One of the why's the legal system does not want us

[malvern]

One of the why's the legal system does not want us to understand our rights;

it is laid down that......

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."

The fact is that this so called "honourable profession of the law" is in the business to sell, delay and deny justice ... to sell to those who can afford, to delay it if the client has money, and deny it if they have not.... so there most be a strong presumption that the whole legal system has been ... Obtaining money on false pretences and obstucting the law..For the Lord Chief Justice of Engalnd and all before, who have allowed this to happen have done themselfs and the people a great injustice, and have done it in the name of thier own gain and greed.... do they swear an oath to up hold the law ??????




freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

[resistance]

One of the why's the legal system does not want us to understand our rights;

it is laid down that......

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."

The fact is that this so called "honourable profession of the law" is in the business to sell, delay and deny justice ... to sell to those who can afford, to delay it if the client has money, and deny it if they have not.... so there most be a strong presumption that the whole legal system has been ... Obtaining money on false pretences and obstucting the law..For the Lord Chief Justice of Engalnd and all before, who have allowed this to happen have done themselfs and the people a great injustice, and have done it in the name of thier own gain and greed.... do they swear an oath to up hold the law ??????




freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers


Welcome to the world of law..where lords, Qc's and barristers get fat..

[malvern]

Welcome to the world of law..where lords, Qc's and barristers get fat..

how true......
it's a shame that other do not understand what are our rights, but just of late this section is turning into a myspace sheeple area....and they want others to do the thinking for them.... no wonder we have a so called nanny state for these children, just a shame they post on the icke site, hoping others will do the work for them..


the law is an area were we have let others nannystate our rights so we do not understand the law let alone know when it apllies


freedom is the grandchildren...we are just the caretakers

[exclamatio]

hoping others will do the work for them

i would say your attitude isnt as constructive as you assume others should be

[john white]

i would say your attitude isnt as constructive as you assume others should be

LOL

Yeah lets not critique anything: its not "constructive"

I'd say Malvern's comment was fair observation

Although I expect nothing more of people than they be themselves: have no illusions about that

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."


This makes it VERY clear exactly how much we have LOST since the time of William of Orange in terms of the basis and principles of Justice

[exclamatio]

my point being he is claiming others to be nothing but information leachers and he is doing nothing himself to improve the situation, a pompus cunt.

[malvern]

my point being he is claiming others to be nothing but information leachers and he is doing nothing himself to improve the situation,

where have i claimed this ; i did state my view about sheeple wanting others to do things ...jusy felt we are missing the point and that real issues are sometimes overlooked, or the point of a thread is killed off for what seems to me to be a wrong reason
if this has upset you, so be it... but should we research your list of posts and then see who is doing things????

the piont of this thread was to open debate on our rights... freeman angle an area you yourself has posted .... these so called lawers, QC's and Lords have been miss using the law for thier gain .... and others miss use this site thats all....just fed up of seeing the general section look like myspace or people killing threads so that good debates are killed off and fluffy braindead distractions put up instead...

if only you knew of the battles i have with the tax, courts and local governments .... the videos i have worked on .... because i do not blow my horn all over the net, does not mean that everyday i do not play it.

as for pompus cunt ..... thank you.



freedom is the grandchildren are you a caretaker or pisstaker

[malvern]

One of the why's the legal system does not want us

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of the why's the legal system does not want us to understand our rights;

it is laid down that......

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."

The fact is that this so called "honourable profession of the law" is in the business to sell, delay and deny justice ... to sell to those who can afford, to delay it if the client has money, and deny it if they have not.... so there most be a strong presumption that the whole legal system has been ... Obtaining money on false pretences and obstucting the law..For the Lord Chief Justice of Engalnd and all before, who have allowed this to happen have done themselfs and the people a great injustice, and have done it in the name of thier own gain and greed.... do they swear an oath to up hold the law ??????




freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

whats your views on the above...... in more that one line please

[zarah]

Im starting a law degree later on this month. Not because I wanna get rich from the misfortune of others, but because I wanna in the position to make a difference. Members do tend to make sweeping, at times, erroneous statements which imply an 'us and them' mentality which does nothing but place further divide.

[malvern]

Im starting a law degree later on this month. Not because I wanna get rich from the misfortune of others, but because I wanna in the position to make a difference. Members do tend to make sweeping, at times, erroneous statements which imply an 'us and them' mentality which does nothing but place further divide.


my lady keeps saying that i should do a law degree, for the books ive read of late...... I would like to make a difference, now i am i father, my little boy can say that his dad did what he knew was right.

I do not care for this us and them, we all breath so we are human beings stuck on this small stone spinning around in space and would like to see us all equal as the law did wish.... It's the areas were we are being mislead, in ever sector of life that rattles me .



freedom is the grandchildren thats why we are the caretakers

[dondaz]

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."

The fact is that this so called "honourable profession of the law" is in the business to sell, delay and deny justice ... to sell to those who can afford, to delay it if the client has money, and deny it if they have not.... so there most be a strong presumption that the whole legal system has been ... Obtaining money on false pretences and obstucting the law..For the Lord Chief Justice of Engalnd and all before, who have allowed this to happen have done themselfs and the people a great injustice, and have done it in the name of thier own gain and greed.... do they swear an oath to up hold the law ??????

Isn't this the case eh. The Law Society is like a cassino, the house is set up to win and because people don't know the law they tell you to shut up, we know the law because we've been to law school. What an opportunity for corruption.

my point being he is claiming others to be nothing but information leachers and he is doing nothing himself to improve the situation, a pompus cunt.

Is this what you think? You are so far off the target mate. How about you stop whinging and get learning about how to stand up for yourself. If you're not part of the sollution, you're part of the problem.;)

Hey malvern, how about typing up some of those Misguided Cases in Common Law where the Judges have deliberately misled Juries on The Bills of Rights and Magna Charta. That's what people need to see too. Keep rocking on mate, you are not alone in your thinking!

[malvern]

Hey malvern, how about typing up some of those Misguided Cases in Common Law where the Judges have deliberately misled Juries on The Bills of Rights and Magna Charta. That's what people need to see too. Keep rocking on mate, you are not alone in your thinking!

The high court missleading dismissed the Maga Carta in the case "Rex v. Haddock" which cost a fine for this of £5. how they did this in the words of Lord Hewart... when Haddock used the example of lord Mildew, said in Klaxon v. GreatWestern Railway(1871) 2QB. " The whole is greater than the part" .... and thus is undoubtedly the law. And if, on detailed examination of a statute, as a bicycle, it is found that nearly every part is obsolete or has been destroyed ther is a strong presumption that the whole for practical purposes ceased to exist. And in the case of the magna carta little is left, and therefore that the chapter on which the appellant relies must be taken to have perished with the others.......!!!!!
the High court said " I am reluctantly compelled to declare that Magna Carta is no longer the law."



How can this be ...... if a human is still breathing is he not alive.... to compare the Magna Carta to a broken bike is laughable..... why did they not service the bike, who allowed it to get so bad and why did we not repair it when it was first broken ...so that it never got in that state ...... the Lords are the keeper of said bike for the people and the crown and should be helt responsable for it's neglect..... hence the post....you can not trust other to look after what is yours .... learn your rights ....




freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

[boots]

Yeah I get pissed off with the dribble that is in the general section, but hey I suppose it is general.

But there is so much power when you can start understanding the statues that control us and then use them against the judges who are the pompus cunts and think they know it all.

We have got to let these criminals know, that we are the power base and their heads are on the chopping block.

It's going to be a long an "individual" battle against the system, we will prevail.

[malvern]

It's going to be a long an "individual" battle against the system, we will prevail.

too right.... boots , but one i feel i must do and it's great to know that others feel the same .......... at every turn they do delay and deny, just yesterday i had a reply from the valuation office

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee320/malvernmark/vokinner.jpg

they diny by missleading you whit thier reply and delay by not imforming correctley of your rights .... this even states that someone high up in a government department was unaware there was a Bill of Rights .... is this not negelt of duty ..when asked a question should they not find the answer.


freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

[boots]

too right.... boots , but one i feel i must do and it's great to know that others feel the same .......... at every turn they do delay and deny, just yesterday i had a reply from the valuation office

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee320/malvernmark/vokinner.jpg

they diny by missleading you whit thier reply and delay by not imforming correctley of your rights .... this even states that someone high up in a government department was unaware there was a Bill of Rights .... is this not negelt of duty ..when asked a question should they not find the answer.


freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

If they have failed to inform you of your rights, Malvern then that is a derelict of duty ?? they have failed and can be taken to court over that a long and costly process I guess.

I'm starting to get into Mary Elizabeth Croft she has some brilliant info and she is having fun with it too, WOW.

Check her out mate.

When dealing with these NWO puppet we have to be VERY precise with the wording and question, without ever committing ourselves to anything.

I feel above all else the UCC (uniform commercial code) is the key to claiming back our power.

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2008/08aug/RICR-080807.php

Have a listen mate and good luck;)

[dondaz]

I'm starting to get into Mary Elizabeth Croft she has some brilliant info and she is having fun with it too, WOW.

Check her out mate.

Listening to it now mate, cheers. This is important stuff folks, so get tuned in:

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2008/08aug/RICR-080807-mcroft.mp3

[malvern]

I've have come across some of Marys work before, also others, like Robert Manard..... there is also some great site out there worth looking at, www.thinkfree and The Freeman Channel on utube...


had to look thruogh the finance act 1988 today so that i could reply and question the VO.....and you are so right in your statement question, without ever committing ourselves to anything. All ask do not tell... !!!





freedom is the grandchildren

[dondaz]

there is also some great site out there worth looking at, www.thinkfree (http://www.thinkfree/) and The Freeman Channel on utube...

http://www.thinkfree.ca

http://www.youtube.com/TheFreemanChannel

And there's a great little section over at TPUC:

http://www.tpuc.org/node/290

Check them out folks. There's some revolations to be seen and then some!

[malvern]

http://www.thinkfree.ca

http://www.youtube.com/TheFreemanChannel

And there's a great little section over at TPUC:

http://www.tpuc.org/node/290

Check them out folks. There's some revolations to be seen and then some!


Hi dondaz, I know you have spent sometime now looking at this work, sadley when you post it .... you always seem to get attacked and the true pomus people dish you... I spent some years writing letters and am only now just starting to understand small areas and like you i face this pomus knock backs from people who are unwilling to look in to it... shockingly it's the people who work in these departments who laugh.... the family tax credit took the piss ( in the background ) when i asked under the bill of rights how does this protect my freedom, my libaty and my propaty to one of thier statement that they would some my claim... still awaiting the reply from them about the conduct of that member of staff.....
It will be a long and hard walk to take , but what the hell, nobody said life was easy.



freedom is the grandchildren... we are the caretakers .. is anyone else out there a caretaker of the grandchildren.

[dondaz]

Remember the days of old when knights were bold and having sex with the wife of another man on her wedding day was said to be right and just by the lords of this land...

The Charter of Liberties of Henry I was possibly the first set of rights put down on paper in the history of England, 1100ad:


The Charter of Liberties of Henry I

This charter, granted by Henry when he ascended the throne, is important in two ways. First, Henry formally bound himself to the laws, setting the stage for the rule of law that parliaments and parliamentarians of later ages would cry for. Second, it reads almost exactly like the Magna Carta, and served as the model for the Great Charter in 1215. Henry, king of the English, to Bishop Samson and Urso de Abetot and all hisbarons and faithful, both French and English, of Worcestershire, [copies weresent to all the shires] greetings.

1. Know that by the mercy of God and the common counsel of the barons of the whole kingdom of England I have been crowned king of said kingdom; and because the kingdom had been oppressed by unjust exactions, I, through fear of god and the love which I have toward you all, in the first place make the holy church of God free, so that I will neither sell nor put ot farm, nor on the death of archbishop or bishop or abbot will I take anything from the church's demesne or from its men until the successor shall enter it. And I take away all the bad customs by which the kingdom of England was unjustly oppressed; which bad customs I here set down in part:...

3. And if any of my barons or other men should wish to give his daughter, sister, niece, or kinswoman in marriage, let him speak with me about it; but I will neither take anything from him for this permission nor prevent his giving her unless he should be minded to join her to my enemy. And if, upon the death of a baron or other of my men, a daughter is left as heir, I will give her with her land by the advice of my barons. And if, on the death of her husband, the wife is left and without children, she shall have her dowry and right of marriage, and I will not give her to a husband unless according to her will.

4. But if a wife be left with children, she shall indeed have her dowry and right of marriage so long as she shall keep her body lawfully, and I will notgive her unless according to her will. And the guardian of the land and children shall be either the wife or another of the relatives who more justly ought to be. And I command that my barons restrain themselves similarly indealing with the sons and daughters or wives of their men.


For the full Charter: http://www.tpuc.org/node/293

[malvern]

12. I impose a strict peace upon my whole kingdom and command that it bemaintained henceforth.


interresting read .. i like number 12.

freedom is the grandchildren

[dondaz]

Here's a protest in London against corrupt solicitors, barristers and judges:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Zr7F-IpLA

[dondaz]

V BENCH

(Taken from "THE LAW'S STRANGEST CASES" by Peter Seddon)

THE OLD BAILEY. LONDON, 1670

It’s certainly unusual for a jury to challenge the authority of the learned legal personages on the bench, but that was exactly what happened in the trial of Penn and Mead in London in 1670. The incident changed the course of legal history in favour of a fair trial for the common man.

On Sunday, 14 August 1670, in Gracechurch Street, London, the English Quaker leader William Penn. then a law scholar, teamed up with a former law student. William Mead. for a spot of gentle street preaching. Nothing manic — it’s just not the Quaker way. A crowd soon gathered and presently a couple of London’s city officers sidled up, as they do, and promptly arrested Penn and Mead in full flow.

The indictment put before the court when their trial began at the Old Bailey on 1 September 1670 was for ‘unlawful assembly’. It spoke dramatically of ‘a tumultuous gathering in contempt of the King’ causing ‘great terror of his people and a gross disturbance of the peace’. In an age of religious intolerance, that was Charles II’s way of saying. ‘Cut out that Quaker stuff right sharp.’

The nine high-ups on the bench, including the Mayor of London, Sam Starling, may have known they were in for a rough ride when Penn and Mead refused to remove their Quaker hats in court. They were duly given a hefty fine.

The trial commenced and the officers who had made the arrests gave evidence of ‘talking’ but certainly not of ‘tumult, violence and terror’.

Penn’s defence was that he had done nothing more than preach peaceably and he demanded to know by what exact instrument he was being prosecuted: ‘Upon common law.’ replied the recorder, Thomas Howel, ‘Then show it me,’ challenged Penn.

When Howel failed utterly to cite particular statutes, Penn suggested that he could surely not be expected to plead ‘to an indictment that has no foundation in law’. Howel. now somewhat hot under the collar. promptly called him ‘a saucy fellow’. The jury looked on. Eyebrows were raised.

Not at all impressed by Penn’s continued argument on a ‘point of law’. the recorder ordered him to be put into a squalid lock-up adjacent the courtroom. That left Mead, rather irregularly. holding the fort.

He plugged away in like manner, but still the recorder was unable to quote the relevant legislation. In the end Meal did it for him. explaining in an aside to the jury that an unlawful assembly ‘is when three or more assemble together to do an unlawful act’. Therefore no unlawful assembly, he insisted, had taken place.

The jury mused. Further eyebrows were raised.

For his insolence. Mead too was put in the lock-up and Penn. buoyed up by events, loudly addressed the jury from there. Doors were quickly slammed shut to put an end to that shenanigan as the recorder summed up. He directed the jury that it was a cast-iron case and they retired to consider on 3 September 1670.

Ninety minutes later. just eight of them trooped back into court. The other four refused to come and they were forcibly dragged in. At that point the rebels’ leader, Edward Bushel, took the unprecedented step for a juror of daring to challenge the bench: ‘We don’t countenance the way this whole matter is conducted, sir.’

After labelling him ‘a troublesome and divisive fellow’. Recorder Howel insisted they retire anew to give ‘a proper ver¬dict’. When they returned later, Foreman Bushel pronounced Penn ‘guilty of speaking in Gracechurch Street’. Nothing more.

The recorder made it clear that the jury were fudging the issue and that they must say ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ without qualification: ‘Go and consider it once more.’ he thundered. Again the jury returned. This rime they found Mead ‘not guilty’ hut again fudged on Penn. The recorder’s response was to lock the jury up for the night, then a standard practice. until they gave a valid verdict. Or, in truth, one he liked. Namely ‘guilty’ full stop.

They emerged tired and hungry at 7 a.m. the next day but with their resolve intact. Their verdict on Penn was unchanged.

Again they were sent out. Again they came back and again Edward Bushel returned the same verdict.

The bench lost patience: ‘I’ll fine you. Edward Bushel,’ raged Recorder Howel; ‘Cut off his nose!’ chipped in the mayor, warming to the fray.

Penn seized his chance to say his bit: ‘What hope is there of ever having justice done when juries are threatened and their verdicts rejected?’

Howel was unmoved: ‘The jury will go out again.’ he warned. ‘and deliver another verdict, else they will starve and will be dragged around the city as in Edward III’s time.’

Out they went for the fourth time and after yet another night locked up without food and water they returned next morning, 5 September 1670, to deliver a historic pronouncement: ‘Our verdict is changed, sir,’ said Foreman Bushel.

The recorder must have thought they’d cracked, but not a bit of it: ‘Both men are not guilty.’ said Bushel.

That signalled the end of a bizarre trial, but not of the story, for the jury was fined heavily and put in Newgate Prison. Penn and Meal were fined for contempt of court and sent to join them but they were freed when Penn’s father paid the fines.

Edward Bushel, meanwhile, the most defiant juror of all time, appealed to the Chief Justice and ably told the full sorry saga of the bench bullies.

Chief Justice Vaughan found entirely in the jury’s favour:

‘A jury must be independently and inscrutably responsible for its verdict fire from any threat from the court,’ he pronounced. before releasing the heroic twelve forthwith.

Bushel and his fellow jurors had stood steadfastly against the worst excesses of kangaroo-court justice and all who have been tried since have something to thank them for. In the hall of London’s Central Criminal Court. the world-famous Old Bailey, is a plaque paying tribute to that trusty jury of 1670, ensuring that this strange but seriously pivotal case will never be forgotten..

[boots]

Bump

I dont want to see this Thread fade into the back ground.

IT IS TO IMPORTANT.

The only way to defeat them is to play them at their own game.

What other way is there?

[dondaz]

I dont want to see this Thread fade into the back ground.

IT IS TO IMPORTANT.

The only way to defeat them is to play them at their own game.

What other way is there?

There is no other way! They can stick their Statutes and Acts when they pulled them from in the first place. It's just shit from the bankers arseholes, nothing more!

[resistance]

Bump.. i'm with yu guys:)

there is some informative stuff on this site guys.

http://www.thetruthwillout.com/common_law.html

[resistance]

The u.k statute law database..

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=S.I.+(All+UK)&title=Criminal+Defence+Service+(Funding)+Order&Year=2007&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=3312630&activetextdocid=3312735

[resistance]

Here's another good website.

http://presys.com/~ekklesia/lvl.htm

[malvern]

hi all ..... just to let you know , mother board is not playing the game ...so system will be down for a few days........:mad:



freedom is the grandchildren

[steevo]

hi all ..... just to let you know , mother board is not playing the game ...so system will be down for a few days........:mad:



freedom is the grandchildren

Ok mate, good luck with that, hope you sort it out soon.

[dondaz]

This is very important folks, not many people actually are aware of this monumental court case that blew the whole lid off credit money and the fractal banking scam:

"Banks will and do create credit (money) out of thin air like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat."

THE CREDIT RIVER CASE

The Credit River Case was conducted in the township of Credit River, Minnesota, USA, on 12th December 1968.

Before a jury of 12 and Justice Mahoney, it was established that the money we are loaned by banks is created out of thin air with nothing of value behind it. The case, between the First National Bank of Montgomery (plaintiff) vs Jerome Daly - the defendant, established a monumental precedent in law that put the cat amongst the pigeons. This precedent has become the Achilles heel of all credit creation banks around the world.

In a case similar to ours, the plaintiff sought Common Law action for the recovery of the defendant’s home due to default of mortgage payments. The defendant, acting as a self-litigant, stated that the plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books (meaning out of thin air), by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage, and alleged failure of consideration for the Mortgage Deed. (Gold or Silver is the consideration the defendant speaks of, i.e. he is saying that the bank had no Gold or Silver to back the loan in the first instance). He also stated that the Sheriff’s sale, passed no title to plaintiff.

The president of the bank Lawrence V. Morgan, appearing as the plaintiff’s only witness, admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books and that ‘this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or law that gave the plaintiff the authority to do this.” The bank manager admitted that the bank had created the money (credit) out of thin air and loaned it to the defendant, without first explaining to the defendant, where the money came from.

Even though it was not challenged or determined in this court case, we believe that the bank had conducted fraud. There was no money for the bank to loan in the first instance and yet the bank cheated the defendant by lying to him that they had loaned him money.

The jury returned a unanimous verdict for the defendant and Justice Mahoney carried out the will of the jury. The judge ordered the return of the defendant’s home as his rightful and lawful property and the mortgage contract was made null and void. Jerome Daly got to keep his home with no debt hanging over him and the bank walked away with nothing because they loaned nothing in the first place.

Two weeks later Justice Mahoney was murdered. Who would have benefited from such an attack? Obviously the bank and those who benefit from the credit creation/debt finance system.

The case was buried for a long time to ensure there wasn’t a flood of cases using the precedent set.

Read the full document, it's great, quite long and worth the effort: http://www.loveforlife.com.au/node/67

[dondaz]

Bump!

[tracker]

One of the why's the legal system does not want us to understand our rights;

it is laid down that......

" to no man will we sell, to no man deny, to no man delay, justice or right."

The fact is that this so called "honourable profession of the law" is in the business to sell, delay and deny justice ... to sell to those who can afford, to delay it if the client has money, and deny it if they have not.... so there most be a strong presumption that the whole legal system has been ... Obtaining money on false pretences and obstucting the law..For the Lord Chief Justice of Engalnd and all before, who have allowed this to happen have done themselfs and the people a great injustice, and have done it in the name of thier own gain and greed.... do they swear an oath to up hold the law ??????




freedom is the grandchildren we are the caretakers

ner saw it that way before

[girlgye]

how true......
it's a shame that other do not understand what are our rights, but just of late this section is turning into a myspace sheeple area....and they want others to do the thinking for them.... no wonder we have a so called nanny state for these children, just a shame they post on the icke site, hoping others will do the work for them..


the law is an area were we have let others nannystate our rights so we do not understand the law let alone know when it apllies


freedom is the grandchildren...we are just the caretakers

Brilliant. I was thinking the same. Even when respectfully pointing out that they do nothing to aid their prejudices or assumptions they keep on making inane sideswipes at any attempt people put up to be free. This isn't sheeple; this is deliberate.

I can understand a newbie in a desperate, conditioned, mindcontrolled, confused state but when they've been on for well over a year it's a disgrace. If you read the subtext of their messages they are loaded with codes to put off the fainthearted. They are even using this very forum for ideas. How many of us have had letters of bailiffs now saying they are going to break into our homes. The one I received yesterday from Rossendale said he was going to do it any time he felt like! F off.

[girlgye]

This is very important folks, not many people actually are aware of this monumental court case that blew the whole lid off credit money and the fractal banking scam:

"Banks will and do create credit (money) out of thin air like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat."

[SIZE=2]

Read the full document, it's great, quite long and worth the effort: http://www.loveforlife.com.au/node/67

Yeah doesn't frigging surprise.

This is how evil operates:-

I know lets murder judgey wudgey.

Yeah Good idea.

That way these terrorists will arm themselves and then we can call them real terrorists and kill them or torture them.

Yeah great idea. Let's roll em.