A sinister development for UK sovs?

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:28 am
Location: England, UK

A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by Normal Wisdom »

Mark "Ceylon" Haining has posted the attached on the GOODF website. Apparently a response to the introduction from 1st November of increased use of "Qualified Majority Voting" in the European Union which is being characterised by sovruns as the final treasonous sell out of the UK, it contains a declaration of right for "indigenous" British people. As usual it is a rambling mish-mash of quasi-legal and historical nonsense which I would normally ignore. However I noticed one rather worrying paragraph which could potentially signal a more serious and sinister turn in the hitherto tiresome but mainly benign actions of sovruns in the UK.

"All free and enneadic descendant British peoples shall, in order to remove the monopoly of force created by a militarised police service and other usurpations of force, have the right to openly have, keep and bear arms for the mutual defence of their nation and that of their household and family ..."

https://www.facebook.com/mark.ceylon/po ... re_comment

https://www.polarisoffice.com/a/1IVkYlP
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by littleFred »

Eek. SovCits with a self-proclaimed right to bear arms? Bad idea.

(Incidentally, I had to look up "enneadic" to see if I qualified. "One of nine", apparently. I am no wiser.)

(Incidentally #2: All Roman law is to be banished. Okay, so why do they give the new principles of law in Latin? If this is an English constitution, why not write it in English?)

(Incidentally #3: Is this English or British? As every true Scot knows, there is a difference.)
JamesVincent
A Councilor of the Kabosh
Posts: 3047
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:01 am
Location: Wherever my truck goes.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by JamesVincent »

That's kinda funny since, as far as I remember, most British police don't even carry weapons.
Disciple of the cross and champion in suffering
Immerse yourself into the kingdom of redemption
Pardon your mind through the chains of the divine
Make way, the shepherd of fire

Avenged Sevenfold "Shepherd of Fire"
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by arayder »

People don't seem to realize that despite concerns about the militarization of the police society doesn't want the cops to be outgunned.

Back in the 1930s citing well armed criminals like John Dillinger and Bonnie and Clyde police forces across the U.S. started carrying .357 magnums. After a few disastrous shootouts with well armed and armored bad guys in the 80's and 90's the cops started carrying semi-auto pistols in 10mm and 40 S&W as well as stowing AR-15s in the patrol car.

My understanding is that the same process has taken place to some extent in other countries.

So one sure way to be sure the cops arm themselves to the teeth is to arm yourself for the expressed purpose of resisting the police as they carry out their routine duties!

I'd bet money that if enough of these UK sovs do what Bobby Menard only talks about doing and start packing pistols police forces across the UK will start arming themselves.
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by grixit »

"Indigenous"="Got here after my grandparents".
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by littleFred »

Aside from international airports etc, British police do not regularly carry firearms. (They do in Northern Ireland.) Only about 2% of British police are authorised to carry and use firearms. In Scotland last year the policy changed such that those police authorised to carry did routinely carry them, even on normal patrol in High Streets or wherever. People didn't like this, and the policy has been reversed.

I'm happy that the police don't routinely carry. If they did, the bad guys would be more tempted to carry. The converse is also true: if more bad guys carry, so will the good guys.
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by PeanutGallery »

littleFred wrote: (Incidentally, I had to look up "enneadic" to see if I qualified. "One of nine", apparently. I am no wiser.)
It's probably something to do with the Witanegemot they apparently had. Which apparently is Sov for a meeting of the brain trust. Funnily enough the actual real old timey Witanegemot (which was a meeting of the Kings advisers) has evolved through social progress to become Parliament and the House of Lords (which is also a meeting of the nations brain trust).

Or it might be a reference to them being really big fans of Jeri Ryan's character on Star Trek Voyager.
littleFred wrote: (Incidentally #2: All Roman law is to be banished. Okay, so why do they give the new principles of law in Latin? If this is an English constitution, why not write it in English?)
Shouldn't it be in archaic Gaelic, if we are going back to the pre-Roman era after all Sov's do love their indecipherable gibberish and what's more indecipherable or gibberish than archaic pre-roman Gaelic.
littleFred wrote: (Incidentally #3: Is this English or British? As every true Scot knows, there is a difference.)
Well it's certainly not Welsh, they'd be too busy singing about valleys or uprating hills.

I think it's just an empty statement that they've taken from the USA uppity colonials and their noble revolution hissy fit about paying taxes, political representation and general naughtiness (for any Americans reading - :sarcasmon:). Of course the security services may take this matter rather differently (and one thing I've learned in my life is that while you can make a joke about Regicide at Buckingham Palace, it's best not to do it towards a member of the Queens bodyguard when her Majesty's location can be described as "just over there")).
Warning may contain traces of nut
ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 3755
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by ArthurWankspittle »

"All free and enneadic descendant British peoples shall, in order to remove the monopoly of force created by a militarised police service and other usurpations of force, have the right to openly have, keep and bear arms for the mutual defence of their nation and that of their household and family ..."
That's going to get him some interest from the Police.
arayder wrote:Back in the 1930s citing well armed criminals like John Dillinger and Bonnie and Clyde police forces across the U.S. started carrying .357 magnums.
IIRC Dillinger's gang had a penchant for using that other BAR, the Browning Automatic Rifle.
"There is something about true madness that goes beyond mere eccentricity." Will Self
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by PeanutGallery »

I believe I have found the requisite YouTube video of this event. Apparently a bunch of Sovruns decided to make a beeline to Stonehenge and stage a protest to claim back the land of Pyrridian (I've not heard this name before, they could have used Avalon, Hyberrian). They made a number of demands about owning Stonehenge and subsequently the police were called. Of course while they claim to be indigenous, they name their spokessovrun "NomineDeus" which is of course a name derived from a misapplication of Latin (which is not one of the indigenous languages of the British isles).

It was rather a non-event for everyone who isn't a sovrun deluded moron, which is probably why we only heard about it after. Basically they went to the Stones, made a nuisance and shouted their inane babble at bemused tourists (one of whom - an "imperealist american" - objected and then was subjected to all manner of hostile Sovrun abuse (including a reference to Obummas lack of a birth certificate) whoever that American was I salute you).

Of course they were in a part of the country rich in history and I can think of a number of other locations that they could have chosen, such as Wilton (the ancient capital of Wessex), Old Sarum, Salisbury Cathedral (which holds one of the surviving copies of the bible according to Sov's a copy of the Magna Carta).
Warning may contain traces of nut
Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by Normal Wisdom »

I watched the video and cannot avoid the conclusion that we cut these cretins waaay to much slack. I feel sorry for the kids being brought up in such an environment.

Mind you they should have gone to Avebury just up the road. No entrance fee there and just as old if not older than Stonehenge.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by PeanutGallery »

The sad thing is these people are just the right side of being no danger to themselves or others to prevent their being sectioned. I do think that a lot of them are mentally ill or operating under some sad delusion.

As for why they didn't go to Avebury, something tells me these historical recreationists aren't all that well versed in actual real history.
Warning may contain traces of nut
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by littleFred »

Na, it's not the same screed as in the OP. This one keeps repeating "We the indigenous peoples ...", and it rambles about Stonehenge, and doesn't say we can bear arms. The phrase "including but not limited to helicopters" rings a bell; I've read that somewhere recently.

All this indigenous stuff, shouting at imperialist Americans, and community, and growing our own food, so what's the end-credit music? Land of Hope and Glory? Na, they play the Star Wars theme!!
The Dog
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:11 pm
Location: England

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by The Dog »

PeanutGallery wrote:It was rather a non-event for everyone who isn't a sovrun deluded moron, which is probably why we only heard about it after. Basically they went to the Stones, made a nuisance and shouted their inane babble at bemused tourists (one of whom - an "imperealist american" - objected and then was subjected to all manner of hostile Sovrun abuse (including a reference to Obummas lack of a birth certificate) whoever that American was I salute you).
I would have thought that the lack of a birth certificate was something to be admired for a sovereign citizen.
The Dog
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:11 pm
Location: England

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by The Dog »

PeanutGallery wrote:The sad thing is these people are just the right side of being no danger to themselves or others to prevent their being sectioned. I do think that a lot of them are mentally ill or operating under some sad delusion.

As for why they didn't go to Avebury, something tells me these historical recreationists aren't all that well versed in actual real history.
Woodhenge is even closer (and in a way more appropriate), but Avebury also has the distinct advantage of having a pub in the middle.
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by PeanutGallery »

I assumed it was linked at the very least, I mean this video (from the linked facebook) mentions NomineDeus at Stonehenge.

As for the Star Wars, it crops up a lot in Wesley Ahmed's videos (along with a rather catchy ditty about the Greater Manchester Police) I think it's because he rather likes the work of John Williams rather than an expression of a deeply felt political belief in relation to Empire and Rebellion and the classic struggle of how to get over your sister kissing you rather passionately in order to make her future boyfriend jealous.
Warning may contain traces of nut
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by arayder »

PeanutGallery wrote:I believe I have found the requisite YouTube video of this event. Apparently a bunch of Sovruns decided to make a beeline to Stonehenge and stage a protest. . Basically they went to the Stones, made a nuisance and shouted their inane babble at bemused tourists (one of whom - an "imperealist american" - objected and then was subjected to all manner of hostile Sovrun abuse (including a reference to Obummas lack of a birth certificate) whoever that American was I salute you). . .
Is it just my perception or are these freeman/sovcit/indigenous people/or whatever they are calling themselves today getting loonier by the day?

Ceylon says he's within his rights to carry firearms in order to protect himself from the militarized police.

Then he shows up at Stonehenge and after one of his lieutenant loonies is rather gently moved away from the restricted area by a decidedly un-militarized security officer Ceylon NomineDeus decides to yell at the tourists visiting at the site, at one point shouting insults at man who asks him to keep the noise down so everybody can enjoy their visit in peace.

Here in the states, where plenty of folks go armed, the expression "an armed society is a polite society" is often voiced. In keeping with that sentiment people usually don't go to a public site to hurl insults at individuals, their country and its leaders for fear that their insults will escalate the situation to the point that physical violence occurs and pistols get drawn.

I suspect Ceylon NomineDeus figures he can stand at the edge of the Stonehenge site, egg a dupe into running onto the site, and then hurl insults at tourists knowing full well the politeness of English society will abide his insanity.

I'd pay money to see this sniveling coward try such behavior outside the Alamo.
Last edited by arayder on Thu Nov 06, 2014 1:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by Normal Wisdom »

That's not Ceylon in the Stonehenge video - it's another nut who goes by the name of "NomineDeus" who I haven't seen before.

Just re-reading the the declaration it's not all bad. Apparently they have outlawed inflation - so that's good.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 3:17 pm

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by arayder »

Sorry, I got my crazy guys confused.

Thanks for the correction.
PeanutGallery
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: In a gallery, with Peanuts.

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by PeanutGallery »

After a while they do all sort of seem to morph into one another.
Warning may contain traces of nut
Arthur Rubin
Tupa-O-Quatloosia
Posts: 1753
Joined: Thu May 29, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Brea, CA

Re: A sinister development for UK sovs?

Post by Arthur Rubin »

PeanutGallery wrote:After a while they do all sort of seem to morph into one another.
Do you want to borrow the software from HerBunk? See, for example, this video.
Arthur Rubin, unemployed tax preparer and aerospace engineer
ImageJoin the Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign!

Butterflies are free. T-shirts are $19.95 $24.95 $29.95