When the 5p carrier bag charge came into power in England, no one could have foreseen the total confusion it would cause. People have taken extreme measures to evade paying five pence for a plastic bag in their own supermarkets, from taking shopping home in trolleys, to thieving Bags for Life, people have appeared to have gone into total meltdown.
Here is the bizarre thing that has taken place with regards to the bag charge since it came into power in England. A man got banned from Asda for scrapping over a carrier bag charge.
An Asda patron felt like he was treated like a dog by employees who supposedly attempted to pressure him into paying for his plastic carrier bag. He maintained that while attempting to convey his shopping to his vehicle in a basket from the store, an employee emptied his merchandise onto the floor.
The man paid for his goods at a self service checkout at the store, however, did not want to spend out money for a bag. After the event, he was asked to depart from the store, and the next day was informed that he was banned for using disgusting language and being insulting towards staff.
Asda asserts the incident was the only one it had experienced over the 5p bag charge. A spokesperson for Asda stated that they don’t take decisions to ban customers from their stores lightly, and that following the mans visit to their store, their coworkers felt this was the proper option as a consequence of the man’s conduct towards colleagues, and not because of the carrier bag charge.
The majority of people aren’t in accord with the 5p charge for the carrier bags, and the situation that people are getting themselves into is becoming absurd. Most people are saving up their carrier bags and taking their own to Asda stores, and I’ve been hearing that some people are being thrown out of Asda for not having an Asda logo bag.
For those that agree with the introduction of payment for bags has clearly missed the sharpened end of the governments tail seeing as they’re paying for carrier bags, and the reuse of those bags four times over.
However, most people will merrily give away their 5p because as human beings we’re extremely compliant, and because people believe they have to do this. Well, you don’t, because you’ve already given payment for those things, in taxes, council tax, and sewage, and now the extra 5 pence.
At one time we certainly didn’t have to pay for our black bin bags, they were given without charge because we paid our taxes, and slowly but surely they’ve vanished from our doorsteps, and then councils made us pay for them, and like little drones we just did, but never questioned why we had to pay for them, when they were free prior to this because we paid our taxes.
All the money we pay out in taxes, council tax, and so forth, not all of it goes on what they state it does, nevertheless, because people believe what they read in black and white, they believe that’s how it should be, and they just dish money out, and go about their day without ever disputing what their hard earned money is really going on – just because it might say it on paper in black and white, doesn’t actually mean it’s true.
Does anybody really sit down and wonder where their hard earned cash is going?
I’m sure everybody has had a thought about it at one time or another, the thing is, no one wants to do anything about it, or they think they can’t do anything about it.
Nevertheless, paying your taxes is actually against the law.
I wonder how many people out there who pay their taxes know that it’s in fact illegal and unlawful.
In agreement with domestic law and international law, if you have a rational reason to suspect that HM Government is associated with criminal proceedings, you’re beholden by law to hold back any, and all forms of funding and support.
HM Government unlawfully and illegally sanctioned HM Armed Forces to invade Iraq, as well as Afghanistan and Libya, and murdered over 1.4 million people and counting, comprising over 450,000 children and counting.
They had no UN permission, no approval at all, yet, they committed and proceeded to carry out mass extermination, terrorism and unlawful acts against humanity completely, illegally and unlawfully.
This is not fiction. This is an acknowledged reality. Recognised as a truth by the UN itself, the Malaysian Capital’s War Crime Tribunal and the Foreign Affairs Office to name an extremely small few.
I strongly encourage and suggest that you spend a couple of hours or so on websites so you can arm yourself with the realities, and much required surrounding understanding, conviction that not only are war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and terrorism that is being committed in your name, however, also why holding back any, and all forms of funding and or support from HM Government is totally legal, and is the legal and conscionable thing to do.
By the time you’ve concluded perusing all the facts provided for you on the issue, you will be dazed and shocked at what you’ve learned – it will be the biggest rude awakening.
In law, it’s widely recognised all over the world that if you become conscious of, or have rational cause to suspect, that an organisation or person is associated in criminal activity, and yet you continue to fund and support the said organisation or person, then you’re culpable of carrying out a crime by association, often known as an accessory, or abettor, and perpetrating an ancillary crime.
The sanctioned explanation of terrorism as specified in the Terrorism Act 2000, and section 15 of the selfsame Act states extremely clearly that if a person knows or has rational cause to have a suspicion that money, funds or taxes will or may be used for the motive of terrorism, that they’re carrying out a crime by association.
So, all that’s necessary is a rational reason to have suspicions that taxes or any other funds will, or may be used to fund criminal activity, in this specific case terrorism.
The People of Britain, and the world are being swindled and lied to. That’s fraud, right? This is where it gets even more fascinating because as stated by the Fraud Act 2006 it would be safe to conclude that HM Government and HM Parliament are perpetual criminals on a daily basis.
So here goes; Section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006
Section 2 – Fraud by false representation
Section 3 – Fraud by failing to disclose information
Section 4 – Fraud by abuse of position
So conspiracy must have been committed right?
The crime of conspiracy, as stated by the Criminal Law Act 1977
And as stated by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 and here
Suffice to say that if a person is aware, or has rational cause to suspect that funding, or any other support will, or may be used for the motive of terrorism, mass murder, offences against humanity, war crimes, fraudulence or conspiracy et cetera, the said person is certainly obliged both by law and moral sense to hold back any, and all forms of funding and, or support from the organisation or persons suspected of carrying out said offences.
So, let’s visualise that through your own investigations and conviction you have decided to give Notice to HM Government that you’re obliged by law and moral sense to hold back tax, owing to you having overwhelmingly reasonable cause to suspect that funds will or may be used to support criminal activity.
Firstly, you would require enough facts to show to yourself and others why and how you have rational cause to suspect criminal activity by HM Government, HM Armed Forces and HM Parliament may be taking place.
Let’s be explicit here, you don’t need to supply proof to show an offence beyond reasonable doubt as you would if you were the prosecutor in a criminal lawsuit. The only prerequisite in this instance is enough supporting evidence to show why you have reasonable cause to believe that an offence may be being committed, and that’s very simple to do in this case.
So visualise the following people, listed below had already gone before you and declared that they consider or have reasonable cause to suspect the Iraq war is illegal and unlawful:
Kofi Annan, former Secretary-General of the United Nations
All 27 lawyers of the Foreign Affairs Office – headed by Senior Legal Advisor Sir Michael Wood
Elizabeth Wilmshurst, former Deputy Legal Adviser
Independent enquiry lead by Dutch Supreme Court Judge Willibrord Davids
Lady Manningham-Buller, former MI5 Chief
Hans Blix, former United Nations chief arms inspector, former UK ambassador to the US
Major General Michael Laurie, former Head of the Defence Intelligence Staff
Dr David Kelly, former United Nations weapons inspector
Robin Cook, former Foreign Secretary, Leader of the House of Commons
Nick Clegg, current Deputy Prime Minister
Professor Philippe Sands QC Director of the Centre on International Courts and Tribunals
Professor Robert Black QC, Professor of Scots law, Edinburgh University, and architect of the Lockerbie trial in The Hague
Professor Sean Murphy, Associate professor of law at George Washington University
Professor Vaughan Lowe Chichele Professor of Public International Law, All Souls College, Oxford
Professor James Crawford Whewell Professor of International Law, Jesus College, Cambridge
Professor Mary Kaldor Professor of global governance, London School of Economics
Professor Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics
Jan Kavan, the president of the UN General Assembly
Judge Abdul Kadar Sulaiman, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Judge Salleh Buang, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Judge Tunku Sofiah Jewa, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Judge Alfred L. Webre, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Judge Shad Saleem Faruqi, Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, Malaysia
Well, envisage no more, they already have, and this is not the complete list.
Once you have given Notice to the proper parties, that in good mind and conscience, and in agreement with the law you are obliged to hold back funding and support due to having reasonable cause to suspect that criminal activity has been committed, and given the proof you have, and the law that obligates you in this matter, then for any person to try to gather funds from you would be a criminal act, under both domestic and international law.
Any official that tries to intimidate, bully, pressure or provoke you to carry out a crime would need to be made mindful of the extremely serious crime they may be about to, or have just committed. It’s quite clear to anybody who takes anything more than a casual look at this subject matter, that huge, abhorrent and wicked crimes have been and are continuing to be committed in our name, and with the tax from our sweat equity paying for it. We’re prohibited by law and moral sense to continue to give funds to perpetrators of these most menacing and wicked crimes, and now you have the legislation to back you all the way.
Are you willing to let the following slide?
Genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, terrorism, conspiracy, embezzlement, and the infliction of pain. Well, if you are, then continue to support and fund.
At present the government has brought in a 5p levy for carrier bags, and we’re now all wondering where our money is once again going, and it’s been hailed a wonderful move to cut refuse and injury to wildlife in England.
They don’t care about our wildlife. If they did, then fox hunting would be prohibited. Nevertheless, they think nothing of killing for pleasure, and that’s contemplated as an okay thing to do, but then we have to reimburse them with 5p for a carrier bag because their troubled it will harm the wildlife of England.
If they’re so bothered it will harm the wildlife of England, why not replace plastic bags with paper bags, like they used to do in America, which worked extremely well for the Americans. After all, we appear to follow everything they do, because our government can’t seem to think for themselves – maybe they should be pursuing the sheep instead of the foxes!
If the government is that concerned that plastic bags will harm our wildlife, why don’t they just outlaw them altogether, along with plastic sandwich bags, and anything plastics because plastic bags never biodegrade, however, they do break down, however, as they do so, any toxic ingredients they comprise, including flame retardants, antimicrobials and plasticisers are set free into the habitat.
Many of these chemicals may disrupt the endocrine system, the delicately balanced set of hormones and glands that affect virtually every organ and cell in the bodies of humans and animals.
Nevertheless, they put chemicals in nearly everything that we deal with in daily life, particularly when it comes to genetically modified food, which is one more toxin that messes with the day to day life of humans and animals, along with fruit, which they genetically modify so they can get a faster turnover in yield and profit.
If plastics are dangerous to the habitat, then why not as an alternative make paper bags, which are biodegradable, instead of making us pay a levy on plastic bags, since at the end of the day, even by charging us, they are still replicating plastic bags that we can purchase, and they’re still damaging the environment, which totally defeats the object.
If they’re defeating the object, and plastic bags are still being reproduced, it can only mean that by charging us, it’s because of pecuniary gain, and nothing to do with the environment at all.
In truth anything that the government does, isn’t for the good of the wildlife at all, and they’re only acting on financial gain, and they’re just implementing something that will make us feel like we’re doing something good for the habitat, when in fact we’re doing something good for the pockets of our government.
You can dress it up as much as you like, you can swathe it up in as much cotton wool as you like, but there is a huge number of people out there that know different, and they’re out there trying to address the problem head on.
Nonetheless, there is a great deal of other people out there that are not willing to do anything about it, because they’re too frightened, and they’re scared that if they do, that they will be bullied by other high ranking officials.
However, we can’t be intimidated if we don’t fear them. Nevertheless, we fear that an adverse reaction to whatever we do, and we fear retribution, and at present the government is on their way to purging our society, when really we need to cleanse society of our government.
Most think that progress and growth is the best way to get on, and it’s all for the good of humanity, however, it’s a field that’s frequently disregarded because when it comes to government there’s no space for change, unless they’re changing it.
If we replaced plastic bags for paper bags, then that wouldn’t be as dangerous on the habitat, but then it would give the government another excuse to charge us for bags because they would then state that it was using up too much wood to pulp down for the bags, and that we’d have to pay a levy on that as well.
It’s just one tax after another, mostly because it gives the government additional money to front more wars on other nations, and it’s intoxicating, however, it doesn’t take that much expertise to pull the wool over the populace of Great Britain.
Nevertheless, the governments stratagem is really devious, and well played out, and we’re their theatre, their entry to do whatever they like. Nonetheless, we do have a way out, and it could be a really magnificent one – we just have to say NO…