyboy says...

Mr Hayes....your stance is interesting, but its not one which could in practice be adopted by those Globe readers who feel as you do about the inadequacy and corruption of our ruling elite. To refuse to pay their council tax and go down the same route as you have done could put their employment in jeopardy and leave them facing legal action for perhaps the first time in their lives. Its not something many people are willing to countenance because its anathema to them to break the law, and of course politicians exploit their reluctance in order to maintain the authority of bad administrations. Adherence to the principle of respecting the law is both our strength as Britons in the good times, and our weakness in times of bad government--of which we've had a lot just lately. What action, short of breaking that law would you suggest that the law abiding majority take to support your cause; or a cause similar to yours if they dont find your particular tactics appropriate, but still recognise the need to challenge the political classes outside election time?
Mr Hayes....your stance is interesting, but its not one which could in practice be adopted by those Globe readers who feel as you do about the inadequacy and corruption of our ruling elite. To refuse to pay their council tax and go down the same route as you have done could put their employment in jeopardy and leave them facing legal action for perhaps the first time in their lives. Its not something many people are willing to countenance because its anathema to them to break the law, and of course politicians exploit their reluctance in order to maintain the authority of bad administrations. Adherence to the principle of respecting the law is both our strength as Britons in the good times, and our weakness in times of bad government--of which we've had a lot just lately. What action, short of breaking that law would you suggest that the law abiding majority take to support your cause; or a cause similar to yours if they dont find your particular tactics appropriate, but still recognise the need to challenge the political classes outside election time? bickyboy
  • Score: 0

5:25pm Sun 13 Mar 11

Positive thinker says...

Don't think many people will turn up
Coranation street is on,i think more will
Find it enough entertainment for a Tuesday night and saving £10.00
I promise it will be the best £10.00
You will spend. Still on another planet
Roger
Don't think many people will turn up Coranation street is on,i think more will Find it enough entertainment for a Tuesday night and saving £10.00 I promise it will be the best £10.00 You will spend. Still on another planet Roger Positive thinker
  • Score: 1

3:29pm Mon 14 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky.
.
People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously.
.
Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed.
Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky. . People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously. . Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed. slumdogg
  • Score: 0

4:14pm Mon 14 Mar 11

pompeyroll says...

slumdogg wrote:
Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky. . People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously. . Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed.
These people, far from being mentally il, are in fact rightly reaffirming their duties and freedoms as guaranteed under Common Law, which is stated fully in both Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights 1689, both of which are our written Constitution, and under which the Monarch, parliament and the Judiciary are sworn to abide to.
It is these other factions, especially Parliament who are seemingly loathe to adhere to this doctrine, and must therefore answer to the law for their misdemeanours.

As Lord Denning stated, " Be he ever so high, the law is above him".
Lord Norman Hewart, ( Lord Chief Justice of England 1928-1942), was also adamant that these factions were committing acts of legislative treason against the citizens of this country, and fully stated his reasons in his book, "The New Despotism ".
Unfortunately, there are many on this board who are disparaging of Mr. Hayes actions, in attempting to correct a wrong, but then again some people still believe that the earth is flat, and cannot encompass the fact that others might be more fully enlightened as to just what treason is taking place.
[quote][p][bold]slumdogg[/bold] wrote: Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky. . People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously. . Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed.[/p][/quote]These people, far from being mentally il, are in fact rightly reaffirming their duties and freedoms as guaranteed under Common Law, which is stated fully in both Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights 1689, both of which are our written Constitution, and under which the Monarch, parliament and the Judiciary are sworn to abide to. It is these other factions, especially Parliament who are seemingly loathe to adhere to this doctrine, and must therefore answer to the law for their misdemeanours. As Lord Denning stated, " Be he ever so high, the law is above him". Lord Norman Hewart, ( Lord Chief Justice of England 1928-1942), was also adamant that these factions were committing acts of legislative treason against the citizens of this country, and fully stated his reasons in his book, "The New Despotism ". Unfortunately, there are many on this board who are disparaging of Mr. Hayes actions, in attempting to correct a wrong, but then again some people still believe that the earth is flat, and cannot encompass the fact that others might be more fully enlightened as to just what treason is taking place. pompeyroll
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Tue 15 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

Large sack of haloperidol for pompey and is friends anyone?
Large sack of haloperidol for pompey and is friends anyone? slumdogg
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Wed 16 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

bickyboy
You say that my stance is not one which Globe readers could in practice adopt... and I agree with you up to a point... most people are hampered by the restraints imposed upon them by other people... i.e. employers or through fear of the system.

This is of course how bad governance and corruption take hold and how we find it almost impossible to eradicate. But if the law makers become the law breakers, then we have a duty to challenge them - failure to do so means surely that we have no cause to complain about corruption, or for that matter ever-escalating taxes.

I am aware also that people are scared of the courts... but isn't that in itself wrong. Surely the courts are there to serve our interests... i.e. to ensure that the law is upheld. If we discover corruption then we should have confidence that the courts will back us up - but they are not doing so. We have a network of corrupt officialdom colluding to deprive us of our rights and a police force which thinks its job is to protect judges - corrupt or otherwise. Their job is to keep the peace and uphold the law.

The problem is that a very cosy situation has developed where the council are now the law breakers and this is being aided and abetted by corrupt judges.

I am not refusing to pay my council tax for a bit of sport... this is a very serious business. I have asked them to provide me with a lawful contract - this is how I can hold them to account, it is called democracy. They are refusing to do so, they say 'pay up or else' that is called autocracy (or dictatorship) - as soon as they send me a lawful contract - the cheque is in the post - and what is wrong with that?

The only thing 'wrong' with that... is from their perspective... they lose the power to dictate, i.e. power comes back to the people where it should be.

That is why I am court, to expose the deception being perpetrated against us. I would encouraged everybody to stop paying their council tax... and contact me at www.thebcgroup.org.u
k so that we can advise how to proceed.
Non-payers are not going to get into trouble...we have a format to suit each individual circumstance.

Corrruption is now endemic in all of our institutions - the MP's expenses scandle was the tip of a very big iceberg and it needs to be stopped.

The reason I arrested the judge in court was because he was breaking our laws. We asked the police to assist with that arrest but they themselves then broke the law by committing the common law offence of 'rescue.'

So, the council are breaking the law knowingly, they secure the services of a corrupt judge to railroad a favourable decision and then the police unwittingly commit a common law crime because they are not longer fully trained in the law. Where is the justice in that? There is none.

If I were given a proper and lawful hearing in which ALL the evidence is made available before a properly constituted common law court in front of a jury - I can promise you that people would be shocked to learn what is happening in our name - and the case against me would be dismissed.

But that is unlikely to happen. The powers that be are desperate to keep control.

People complain that they are not happy with the way they are being governed and about the high taxes we are being forced to pay... well I agree with them, but I am no longer prepared to stand by and do nothing.

If anybody wants to find out just what is going on... then I invite them to come and listen to the full story at the Hollins Hey - 7pm 22nd March. I am charging a small fee of £10 to cover costs.
bickyboy You say that my stance is not one which Globe readers could in practice adopt... and I agree with you up to a point... most people are hampered by the restraints imposed upon them by other people... i.e. employers or through fear of the system. This is of course how bad governance and corruption take hold and how we find it almost impossible to eradicate. But if the law makers become the law breakers, then we have a duty to challenge them - failure to do so means surely that we have no cause to complain about corruption, or for that matter ever-escalating taxes. I am aware also that people are scared of the courts... but isn't that in itself wrong. Surely the courts are there to serve our interests... i.e. to ensure that the law is upheld. If we discover corruption then we should have confidence that the courts will back us up - but they are not doing so. We have a network of corrupt officialdom colluding to deprive us of our rights and a police force which thinks its job is to protect judges - corrupt or otherwise. Their job is to keep the peace and uphold the law. The problem is that a very cosy situation has developed where the council are now the law breakers and this is being aided and abetted by corrupt judges. I am not refusing to pay my council tax for a bit of sport... this is a very serious business. I have asked them to provide me with a lawful contract - this is how I can hold them to account, it is called democracy. They are refusing to do so, they say 'pay up or else' that is called autocracy (or dictatorship) - as soon as they send me a lawful contract - the cheque is in the post - and what is wrong with that? The only thing 'wrong' with that... is from their perspective... they lose the power to dictate, i.e. power comes back to the people where it should be. That is why I am court, to expose the deception being perpetrated against us. I would encouraged everybody to stop paying their council tax... and contact me at www.thebcgroup.org.u k so that we can advise how to proceed. Non-payers are not going to get into trouble...we have a format to suit each individual circumstance. Corrruption is now endemic in all of our institutions - the MP's expenses scandle was the tip of a very big iceberg and it needs to be stopped. The reason I arrested the judge in court was because he was breaking our laws. We asked the police to assist with that arrest but they themselves then broke the law by committing the common law offence of 'rescue.' So, the council are breaking the law knowingly, they secure the services of a corrupt judge to railroad a favourable decision and then the police unwittingly commit a common law crime because they are not longer fully trained in the law. Where is the justice in that? There is none. If I were given a proper and lawful hearing in which ALL the evidence is made available before a properly constituted common law court in front of a jury - I can promise you that people would be shocked to learn what is happening in our name - and the case against me would be dismissed. But that is unlikely to happen. The powers that be are desperate to keep control. People complain that they are not happy with the way they are being governed and about the high taxes we are being forced to pay... well I agree with them, but I am no longer prepared to stand by and do nothing. If anybody wants to find out just what is going on... then I invite them to come and listen to the full story at the Hollins Hey - 7pm 22nd March. I am charging a small fee of £10 to cover costs. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

8:54pm Wed 16 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

Purple Hayes, you only live around the corner. Show us how you arrived at a figure of ten pounds per person as 'costs' What is the capacity of the room? How much did it cost you to hire? what other costs do you have? Show some accountability Purple Hayes!
Purple Hayes, you only live around the corner. Show us how you arrived at a figure of ten pounds per person as 'costs' What is the capacity of the room? How much did it cost you to hire? what other costs do you have? Show some accountability Purple Hayes! slumdogg
  • Score: 0

10:28pm Wed 16 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

It's good to see people power beginning its fight back in this area again. We did it against the poll tax - mass non-payment worked AND we got rid of Thatcher into the bargain. Only last yeat the people of Wirral stopped the closure of the libraries and sports centres. Labour and the CONDEMS are merely different wings of the same capitalist political party. We need a new party for ordinary working class people. And don't forget the march in London on March 26! 100s of thousands are going. This will only be the beginning.
We need workers to then stage a one day public sector strike combined with protests of all anti-cuts campaigns then escalate the strikes and maybe a few occupations of council chambers and courts. That'll put real fear into the government. Then we'll see whether Cameron really believes in people's democracy like he's been calling for in the Middle East revolutions (where, by the way, he was originally over there peddling arms!)
It's good to see people power beginning its fight back in this area again. We did it against the poll tax - mass non-payment worked AND we got rid of Thatcher into the bargain. Only last yeat the people of Wirral stopped the closure of the libraries and sports centres. Labour and the CONDEMS are merely different wings of the same capitalist political party. We need a new party for ordinary working class people. And don't forget the march in London on March 26! 100s of thousands are going. This will only be the beginning. We need workers to then stage a one day public sector strike combined with protests of all anti-cuts campaigns then escalate the strikes and maybe a few occupations of council chambers and courts. That'll put real fear into the government. Then we'll see whether Cameron really believes in people's democracy like he's been calling for in the Middle East revolutions (where, by the way, he was originally over there peddling arms!) C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

3:36am Thu 17 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

C Robinson. These people are more likely to kiss Thatchers feet if they met her. They don't act out of camaraderie or solidarity. They act out of self interest. They believe in the Monarchy having a say in the running of the country!
C Robinson. These people are more likely to kiss Thatchers feet if they met her. They don't act out of camaraderie or solidarity. They act out of self interest. They believe in the Monarchy having a say in the running of the country! slumdogg
  • Score: 0

11:21am Thu 17 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

Is that right, Slumdogg? Then they need to broaden it out to more people being involved like they did with the anti-poll tax campaign. The Royal Family are amongst the biggest parasites going - now there's where we should make some savings! And yes, Roger Hayes charging people a tenner for people to come and listen to him speak is a bit 'one man band-ish'. He should hire the hall and then pass a couple of buckets around, sign people up to a proper 'Anti-Council Tax Union with an elected committee and have stalls around the borough giving out leaflets, signing people up pushing for a mass campaign of non-payment. That's how we beat the poll tax.
Is that right, Slumdogg? Then they need to broaden it out to more people being involved like they did with the anti-poll tax campaign. The Royal Family are amongst the biggest parasites going - now there's where we should make some savings! And yes, Roger Hayes charging people a tenner for people to come and listen to him speak is a bit 'one man band-ish'. He should hire the hall and then pass a couple of buckets around, sign people up to a proper 'Anti-Council Tax Union with an elected committee and have stalls around the borough giving out leaflets, signing people up pushing for a mass campaign of non-payment. That's how we beat the poll tax. C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

11:43am Thu 17 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

Just checked the British Constitution Group out, Slumdogg. you're right. It appears Roger H. was expelled from the UKIP and is a failed Referendum Party and they appear to think the Queen was 'elected' you've gotta laugh, haven't you? Thanks for the info. I would still support an anti-council tax campaign democratically won but not behind these jokers.
Just checked the British Constitution Group out, Slumdogg. you're right. It appears Roger H. was expelled from the UKIP and is a failed Referendum Party and they appear to think the Queen was 'elected' you've gotta laugh, haven't you? Thanks for the info. I would still support an anti-council tax campaign democratically won but not behind these jokers. C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

3:53pm Thu 17 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

Loons! Stay well away.
.
The same people who usually complain about benefits and immigrants, but support a family of Germans/Greeks who cost us £180 million per year and get the free and exclusive use of several castles, palaces yachts etc, priceless jewellery to play dressing up, plus the income from two huge tracts of land in the duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster. Do you think they might be under occupying?
Loons! Stay well away. . The same people who usually complain about benefits and immigrants, but support a family of Germans/Greeks who cost us £180 million per year and get the free and exclusive use of several castles, palaces yachts etc, priceless jewellery to play dressing up, plus the income from two huge tracts of land in the duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster. Do you think they might be under occupying? slumdogg
  • Score: 0

10:43pm Thu 17 Mar 11

lendusaquid says...

Is it wrong to force the state to obey the law of the land and respect peoples rights ?
Is it wrong to force the state to obey the law of the land and respect peoples rights ? lendusaquid
  • Score: 0

2:26pm Fri 18 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

1. The Monarchy is an institution - not an individual. The question people might want to debate is 'Should we have a monarchy or a replublic?' I welcome that debate - I have no time for people who try to make their point using insults and ignorant assumption. Each Monarch IS elected... very few people understand this... but I am more than happy to explain at my conference on the 22nd March - 7pm Hollins Hey Hotel.

I do not want to be ruled by a 'King' or 'Queen' - I want our governemnt to be controlled by the institution of monarchy i.e. our constitution because it has been tried and tested over centuries... and has always come up on top in defence of our freedoms and liberties. We beheaded Charles 1 and got rid of James 2 (glorious revolution)

The institution of the monarchy is about the maintenance of our constitution... and the rule-of-law - it is not about subservience to another flesh and blood human being, be they queen or king. This would be a very ignorant interpretation of what a constitutional monarchy is all about.


2. The British Constitution Group is a national organisation with overheads. Those who are not happy to pay the £10 and come and learn about their constitution are free not to attend. Those who do attend will learn about the biggest scam being perpetrated against each one of us... and how we can fight back. People who do not want to learn can indeed stay home and watch the television. Or possibly spend their time on the internet making snide uneducated comments at which some individuals on this blogg excel.

But also... people will learn how they are being deprived of their liberties... if your freedom isn't worth £10 - fine.

Our constitution is the foundation of our law, people can only benefit from knowing more... going by a number of comments on this blogg there are some people who certainly need educating on the subject.

Mr Bollo says 'Vive La Republique' oh really? And which upstanding individual did you have in mind for president - Tony Blair maybe?

3. The Monarch serves the people - not the other way around. She does this by way of her coronation oath. 'To govern according to our laws and custom' Politicians have a tendancy to help themselves before they serve others.

4 The political establishment and judiciary swear an oath to the Monarch... who represents the people. This is how we hold them to account... their authority is conditional upon their oaths of office... they govern with the constraints of their oaths.

5. Those who will not confirm that they are acting under their oaths... are in breach of the law. Our constitution guarantees that nobody is above the law. The European system of justice 'corpus juris' gives no such guarantee. That is why I am pressing judges to confirm their oaths... because corpus juris is being slipped into our courts by stealth - for which we are all the poorer in a judicial sense.

6. I was not ejected from UKIP... when something stinks... one is inclined to step out of it. That is precisely what I did.

7. People no longer understand the basic principles by whcih we are (or should be) governed. We no longer teach our constitution in schools or our universities. If we do not know how we can hold our elected leaders to account we end up with corruption... and that is what we have now. The political establishment is taking advantage of our collective ignorance.

I am standing up for our constitution and the rule-of-law... because that is the only thing that stands between a lawful society and tyranny.

When people do not understand our constituon and the institution of monarchy - they invariably end up talking worthless drivel like slumdogg (whose choice of name should tell us something of his/her mentality)

Slumdogg is a sad individual who passes childish insults, uneducated opinion, and disparaging remarks from the shield of a phony name because he/she has nothing worthwhile to say or hear - we all know the type - Shadowy and spineless. I have not observed a single construtive or valid comment made by slumdogg.

I will let the people who attend my presentation on the 22nd March at the Hollins Hey Hotel (7pm) be the judge as to whether my views are valid... as for the slumdoggs of this world... keep hiding out od sight is out of mind.. and I really do think you are 'out of your mind.'
1. The Monarchy is an institution - not an individual. The question people might want to debate is 'Should we have a monarchy or a replublic?' I welcome that debate - I have no time for people who try to make their point using insults and ignorant assumption. Each Monarch IS elected... very few people understand this... but I am more than happy to explain at my conference on the 22nd March - 7pm Hollins Hey Hotel. I do not want to be ruled by a 'King' or 'Queen' - I want our governemnt to be controlled by the institution of monarchy i.e. our constitution because it has been tried and tested over centuries... and has always come up on top in defence of our freedoms and liberties. We beheaded Charles 1 and got rid of James 2 (glorious revolution) The institution of the monarchy is about the maintenance of our constitution... and the rule-of-law - it is not about subservience to another flesh and blood human being, be they queen or king. This would be a very ignorant interpretation of what a constitutional monarchy is all about. 2. The British Constitution Group is a national organisation with overheads. Those who are not happy to pay the £10 and come and learn about their constitution are free not to attend. Those who do attend will learn about the biggest scam being perpetrated against each one of us... and how we can fight back. People who do not want to learn can indeed stay home and watch the television. Or possibly spend their time on the internet making snide uneducated comments at which some individuals on this blogg excel. But also... people will learn how they are being deprived of their liberties... if your freedom isn't worth £10 - fine. Our constitution is the foundation of our law, people can only benefit from knowing more... going by a number of comments on this blogg there are some people who certainly need educating on the subject. Mr Bollo says 'Vive La Republique' oh really? And which upstanding individual did you have in mind for president - Tony Blair maybe? 3. The Monarch serves the people - not the other way around. She does this by way of her coronation oath. 'To govern according to our laws and custom' Politicians have a tendancy to help themselves before they serve others. 4 The political establishment and judiciary swear an oath to the Monarch... who represents the people. This is how we hold them to account... their authority is conditional upon their oaths of office... they govern with the constraints of their oaths. 5. Those who will not confirm that they are acting under their oaths... are in breach of the law. Our constitution guarantees that nobody is above the law. The European system of justice 'corpus juris' gives no such guarantee. That is why I am pressing judges to confirm their oaths... because corpus juris is being slipped into our courts by stealth - for which we are all the poorer in a judicial sense. 6. I was not ejected from UKIP... when something stinks... one is inclined to step out of it. That is precisely what I did. 7. People no longer understand the basic principles by whcih we are (or should be) governed. We no longer teach our constitution in schools or our universities. If we do not know how we can hold our elected leaders to account we end up with corruption... and that is what we have now. The political establishment is taking advantage of our collective ignorance. I am standing up for our constitution and the rule-of-law... because that is the only thing that stands between a lawful society and tyranny. When people do not understand our constituon and the institution of monarchy - they invariably end up talking worthless drivel like slumdogg (whose choice of name should tell us something of his/her mentality) Slumdogg is a sad individual who passes childish insults, uneducated opinion, and disparaging remarks from the shield of a phony name because he/she has nothing worthwhile to say or hear - we all know the type - Shadowy and spineless. I have not observed a single construtive or valid comment made by slumdogg. I will let the people who attend my presentation on the 22nd March at the Hollins Hey Hotel (7pm) be the judge as to whether my views are valid... as for the slumdoggs of this world... keep hiding out od sight is out of mind.. and I really do think you are 'out of your mind.' Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

8:32pm Fri 18 Mar 11

lendusaquid says...

Roger Hayes, not everyone has a closed mind and i wish you good luck in your endeavor.
Roger Hayes, not everyone has a closed mind and i wish you good luck in your endeavor. lendusaquid
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Fri 18 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

Look, Mr Hayes, whichever way you look at it there's no way the queen or any of the Royal Family are elected. sure, you can go into the finer points of the 'Glorious Revolution' settlement - the monarch, according to these laws, has the power to dissolve parliament as indeed she got rid of Gough-Whitlam the Australian Labour PM in the 70s because he had left wing policies - so don't let's pretend she hovers above politics. She is the figleaf behind which 'Her Majesty's Government' hides behind while they - the political and financial class - oppress us with THEIR laws, their financial greed. Who do you think have more in common - the Queen and some merchant banker, or the Queen and a bricklayer?
It was the House of Lords that undemocratically removed the Liverpool Labour council in the 1980s for daring to fight for the policies they were democratically elected to do - ie. build houses, create employment.
What we need is a new workers' party whose representatives will be workers MPs on a workers wage subjected to immediate recall, nationalise the backs and the public utilities, let them be democratically run by the people who work in them. We desperately need a massive house-building programme. We need more people in work to produce more tax income, better schools and hospitals, and a return of student grants.
Hopefully, the TUC demonstration in London on March 26 is a first step towards a real fight back. The union leaders need to grow a collective spine and stop kow-towing to the supine Labour leadership. What we need is genuine socialism - not Stalinism - socialism!
Look, Mr Hayes, whichever way you look at it there's no way the queen or any of the Royal Family are elected. sure, you can go into the finer points of the 'Glorious Revolution' settlement - the monarch, according to these laws, has the power to dissolve parliament as indeed she got rid of Gough-Whitlam the Australian Labour PM in the 70s because he had left wing policies - so don't let's pretend she hovers above politics. She is the figleaf behind which 'Her Majesty's Government' hides behind while they - the political and financial class - oppress us with THEIR laws, their financial greed. Who do you think have more in common - the Queen and some merchant banker, or the Queen and a bricklayer? It was the House of Lords that undemocratically removed the Liverpool Labour council in the 1980s for daring to fight for the policies they were democratically elected to do - ie. build houses, create employment. What we need is a new workers' party whose representatives will be workers MPs on a workers wage subjected to immediate recall, nationalise the backs and the public utilities, let them be democratically run by the people who work in them. We desperately need a massive house-building programme. We need more people in work to produce more tax income, better schools and hospitals, and a return of student grants. Hopefully, the TUC demonstration in London on March 26 is a first step towards a real fight back. The union leaders need to grow a collective spine and stop kow-towing to the supine Labour leadership. What we need is genuine socialism - not Stalinism - socialism! C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

11:38pm Fri 18 Mar 11

lendusaquid says...

If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program,but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth,then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all.Instead,it becomes logical,even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs.
Communism,or more accurately, socialism,is not a movement of the downtrodden masses,but of the economic elite.

Gary Allen,Author

socialism is feudalism

We are all born equal in the eyes of our creator (whoever or whatever that is).
No man has authority over any other man unless consent is given.
My rights end where another mans rights begin.
The Law protects the individual, not the collective. If the individual does not have rights then no one has rights.We must force our so called servants to obey the Law. The Golden Rule is the law and the Common law is the law of the land. Man does not have the authority to create law, he can only discover it and then test it to find if it is true or not. Statutes are made by man and must have our individual consent to have the force of law. Learn the Common law and learn who you are. You are not the property of the State
If one understands that socialism is not a share-the-wealth program,but is in reality a method to consolidate and control the wealth,then the seeming paradox of super-rich men promoting socialism becomes no paradox at all.Instead,it becomes logical,even the perfect tool of power-seeking megalomaniacs. Communism,or more accurately, socialism,is not a movement of the downtrodden masses,but of the economic elite. Gary Allen,Author socialism is feudalism We are all born equal in the eyes of our creator (whoever or whatever that is). No man has authority over any other man unless consent is given. My rights end where another mans rights begin. The Law protects the individual, not the collective. If the individual does not have rights then no one has rights.We must force our so called servants to obey the Law. The Golden Rule is the law and the Common law is the law of the land. Man does not have the authority to create law, he can only discover it and then test it to find if it is true or not. Statutes are made by man and must have our individual consent to have the force of law. Learn the Common law and learn who you are. You are not the property of the State lendusaquid
  • Score: 0

12:31am Sat 19 Mar 11

lendusaquid says...

Left wing, right wing, its all an illusion created to divide the people. Divide and rule. Keep us fighting each other. Give it up and join together as one nation.
The LibLabCon all work for the same Corporation. All we are doing at an election is voting for the board of directors and the company will carry on regardless of who they are. Who is Parliament working for? who controls it? and i quote

I care not what puppet is placed on
the throne of England to rule the Empire, ...
The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire.
And I control the money supply.

Nathan Mayer Rothschild

I ask why does the government not create the money it requires and use it for works instead of borrowing it from the banksters?. The banks create the money (credit) from thin air and then charge interest on it. If the Government created the money supply we would not have any debt. The national debt is a complete fraud.
As an example of how even a mortgage loan is a fraud check out this:
CREDIT RIVER DECISION
http://educationcent
er2000.com/legal/cre
dit_river_decision.h
tm

The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again...Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp
Left wing, right wing, its all an illusion created to divide the people. Divide and rule. Keep us fighting each other. Give it up and join together as one nation. The LibLabCon all work for the same Corporation. All we are doing at an election is voting for the board of directors and the company will carry on regardless of who they are. Who is Parliament working for? who controls it? and i quote I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ... The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply. Nathan Mayer Rothschild I ask why does the government not create the money it requires and use it for works instead of borrowing it from the banksters?. The banks create the money (credit) from thin air and then charge interest on it. If the Government created the money supply we would not have any debt. The national debt is a complete fraud. As an example of how even a mortgage loan is a fraud check out this: CREDIT RIVER DECISION http://educationcent er2000.com/legal/cre dit_river_decision.h tm The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again...Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit. Sir Josiah Stamp lendusaquid
  • Score: 0

1:04am Sat 19 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

C. Robinson.
During the Queens Coronation... the Archbishop of Canterbury turns to the 4 corners of Westminster Abbey and asks the gathered congregation - Do you accept (named individual) as your monarch... they reply.

The congregation are representatives of the people of the United Kingdom and of course the Commonwealth...

They are invited to give verbal affirmation - or not.

Shop stewards do it at union meetings... 'All in favour say I'

Both formats may be crude and different from the box ticking variety... but they are both 'elections' because there is an opportunity to say yes or no.

We, the British people, didn't 'elect' David Cameron as Prime Minister... his party did.

The Queen cannot be crowned without that process having been followed. If the gathered congregation cried NAY! in response... (it has never happened) do you think the Queen/King could claim any legitimacy? We have however got rid of Royalty when they got too full of themselves... it might happen again.

I am not a fan of the 'Royal family' per se. I am a supporter of 'constitutional monarchy' which is a very different thing. If we could rely on a toby jug to protect our constitution - fine give the jug the job.

It is the CONSTITUTION that is important here, not the queen/king, they are incidental. BUT... if we just happen to find ourselves with a good, honest reliable person to act in the role - fine by me... give them the job... tell them the terms and conditions by which they are given the role of Monarch and let them get on with it.

Tell them to protect and defend the constitution by the proper use of the royal assent... and whilst they are doing so... I can get on with my life.

The fact that the monarch comes to us courtesy of lineage is neither here not there... it saves a lot of in fighting.

C. Robinson... the fact is if you are a decent, honest, law abiding person and you will defend our constitution and the rule-of-law 'so help you god' then as far as I am concerned YOU can be the next queen. (no offence intended).

It is about the constitution and the rule of law... contained within the system of 'constitutional monarchy' and it has very little to do with the flesh and blood individual who is playing the role of queen/king at the time. We just want them to act with dignity as our representatives. We provide them with a guilt edge life style and the job description so that we can live our lives freely - certainly much freer than they can.

Queens and Kings come and go... but the constitution lives on (or it should)

The constitution is valuable to us because it cannot be meddled with by politicians - who are utterly untrustworthy.

David Cameron is trying to give us a new bill of rights... pity he doesn't respect the existing one. The new bill of rights is a deliberate ploy to destroy the Bill of Rights 1689 precisely because it constrains the political establishment. It is a power grab by the politicians.

As for the Gough-Whitlam affair... all is not what it seems. Did you know that the authority of the Royal Assent was passed to the Governor General in Canada. i.e. He now excercises it on direction of the Canadian Government NOT the Queen. I am pretty sure the same happened in Australia... albeit circumstances were different. In Canada the government knew they would lose their finance bill causing them to resign... so they directed the Governor General to close parliament early... avoiding the defeat - clever little wheeze. The Queen was not involved.

I hope I have made my position clear. I am in favour of a constitution. I am chairman of the British Constitution Group... not British Monarchy Group.

I agree with you re the oppression - that is why I am so hot on the rule-of-law issue - I bet you that we have more in common than you realise.

Why don't you come to my presentation and find out. I will put £10 down that says you agree with me more than you disagree with me. I am actually a very agreeable sort of chap.

My position is this... No one on this planet can tell anybody else what to do without their consent... you made this very same point.

I can see that you are a reasonable sort of individual - worth debating with - not prone to childish jibberish and insults like the sad individual that goes by the name slumdog.
C. Robinson. During the Queens Coronation... the Archbishop of Canterbury turns to the 4 corners of Westminster Abbey and asks the gathered congregation - Do you accept (named individual) as your monarch... they reply. The congregation are representatives of the people of the United Kingdom and of course the Commonwealth... They are invited to give verbal affirmation - or not. Shop stewards do it at union meetings... 'All in favour say I' Both formats may be crude and different from the box ticking variety... but they are both 'elections' because there is an opportunity to say yes or no. We, the British people, didn't 'elect' David Cameron as Prime Minister... his party did. The Queen cannot be crowned without that process having been followed. If the gathered congregation cried NAY! in response... (it has never happened) do you think the Queen/King could claim any legitimacy? We have however got rid of Royalty when they got too full of themselves... it might happen again. I am not a fan of the 'Royal family' per se. I am a supporter of 'constitutional monarchy' which is a very different thing. If we could rely on a toby jug to protect our constitution - fine give the jug the job. It is the CONSTITUTION that is important here, not the queen/king, they are incidental. BUT... if we just happen to find ourselves with a good, honest reliable person to act in the role - fine by me... give them the job... tell them the terms and conditions by which they are given the role of Monarch and let them get on with it. Tell them to protect and defend the constitution by the proper use of the royal assent... and whilst they are doing so... I can get on with my life. The fact that the monarch comes to us courtesy of lineage is neither here not there... it saves a lot of in fighting. C. Robinson... the fact is if you are a decent, honest, law abiding person and you will defend our constitution and the rule-of-law 'so help you god' then as far as I am concerned YOU can be the next queen. (no offence intended). It is about the constitution and the rule of law... contained within the system of 'constitutional monarchy' and it has very little to do with the flesh and blood individual who is playing the role of queen/king at the time. We just want them to act with dignity as our representatives. We provide them with a guilt edge life style and the job description so that we can live our lives freely - certainly much freer than they can. Queens and Kings come and go... but the constitution lives on (or it should) The constitution is valuable to us because it cannot be meddled with by politicians - who are utterly untrustworthy. David Cameron is trying to give us a new bill of rights... pity he doesn't respect the existing one. The new bill of rights is a deliberate ploy to destroy the Bill of Rights 1689 precisely because it constrains the political establishment. It is a power grab by the politicians. As for the Gough-Whitlam affair... all is not what it seems. Did you know that the authority of the Royal Assent was passed to the Governor General in Canada. i.e. He now excercises it on direction of the Canadian Government NOT the Queen. I am pretty sure the same happened in Australia... albeit circumstances were different. In Canada the government knew they would lose their finance bill causing them to resign... so they directed the Governor General to close parliament early... avoiding the defeat - clever little wheeze. The Queen was not involved. I hope I have made my position clear. I am in favour of a constitution. I am chairman of the British Constitution Group... not British Monarchy Group. I agree with you re the oppression - that is why I am so hot on the rule-of-law issue - I bet you that we have more in common than you realise. Why don't you come to my presentation and find out. I will put £10 down that says you agree with me more than you disagree with me. I am actually a very agreeable sort of chap. My position is this... No one on this planet can tell anybody else what to do without their consent... you made this very same point. I can see that you are a reasonable sort of individual - worth debating with - not prone to childish jibberish and insults like the sad individual that goes by the name slumdog. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

1:27am Sat 19 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

lendusaquid wrote:
Left wing, right wing, its all an illusion created to divide the people. Divide and rule. Keep us fighting each other. Give it up and join together as one nation. The LibLabCon all work for the same Corporation. All we are doing at an election is voting for the board of directors and the company will carry on regardless of who they are. Who is Parliament working for? who controls it? and i quote I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ... The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply. Nathan Mayer Rothschild I ask why does the government not create the money it requires and use it for works instead of borrowing it from the banksters?. The banks create the money (credit) from thin air and then charge interest on it. If the Government created the money supply we would not have any debt. The national debt is a complete fraud. As an example of how even a mortgage loan is a fraud check out this: CREDIT RIVER DECISION http://educationcent er2000.com/legal/cre dit_river_decision.h tm The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again...Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit. Sir Josiah Stamp
Lendusaquid

You are 'bang on the money' and you know exactly what you are talking about.

Our job is to educate. I trust you will join me at the Hollins Hey - I'll happily buy you a beer.
[quote][p][bold]lendusaquid[/bold] wrote: Left wing, right wing, its all an illusion created to divide the people. Divide and rule. Keep us fighting each other. Give it up and join together as one nation. The LibLabCon all work for the same Corporation. All we are doing at an election is voting for the board of directors and the company will carry on regardless of who they are. Who is Parliament working for? who controls it? and i quote I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire, ... The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire. And I control the money supply. Nathan Mayer Rothschild I ask why does the government not create the money it requires and use it for works instead of borrowing it from the banksters?. The banks create the money (credit) from thin air and then charge interest on it. If the Government created the money supply we would not have any debt. The national debt is a complete fraud. As an example of how even a mortgage loan is a fraud check out this: CREDIT RIVER DECISION http://educationcent er2000.com/legal/cre dit_river_decision.h tm The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again...Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be slaves of the banks and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit. Sir Josiah Stamp[/p][/quote]Lendusaquid You are 'bang on the money' and you know exactly what you are talking about. Our job is to educate. I trust you will join me at the Hollins Hey - I'll happily buy you a beer. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

10:49am Sat 19 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

Precisely my point is: 'the Archbishop turns to the gathered congregation', those people wearing ermine, those unelected House of Lords and clearly, as you say, that congregation saying 'nay' has never happened because it won't happen as long as the political establishment stand together as one. The three main political parties you could just about put a cigarette paper between their policies. They are three wings of the same capitalist party defending a rotten capitalist system that has (once again) failed and needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history.
The Labour Party once had a democratic working class base, a membership that its leaders had to consider, hence the 1945 government could introduce radical changes to our economy that brought us the NHS, public ownership of most of the commanding heights of the economy, free education and full employment. After six years of sacrifice fighting fascism our people expected nothing less, and deserved nothing less than no return to the conditions of the 1930s that gave birth to those conditions that brought Hitler and Mussolini to power. Don't forget, the west, especially the British political elite, were happy to see Hitler strengthen Germany as a bulwark against 'bolshevism' (Churchill wrote admiringly of Hitler and Mussolini in his 'Great Contemporaries', particularly the way they had dealt severe blows in neutralising their respective labour movements).
The Marshall Plan poured dollars into our economy (and Europe's) because the American capitalists understood that not to do so ran the risk of all of Europe turning to the left and if they could make a financial killing at the same time, all well and good.
But ever since the Labour Party began to supersede the Liberals (around the 1920s), those middle class interlopers who wanted a political career jumped ship and joined Labour and worked their way to the tops of the party to turn it away from socialism to the 'mixed economy' of Social Democracy throwing capitalism a lifeline until it could regain lost ground.
Those interlopers and their shadows at the tops of the unions completed their counter-revolution by the end of the 1980s after expelling the genuine socialists and the Blair/Brown project set about turning New Labour into a proto-US Democratic Party, a mere election machine, all image but no substance. They stuck to Tory spending plans. None of those Labour leaders supported the anti-poll tax campaigners, in fact athey actively opposed them. 'Pay the poll tax and wait for a Labour government', they told us. Fat chance. If we had waited for them we would have still been stuck with monstrous individual local tax bills far worse than the Council tax and Thatcher would have served a full third term.
Instead, we defeated the poll tax and unseated Thatcher into the bargain but because of Labour leadership's failure to come to our aid and support us, as they refused to support the Miners' Strike, working class people didn't trust them. But after eighteen years of Tory rule, ending in the shambles of the Major government, I think people would have voted for a little pink pussycat. Instead, we got the smoke and mirrors of the Blairites, the pale pink Tories. They kept to the aforementioned Tory spending plans, including the council tax (the old rates by another name) and squandered any trust voters may have had in Blair's 'new dawn'. Now firmly wedded to the capitalist system, we have the 'grotesque chaos' of a Labour Party having joined in the madness of privatisation, attacking benefits, introducing tuition fees, and funding oversea wars on the tailcoats of the US.
This is why we can't afford to tinker with the capitalist law or constitution. We need a new political party that will represent the majority, the millions not the millionaires. The majority in this country are ordinary working people. Their elected representatives should be workers' MPs on workers' wages so they cannot be drawn into the magic circle of the wealthy elite. They should be subject to instant recall. We then need a manifesto based on need not on greed. We should tax the rich and the super-rich, the big corporations and the banks and financial houses and invest the money into creating the jobs and services we need: a massive house-building programme, new schools and hospitals, a better transport system, new renewable energy industries. With full employment we could cut the working week with no loss of pay and have decent wages, student grants and pensions. Pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and cancel Trident.
That, to me, is socialism.
Precisely my point is: 'the Archbishop turns to the gathered congregation', those people wearing ermine, those unelected House of Lords and clearly, as you say, that congregation saying 'nay' has never happened because it won't happen as long as the political establishment stand together as one. The three main political parties you could just about put a cigarette paper between their policies. They are three wings of the same capitalist party defending a rotten capitalist system that has (once again) failed and needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history. The Labour Party once had a democratic working class base, a membership that its leaders had to consider, hence the 1945 government could introduce radical changes to our economy that brought us the NHS, public ownership of most of the commanding heights of the economy, free education and full employment. After six years of sacrifice fighting fascism our people expected nothing less, and deserved nothing less than no return to the conditions of the 1930s that gave birth to those conditions that brought Hitler and Mussolini to power. Don't forget, the west, especially the British political elite, were happy to see Hitler strengthen Germany as a bulwark against 'bolshevism' (Churchill wrote admiringly of Hitler and Mussolini in his 'Great Contemporaries', particularly the way they had dealt severe blows in neutralising their respective labour movements). The Marshall Plan poured dollars into our economy (and Europe's) because the American capitalists understood that not to do so ran the risk of all of Europe turning to the left and if they could make a financial killing at the same time, all well and good. But ever since the Labour Party began to supersede the Liberals (around the 1920s), those middle class interlopers who wanted a political career jumped ship and joined Labour and worked their way to the tops of the party to turn it away from socialism to the 'mixed economy' of Social Democracy throwing capitalism a lifeline until it could regain lost ground. Those interlopers and their shadows at the tops of the unions completed their counter-revolution by the end of the 1980s after expelling the genuine socialists and the Blair/Brown project set about turning New Labour into a proto-US Democratic Party, a mere election machine, all image but no substance. They stuck to Tory spending plans. None of those Labour leaders supported the anti-poll tax campaigners, in fact athey actively opposed them. 'Pay the poll tax and wait for a Labour government', they told us. Fat chance. If we had waited for them we would have still been stuck with monstrous individual local tax bills far worse than the Council tax and Thatcher would have served a full third term. Instead, we defeated the poll tax and unseated Thatcher into the bargain but because of Labour leadership's failure to come to our aid and support us, as they refused to support the Miners' Strike, working class people didn't trust them. But after eighteen years of Tory rule, ending in the shambles of the Major government, I think people would have voted for a little pink pussycat. Instead, we got the smoke and mirrors of the Blairites, the pale pink Tories. They kept to the aforementioned Tory spending plans, including the council tax (the old rates by another name) and squandered any trust voters may have had in Blair's 'new dawn'. Now firmly wedded to the capitalist system, we have the 'grotesque chaos' of a Labour Party having joined in the madness of privatisation, attacking benefits, introducing tuition fees, and funding oversea wars on the tailcoats of the US. This is why we can't afford to tinker with the capitalist law or constitution. We need a new political party that will represent the majority, the millions not the millionaires. The majority in this country are ordinary working people. Their elected representatives should be workers' MPs on workers' wages so they cannot be drawn into the magic circle of the wealthy elite. They should be subject to instant recall. We then need a manifesto based on need not on greed. We should tax the rich and the super-rich, the big corporations and the banks and financial houses and invest the money into creating the jobs and services we need: a massive house-building programme, new schools and hospitals, a better transport system, new renewable energy industries. With full employment we could cut the working week with no loss of pay and have decent wages, student grants and pensions. Pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan and cancel Trident. That, to me, is socialism. C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

9:34am Sun 20 Mar 11

Roger Hayes says...

C. Robinson
I agree with most of your sentiments, but what you label socialism... I call common sense. I think the political labels are a distraction from the issues themselves.
The poll tax riots did not bring down Thatcher... she was stabbed in the back by the Europhiles in her own party because of her NO NO NO stance to the creation of a federal Europe.

Anyway... you clearly have a lot of ideas as to how the country could and should be changed... as have I, but what are YOU doing about it?

I am calling for Lawful Rebellion - which I am explaining at the Hollins Hey Hotel - Tuesday 22nd March 7pm - you are welcome to come and listen to my solutions to the many problems that you yourselve have mentioned.

'Evil prospers when good men do nothing'

I trust you will take a few hours out of your life to try and make a difference.
C. Robinson I agree with most of your sentiments, but what you label socialism... I call common sense. I think the political labels are a distraction from the issues themselves. The poll tax riots did not bring down Thatcher... she was stabbed in the back by the Europhiles in her own party because of her NO NO NO stance to the creation of a federal Europe. Anyway... you clearly have a lot of ideas as to how the country could and should be changed... as have I, but what are YOU doing about it? I am calling for Lawful Rebellion - which I am explaining at the Hollins Hey Hotel - Tuesday 22nd March 7pm - you are welcome to come and listen to my solutions to the many problems that you yourselve have mentioned. 'Evil prospers when good men do nothing' I trust you will take a few hours out of your life to try and make a difference. Roger Hayes
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Sun 20 Mar 11

C. Robinson says...

Roger, it wasn't the poll tax riots that brought down Thatcher, it WAS a campaign of mass nonpayment. Out of 36 million people liable to pay the poll tax, 18.5 million were either refusing to pay at all or were in serious arrears. The Tory grandees knew this, among other issues, meant that Thatcher was an electoral liability. She'd lost her touch. Where before she took on the labour movement one step at a time - the miners, the councils - with the poll tax she took on the whole of the ordinary working people, a terrible misjudgement on her part. The European issue was the excuse to get rid of her.
I admire what you are doing, but fear that yours is a one man band approach in that you are putting yourself solely at risk of imprisonment, a worthy principle, but who will take your place? Using the finer points of law will lose people in a tangle of regulation and clauses and sub-clauses. I do wish you luck and I will follow your campaign with interest.
For my part, I will be attending the TUC demonstration in London next week, along with tens of thousands of others, trade unionists, anti-cuts campaigners, and will be one of those who will call for an escalation towards a general public sector strike, council chamber and workplace occupations, and more marches and rallies until we show the CONDEMS (and Labour for that matter) that working people will not take these attacks lying down.
The Trade Union and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) will also be standing candidates across the country in the next local elections in May and will campaign until we forced a split in the government coalition and another general election is called where we will stand TUSC candidates there too.
Roger, it wasn't the poll tax riots that brought down Thatcher, it WAS a campaign of mass nonpayment. Out of 36 million people liable to pay the poll tax, 18.5 million were either refusing to pay at all or were in serious arrears. The Tory grandees knew this, among other issues, meant that Thatcher was an electoral liability. She'd lost her touch. Where before she took on the labour movement one step at a time - the miners, the councils - with the poll tax she took on the whole of the ordinary working people, a terrible misjudgement on her part. The European issue was the excuse to get rid of her. I admire what you are doing, but fear that yours is a one man band approach in that you are putting yourself solely at risk of imprisonment, a worthy principle, but who will take your place? Using the finer points of law will lose people in a tangle of regulation and clauses and sub-clauses. I do wish you luck and I will follow your campaign with interest. For my part, I will be attending the TUC demonstration in London next week, along with tens of thousands of others, trade unionists, anti-cuts campaigners, and will be one of those who will call for an escalation towards a general public sector strike, council chamber and workplace occupations, and more marches and rallies until we show the CONDEMS (and Labour for that matter) that working people will not take these attacks lying down. The Trade Union and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) will also be standing candidates across the country in the next local elections in May and will campaign until we forced a split in the government coalition and another general election is called where we will stand TUSC candidates there too. C. Robinson
  • Score: 0

5:24pm Mon 21 Mar 11

bickyboy says...

slumdogg wrote:
Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky. . People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously. . Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed.
Slumdog, I accept the explanation of your decision to slur the mentally ill, and I accept it willingly. I do so only because your comments about Phil the Greek, the Queen, Thatcher and Mr Hayes and his ilk made me laugh out loud, despite my sneaking admiration for those who try to buck the trend that so many of us adhere to, a craven public surrender to authority coupled with incessant private whingeing. Thanks for the entertainment.
[quote][p][bold]slumdogg[/bold] wrote: Iv'e known one or two people with mental health issues, yes bicky. One believed a friend of his was Jesus Christ. Another thought he had caught himself burgling his mother's house. I could go on, but there is little point in doing so. I have a close friend who has had much more extreme episodes than either of these. He can laugh about them afterwards, and that is a very good thing. It means he has got better you see bicky. . People will believe all kinds of things when the balance of their mind is disturbed. They might even take this man Roger Hayes seriously. What they are proposing is a coctail of anarchy and feudalism, and only people a few pickles short of a jar would take them seriously. . Naturally, I hope you all get as well as possible, as soon as possible. Mental illness in itself is no joke at all, and proper help can be very difficult to root out. Most people end up on repeated rounds of CBT and SSRI's without ever really having their problems addressed.[/p][/quote]Slumdog, I accept the explanation of your decision to slur the mentally ill, and I accept it willingly. I do so only because your comments about Phil the Greek, the Queen, Thatcher and Mr Hayes and his ilk made me laugh out loud, despite my sneaking admiration for those who try to buck the trend that so many of us adhere to, a craven public surrender to authority coupled with incessant private whingeing. Thanks for the entertainment. bickyboy
  • Score: 0

8:12pm Mon 21 Mar 11

slumdogg says...

C. Robinson, well said on every point. I admire your patience in engaging with Purple Hayes and his acolytes, but for me it, smacks of futility. I'm for denying them a platform. Best of luck to you!
.
Thanks bicky, and you're very welcome.
.
Purps, see you tomorrow night. I'm bringing a GP and social worker, so we can get you some help.
C. Robinson, well said on every point. I admire your patience in engaging with Purple Hayes and his acolytes, but for me it, smacks of futility. I'm for denying them a platform. Best of luck to you! . Thanks bicky, and you're very welcome. . Purps, see you tomorrow night. I'm bringing a GP and social worker, so we can get you some help. slumdogg
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree