In recent years the matter of the BBC and its licence fee has become a hot topic. With increasing and prolific evidence of the BBC’s complicity in paedophilia with first the Jimmy Savile case, followed by numerous other allegations (some of which have been leaked in the recent report on the BBC), never has public confidence in this propaganda machine for the government been so low. Couple the sexual abuse scandal with the prolific bias in reporting in favour of the zionists, oligarchs and the out of control British government executive and we have a recipe for disinformation at an industrial scale. Add to this the constant stream of demanding money with menaces that TV Licensing uses on a daily basis and we have a problem. Let us not also forget that the BBC accepts subsidies from the European Union and actively promotes integration, contrary to the Bill of Rights 1689. Article 61 to the rescue.
The “legal” situation right now is that you “require” a TV licence if you watch or record a TV programme as it is being broadcast. Conversely those who rely entirely on download services (e.g. “catch-up TV”, Netflix, TV Now, Amazon Video) and other non-live broadcast material most certainly DO NOT require a TV licence (according to the “law”). We do not wish to become embroiled in the truther argument for abstention from TV at this time.
Like water bills, the TV licence “fee” is derived from statute – part iv of the Communications Act 2003 to be precise. Being an Act of parliament this is on its own a good enough reason to refuse to comply (since the invocation of Ch.61 Magna Carta 1215) however there is more. One of the principal mechanisms we use in Lawful Rebellion is to withhold tax as is our common law obligation to do so until redress of grievance. “But wait!” I hear you say, the TV licence is not a tax!
Oh yes it is. . . In 2006 the ONS (Office of National Statistics) reclassified the TV licence as a tax, so to be absolutely clear about this, a governmental agency (Crown agency) has declared the TV licence a tax. Under Ch.61 we have a common law obligation to distress and distrain the Crown. Withholding tax is an obligation for all those standing in lawful rebellion.
If you are considering civil disobedience by way of cancelling your TV licence here are the things you should know.
- You can cancel your licence online.
- You could try a direct debit clawback (indemnity). See getoutofdebtfree.org for more info.
- If you have sent off your oath and received confirmation of delivery we suggest writing a letter informing TVL of your stance on A.61 and your obligation to distress & distrain the Crown. DO NOT admit to having or using a TV in that letter or any subsequent communication. Trust us, things can get “messy” with summonses to magistrates “court” and if you refuse to attend or even if you conditionally accept, they will find against you in absentia, resulting in “court” appointed Bailiffs. Whilst this does not bother some, it has the potential to cause unwanted hassle and upset, especially if your partner hasn’t “woken up” yet. . .
- To stop the doorstep visits by the “TV Licence Goons” as they are commonly called, you can also include in your A.61 letter, a notice of removal of implied rights of access. This is a common law tenet which deprives anyone from lawful access to your property (owned or rented as it is based on possession, not ownership) and renders them a trespasser. It is important to understand that court appointed Bailiffs(in contrast to debt collectors) have protection under “regulations” to allow them to ignore this and they will insist they have rights of access – except they do not whilst Ch.61 remains in effect and you have taken the oath of allegiance. That however is another story.
- If you withdraw (remove) the implied rights of access you will receive a letter from TV Licensing stating that they acknowledge the withdrawal but “reserve the right to use other methods of detection”. That would be the dreaded TV Licence Detector Van. Yes they are real, as you will see – but rely on a very different technology to that espoused by the BBC and TVL, historically.
(FIND OUT MORE ABOUT ARTICLE 61) click on this to learn everything!TVL are bullies. They resort to various bullying tactics from hard-sell at the door to threats of legal action. They seem to like making nervous housewives cry. Here is our suggestion if you want to keep it simple.
- NEVER we repeat NEVER speak to them – do not open the door. If you have notcompleted a RoIRA they will come to your door and ask if Mr Smith lives here or if you live here. 90% or more of enforcement action is derived by self-incrimination.
- If you feel you must speak to them NEVER we repeat NEVER offer or admit your name. Identification is a critical feature of successful prosecution. “Under what law am I obliged to answer your question?” there isn’t one.
- NEVER we repeat NEVER let them in your home. EVER. It is possible that if they have reasonable grounds for suspecting you are watching broadcast TV without a licence, they may go to a magistrates “court” to obtain a warrant of entry. How you deal with this is up to you but since we have an obligation to distress and distrain the Crown, such a warrant is void. Of course, if this happens, then the magistrates “court” will likely ignore Ch.61 MC1215 and issue contempt proceedings (which are also void as you have lawful excuse to not accede to the warrant). This process to our knowledge (at magistrates “court”) is untested. We know that they routinely ignore their own rules so be very sure you want to engage in a battle of wills with the judiciary. We have rebutted warrants and even 7-day custodial contempt charges at County “Court” but reiterate that the magistrates route remains untested to our knowledge.
- ALWAYS we repeat ALWAYS have a working video camera (phone camera, camcorder, Go-Pro etc) with you if you feel you must answer the door and take them on. Require (do not ask) for them to identify themselves to you and show their ID to the camera (generally they run away at this point). If accompanied by the police (often they will be if in possession of a warrant of entry) then you ask the police to identify themselves and produce their warrant card for the camera. The police will be there, not to help gain entry but simply to keep the peace. They cannot force entry.
- Stay cool, don’t get abusive. Remain firm but polite.
Here’s also evidence against the BBC for reporting on the world trade center building 7 collapse before it had occurred, which can be see on you tube, provides very good evidence that the BBC are implicit in the massive cover up of terrorism committed by the state.
See: Historic Court Case Win against the BBC! Where Tony Rooke refused to pay a TV licence fee because the BBC intentionally misrepresented facts about the 9/11 attacks, he alleged. It is widely known that the BBC reported the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 over 20 minutes before it occurred. WTC 7 was a 47-story skyscraper that was not hit by a plane on 9/11 but collapsed at free-fall speed later that day.
So Rooke said the BBC had to have had prior knowledge to a terror attack making them complicit in the attack. He presented the BBC footage to the judge along with a slew of other evidence, and the judge agreed that Rooke had a reasonable case to protest. Rooke was found not guilty and he was not fined for failure to pay the licence fee.
TV Licence Detector Vans
There is an enormous amount of disinformation on the internet about these. Many of us are old enough to remember the “detector vans” with large aerials roaming the roads. They are fake. There is not one criminal conviction on record having been secured by evidence of a detector van. Indeed, those who have stuck with it and insisted on full disclosure (Criminal Procedure Rules) of the specifications of the equipment have had their cases withdrawn, rather than TVL be forced to reveal their method. The vans have historically been a big stick to frighten most people into admitting an offence… BUT and there is a but. . .
Technology has moved on. There is a variety of TV detector van which is used to obtain evidence of “reasonable grounds of suspicion” which is then used to convince a justice of the peace to issue a warrant of entry. One of our members who is an electrical engineer was able to capture a photograph of a TV detector van actively monitoring his property in January 2016. Want to see it?
This is how he explains its operation:
I am an electrical/electronic engineer with familiarity in various radio frequency and imaging monitoring techniques. TVL have historically convinced people they have the technology to see what you are watching on TV. This was an abject lie. However with advances in technology it is feasible (but as yet unproven) that this is now possible. Unlike the purely for show vans with antennas attached, TVL actually use a fairly simplistic system of video monitoring. What actually happens is that they roll up in a van, just like in the photo above, which has a computer system, some video cameras (in the upper window) and a light frequency spectrum analyser. They point the camera at your window and record the flickering light changes resulting from the reflection on your walls/curtains from the screen of your TV/monitor/games console.
During their visit to my property I was able to clearly see the spectrum analyser mounted on the dash and see its changing display as the light from my catch-up TV system varied. When I paused the downloaded programme, the spectrum analyser output became static, precisely as I would expect from such a system. I then took a camera outside and the van raced off before I could get a decent shot of the driver and his dashboard technology. Despite this I was able to see the spectrum analyser clearly through binoculars from a darkened room, prior to taking the photo.
As I took the photo the van driver started the engine and a motorised screen (blind) descended down the interior of the upper window to mask the camera which is behind a slightly mirrored glass. It is the data from this monitoring event that is then used to justify the “reasonable suspicion” argument used to obtain a warrant.
What is not clear for the time being is whether TVL have a live or retrospective “correlative analyser” which can check the light variations against a potential database of live broadcast TV at the precise time of the monitoring activity. Evidence to date suggests that people have been targeted who are legitimately using internet based catch up services or even playing on games consoles and thus have no need for a licence.
Immaterial of whether you are in lawful rebellion, if you object to the corruption and bias of the BBC and see one of these vans, please help us get a photograph of the dashboard which we will anonymously make available to everyone to show what TVL are up to. Needless to say, Ch.61 gives us lawful excuse to disrupt or defeat this so-called “law enforcement” technique and we will not take down any images, even upon receipt of a so-called “court” order.
If you want to find out about the Lawful Rebellion & The Conditional Acceptance Process. (Click here)