Quatloos!

.the risky bit is that there are no courts of law to get remedy within if he breaches the agreement

So by their own admission, the whole thing is just another pointless farrago. With the added bonus that they've put this out in a public group, which R4 will presumably be mining for examples of their daftness....

I guess this will be on "You & Yours". It will go much the same way as Peter of England's appearance, they'll let them spout their shit, challenge them on some points, then we'll hear from an expert who will explain why it's a load of shit.

Mr Jenkins presents a series called 'Out of the Ordinary'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08hjysv

John Uskglass wrote:Mr Jenkins presents a series called 'Out of the Ordinary'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08hjysv

From the program description ("stories from out of left field") and tags ("pseudoscience", "internet culture") it doesn't seem like the show would be sympathetic to the likes of the A61-holes.

Which makes it puzzling that the producer supposedly signed this agreement to portray them in a positive light. And maybe my journalistic ethics are outdated and/or not applicable to the UK, but this agreement, if it exists, is troubling on many levels.

TheNewSaint wrote:Which makes it puzzling that the producer supposedly signed this agreement to portray them in a positive light. And maybe my journalistic ethics are outdated and/or not applicable to the UK, but this agreement, if it exists, is troubling on many levels.

Or perhaps he knows it's just a worthless scrap of paper with idle threats and genuine frontier gibberish. Sign it to shut them up and crack on with the programme.

To round off the content the R4 produced is off to Kent tomorrow to interview Crabby.

In the style of Dads Army, "do you think that's awfully wise Captain Robinson?"

It seems that yet again the 'powerless' council and the 'powerless' bailiffs have committed treason by seizing Roy Begg's goods and chattels. I assume the pictures of the wrists means he got himself cuffed by the cops who can't do anything because it's a civil matter too...



Yet another victory against the powerless powers that be...

Yesterday myself, Danial Daniel Daykin and Pauline Robinson met with Jolyon Jenkins a radio producer for BBC radio 4.

After he had accepted and signed an agreement that we had drawn up...

it has been explained to Jolyon that if he does the same then the movement can and will take legal action against him, which may not involve a trial by jury (until a later date) but the seizure of properties and a citizens arrest for sedition (possibly)....sedition is a very serious crime indeed.

We as a movement would have no option but to direct our action against him personally and the BBC in general....

I'm not sure what to believe here. Really not likely that a BBC journo would sign something like this (or be permitted to do so by the management). Jenkins is either some kind of gonzo reporter out on the edge, or the PLD's are inventing this for some reason. Look at us, we've got media interest!

If it's true, it could be utterly hilarious. Inevitably one or another of them will find offence in some aspect of any programme he makes, and if they do then try and arrest him there might be a series in it. Jolyon Jenkins reporting on life as a fugitive, in a safe house with Salman Rushdie.....

Judging from other episodes of Out Of The Ordinary, I seriously doubt Joylon Jenkins intends to write a fawning paean to the Article 61 movement. Or that he'd be intimidated by David Robinson and his pack of losers.

This episode about Liberland (an attempted micronation in disputed territory on the Croatia/Serbia border) might be a good gauge for what we can expect. Jenkins asks his subjects open-ended questions, then lets them make fools of themselves. Best moment (starting at 9:30): during the "presidential address", the new Roy of Sealand implores his supporters "if you are able, come down and visit Liberland." He said this from a boat, while he was being blocked from visiting Liberland. You can hear someone chuckle immediately afterwards.

I also liked Jenkins' description of Liberland's national anthem as "Joan Baez channeling Ayn Rand."

So, yeah, this is going to be high comedy. What really cracks me up is that David Robinson is making the same mistake Chrisy Morris made less than a month ago: assuring people he had editorial input when he very much does not. Some people can't learn from history; these idiots can't even learn from current events.

I hope it is pointed out that David is a freeman on the land also. Despite his repeated protests, he has confirmed he started out his personal crusade as a freeman-

http://lawfulrebellion.info/author/buster/

And let's be honest the term isn't that broad, both believe the rule of law has being removed from the people via some government conspiracy.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

Courts unlawfully detaining people? Common law taken from "us", corrupt judges and so on,

Sorry, Dave but you're (*thanks Siegfried) a freeman!

You're a freeman! Your writing frequently muddles up these homophones.

Re-reading the 'Agreement' I don't think any reputable journalist would have a problem signing it, reporting interviews accurately and in context may not be exactly what these people want but it may be what they get. The bits about arrest and sedition are clearly nonsense, I suspect the chap has taken bigger risks than the prospect of a jury trial some time after the rule of Magna Carta is re-established.
Only condition 4 seems a bit doubtful, I cannot really see how the program can be broadcast without 'third party agents' hearing the interviews.

And what's with Danial Daniel anyway, as a name? Magic power?

Read Catch 49 sometime and become acquainted with Major Major Major.

King Lud wrote:

TheNewSaint wrote:Which makes it puzzling that the producer supposedly signed this agreement to portray them in a positive light. And maybe my journalistic ethics are outdated and/or not applicable to the UK, but this agreement, if it exists, is troubling on many levels.

Or perhaps he knows it's just a worthless scrap of paper with idle threats and genuine frontier gibberish. Sign it to shut them up and crack on with the programme.

I wonder if they have signed a standard-ish BBC disclaimer in return, giving the journalist final editing rights etc. etc. So if it ever came to court one side would have the A61 woo paperwork and the other have a standard BBC broadcast agreement. Or maybe he just crossed his fingers behind his back when he signed.

Siegfried Shrink wrote:Re-reading the 'Agreement' I don't think any reputable journalist would have a problem signing it

I do. As I said on the Chrisy Morris thread, journalists don't make a habit of ceding editorial control to the people they interview. Certainly not when it's being demanded in such a snotty, condescending fashion as this. Most journalists I know would tell them where to shove their agreement and which hand to use.

I get what you're saying, though: this is all meaningless and unenforceable. #1, "correct context", is too subjective for a court to rule on, and falls under "honest comment" besides. #2, "don't call us freedmen", may be something Jenkins wasn't planning to do anyway. #3 is pretty much a bland mission statement, demanding the movement be treated as "peaceful and legal", which it mostly is. Calling the movement violent when it isn't would probably fall under libel anyway, rendering this unnecessary. #4 is poorly worded, but journalists generally don't give their hard work to other entities for free, and these recordings would have little value beyond this program anyway.

I still think reporters should decline all such agreements in principle, but I'll get off my soapbox about that.

If it were me, the agreement itself would be one of the many things I'd be mocking.

Burnaby49 wrote:Read Catch 49 sometime and become acquainted with Major Major Major.

Was Catch 49 the sequel to The Crying of Lot 22?

jcolvin2 wrote:

Burnaby49 wrote:Read Catch 49 sometime and become acquainted with Major Major Major.

Was Catch 49 the sequel to The Crying of Lot 22?

If Catch 49 was the sequel to anything it was Lolita with it's main protagonist and narrator Humbert Humbert.

ArthurWankspittle wrote:I wonder if they have signed a standard-ish BBC disclaimer, giving the journalist final editing rights etc.

I found a "contributor consent form" here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/forms

As you suggest, it says the BBC may "edit, copy, adapt, or translate" as they see fit.