give you a chance

The Common Law Society Educate People to Protect Themselves       www.TheCommonLawSociety.com/   info@thecommonlawsociety.com   T: 057 8688 410     PLEASE SHARE THIS EMAIL WITH AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.  IT MAY HELP THEM TO LEGALLY PROTECT THEMSELVES   WE are shocked and somewhat bemused ...   Although we have a great many People that are readers of the material we put out, and have been with us, for a great many years, we still get letters/notes from People like the one below.    Please Critically read before we continue:   ~~~   Hi The CLS,   I'm due in court on the fourth of March (must double check the date). Got a summons in December by registered post which I collected at the post office (it was my parents address so thought it might be family matters). Appeared in Court in January. I stated that that was not my address it was my parents address. They want me to prove there was a license at that address.   Why should I? It's not my property.  Summons was for AN ADDRESS … My address is ANOTHER ADDRESS. Surely they have to have the correct address in order to get conviction?   I felt very intimidated by the judge as he seems to be siding with the state solicitor (conflict of interest), who pays his wage. I want to fight for my rights. With your help I would hope to achieve that goal and after to have it on your website for people to read. I believe we must learn the law and use it for our protection. Summary of events: July 2015 inspector calls to house, unfortunately I answered the door, stated the person he was looking for was not at the property. Any post from an post TV license, was placed back in post box with return to sender. Picked up the registered letter in December.   Hope to hear from you soon, thank you in advance. ... Best Regards, Paddy   ~~~    Ok … lets have a critical go at this.    To be crystal clear and for the record, we are not having a go or trying to be disparaging of the Man (Paddy), we are critiquing all the human errors that have been made, which from time to time any of us can be guilty of.   Paddy Stated: "Got a summons by registered post which I collected at the post office".     This tells us that the post office tried to deliver the said "summons", and failed to do so, because there was nobody at the address to accept it. It would have been returned to the sorting office as not being delivered.   NOTE: Delivery was NOT refused.  … In this case, it would have gone back to the SENDER as undelivered, and therefore NOT LAWFULLY SERVED. Therefore NO CASE could proceed at that time.  Paddy erred, by picking up the "summons" from the post office and signing for it.   The said "summons" was issued in Paddy's name. Paddy did get the "summons", it was in his name, and he did appear in the Court on the day confirming all of this, therefore he conceded Jurisdiction to the Court.    The Court are now treating the address question as a technical issue/error, and not relevant, because Paddy has identified himself as being served, and is in the Court to answer the charge.  THIS ISSUE SHOULD NOT BE DROPPED, but it will be "overlooked" and "passed over" by the Court, if Paddy continues to let it be so.   JURISDICTION was/is established for the case to proceed. The State are not trying to convict "the address" per se, they are attempting to fine/convict Paddy.   Paddy stated: "I felt very intimidated by the judge as he seems to be siding with the state solicitor (conflict of interest), who pays his wage".    Yes Court is a very intimidating place to find yourself, nonetheless, Paddy has offered NO EVIDENCE to us that the said Judge was/is siding with the state solicitor.    Paddy has NOT provided us with a FULL TRANSCRIPT or any EVIDENCE of what was said/stated by the parties to the case on the day, so this is just his emotions/feelings, and are at present NOT relevant to the matter, they are just here-say.   Paddy stated: "I want to fight for my rights. With your help I would hope to achieve that goal and after to have it on your website for people to read. I believe we must learn the law and use it for our protection".     This is a contradiction in terms really, as if you are going to "fight for my rights" per se, then why would you need or want anyone's "help"?    Equally, Paddy with this statement is also telling us, that he has not Critically read any of the material that we have been sending out, issuing and broadcasting for a great may years now, and directly to Paddy.  If Paddy believes he must learn the law, why has he not learned and know the law already? And more to the point, why has Paddy NOT brought the LAW into Court?     The answer to that question probably rests firmly in the human condition called "If it does not affect me, why would I give a damn or bother?"  … In other words, Paddy didn't see the TV License issue as an issue affecting him, because nobody came knocking on his door until July 2015, and then of course it became something that was immediate to him, but something he had not prepared for. Now Paddy is in a bit of a bind … and seeks "help".   Paddy Stated: "July 2015 inspector calls to house, unfortunately I answered the door, stated the person he was looking for was not at the property."    Was it "unfortunate" that Paddy answered the door, or was it "unfortunate" that he stated to the inspector that "the person he was looking for was not at the property", or perhaps both?   The more serious issue may arise, given that Paddy is now in the Court.  The said inspector can now evidence that on the face of it Paddy lied to him, about not being "the person he was looking for" (if it was indeed Paddy he was looking for).  This will of course not go down well with the Judge, and will paint Paddy in a certain light, of either being a bit crazed, or a bit of a liar or possibly both "a crazed liar!".   Paddy Stated: "Any post from an post TV license, was placed back in post box with return to sender."  How many times have we covered this "return to sender" thing with People?  We know there are several characters out there, that still put it out to People, that sticking something back in the post with a "return to send (RTS)" note on it, is the magical or silver bullet that will solve all your problems … FFS.    Yes there are times when it may be appropriate to put a "RTS" note on an envelope or card and send it back, but in this case, it may have made matters worse for Paddy.  It may have flagged the matter with the TV License Inspector, that Paddy and the address should be investigated. If nothing else; but to establish if the property has People living in it, or not. Clearly, there must be someone there, if they are getting their mail back with "RTS" on it, and perhaps they are evading payment? So in this case the "RTS" thing has potentially assisted in getting Paddy into Court and into trouble.   Paddy Stated: "They (the Court/Judge) want me to prove there was a license at that address."    This perhaps this is where Paddy's case can start/begin.   Up to this point, the case against Paddy was open and shut (and may still be).  In Court, Paddy did not ask/seek a Gary Doyle Order, as in FULL DISCLOSURE of the Accusers Evidence, and this is why the Court are desirous of Paddy proving "his case".  They have shifted the BURDEN OF PROOF from themselves onto the Accused (Paddy).   THE BIG QUESTION: How is it possible in LAW, for Paddy to PROVE "there was a licence at that address" ... if "that address" is not his?     Perhaps Paddy should ask the Judge that question, and ask the Judge to make an Order to do something that in LAW cannot be done?   Will the Judge be able to make such as Order? Well only if wishes to have the matter Judicially Reviewed and/or have potential impeachment proceedings issued against him.     Paddy gave evidence by making the statement "I stated that that was not my address it was my parents address."  … and by making such a statement, the Court have now bound Paddy to PROVE HIS STATEMENT, which in LAW they are correct to do.  Whereas if Paddy had had his research and study done, he would have said to the Court, the State/TV License Authority as the accusers, carry the BURDEN OF PROOF in LAW to PROVE THEIR CASE …   This brings the headache back to the accuser(s).   THIS CAN STILL BE DONE … IF PADDY PUTS IT TO THE COURT.   IN CONCLUSION: There is absolutely no need whatsoever for any of the People that subscribe to the material we put out, to coalesce to the Courts in respect of these types of matters.   The LAW is clear and very well defined.  Judges may not be happy that you are seeking a "Gary Doyle Order" as in FULL DISCLOSURE, and may challenge you on the validity of this.  If you are found wanting or lacking in the knowledge you need, Judges will and do take advantage of your lacking, and your ignorance of the LAW will only serve to help the prosecution/accuser.  If you are not prepared to have a VERBAL TUSSLE with a Judge, and then are not prepared to put EVERYTHING ON RECORD ACCURATELY by writing to the Court/Judge … you are going nowhere in a hurry.   ALL the Information, the Knowledge and the LAW you need in these types of cases (CRIMINAL), are to be found under the DPP Guidelines for Prosecutors (2010) … S8 and S9: https://www.dppireland.ie/publications/category/14/guidelines-for-prosecutors/   Moreover, the book "The Gary Doyle Order"  … works through a particular case, and specifically gives and outlines what you can seek and by LAW get here:  www.TheGaryDoyleOrder.com/   For those of you reading this, there are no excuses for not being prepare and not seeking a "Gary Doyle Order" and/or FULL DISCLOSURE. And at least on the face of it, giving yourselves a fighting chance of winning your case(s).   ~~~   The Next School of Commonology is on Monday 28th. March 2016, and focused on the Criminal Aspects of Income Tax, and what can happen in Court.  More information and booking is available here: www.itcl.eventbrite.com/

JoePlummer.com News 02-29-2016

StopTheLie.com News update 02-29-2016

Pax: An Ethereum Powered Virtual Nation
Source: Bitcoin.com
--The governance 2.0 platform claims its system is a "high-trust environment" that will allow people to enter voluntary agreements with accountability and this type of voluntary legal architecture will create something that encompasses the best of both worlds when it comes to authority and sovereign autonomy.

--These types of projects have planted the seeds in our society that will transform the way we view government. Society is starting to realize that trusting in numbers instead of trusting fallible representatives, might be the better option for humans to govern themselves. Banks are not the only institutions subject to disruption. The nation state has something to fear as well.
Read full article at: https://news.bitcoin.com/pax-an-ethereum-powered-virtual-nation/

======================================================

Anarchy VS Limited Government Debate (Video) 
Source: YouTube.com
Larken Rose and Mark Skousen debate the need for government in society. 
Watch video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUjwmC7byCM

======================================================

Edward Snowden Speaks at New Hampshire Liberty Forum (Video)
Source: FreeStateProject.org
Edward Snowden addresses a crowd of over 500 at the Free State Project's Liberty Forum. 
Watch video at: https://youtu.be/M94ZO6jYU6c

======================================================

Tragedy and Hope 101 interview with Joe Plummer (Video)
Source: TragedyAndHope.com / Richard Grove
In his 1300-page history book "Tragedy and Hope," professor Carroll Quigley showed us that "representative government" is, at best, a carefully managed con game. In "The Anglo-American Establishment," Quigley went even further to expose the network of "experts" that he said "will replace...the democratic voter in control of the political system."

As a respected Ivy League historian, Quigley was given access to the secret records of this network. He supported most of its aims, but objected to the fact that it insisted on working behind the scenes; unknown to the general public. If you feel this is something you should learn more about, but you don't have the time to read Tragedy and Hope or The Anglo-American Establishment, you can read a condensed version of Quigley's work in "Tragedy and Hope 101." The 90-minute interview below also provides more details.
Watch video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J18h--LFW_8

COMMENT: If you're short on time, there is a 10 minute preview available here: 

https://youtu.be/2sV6Wd9EYdE?t=50s

======================================================

PLEASE forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to our news list can sign up at: http://stopthelie.com/stl_newsletter.html

Other sources for alternative news: 

http://www.PrisonPlanet.com/
http://needtoknow.news/ 
http://www.FreedomsPhoenix.com/Front-Page.htm
http://libertycrier.com/


Previous Week's News 02-22-2016

TRUMP: 'ELECT ME AND YOU'LL FIND OUT WHO REALLY KNOCKED DOWN THE TWIN TOWERS'
Source: InfoWars.com
"We went after Iraq, they did not knock down the World Trade Center." Trump told those in attendance.

"It wasn't the Iraqis that knocked down the World Trade Center, we went after Iraq, we decimated the country, Iran's taking over, okay." Trump continued.

"But it wasn't the Iraqis, you will find out who really knocked down the World Trade Center. Because they have papers in there that are very secret, you may find it's the Saudis, okay? But you will find out."
Read full article at: http://www.infowars.com/trump-vows-elect-me-and-youll-find-out-who-really-knocked-down-the-twin-towers/

COMMENT: Assuming the evidence of Saudi guilt is clear, you really have to ask yourself: 

Why would US policy makers, while claiming to "protect us from terrorism," choose to PROTECT those that facilitated the 9/11attacks? The "cover up" alone makes them an accessory to the crime...(Maybe our policy makers don't want anyone "pulling the Saudi thread," for fear of where it will lead back to.)

======================================================

Would we not shatter it to bits?
Source: NeedToKnow.News
--The contradiction in the stories in the Middle East is that it is almost impossible to tell who is fighting terrorism and who is protecting terrorism. A recurring thread is that the US is leading a great military campaign against ISIS but it also delivers weapons to ISIS, provides aid to ISIS, attacks ISIS with powder-puff blows, and does everything to prevent Russia from knocking the hell out of ISIS. 

Turkey and Egypt, allies of the US, are performing similar roles. In the name of fighting terrorism, they somehow manage to do more harm to those who genuinely are fighting ISIS than to ISIS itself. If you haven't yet picked up on this consistent contradiction, this week's news will make it abundantly clear.

Whenever there is a consistent contradiction, it is a sign that it isn't a contradiction at all but that our expectations are based on wrong assumptions. That clearly is the case with the war on terrorism.
Read full article at: http://needtoknow.news/archives/2016-2/2016-02-19/

COMMENT: A nice / short article by Ed Griffin. 

======================================================

Why Psychiatry Holds Enormous Power in Society Despite Losing Scientific Credibility
Source: Alternet.org
--All societies, communities and families coerce and control members who frighten them. However, the kinds of behavior that frightens people varies enormously, and thus what is permissible to control and coerce varies enormously. So, while it would be fairly universal for a society to coerce and control someone who is physically attacking another of its members, it is quite historically exceptional—as is done in U.S. society—to use antipsychotic drugs to subdue a bored seven-year-old who is resisting classroom controls.

In December 2012, the Archives of General Psychiatry (renamed JAMA Psychiatry) reported that, between 1993-2009, there was a seven-fold increase of children 13 years and younger being prescribed antipsychotic drugs, and that nonpsychotic conditions such as "disruptive behavior disorders" were the most common diagnoses in children medicated with antipsychotics, accounting for 63% of those medicated.

The dramatic growth of antipsychotic drugs in the United States is largely about ever-increasing societal acceptance of using drugs to control unwanted behaviors. Antipsychotics grossed over $18 billion a year in the United States by 2011, and by 2013 one antipsychotic drug, Abilify, was the highest grossing of all drugs in the United States with nearly $6.5 billion in sales. In addition to children—especially foster children—the burgeoning U.S. antipsychotic market includes the elderly in nursing homes and inmates in prisons and jails, where antipsychotic drugs are a relatively inexpensive way to subdue and more easily manage these populations.
Read full article at: http://www.alternet.org/comments/why-psychiatry-holds-enormous-power-society-despite-losing-scientific-credibility#disqus_thread

======================================================

Cash Wars: The People Strike Back?
Source: CorbettReport.com
--Harald Mahrer is one of the people warning about the move, and he's not just your average Joe. He's a Deputy in the Economic Ministry of the Austrian government. "We don't want someone to be able to track digitally what we buy, eat and drink, what books we read and what movies we watch," he told Austrian public radio station Oe1 last week. He argues that the ability to use cash should be a constitutional right for Austrians.

Mahrer is just reflecting what an increasing number of people are beginning to realize: that cash transactions are a key to maintaining anonymity. Heck, when even mainstream propaganda outlets like Slate.com are running pieces making the case that "cash is a classic privacy protection" (in direct contradiction to their earlier anti-cash propaganda) you know the would-be Gods of Money still have a way to go to convince the public to part ways with paper.

But more than just privacy protection, the true importance of cash becomes apparent in times of banking crisis. Just witness when Greece started clamping down on cash withdrawals during their banking panic and people began literally stuffing it under the mattress. It is no coincidence that we are moving into a time of global economic uncertainty being frontrun by (what else?) a banking crisis in Europe.
Read full article at: https://www.corbettreport.com/cash-wars-the-people-strike-back/

PLEASE forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be interested. Those who'd like to be added to our news list can sign up at: http://stopthelie.com/stl_newsletter.html

US Intelligence Director Says Genome Editing is a WMD

Gene Editing with CRISPR/Cas-9 Can Heal or Kill. Facebook Twitter YouTube Instagram