I DIDN'T TAKE THIS ROUTE TO BE CHECKED.

[Guest Waka Flocka Dave]

policewoman in a male team are alwwaaaysss cunts...

the entire force is built full of people with inferiority complexes

'tis why so often you'll find that they're d*ckheads

dunno if it's inferiority complexes, think it's just natural that people abuse their positions

if i was a cop i'd probably go on savage power trips, just in a different way to thick, d*ckhead bobbies on the beat

some of them do have some kind of complex

like they were them goody two shoes who always gt bullied in school, then they grew up bulked up abit n joined the force to prove to people they see as like those who bullied them that they can hold themselves

i dunno, that prob aint right, bt its how i think some of them are

met some cool ones though so theyre not all pricks

[Yuri]

any 'special task force' type ones are cunts. think its one of the job specs 'cunting experience'

gahahah this is what i meant when i said this: 'i'd probably go on savage power trips, just in a different way to thick, d*ckhead bobbies on the beat'

[Guest Klitschko]

Police are people.

This means, like all people,half of them are cunts.

Unlike normal people though, when police are cunts, it actually spells major troubs for you.

Joe Bloggs being a c*nt = no problem

Polcie Officer being a c*nt = your f*cked

[JOHN DOE]

policewoman in a male team are alwwaaaysss cunts...

THIS IS VERY TRUE

its like the feel they have to increase thier level of c*nt in order to be taken seriously which in some point is understandable

but f*ck feds all d same

[Yuri]

ye f*ck the dboys

one guy whos not even on this ting like tht is being stitched up by them for a strap charge. werent even his nd werent on him

they basically putting it on him like, snitch or go jail.

put the vest over his head to not leave marks when they f*cked him up

gotta reach them quotas bro

[Hernandez Balcazar]

looool

[JGGB]

Never been stopped but I'm gonna look into this so that when I get a whip next year after uni similar tactics will be implemented to this guy if I'm am conducting my life lawfully and am stopped by poilice

[Mic Man]

http://www.fmotl.com/

also got a forum on there....very interesting

:!: :!: :!:

sh*t is deep. People need to take note of this-

Probably the most important bit:

14) Contractual obligation. For ANY contract to be lawful, INCLUDING A CONTRACT BETWEEN YOURSELF AS PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT IN A COURT DE FACTO, it must comprise the following:

A) FULL DISCLOSURE by both parties. Neither party can later claim 'you should have known' if it was not specifically declared at the time of making the contract.

A CONSIDERATION offered by both parties, this being the subject of the exchange. It must be a sum of money, or an item of value. Both parties agree that their CONSIDERATION is worth (to them) the other party's CONSIDERATION.

C) LAWFUL TERMS & CONDITIONS for the contract, to which both parties agree.

D) 'Wet' SIGNATURES of both parties. This means hand-written SIGNATURES, as made by two human beings.

Even though businesses and officials act as though there is a lawful contract in place, 99 times out of 100 these rules have not been followed. (Maybe it is 999 times out of 1,000 - or even more!). Standing on these 4 rules, requesting proofs, is the simplest way of stalemating just about every action that may be taken against you. (See No. 16, below)

15. Agreement to pay. Consequent to (14) above, all 'payment demands', that could result in court actions against you, can be stopped by 'conditionally agreeing to pay the sum demanded', subject to proofs that the 4 rules were followed in the first place. (Make sure you send this letter by registered post, heading it 'Notice of Conditional Agreement' and including 'Without Prejudice' in a suitable place). In almost all cases no proofs are possible (because the rules were never followed lawfully). However, by 'agreeing to pay' you have removed all CONTROVERSY. Thus a court action, which is only there to adjudicate on CONTROVERSY, cannot take place. If you receive a Summons, you can write back (registered!) with a copy of your agreement to pay, subject to the proofs being presented. The court will consider that any further action is 'frivolous', i.e. a complete waste of its time, since there is no CONTROVERSY on which it can adjudicate. (The court may even consider whoever applied to the court to be in contempt). (See No. 16, below)

16. "I feel 'guilty', because I owe the money". No, you don't owe a damn thing! When taking out the loan, you were 'loaned' back what was yours in the first place. You created the 'money' when you signed the Loan or Credit Application. By doing so, YOU gave THEM a Negotiable Instrument called 'the money'. They cashed this in(*), and then used that to loan you back your own money. You don't owe a damn thing! THEY owe YOU - an apology at the very least - for applying this confidence trick on you - AND FOR CHASING YOU FOR SOMETHING YOU ALREADY GAVE THEM.

(* Actually they just could have walked away with your cash. But they didn't, because they are greedy, greedy, greedy, greedy. They knew they could get you to pay everything back, and also to pay them INTEREST on top of that. Thus they had already been paid in full ONCE when they cashed in on your money, took a risk by offering it back to you, and reckoned on being paid TWICE OR EVEN MORE via the 'interest'. Are you just beginning to feel slightly less sympathetic? If not, I don't know what else to say.

"Can this really be true?" Answer: Yes, because there is no other way. Banks are not allowed (by LAW) to lend Depositor's money (which is held by them 'in trust'). Loan Companies and Credit Card Companies (etc.) have no Deposit Money in the first place! Do they? So how else could they do it, then?)

If a loan company cannot provide the 4 things listed- then the contract is void.

If this is the case, I will take out a mortgage tomorrow and never pay it back! Do we have any law bods on the forum willing to look further into it?

Also, I wonder if your credit score will get shot to pieces? *continues reading*

[Afroman]

http://www.fmotl.com/

also got a forum on there....very interesting

pos'd

quality stuff... Bookmarking this.

[J. Edgar]

Arguing with feds is long and gets you no-where. The best thing to do is take their badge number down, and if you think you have been wrongly stopped, complain to the IPC and try to get compensation.

Officers are just like me and you, so you sitting there schooling them about the law of the land for 30 minutes isn't really productive

[Meticulous]

IPCC dont give a f*ck about your complaints

[Guest Awesome Kong]

IPCC dont give a f*ck about your complaints

[Yuri]

IPCC dont give a f*ck about your complaints

I had one upheld a while back funnily enough

And I know someone else that did too

[Mr. Gayle]

http://www.fmotl.com/

also got a forum on there....very interesting

:!: :!: :!:

sh*t is deep. People need to take note of this-

Probably the most important bit:

14) Contractual obligation. For ANY contract to be lawful, INCLUDING A CONTRACT BETWEEN YOURSELF AS PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT IN A COURT DE FACTO, it must comprise the following:

A) FULL DISCLOSURE by both parties. Neither party can later claim 'you should have known' if it was not specifically declared at the time of making the contract.

A CONSIDERATION offered by both parties, this being the subject of the exchange. It must be a sum of money, or an item of value. Both parties agree that their CONSIDERATION is worth (to them) the other party's CONSIDERATION.

C) LAWFUL TERMS & CONDITIONS for the contract, to which both parties agree.

D) 'Wet' SIGNATURES of both parties. This means hand-written SIGNATURES, as made by two human beings.

Even though businesses and officials act as though there is a lawful contract in place, 99 times out of 100 these rules have not been followed. (Maybe it is 999 times out of 1,000 - or even more!). Standing on these 4 rules, requesting proofs, is the simplest way of stalemating just about every action that may be taken against you. (See No. 16, below)

15. Agreement to pay. Consequent to (14) above, all 'payment demands', that could result in court actions against you, can be stopped by 'conditionally agreeing to pay the sum demanded', subject to proofs that the 4 rules were followed in the first place. (Make sure you send this letter by registered post, heading it 'Notice of Conditional Agreement' and including 'Without Prejudice' in a suitable place). In almost all cases no proofs are possible (because the rules were never followed lawfully). However, by 'agreeing to pay' you have removed all CONTROVERSY. Thus a court action, which is only there to adjudicate on CONTROVERSY, cannot take place. If you receive a Summons, you can write back (registered!) with a copy of your agreement to pay, subject to the proofs being presented. The court will consider that any further action is 'frivolous', i.e. a complete waste of its time, since there is no CONTROVERSY on which it can adjudicate. (The court may even consider whoever applied to the court to be in contempt). (See No. 16, below)

16. "I feel 'guilty', because I owe the money". No, you don't owe a damn thing! When taking out the loan, you were 'loaned' back what was yours in the first place. You created the 'money' when you signed the Loan or Credit Application. By doing so, YOU gave THEM a Negotiable Instrument called 'the money'. They cashed this in(*), and then used that to loan you back your own money. You don't owe a damn thing! THEY owe YOU - an apology at the very least - for applying this confidence trick on you - AND FOR CHASING YOU FOR SOMETHING YOU ALREADY GAVE THEM.

(* Actually they just could have walked away with your cash. But they didn't, because they are greedy, greedy, greedy, greedy. They knew they could get you to pay everything back, and also to pay them INTEREST on top of that. Thus they had already been paid in full ONCE when they cashed in on your money, took a risk by offering it back to you, and reckoned on being paid TWICE OR EVEN MORE via the 'interest'. Are you just beginning to feel slightly less sympathetic? If not, I don't know what else to say.

"Can this really be true?" Answer: Yes, because there is no other way. Banks are not allowed (by LAW) to lend Depositor's money (which is held by them 'in trust'). Loan Companies and Credit Card Companies (etc.) have no Deposit Money in the first place! Do they? So how else could they do it, then?)

If a loan company cannot provide the 4 things listed- then the contract is void.

If this is the case, I will take out a mortgage tomorrow and never pay it back! Do we have any law bods on the forum willing to look further into it?

Also, I wonder if your credit score will get shot to pieces? *continues reading*

Yeah there is a lot of info about banks/loans/credit on the Consumer Action Group forum, used them nuff, put some letters and tactics on here a while back. Worked for me, the majority of people dont know your rights so end up being f*cked. Ive had 2 CCJ's wiped from my file using tactics from CAG

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/index.php

[Mr. Gayle]

http://www.fmotl.com/

also got a forum on there....very interesting

:!: :!: :!:

sh*t is deep. People need to take note of this-

Probably the most important bit:

14) Contractual obligation. For ANY contract to be lawful, INCLUDING A CONTRACT BETWEEN YOURSELF AS PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT IN A COURT DE FACTO, it must comprise the following:

A) FULL DISCLOSURE by both parties. Neither party can later claim 'you should have known' if it was not specifically declared at the time of making the contract.

A CONSIDERATION offered by both parties, this being the subject of the exchange. It must be a sum of money, or an item of value. Both parties agree that their CONSIDERATION is worth (to them) the other party's CONSIDERATION.

C) LAWFUL TERMS & CONDITIONS for the contract, to which both parties agree.

D) 'Wet' SIGNATURES of both parties. This means hand-written SIGNATURES, as made by two human beings.

Even though businesses and officials act as though there is a lawful contract in place, 99 times out of 100 these rules have not been followed. (Maybe it is 999 times out of 1,000 - or even more!). Standing on these 4 rules, requesting proofs, is the simplest way of stalemating just about every action that may be taken against you. (See No. 16, below)

15. Agreement to pay. Consequent to (14) above, all 'payment demands', that could result in court actions against you, can be stopped by 'conditionally agreeing to pay the sum demanded', subject to proofs that the 4 rules were followed in the first place. (Make sure you send this letter by registered post, heading it 'Notice of Conditional Agreement' and including 'Without Prejudice' in a suitable place). In almost all cases no proofs are possible (because the rules were never followed lawfully). However, by 'agreeing to pay' you have removed all CONTROVERSY. Thus a court action, which is only there to adjudicate on CONTROVERSY, cannot take place. If you receive a Summons, you can write back (registered!) with a copy of your agreement to pay, subject to the proofs being presented. The court will consider that any further action is 'frivolous', i.e. a complete waste of its time, since there is no CONTROVERSY on which it can adjudicate. (The court may even consider whoever applied to the court to be in contempt). (See No. 16, below)

16. "I feel 'guilty', because I owe the money". No, you don't owe a damn thing! When taking out the loan, you were 'loaned' back what was yours in the first place. You created the 'money' when you signed the Loan or Credit Application. By doing so, YOU gave THEM a Negotiable Instrument called 'the money'. They cashed this in(*), and then used that to loan you back your own money. You don't owe a damn thing! THEY owe YOU - an apology at the very least - for applying this confidence trick on you - AND FOR CHASING YOU FOR SOMETHING YOU ALREADY GAVE THEM.

(* Actually they just could have walked away with your cash. But they didn't, because they are greedy, greedy, greedy, greedy. They knew they could get you to pay everything back, and also to pay them INTEREST on top of that. Thus they had already been paid in full ONCE when they cashed in on your money, took a risk by offering it back to you, and reckoned on being paid TWICE OR EVEN MORE via the 'interest'. Are you just beginning to feel slightly less sympathetic? If not, I don't know what else to say.

"Can this really be true?" Answer: Yes, because there is no other way. Banks are not allowed (by LAW) to lend Depositor's money (which is held by them 'in trust'). Loan Companies and Credit Card Companies (etc.) have no Deposit Money in the first place! Do they? So how else could they do it, then?)

If a loan company cannot provide the 4 things listed- then the contract is void.

If this is the case, I will take out a mortgage tomorrow and never pay it back! Do we have any law bods on the forum willing to look further into it?

Also, I wonder if your credit score will get shot to pieces? *continues reading*

read the forum on that site, questions been asked.

basically you wont have a credit rating youl be over however on the site it also says it is possible to force the credit companies to withdraw you from their list

Yes you can request that credit companies do not use automated processes for your application

[Thizz]

WAIT WAIT WAIT SO YOU'RE SAYING IF I GET A LOAN AN THE COMPANY DON'T GO BY THESE RULES I CAN VOID THE CONTRACT???

[Guest Yilmaz]

Lol, I watched the video. Then I googled "Freeman's Law" and !Freeman on the land law". The first two names I managed to stumble across were "David Icke" and "Ali G".

That tells me all I need to know about this.

[Guest Yilmaz]

you wifeyd charlie c*ck

yAAwn

[BLACK VICTIM]

wifeyd a butters whore

and she has moved on and he has nobody

woah duuude

[Guest Yilmaz]

wifeyd a butters whore

and she has moved on and he has nobody

woah duuude

[M.Dot]

Looks like the officer from the first video

[Black Ant]

that was entertaining.

[imhim]

Looks like the officer from the first video

[media=]

[/media]

u cant f*cks wiv people who are hood smart

[Seymour Cake]

Man was on point but I can't help but think if he came across the CUNTISH officers, he would be on the floor with a couple knees digging into his back