Strikes & Striking

Strikes an Striking

            The act of withdrawing labour as a means of protesting over work or pay related issues!

Question?

            What is the point of withdrawing labour in protest when it only serves to harm you and those around you?

Perhaps your employer is not the issue and by withdrawing labour or inhibiting and restricting them you harm yourself by undermining that business, body or service all of which damages and compromise you in both the short and long term. Additionally to this does it highlight and expose state, system or administrative failures within the modern environment when that system, state or body really doesn’t care?

            Clearly the issue is not about withdrawing labour it is about protesting in such a way as to demonstrate the measure of your disapproval over work related and/or pay conditions all of which affect thereby impact upon your every day standard of living and quality of life (the result of which is all too apparent).

Perhaps the issues are less about what we assume they are about and more to do with other issues which we are dismissing since we fail to see them therefore we are oblivious to their existence. Within the above clearly we exist within a world where beurocracy has gone mad with governments exceeding their mandates by dabbling in and manipulating the financial institutions and markets for both profit and control. The result of which through state legislation and controls inhibits free enterprise by restricting sales, growth and profit; all these things impact upon you by undermining a companies ability to provide long term job security and stability within the environment (both local and national).

Compounding this issue is the fact that government who are paid by the public and cannot balance these funds extorts ever increasing amounts off Individuals, Business and Industry inhibiting and restricting both people and these companies from success or long term survival all of which impact upon the individual within society (with them forming and being representative of the public).

So perhaps the issue is less to do with the protest itself but the manner within which we protest. Clearly withdrawing labour and inhibiting or restricting others is a failure upon our part since we are damaging the local economy which compromises us in return.

Issue!

Are the reasons for ‘Striking’ related to the ‘Provision of Lawful Service’ upon the part of the ‘State’?

Do we employ the ‘State’ to provide us with ‘Lawful Service’?

If so and you can establish through ‘Lawful Argumentation’ based upon ‘Reason and Reasonability’ perhaps the issue is less to do with ‘Withdrawing Labour’ and more to do with ‘Withdrawing Funding’ through the ‘Supplementation of Taxation’?

Read the ‘Common Contract’ and try to understand the ‘Issues’ since we ‘All employ our Governments to Provide us with Lawful Service’; establishing the ‘Failure’ is less to do with ‘Proof’ and more to do with ‘Volume of Disapproval’.

Clearly if both ‘Employers and Employee’ (Company and Individual/s) withdrew ‘Tax’ in protest by ‘Refusing’ to ‘Collect and Pay’ (add tax to the price of goods or pay tax on top of the actual cost of purchasing those goods) then this would impact upon ‘Government’ by A/ ‘Highlighting Public Disapproval’; B/ Exposing the seriousness of the issue and C/ Restricting Government through ‘Financial Reprimands’.

Would any of this be ‘Legal’ well there is an argument in relation to ‘Lawful Service’ and whether or not you can prove to the satisfaction of a court of law that you have been ‘Denied Lawful Service’ through a failure upon the ‘part of the State’ to ‘Deliver what they are Bound in law to Provide’.

It should be ‘Noted’ that any ‘Issues’ arising from ‘Prejudice’ within the ‘Process of Law’ and upon the part of the ‘Judge’ would invalidate the ‘System’ with this being arguable as ‘System failure through Prejudice against the Public’  which besides being a ‘Critical failure’ could be construed as being ‘State treason or State Crime’.

Ultimately you pay for ‘Lawful Service’ and any person, body or agency’ whom are engaged by you (Public, State or Other) are bound within the law to provide you with a ‘Non prejudicial, Legitimate and Lawful Service’ which should be commenced and completed to the best of their ability.

So perhaps ‘Withdrawing Labour’ is a ‘Futile gesture’ when ‘Withdrawing your Money’ is a more apt ‘Response’ – Understand something ‘Taxation’ is only ‘Lawful’ for as long as ‘The Government’ whom are ‘Your Employee’ provide you with ‘Lawful Service’.

(Tax is after all Your Money NOT theirs).

Please note that within the above I do not promote or encourage Dissidence on any level but am attempting to Clarify  an Issues of law which relates directly to public concerns; I personally do not approve of any Illegal or unlawful Action.

For ‘Clarification I wish to Attest’ that there is at least one division of ‘Government’ whom do indeed provide the ‘Public’ with ‘lawful Service’ these being ‘Local Government’ who only approach the ‘Public for Funding’ because the ‘National Government are abusing our Resources’. Within this it is fair to state that the ‘Local Government provide All the Services they are Contracted to Provide’ and of all the ‘Authorities the ‘Public’ should make ‘Every Effort to Support this Aspect of our State’.

Within the Nature of the Above Please be Aware that Tax is a Percentage of Your Money (Wages, Earnings or Profits) with this being the Individual in Society (Public) which is then reinterpreted and being called Revenue. These Moneys take as tax represent and are proportional to the property of each and every individual whom contributes towards funding a State through the supplementation of Taxation. None of these Moneys are the Property of Any Member of Government or that Government itself that to include Any System; these are the Publics Moneys and if the Public is Denied, Inhibited or Restricted from Receiving Lawful Service they have a Lawful Right to Refrain from and/or Withdraw Funding through the Supplementation of taxation and/or Funding to a State or Governmental Body until Lawful Service is Received, Applied and Provided.

To infer different is to imply Abuse which would undermine the Legitimacy of the State, the Government and the Law.

“A Sentient Mind is a Wonderful and Rare Thing”

Christopher ©15^th May 2012

‘Implications within Statements’ as a ‘Point of Prejudice’

‘Implications within Statements’ as a ‘Point of Prejudice’

The issue here is this: You are an individual therefore you are unique, so it is fair to argue that you see, experience and interpret everything differently to any other individual. You also define and quantify those experiences uniquely whilst projecting them distinctly and in an interpret way to you yourself.

In other words no one else experiences what you are feeling or can genuinely perceive what you experience since you are unique as an entity. It is therefore fair to argue that you transmit these thoughts and feelings through speech uniquely with any hidden interpretation being unintended (innocent).

            Other individuals may attempt to understand what you are saying and projecting by interpreting the information you are transmitting with this being put into context by themselves and in relation to how they perceive the content of what you are saying. This being a re-interpretation of your statement and not necessarily what you actual stated or implied since that would be speculative.

            The re-interpretation of your statement or comment is an attempt by most to perceive things from your perspective however in some cases it is distorted to project a point of prejudice. Within this the other person is re-interpreting the statement or comment to imply something other than what you stated or intended with them superimposing their own unique interpretation of that statement over yours. This may be perceived as a form of abuse with one person subjecting the other to a form of domination with this bringing the individuals (victim) credibility into question when the entire argument is prejudiced through bias.

Compounding this is the argument in law in as much as: are people being directed through bias to reinterpret statements via intent (as in an intention to re-interpret with the intention to discredit).

Ultimately it is the individual’s statement or comment and not the interpreters with them understanding the original projection, meaning or interpretation therefore their interpretation takes precedence since anything else would be a projection of bias through abuse and that is a crime.

For more on this read the 'State of Injustice' upon the paw-lew.co.uk website since I have investigated this issue in greater depth; I hope this clarification helps you or someone close to you.

Christopher © 14^th may 2012

The Common Contract

Y paw-lew (llaw y Llew) darn or Llew Ronc.

The Lions Paw (Palm of the Lion) part of the Lion Rampant.

Justice should be every persons Right in Law with any failure within the Law to Uphold and Defend these Rights being a Crime in Law.

The State of Injustice

To Whom It May Concern

Please consider these ‘Issues’ carefully.

Is the issue here that a ‘Crime’ was committed by the ‘Authorities’ or is the issue here that any ‘Lawfully Perceived Authority’ could or has committed a crime through the ‘Abuse of Public Trust and/or Public Resources’? Clearly if the ‘Authorities’ are ‘Attacking the Public’ that is a ‘Serious Crime’ (some may call that Treason); obviously ‘No Authority’ has requested ‘Permission’ from the ‘Public’ to ‘Commit Crimes’ since that would highlight or express ‘Intent’ (as in an intention to commit crimes). Additionally ‘No’ member of the ‘Public’ has at any time ‘Authorised’ those ‘Authorities’ to ‘Commit Crimes’ since they would be ‘Requesting Abuse’ through the ‘Provision of Terror’ it is therefore ‘Arguable’ that the ‘Public’ employ the ‘Authorities’ through the supplement of ‘Revenue’ to provide the ‘Public’ with ‘Lawful Service’.

Compounding the ‘Above’ is the ‘Issue’ of ‘Truth’.

Are the ‘Authorities’ bound within the ‘Law’ to provide the ‘Public’ with the ‘Actual Truth’ that being the ‘Truth in all Actuality’ and ‘Not Distorted nor Perverted’. If they are then does any ‘Public Servant’ have the ‘Right in Law’ to practice the ‘Satanic Arts of Perversion, Distortion, Manipulation, Deceit or Corruption’ these forming the arts of ‘Politics’.

Aren’t they ‘Employed by the Public’ to uphold the ‘Legitimacy of Law through their Actions’ with those ‘Actions’ highlighting the ‘Difference’ by ‘Setting the Standard’. Clearly there is no ‘Truth within a Lie’ since that is a ‘Distortion’ and a ‘Perversion’ of what is ‘True over what is Not True’.

We stand as ‘Nations’ upon the ‘Platform of Justice’ with the measure of our ‘Integrity being Defined within the Legitimacy and Honesty of Our Governments’.

Please find enclosed a platform upon which to hold Government’s and other Public Authorities accountable for their crimes and/or negligence’s. The enclosed contract if accepted can force legitimacy upon authorities through the recognition of ‘Rightful Conduct’ coupled with ‘Lawful Service’ through the establishment of ‘Legitimacy within the Law’.

Within the above it is fair to recognise that the ‘Public’ employ the ‘Authorities’ to provide the ‘Public’ with ‘Lawful Service’ which is founded upon what ‘IS’ Legitimate over what is ‘NOT’; clearly the ‘Public’ pay for the ‘Truth’ through the establishment of what the ‘Truth actually is’ and this through the acknowledgement of ‘Any Distortion’ or ‘Perversion’ of the ‘Truth’ making it a ‘Lie’ therefore ‘False’.

The recognition that authorities are public employees with privileged lives; that they are not placed under the same duress as members of the general public who have to fend for themselves. Public employees receive their wages and pensions without fail from the public coffers which is extracted through revenue however the public themselves have no such assurances.

As public employees all authorities are bound within the ‘Law’ to provide ‘lawful service’ there by upholding the ‘legitimacy of the law’ through their actions. The Law itself is the platform upon which we as a Nation stand before other nations to be seen and recognised as being Lawful.

Justice stands upon this as does the nation to include its people’s identity.

The ‘Contract’ is indeed a ‘Lawful’ and ‘Binding Contract’ which you are free to publish upon the grounds that you recognise my contribution and © Copyrights.

There are other issues raised and available within the book 'The State of Injustice' upon the 'Paw-Lew.co.uk' website - it is Free to Download.

The Common Contract.

With reference to, an unwritten but commonly accepted and agreed contract between the Crown/State/Government and the individual.

The individual/individuals being nationals of that governing body’s authority where by the latter is employed by the prior i.e.: the party of the second part (Crown/State or Government) to act in an ad ministerial position and for the benefit of the party of the first part i.e.:(individual/individuals/the public).

To which the party of the first part agrees to employ for an agreed term of office and at a fair rate of recompense the party of the second part with the provision of funding and support through revenue. Additionally and in times of crisis to physically support the party of the second part in the protection of the party of the first part and the party of the second part.

On the part of the party of the second part, it is their contractual obligation to utilize the combined revenues of each individual with each individual being both singularly and collectively the party/parties of the first part.

That all the revenues gathered are for the benefit and security of the party of the first part with the rates of revenue being kept to a minimum in order  to minimise the financial burden upon the individual/individuals and society.

These revenues being provided by the party of the first part for the lawful use/acquisition and supply of services; support by the party of the second part and for the benefit and security of the party of the first part.

The contract is indeed a lawful means by which a government is employed by the public in addition to the terms and conditions of employment.

The foundation of the contractual obligations for a government being: services in exchange for revenue. With those services being for the benefit of the people to whom the body of administration is contractually obligated (each individual within that country). 

The revenues supplied by the party of the first part are for the provision of services in the manner of health & welfare, education and commerce, social and economic infrastructure, armed forces (for the deployment and protection of the nation and the nations sovereignty), fair and impartial justice, the provision of an impartial and professional police force dedicated to the forensic and clinical gathering of evidences and the investigations of allegations, crimes, incidences and or complaints.

The provision of a healthy, safe environment whereby the party of the first part may excel through commerce and industry combined with the latest and most advanced collective thinking, information, technologies for social and economic development.

This is a fair contract whereby the government (systems of administration) are employed by the people to lawfully administer to their finances. To utilize these funds and provide fundamental services all of which are for the benefit of the people (individual/individuals) within the society of that given nation.

Ultimately, it is the individuals funds that the government administers, not their own therefore they are legally obligated to act lawfully and to provide lawful service.

Revenue is taken by the government and since it is widely accepted (and has been for generations) that this is in exchange for the provision of those lawful services as aforementioned with the government taking responsibility for the supply of those services the contract is unlikely to be disputed. Additionally and since the government actually do provide these services through the provision of public funding (Revenue) it must be seen that both parties do indeed complete their parts within this contract.

Therefore the ‘common contract’ is indeed a lawful contract based upon ‘services’ in exchange for ‘revenue’.

It is fundamentally a foundation upon which Any and All Lawful or Legitimate Governments, States or Bodies of Authority should stand. A platform for Justice built upon Lawful Conduct and the recognition of what ‘IS’ Lawful as opposed to what is ‘NOT’.

Written by: Christopher D. J. Maylor © Copyright 2010 (All Rights Reserved)

The Common Contract.

Crown/State vs. Any Individual

These are the contractual obligations of both parts of this contract with these being given as parts (a) and part (b).

(Part A)

On the part of the individual: I/we the individual/individuals undertake from a reasonable age to support you the systems of administration through the supplement of revenue. Furthermore; within times of crisis we undertake to physically support those authorities in the defence of this country.

(Part B)

 

On the part of the systems of administration: it is that you undertake to utilise the resources provided by said individual/individuals, to better protect said individual/individuals from external as well as internal threats.  Those threats to include you as people in positions of authority sometimes abuse their positions or that authority.

That you utilise those collective resources to provide a professional, well-equipped defensive system of armed forces, for the deployment and the protection of the individual/individuals and/or people of this country. Additionally that they serve for the protection of the sovereignty of our nation which is our property with them being the lands and territories upon and within which we stand as a nation.

Note: The country being the individual/individuals, the people and not the systems of administration, state and/or the crown.  Recognising that, the people’s collective identity forms and gives a name and a purpose for the existence for a state. That we the people and not you the systems of administration, the crown or the land where upon we stand; as these things are obsolete and having no identity without the people and their collective identity. (It is the people whom form the nation they in turn give identity to the land upon which they stand and purpose for there to be a government with that government’s duty being in the service of that nation).

Furthermore, that you the systems of administration also undertake to utilise the resources provided by the individual/individuals to benefit and improve the quality and quantity of life for each and every individual.  Those improvements to be in the overall development and improvement of health and welfare services, social and economic infrastructure, education coupled with future prospects, the implementation and protection of civil freedom, human rights and democracy. 

The provision of a fair, impartial and lawful judicial system for the purpose of establishing the truth based upon clinically gathered evidences and facts. The provision of a professional and impartial police force dedicated to investigating without prejudice so as to establish the facts through the clinical acquisition of evidences, statements and information.

For the provision of efficient and effective emergency services and other essential support necessary to maintaining a healthy caring civilised society. That you also support and encourage free enterprise with the creation of an environment beneficial to the encouragement and growth of commerce and industry whilst recognising companies and individual have a lawful right to prosper through and from their initiatives. (Without that one single right ‘to prosper’ from their efforts where is the motivation for any business to exist). Without business, industry and free enterprise there is no employment and without that there is no revenue.

Greater freedom for the individual coupled with the right to improve their quality of life, the right to prosper from their own skills, initiatives, innovation and enterprise.

That you the systems of administration recognise that you are the employees of the people, that your purpose of existence being for the benefit and protection of the individual and the people of this country.

It should be noted: that the individual agrees to this contract through the supplement of revenues and the system of administration through the supplement of services.  Since both parties have provided their parts to this contract i.e.: revenue is taken and services are in place for most parts, this contract must be seen as being legal and binding even though it is not written (until now) but accepted

Written by: Christopher D. J. Maylor © Copyright 2010 (All Rights Reserved)

The above is Founded and Presented upon the platform of ‘Lawful Service’ coupled with the provision of the ‘Actual Truth which is neither Distorted nor Perverted’ with this recognition of what ‘IS’ lawful and ‘True’ over what is ‘NOT’ lawful or ‘True’ establishing the difference between whom is ‘Innocent’ of providing ‘Lawful Service’ over whom is ‘Guilty’ and having failed to provide ‘Lawful Service’.

Within the above any failure by the ‘State/Authorities’ to provide the ‘Public’ with ‘Lawful Service’ is not only a ‘Breach of Contract’ but may be classed as ‘Crimes against the Nation’ since all ‘Public Servants are Employees of the People’.

I sincerely hope that this page helps people receive justice through the establishment of what is 'lawful over what is Not'.

Christopher.