Guy Taylor, a self confessed convicted counterfeiter and wealthy ‘property developer’ from the Hereford and Worcester area, is thought to be behind how the money is getting printed.
ffs, this whole thing is littered with ropey people, as well as totally conflicting info being banded about. Shady as...

Space Bandit wrote:
There isn't much confusion for anyone who has taken the time to listen to Roger Hayes's presentations where he states he isn't directly involved with the Lawful Bank.

Ye he is so shady and under hand that the first thing he does in one of his presentation is announce the fact that he was convicted for counterfeiting. I think I would rather trust the likes of Guy than Tony Blair, Brown or Camoron and of course the current system isn't operated by sneaky fucking crooks, who get bailouts rather than prison terms is it?

Frog wrote:
So replacing one bunch of crooks with another is a good idea? :/

thoreau wrote:
There are more details about how the they intend to establish the currency and also how they can be used for payment with retailers, businesses and service such as gas and electricity etc. in some of the later presentations by Roger Hayes. The proposal is really modeled on the existing system but from a ground up as opposed to top down. It also seems that they are also working on the premise that the legal and political systems are restored to legitimate position, based on common law and the British constitution. I think there is a lengthy audio only presentation kicking around which goes into some of the finer points. To get to the most detailed and up to date information you would need to register with the Lawful Bank website which is free, or attend one of their meetings.

Space Bandit wrote:
Do you have anything of substance which establishes that their intentions are dishonorable? I would be very interested to know how you have established that Roger Hayes is a crook? Unless that was just an attempt at slander on your part.

The proposal as I understand it means the bank will be built up of local branches which are controlled by members of the local community. Anyone involved in the management of a branch/es is limited to holding a position in a maximum of three branches.

As a group the various different parties are all committed to reestablishing a functional legal and political process where personal responsibility is a prominent feature. Which would mean that they are more likely to be hauled over the coals should they digress from their responsibilities. Which is not the case under the fraudulent and corrupt system that is currently in operation. A citizen or local community has little chance of getting a bank official in front of a jury as it stands now.

Frog wrote:
He's talking about Guy Taylor, the fella who admits he was convicted for counterfeiting and who wants to run a FR bank...lol

dubs expose of extreme nationalist connections to the British Constitution Group.

Day 1- Google search 1. 0.45 seconds

www.bnp.org.uk/news/drama-liverpool-cour...-protesters-arrested

I especially like this bit:
"Roger Hayes (who is not a member of or a sympathiser of the British National Party), chairman of The British Constitution Group (which is totally separate from the British National Party, although it is supported by some of our members), was due before the Judge over his refusal to pay Council Tax, which he claims is illegal and imposed without his consent."

Which certainly smacks of the kind of 'distancing' from C18 attempted by the BNP under John Tyndall to anyone who is familiar with the BNP. Even with that effort removed from one's judgement there's the statement that BCG is supported by "some" BNP. Gotta love far right politicos aint ya

"The North West Regional Organiser of the British National Party is today into his second day of a 14-day prison sentence for contempt of court. Popular activist and official Councillor Mike Whitby was jailed following his arrest for demanding the name of a police officer who assaulted him and ripped his jacket during a demonstration in Birkenhead County Court."

BNP at Birkenhead??? Shock horror! Obviously they must have piggy backed the protest, that's the only possible explanation isn't it

Oh wait.....hang on a mo....

"The hundreds of protesters - including Cllr. Whitby - were there under the banner and concept of "lawful rebellion",.

Ooh look at this link at the bottom of the page:
Help The British National Party's Campaign For Traditional British Justice.
Dead now it seems but Mmmmmmm

Has anyone heard of the Constitutional Movement? I expect a few at least here have:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_Movement

Coincindence that they were called the "constitutional" movement? Must be obviously

thebritishresistance.co.uk/writers/the-e...ish-resistance-forum

www.thebritishresistance.co.uk/writers/t...istance-paltalk-room

studentactivistdiary.co.uk/index.php/tag/brian-gerrish/

www.hopenothate.org.uk/blog/article/1521...t-manchester-meeting


Mmmm well lookee here

This is probably the easiest expose ever and I am already frankly quite underwhelmed. The case is clear. The exact same kind of "distancing" that went on with C18 is all over these clowns. Then of course we have happy little coincidences like the name "UK Column". Don't be fooled. The BCG is a front for the far right.

I have to ask myself why anyone would be defending them?

Lets have a look at where some of the inspiration for the approach of the BCG may have come from:

Does the name Roger Elvick ring any bells?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemption_movement

"Elvick was the national spokesman for the white supremacist group Committee of the States and the president of Common Title, a farm loan scam."

Oooo he's a white supremacist and a scammer

Frog wrote:
Well I wasn't talking about Roger the dodger there was I?
Apart from that, Hayes's involvement in this is unclear as I posted with the quizzical expression above. Although if he is involved, I know that;
- Hayes does not appear to have a consumer credit licence
- He doesn't appear to have any financial services authorisation,
which would make him a crook should he get involved. What happens to the 'retired' money Frog? Doesn't that ring some alarm bells? Because, let's be honest, this is never ever going to work... it would take a critical mass of the population to swap their money to this new currency before Sterling would become worthless. How many people are going to do that eh? How many people have even heard about this and take an interest? The new currency will only hold worth if people and businesses start accepting it as legal tender...
Then there are several problems with the liquidity of the bank, should it offer financial services such as mortgages.
Say for example, for a 10% admin fee, you could borrow 100,000. Which is 10,000. But that's only 10,000 over 25 years. And it's a huge risk which nobody is going to insure for so little, leaving even less profit. So where does the bank get it's extra money from since it's never going to have enough in reserve because it offers out 10 x the deposit? If it just prints the money - that's hyperinflation straight away. Zimbabwe springs to mind.
This thing is very badly thought through at best, but with all the dubious characters involved - a scam is far more likely.
Then there is also to take into consideration some of the claims made by Roger Hayes and the fmotl crowd. - none of it has any basis in law, and has been shown to be little more than a fancy conspiracy theory with a few people cashing in and a few people getting sent down. The whole thing is a sham & if I were you I'd stick well clear of it.

Space Bandit wrote:
Well its not quite true to say that none of it has basis in law, it just has no basis in APPLIED law.
Applied law is all that really matters and this is why I said the UK has no constitution because it is not applied and also it really doesn't have a constitution that applied to all of us today in the way we would like it to.

Further than that though and much more importantly there is the due consideration we should give that this whole carry on is GLOBAL in nature, the UK is not the be all and end all of whats going on. This is why I do not support such stuff as BCG as being a 'solution', a co-op bank with fees instead of interest is just that...a co-op bank it makes little difference other than to be slightly better than a standard bank. Also if you cannot use such a bank for current accounts with daily transactions etc then it ends up being just for savings and loans which defeats the whole object imho.

We should remain focused on the big picture. All the countries in the world have adopted the fractional reserve banking standard and we have seen ludicrous amounts of debt created off it. We should stamp out the madness once and for all and the link I gave to www.positivemoney.org.uk/ explains everything in great detail. There is no political agenda there just sensible economics.
The banking act of 1844 is a law that intended to stop fractional reserve, the banks just created a new kind of money and side-stepped it and politicians did nothing about it.
A constitution should be all encompassing and embedded, at the end of the day it is my belief that this will not come about peacefully as people remain divided for whatever reason, concentration on the UK while a start is nowhere near good enough.

The global economy would have to adopt FULL reserve banking at the same time more or less for the economy to recover, its that simple. You cannot solve debt with more debt.

andyh wrote:
If money is to be maintained as a method of distributing resources ( and it is highly questionable that it needs to be) then this ^^^ is the plain and simple truth. An FR system inevitably leads to the need for "growth" in an economy. That need for growth throws common sense out of the window and opens the door to a whole lot of very destructive actions. It is literally madness.

To be fair the the lawful bank people at least they are trying to be proactive - I see it though much in the way I see this place - lawful rebellion seeks to change one control system for another but with people in charge who are deemed to be more trustworthy and with tweaks in how people wish things to be - which is great for the first generation of people who contributed to what those tweaks are but for those who come to the table later or are 'born' into it therefore had little to no say in things it wont be a reflection of how they want to see things run nor will they necessarily have that trust.

On a forum people have the opportunity to not join - to leave or to conform - in real life however things are very different.

That is why the world has so much conflict - each generation wishes to do what they see as fair and right whilst the previous wants to retain control. Consensus made in one generation does not necessarily pass down to the next.

thoreau wrote:
given the guy involved I would say its just to make a few bob out of truthers again.

www.positivemoney.org.uk/2012/07/co-op-bank-were-boring/

^There's a co-op bank already setup, why don't they just pimp that?

/shrugs.

Or how about promoting non fiat based forms of exchange? Some good old fashioned you scratch my back attitude?

dubmeup wrote:
Well the irony is that I would expect the 'conservative' view to be that we should abolish the law of 'legal tender' if you get my drift...

andyh wrote:
While I partly agree with that, much of fmotl stuff that I looked into has no basis in law... ever!
It's no good to expect ancient laws that have been repealed moons ago to still have effect - times change, the law changes, and things move on - regardless of whether we agree with it or not - the system has the power and will apply the law as it sees fit using force if necessary.
As much as I wanted fmotl stuff to be true - it's just not and is founded on a load of nonsense & lies - which is never a good start or indicator of any 'movement' as far as I'm concerned.

Yes even if the UK were to move to this 'lawful bank' that wouldn't solve much even if it were to work. As far as I'm concerned, money = slavery. I see little point in trying to solve one problem by creating a load of new ones.

Space Bandit wrote:
That is what I'm saying basically...we have common law which does indeed change over time.
The 1844 banking act is a good example, the intent of it is no longer carried out simply because of a change in the environment that led to a loophole for interpretation. It is truly sad that our courts would play such a stupid childish game.
At the end of the day the brits are unarmed and at the mercy of their own police and armed forces. The day will come when people realise this, I just don't see any way out of this without violence one way or the other or we're all going to end up chipped slaves and eventually cyborgs and well you know the rest..

Debt is slavery yes and as long as money remains debt (which it does with fractional reserve) then we remain slaves.
The ideal situation is for people to not need to have to borrow money to get what they want. The idea situation is for there to be a situation brought about where there are plenty of resources and little in the way of scarcity.
Its actually a very old anarchist economic principle.

andyh wrote:
Indeed... & we know it's possible. Implementing it is the tricky bit!