FREEMAN ON THE LAND

Post Reply New Topic

*facepalm* Sorry, gotta call hypocrisy on that one.



Actually no, Maybe this is where you're stumbling. Coz this is a matter of LAW. the difference between bodies of law and whether or not it applies to human beings.



Awwww, diddums. (That's a joke by the way. Just before you take that personally.) Sorry, but I have just pointed out a double-standard. Its ok for Peebo to do it, so you either accept it, or you call him (or her) out on it.



No I just felt the need to state the obvious out of your statement. You simply cannot stand having your words picked apart, can you? Well its otherwise known as reaping what you sow. Deal with it and stop whinging about it. Afterall, you demand that I deal with it. You're no special.



If you cannot stand being called out on this, Get over it.

At this point I will not be responding to your posts any further, there is very little value in continuing unless something changes in your posting style.[/quote]

Ditto dude. Coz you have failed to intimidate me into accepting your DIVINE authority on any and every subject and complete and utter infallibility with every word you type. Get over yourself.

Now just a note for a certain mod, this is the exact same manner that other speak to me on here, and I never see a single reprimand towards them. So leave me be.

Last edited by Adam-Anti-Um on 29 Dec 2011, 8:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

i just noticed the two videos that i am sure you sneaked in in an edit on page 2. i am sure they weren't there before. maybe i overlooked them... why didn't you just stick them in the bottom of the thread for the scrutiny of everyone who is posting in here? had a quick look, and they don't look like proof of much. heavily edited camera phone videos with poor image and audio quality, where the salient points are provided by a voice over and captions. from a cursory glance they don't seem to be proving anything much.

i know, you're obviously right. i can't help t, he's baiting me!!

Nope, not included in an edit. I had theose two already in mind for the post and used that opportunity to post them. Maybe their sheer size on the page was big enough even for you to spot them. And if you like you can see if you can request from Alex the post logs to see whether I inserted the links in the original edit.



How does one do that exactly? You do relaise that anyone who can actually be bothered can find them on the page, or even on youtube.



A quick look isn't gonna be good enough Im afraid. Come ON, both combined they don't even amount to over 20 minutes, is it really THAT difficult for you to fix your attention on something for that short a time period?



What more do you expect from cameraphone footage? Blood?



Considering that your "quick look" doesn't even seem to prove that you have watched them in their entirety, then its not suprising what you have typed here about it. But just as I thought, nothing is gonna be good enough for you. But I have fulfilled my "burden of proof". Now its up to you to look at it for yourself instead of gingerly watching it for about a minute and quickly clicking it off because you can't stand to change your mind about this. Yes, you read right, you change YOUR mind. Not me changing it.

Come on Peebo, is it really THAT much to ask you to watch 2 short videos?

Jesus f*cking Christ, you're ignorant of the British Parliamentary system. The UK doesn't have a written constitution and hasn't codified many core legal conventions. Nevertheless, I suggest you start here for some basic learning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament ... ed_Kingdom

Indeed - the UK state and the British parliament has taken many centuries to develop into what it has become today.

Last edited by Tequila on 29 Dec 2011, 8:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I am in complete agreement here with MP, shocking I know. I pointed this out earlier, he has been ignoring it ever since.

What is odder is that you and me both are almost always never agree with MP on anything (though I was submit that the EU has a massive influence over UK sovereignty also these days). Strange times eh?

It is good that sometimes we can all have agreement on something.

Jesus Christ, Adam-Anti-Um is a resident of the UK! How the hell can you be so bloody ignorant of your own State's system of government?

I think what he was trying to get at is that because the UK doesn't have a written constitution that the sovereignty of the state over him can be disregarded. Or something.

Perhaps the most accurate depiction of the average PPR user ever created.

This thread really ought to be a graduate course in when you can safely walk away from a debate though.

ok, i watched your youtube videos. poor video and audio quality, we are left having to trust the narrator and the captions on most of what happened. at the end, we can see a liability order is produced, so the case is not, after all, closed, mr barry does indeed still owe the money. i wonder if he was still laughing when the bailiffs and police came to his door. it proves nothing, i'm afraid.

so basically, layperson goes into court, declares himself highest authority in the court, and yet the liability order is signed anyway and the debt still stands. great.

also, the "layperson" in the video is apparently a notorious scammer who has been notably selling fake titles, charging people to come to seminars where he teaches them flaky methods to avoid paying council tax, setting up bogus churches and fake charities collecting donations, etc etc. overall nice guy.

http://www.realscam.com/f11/ray-st-clair-real-story-49/

I'm not satisfied with an "apparently". But wow, you actually did some RESEARCH! Well done, that's the spirit.

[quote=]

Then don't trust it. No-one is asking you to take anything on faith. Find out for yourself the truth of the statements made.[/quote]

how is that in any way possible? he is providing a commentary on a court hearing that i wasn't at, and that can't be made out from the poor quality video.

for anyone to take that video at face value, they'd have to take the narrator's word on faith.



no it wasn't. this is a good example of a glaring error on the part of the narrator. the order said 10am on it as this is the time that the hearing would have been calling. in a lower court, however, this is no guarantee that the case will actually be heard at that time, nor does it mean that the document was signed at 10am.

generally where people don't consent to paying council tax, they find police an bailiffs coming to the door, or sheriff officers if you are in scotland, and failing this you might end up in prison. try it and see for yourself.



this means nothing. the result of the court hearing was a liability order, the next step is police and bailiffs then the possibility of prison. the video provides no evidence of what happened following the hearing, adam.



stop being so pedantic. ok, forget apparently, it seems quite evident he is a scammer. but fair enough, adam, put your faith in such types if you like. if that's the sort of person you go to for information that's our choice.


so, still no evidence of FREEMAN ON THE LAND working. i think we can conclude that it's nonsense, if this is the best you can do.