Archive for Lawful Rebellion

InformedMinds – v – The Judicial Mafia

Posted in Governance, Judicial Corruption, Law with tags , , , , , , , on April 23, 2012 by informedminds

I’m BACK!

I’ve been awfully busy of late though I am looking forward to doing a lot of posting in the latter half of this year.

My first bat is a little court fun I had over a civil matter, the council bureaucrats just don’t like to answer requests for clarification or have their pressumption of legitimacy questioned. The following is an account of the day back in February, round two (proofs) is (apparently) scheduled for the 27th of April.

Supposedly, for an eviction from a West Lothian Council (hereafter the Council) Temp-Tenancy of three years after two wholly and demonstrably unsuitable offers of permanent housing.

Let’s be clear, this is about me not doing as I was told, not settling for something just to tick bureaucrats checkbox and conform to a bit of arbitrary local government corporate policy, not even a by-law… Just “do as you are told, because we say so!” I have done nothing wrong, harmed none, it cannot even be argued that I am preventing anyone from excercising a legal ‘right’…

This is all about non-compliance.

The following is from my notes taken during the event, I have done my best to describe what was in effect two and a half hours of conflicting nerves and boredom with a mere ten minutes of relative  excitement. My notes were written at the time in the first person with a mind to be used in my sworn declaration (for you yanks that is accepted to have the roughly same weight in Scottish Civil law as an Affidavit) that I will be filing with the Clerk before the next hearing. But that is getting ahead of myself.

As you should be, I was in the lion’s den in plenty of time, at the desk I inquired about THE name, quoting the reference number and finding out which court room I was in. The offer of help from the “Advice Shop” I brushed off with simple thanks, but no thanks. So I waited patiently, watching the blissful sleepers drifting in and all unwittingly to be fleeced, the serial hard case offenders swagger past amongst the suits, black-robed vultures and the occasional policy enforcer wielding a deadly clipboard.

Never was it so clear to me that we really are the informed minority.

In the court I picked my perch in the back corner, readied my little A5 notepad, the pen, checked the phone for the last time and waited some more. The festivities, when they began, were only fifteen minutes late as The Man Acting as The Sheriff (hereafter merely referred to as the Sheriff) wandered in to sit on high. For those out with the land known as Scotland the Sheriff is I believe the equivalent of a county court judge.

Twenty one cases were heard before my turn; three people were granted a decree against them (with expenses awarded) and evicted as I watched. Continuations for the rest who begged leave of the COURT for its mercy. To stave off nerves I took notes on the business before the ‘court’. I caught the clerk eyeing me intently more than a few times but I stayed focused.

It should be noted that on numerous occasions I caught the Clerk of the Court watching me throughout the next couple of hours.

The case number was called.

The name game was played very briefly, “are you Mr InformedMinds?” not wanting to make a fuss I just replied “I am known as that.” A number of eyebrows went up, but nothing was said. I had decided not to accept his oath at this time, I know fine well he would not be able ‘hear’ me in this “court”; instead I had opted to get the matter out of summary causes, the route I viewed as being the least contentious. Let’s be clear, this is a Council opposing me, they have deep pockets and a bevy of petty bureaucrats with grudges that I probably should not have embarrassed quite so much in publicly exposing their fictions. I really did piss them off, how dare I, a lowly peon, dare to ask questions they will not or cannot answer.

The Council Representative made a rather presumptuous opening I thought and could be summed up I’d say in the following:

  1. The council claims to have served all notices and summonses properly. [Bull-biscuits!]
  2. That the (alleged) defendants have not engaged in any communication. [Bull-biscuits!]
  3. That there are no arrears or complaints made against us. [Actually they owe me money!]
  4. I apparently have refused two “reasonable” offers of housing. [More Bull-biscuits!]
  5. Thus they desire a decree and expenses for simple repossession. [Cheeky blighters!]

That’s right; their whole attack rests upon ONE (as yet) unsubstantiated claim and process.

I started straight off by moving to remove any controversy, saying that I did not understand the nature and cause of the proceedings as I in fact did not see that I had an argument with the Council. Around me I noticed the sudden change in the court staff, up till now only one case had not been a total turkey shoot for them. I continued, rebutting the absolute bare-faced lie about the lack of engagement.

I asked pointedly. “First off, is the representative of West Lothian Council claiming they were NOT in receipt of a private correspondence between one Caroline Polson, acting in the capacity / Office of Housing Manager and myself, which I will attest to having delivered by hand?” The council representative declined to answer or deny my question though she scribbled furiously on a VERY official and EVER so important looking collection of forms. I did however tell them that I had declined any and all oral communication via telephone. When asked why I merely stated that I was not obliged to do so, instead I had previously demanded that all correspondence was written as I did not trust the Housing Officers to not misinterpret what I said to them. I went on to state that I still, to this day, wanted to talk to the Housing Officers to resolve this fiasco, I just want them to answer my bloody questions and acknowledge my requests for clarification.

I next tackled their assertion about a correct and proper notice / service process being completed. I asked if there was any evidence that I had accepted or was in receipt of these notices or a summons. The Sheriff jumped on that smartly, telling me “that was not required.” I was ready too, countering with, “would not that be an assumption of service and was I obliged to accept that assumption as fact and applicable?” He didn’t want to touch that one for some reason, can’t think why… The Sheriff held up a stack of stapled paper and began speaking about a summons. “What summons?” I asked. “This summons,” he said with gesturing with the stack of paper. “I see no summons,” I replied. His face was priceless and though I was too focused to look about, I knew every eye was on me.

To add insult to injury for the Council I then went on to voice my grave concerns about the alleged service Notice to Quit (supposedly served on the eleventh of July 2011). The nice lassie (acting in the capacity of a Housing Officer) did assert that I would denied a right to appeal a “decision” unless I accepted their envelope purported to contain both a notice and a letter which she claimed gave me a “right” to appeal. As yet, I informed them, I have not seen any evidence of this decision upon which they claim to have had the right to issue a Notice to Quit despite my numerous queries. Yet again there was no comment from the Council representative but for more furious scribbling. I continued, demanding that I see this decision; I had to be certain the Council had taken into account all the factors which had been presented to them, which I outlined to him briefly. I insisted that The Sheriff had an incomplete understanding, as the Council had failed to provide any substantiation to their claims. I was a bit surprised when the Sheriff actually openly admitted he had no knowledge of the Council’s decision made against myself.

I pressed on, demanding to know who was to benefit from these proceedings; I stated I was not a lawyer but that I set great store in my own common sense which told me that this nonsense was a waste of everybody’s time. Nothing would be changed by the Councils attack upon me and my family save but to our detriment, the Council’s liabilities remained the same as our housing requirements and situation would be unchanged. The Council representative again said nothing.

We moved on to address the Council’s primary claim that I had “refused” their “reasonable” offers. “What evidence is there that I refused anything?” I asked the Sheriff, which was met with more static. When asked what my opinion was, I was quite happy to respond (though I did consider staying silent) by repeating what was already in writing to the Council. THEIR legislation states suitable, not reasonable which seemed to me to be a compromise, made suitable by agreement. The offered properties were by their own Allocations policy not “suitable or fit for purpose” based on our family and circumstances, all this I stated had been communicated to and as yet unrebutted by the Council. The Council representative again declined to comment it seems.

The Sheriff made an attempt here to accepting their adversarial system by asking me if that was the defence I would be submitting. “That depends”, I responded, “I have not yet been persuaded that there was a controversy upon which to defend.” He tried a few times more though I fended them off.

Talk about putting a cat amongst the pigeons, eh? This at last spurred the Council representative in to action. She pounced, demanding that the Court require “Mr InformedMinds” enter a written defence (which of course would serve to validate the controversy they wish be adjudicated upon). This was to become quite comical because the Sheriff start to say that someone representing themselves would not normally be required to do so, then he stopped and instead asked me if I would be “willing” to do so.

My sole concession to considering his offer was an “hmmm.” I quickly corrected the Sheriff on his error, informing him that I was not representing anything, that I am presenting myself and liable for any and all of my actions and obligations before I told him no, I would not be willing… Though I would however be entering a Sworn Declaration under penalty of perjury to attest to the facts as I knew them.

That seemed to throw him a bit and he quickly assured me that “would not be necessary“. I responded with, “maybe not, but it was what he was going to get.” Neither the Sheriff nor the Council representative made any further issue of this, instead moving on to “require” me AND my wife to make an appearance for a full hearing for Proofs. I rejected out of hand that my wife be subjected to the strain of these proceedings. I stated that my wife was of delicate sensibilities and as I have her complete trust and authority to act in her stead. I was asked if that could be provided in writing, I declared it could. I pressed on asking was she in any way obliged to be present. The Sheriff then affirmed that she would not.

Finally the Sheriff asked if I would be “willing” to appear on the 27th of April 2012, I agreed that I would, but that it would be under threat and duress. I stood up smartly, turned, never looked back and paused only briefly to collect documentation from a Clerk. The looks though on the sheeple waiting to be fleeced said it all, “what in the hell just happened there?

So… Not perfect by a long shot, but I’m not looking to ‘win’, I just need to stop THEM from winning for a few more months. After all, the burden of proof is theirs, not mine. Watch this space.

The Great 2011 Census Heist – We Told You So!

Posted in Census 2011, Governance, Hacktivism, Lawful Rebellion with tags , , , , , , , on June 23, 2011 by informedminds

It all started with this PasteBin Link and I’ll be clear from the outset, it’s all unconfirmed so far.

I read in the Register:

“Greetings Internets,

We have blissfully obtained records of every single citizen who gave their records to the security-illiterate UK government for the 2011 census   We’re keeping them under lock and key though… so don’t worry about your privacy (…until we finish re-formatting them for release)”

In response the Office of National Statistics (ONS) had this to say:

“We are aware of the suggestion that census data has been accessed. We are working with our security advisers and contractors to establish whether there is any substance to this. The 2011 Census places the highest priority on maintaining the security of personal data. At this stage we have no evidence to suggest that any such compromise has occurred.”

Sky news have been quick to set out the ‘authorized’ line, the usual pre-trial sentencing on the alter of public scrutiny has begun in earnest, article here. It must be said that this 19 year old lad, named as Ryan Cleary has been hurriedly ‘associated’ with a number of recent (and very convenient) high profile cyber-attacks. The usual sheeple will of course fall in line with the standard line of ‘where there’s smoke, there’s fire,’ whether the lad is innocent, or not. I say convenient simply because only a fool would fail to see that this ‘opportunity’ will be seized on to its fullest to bring in a whole heap of regulation and censorship upon the only source of unfiltered information on what’s really happening in the world. Articles aplenty litter the net on the Internet 2, internet ‘driving licenses’ and even just plain preferential bandwidth for those sites that ‘toe the line’ as opposed to those that would question and dare I say possibly object to being force-fed complete shite!

So it should not come as a surprise that I’m hardly surprised if this has happened. People allowed themselves to be deluded into believing their private details would be kept confidential, though it never could be and all they had to do was read the clauses within the bloody PRIVACY STATEMENT. The blog Wasps Nest did excellent posts on this subject last October entitled “2011 Census – who gets your information?” and “2011 Census – the ONS responds” both of which spelled it out quite clearly.

FOIR – Access to census data by “law enforcement” authorities

Cyber Fascism Coming Your Way

Now, to talk of the ‘attack’ itself and what might be coming down the pipe in the very near future.

If its legit, not a hoax which is making my gut twitch just thinking about it, and the motifs of these “hackivists” are true, then sure, you may argue that the ends justifies the means. Certainly this seems to be a position favored by a great many on the various social networking sites.

Others though, not just vested interests and shills, will flat out denounce this as the work of completely unaccountable nobodies running amok with potentially ulterior motifs and that unknown scares them more than the at least partially accountable (often corrupt) officials in the public offices… They at least are quantifiable, we expect the worst from those parasites, it’s no surprise when they talk out their arse and fail to keep their promises.

Morally on the other hand… I’d have to point out that any infringement on anothers personal information is essentially wrong, but for a slight ‘legal’ justification in this case, that being those who actually signed that declaration on the 2011 census gave up property rights on the data submitted to the Crown via its agency the ONS (see below).

We were originally assured by the ONS that:

“ONS has put in place additional contractual and operational arrangements in the 2011 Census contract with Lockheed Martin UK to ensure that US authorities could not gain access to census data.” Those arrangements included:

  1. All data processing will be carried out in UK – no data will leave or be held at any point outside the UK
  2. All data is the property of the ONS and only UK/EU owned companies will have any access to personal census data
  3. The only people who have access to the full census dataset in the operational data centre will be ONS staff
  4. No Lockheed Martin staff (from either the US parent or UK company) will have access to any personal census data
  5. ONS will control system access rights to all data systems
  6. Everyone working with census data will sign declarations of confidentiality
  7. Independent checks by an accredited UK security consultancy of both physical and electronic security are carried out for ONS.”

That signature gave up any legal claim to the information submitted by you upon their forms, not that its un-winnable, there’s always lawsuit for tort for example. Can we say we have been damaged by this fiasco (suffered personal loss) by this loss of privacy?

Yes…

Can we we say that there was an expectation of every measure being taken to protect the data obtained under the threat of reprisal (initiation of force) for non-compliance?

Yes, this was expressly declared on the mainstream media relentlessly…

Was this a breach of civil duty and trust?

Yes…

All then that is required surely is proving their negligence and Lockheed Martin already had to put their hands up to a failure of RSA security tokens and a subsequent security breach.

So you have to ask, why they are putting the information on a network that can be accessed with, it would appear, relative ease via the internet. Sounds somewhat risky to me… Though what’s a little more bad press for the ONS (with Lockheed Martin to use as whipping boy/scapegoat in the daily rags) a small price to pay for some seriously freedom curtailing legislation to throttle the internet, i.e. make the hosting companies liable etc for the content… to protect our liberties of course… and our data… oh, and to stop those gosh darn terrorists. (God I wish I could truly express the intense sarcasm that is dripping off that last sentence!)

But the plot thickened immediately as LulzSec disavowed the alleged census hack, as it must, when the indoctrinated masses are well used to these shenanigans, though their 15 minute attention spans help the propagandists craft such a fine dramatic farce to keep them occupied.

So what did the LulzSec twitter feed say?… Drum roll please!

“Not sure we claimed to hack the UK census or where that rumour started, but we assume it’s because people are stupider than you and I.”

This is followed by:

“I’m not seeing “we hacked the UK census” on our twitter feed or website… why does the media believe we hacked the UK census?”

A previous message noted:

“Seems the glorious leader of LulzSec got arrested, it’s all over now… wait… we’re all still here! Which poor bastard did they take down?”

Now the only thing I want to know is who’s perpetrating this apparent hoax, who benefits from the heightened atmosphere of cyber-fear? Hmm, I wonder…

Discention In The Ranks – TNSRADIO 04/12/11

Posted in Interview, Lawful Rebellion, TNS Radio with tags , , , , , , , , , on April 12, 2011 by informedminds

http://scottishsovereignsontheland.ning.com/

http://northetruth.ning.com/

http://tnsradio.ning.com/

http://tnsradio.com/

http://www.ustream.tv/user/TNSRADIO/

USTREAM Broadcast 12/04/2011.

Further to the events of the 7th of March 2011 at Birkenhead, a response to media attempts to vilify the parties involved by painting them as being affiliated to the BNP. Also a particular focus on some interesting subsequent divisions appearing in the various groups and sites within the “truth” – freedom loving movement. This show tackled this head on to get it out in the open, threats, intimidation and some impressive ego trips.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Discention In The Ranks – TNSRADIO 04/12/11, posted with vodpod

Too Busy Bitching About Broken Windows…

Posted in Lawful Rebellion, Politics, Protest, Spin with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 30, 2011 by informedminds

I wonder how this world we are given to live in, with all its benefits and privileges, would look if we were able to hold those who lie to us, steal from us, abuse our misplaced trust. Be they in the government, judiciary, financial, religious, armed forces, police or any other ‘public’ office), up to the same level of scrutiny as is imposed on those who point out their lies…

Ever heard of malfeasance in public office? Sort of rolls off the tongue, doesn’t it? Or here’s a good one, what about treason? I could go on, the list of their crimes are myriad and guarded too by those we also trust to protect our collective rights…

No? – But we can sure bitch about a few busted bank windows and some graffiti, bemoaning the “damage to private property” but lets not worry about the devastation wrought by banker manipulation, fraud and let’s not sugar coat it and call it anything less than financial terrorism.

Keep Up The Pressure, It’s Working…

Posted in Censorship, Lawful Rebellion with tags , , , , , , , on March 24, 2011 by informedminds

This came to my attention earlier today, signs are that events of the 7th of March at Birkenhead are still not fully played out, video is being removed by the Government no less. So re-upload them all, keep it alive, if my little channel can get 10,000 hits on this subject without much effort, what about 100,000 people doing the same?

The now defunct [ Link ]

I only uploaded four videos of the day on my little account and as yet no notifications.

1st video1,112 views on 24th of March 2011

2nd video5,212 views on 24th of March 2011

3rd video1,121 views on 24th of March 2011

4th video2,180 views on 24th of March 2011

Small views really, I don’t promote the channel very well, can’t be bothered really given the average apparent IQ of YouTube users, and the majority of the videos I put up are informative, too many just want to be entertained.

And I don’t bother fending off the trolls and shills for the most part, my energy is best spent elsewhere I feel.

A Step Too Far – The 2011 Census Rebellion

Posted in Census 2011, Lawful Rebellion, Politics with tags , , , , , , on March 14, 2011 by informedminds

I find this absolutely wonderful…

At every turn now I’m seeing a whole host of people from every class, creed, religion, ideology AND politic persuasions across the entire spectrum, but all with a  consensus that is damn near universal.

So many ideas, so many views, all telling the corporate State, this intrusion a step too far and answer it with a resounding – I’m telling you jack diddly squat, mate! But I have noticed a distinct lack of support from those we’d say as having ‘clout’, in the eyes of the masses, those being the officials, the mainstream media and talking heads, the journalists with any integrity left, the personalities even the CELEBRITIES…  (yes I know, scrapping the barrel there with that last one!) But then, it’s hardly sexy, is it, not much scope for getting on the next chat show except as the oddity, a stitch up, or just for comic relief…

Even the serial conformists are having issues with a great deal of the  2011 fiasco, not just the invasive, irrelevant questions, but the choice of Lockheed Martin as the agent for the ONS.  Have we all sunk so low, are we truly become the apathetic wretches who are so cowed, so servile, that we shrink and tug a forelock to those men and women in government?

Oh I have seen a few notable exceptions, many, many great articles detailing with this subject, but few personalities were weighing in and then I had to stand corrected…  In strode Janet Street Porter with her indomitable flair and typical ‘shoot from the hip’ attitude to brighten my day.

How can the simple job of gathering information about the population once every ten years, which started out in 1801 as a single sheet of paper, have morphed into this costly (£480 million and rising) exercise during a period of national financial hardship?

If we can’t afford help for carers, child day-care centres, meals on wheels and libraries, how can we bloody well afford this grandiose census? We are told it’s justified because the information allows the Government to plan grants to local authorities and to decide how much money to allocate for future health care.

The stuff about our homes helps to formulate future strategy for housing. If we tell them how we get to work, apparently it will help with the planning of transport systems and new roads.

And pigs can fly. Every time a new road, bus or rail route is planned, what happens?

There’s a fresh consultation exercise. Ditto when it comes to new housing and hospitals — there’s always a need for up-to-date information and research. More questionnaires, more information, more money spent.

I’ll leave that article with a thought, a small pondering of mine…  Just who has more balls, Janet Street Porter?…  Or the traitorous ConDem coalition?…  Tough call, isn’t it?

This one from Big Brother Watch tickled my fancy for sure.

The real question depends on the number of people, who either by not returning, defacing or directly challenging the  applicability of census via the No Contract – Return To Sender, conditional acceptance, religious reasons, support of State terrorism, or whatever…  and dealing with potential doorstep intrusions…

Even then it’s hardly an issue for even the most timid, a simple NO TRESPASS notice prominently displayed, bring it to their agents attention and close the door.  Too simple?  Then why did Census director Glen Watson have this to say on the subject back in July 2010:

“We have to have made contact.  So quite a lot of the people that don’t return the questionnaire, our census field staff have not been able to make any contact and you cannot prosecute a house.

Who will be prosecuted, and under what circumstances?

Of the 1.5 million families that, in whatever manner, refused to participate in the 2001 census, only 38 were successfully prosecuted, and given the lack of understanding in any number of legal ‘tricks’ to gain jurisdiction, it is a wonder to me, that there wasn’t more…  Only one ended up in a prison sentence, and that was a well publicised case where a particularly obstinate man was done for contempt of court for refusing to pay the fine.  The details of the criteria used can be found here.

“Prosecutions were sought on a case-by-case basis, where there was clear evidence of a refusal to return a completed Census form. The criteria for Non-Compliance Unit dropping potential cases were decided by the Legislation Project Manager, following the practise in previous censuses and taking account of more recent legal advice. The main reasons for dropping cases included:

  • insufficient confirmation of householder’s name (in cases, for example, where no contact had been made and evidence from other sources of information – such as the Electoral Register – was lacking);
  • responsibility for making a return had not been established;
  • possible irregularities in field procedures;
  • evidence of mitigating personal circumstances, such as age or infirmity of the householder or in cases of bereavement;
  • claims that forms had been posted back which could not be readily verified because of postal difficulties; and
  • cases relating to a second home or holiday accommodation.”

So will the government  actually fine them, or will they be seen to be selectively prosecuting individuals which must invariably  appear politically motivated?

Something to think on if you really must fill it in, deface it or whatever, please, please, consider rubbing  a white candle over the ‘official use’ boxes, make these bureaucrats work for their shekels.  If ‘we’ are paying so much for it, is it so much to ask that we get value for our tax-thefts?

Some may be wondering how I may be handling this, to date I haven’t had a form delivered yet, but when it does I will be sticking to the No Contract – Return To Sender route. A doorstep visit bothers me not a jot, I will be challenging that on the doorstep, no tricks, I will be stating something like:

“There is no man or woman here with any liability to, nor obligation to perform in this matter upon your request.  Go tell that to your boss mate, you’re finished here, now fuck off, the sign there says “NO TRESPASS”, are you blind as well as ignorant?”

But that’s just me.


History in the making at Birkenhead…

Posted in Lawful Rebellion with tags , , , on March 8, 2011 by informedminds

This day, history was made an only time will show the true magnitude of the events that played out on the 7th of March 2011 at Birkenhead County Court.

This was a declaration of lawful INTENT, an expression of rights… In a nutshell, a wonderful (if noisy) revocation on the State’s presumed legitimacy to rule! We only want a fair playing field, one law for all… surely not an unreasonable goal?

Here is a very different form of protest, not a protest – an assertion of Man’s true standing, a revocation, a rebuttal of a system hopelessly corrupt. ‘Judge’ Michael Peake was ‘civilly arrested‘ for treason, he failed to produce the warrant he claimed on the record to hold under the Queen, nor did he affirm his standing on his oath of office, time and again refusing to acknowledge his oath with its ascribed duties and obligations. Administrative law, not justice.

Also details emerging of a sheriff not exercising his obliged duties (full story on that bombshell to come out in time, and it’s massive), and police behaving very well it seems, and yet still protecting a criminal at large – aiding and abetting his “rescue” – or if you prefer “importing” aid and comfort to the enemy…

The mainstream media are telling us 300 supporters on the ground in support of lawful rebellion, less jaded eyes say it could have been far more that turned out to support Roger Hayes defend himself from an utterly corrupt and morally bereft judiciary, and in the process ‘civilly arrest’ the Judge, Michael Peake and Seize the court – which was held for almost an hour.

Lawful Rebellion in action, but the BBC of course attempts to downplay its importance, this will not be a story to be swept away so easy as they may wish.

Intruders have tried to arrest a judge after storming into a courtroom on Merseyside.

The activists went into the room at Birkenhead County Court while about 300 protesters gathered outside the building.

The incident is believed to be related to a bankruptcy hearing at the court.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said police were called to deal with the incident and the intruders had since left the building.

Streets surrounding the courtroom have been closed.

A leaflet handed out by the demonstrators said they were trying to seize the building “in defence of our freedoms and liberties as provided for under section 61 of Magna Carta”.

Merseyside Police said two people had been arrested for assaulting police and breach of the peace, while four others had been arrested for breach of the peace.

Articles Wirral Globe articleBBCSovereign Independent

Outside the “Event” the police were not so pleasant…

A more in depth report to follow.