Iceland wants freedom from crooked bankers

Conspirator
Posts: 1544
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:36 pm

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:21 am » by Truthseeker


Iceland stands alone wanting its own land sea and air it wants its own banks and its people need to be able to live life free of the world bankers wanting all they own ,its not a new idea Ireland Scotland and all uk owned land is owned by the elite bankers land owners and so called gentry ,these people in past and present own land and houses they want the cattle slave class out on the streets .In the uk at this time this new conlib goverment want your tenant houses off you ,once you had the right to buye them now you have no rights they want the old and sick out of there houses and put into the streets as they did in the past during the land grab times in Scotland and Ireland using a famine as a reason to kill a million Irish and 600 Scotish farmers the past is the future and the future is the past .
History repeats itself so when the 88 year old man or women is draged into the streets from there rented council house then the past as come into the future ,you are slaves in rented houses and you are slaves in bank owned houses your rights are slowly taken off you with the excuse of greed and shortage ,if you dont see there trick then history will be repeated .
Iceland stands tall and let history say Iceland can see the bank lies and there plan to take land and the Iceland soul away from its men women and chilldren let them shout out load and fight for there land and freedom .Iceland Under Attack? HAARP Activity Corresponds to Iceland Earthquake Swarms
By wmw_admin on December 7, 2010

Zen Gardner – Before it’s News.com December 7, 2010

Can’t say for sure, and many jump to the conclusion that every earthquake is the result of HAARP or other atmospheric heater activity. Haiti for example did have corresponding HAARP activity and other anomalies. Chile apparently did not.

But checking a HAARP monitoring website after seeing the news about the heavy earthquake activity in Iceland, there’s a clear correlation.

Put it this way. We know it’s possible for this technology to do such a thing.

Who’d benefit, and why Iceland?
1. Iceland didn’t take the bail out and hasn’t wanted to knuckle under to the EU. They still have a strong free market economy and are poised for recovery. That’s not falling in line with the program.

2. In addition, Iceland recently established themselves as a “free speech haven” to protect journalists and their sources, even offering censorship-free servers and other services to journalists and internet businesses. Sound like an idea those wanting an internet crackdown would like to see happen?

3. More volcanoes would also further exacerbate the horrific weather Europe is experiencing. That should keep their minds off of politics, their engineered economic maelstrom and quell any thoughts about demonstrating now, wouldn’t it?

and…

4. Mighty nice distraction from the Wiki-storm and all its fallout, wouldn’t you say?

Just wondering.

Full article with illustrations charting the intensity and location of recent HAARP activity

Posted in Behind The "News", Current Affairs, Feature Posts | Leave a response
wmw_admin so fight the land bank grabers .

Conspirator
Posts: 3711
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: Scotland

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:30 am » by Muchtyman


Iceland wants to stop killing Whales ..........Until then , the bankers can bleed the bastards white .............. :twisted:

Image

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/38434/

Writer
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:51 pm

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:42 am » by Frigard



Conspirator
Posts: 3711
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: Scotland

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:45 am » by Muchtyman


frigard wrote:http://corruptio.blog.com/


I got it the first time buddy ............... :flop:

Conspirator
Posts: 1544
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:36 pm

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:49 am » by Truthseeker


Great Scots land grab’ that could end up in our courts
Published on 16 Oct 2010


David Ross, Highland Correspondent

The battle has been raging in Scotland for hundreds of years and once was fought with clubs, staves and other weapons.

Now it appears a war of words in a court of law will be required to settle a dispute that is one of the most enduring in this country’s history – ownership of the land.

The Hill of Alyth is an unlikely battleground but the tangled history of land ownership in this part of Perthshire between Kirriemuir and Blairgowrie serves to demonstrate how, despite land reform, this remains a controversial and convoluted matter, possibly involving the use of a seven-figure sum of public money.

Andy Wightman, the leading land reform campaigner, has uncovered documentary evidence to show that Scottish ministers paid nearly £3 million of public money to buy land at the Hill of Alyth – despite half of the land never belonging to the sellers.

It is common land, which the community had tried to defend for generations, on one occasion in the 18th century with “clubs and staves and other weapons”. In 1949 more than 500 turned out to take direct action. They cut down fences that had been put up on land they believed had been theirs for 600 years.

In his new book, The Poor Had No Lawyers, being serialised by The Herald and Sunday Herald, Mr Wightman traces how in the 1920s one of Scotland’s oldest aristocratic families assumed it could include parts of this land with its neighbouring properties, near the village of Alyth.

The author reveals that in 1977, when the Earl of Airlie’s trustees came to sell two parcels of this common land, they admitted in the deed of sale they had never claimed the disputed area they were selling on the Hill of Alyth was part of their property. They simply claimed it could be “construed” to be.

They also conceded in the deed “we or our predecessors in title have at various times disponed [made over or conveyed legally] parts of the subjects known as The Hill of Alyth to which we or they may have had a right but granted no warrandice [legal guarantees, including that the seller can validly transfer ownership]”.

So, despite not being able to prove they owned it, they sold it to another landowner who then sold it to the Scottish Government, whose lawyers approved the purchase.

In 1998 leading estate agents FPD Savills marketed another part of the common land on the Hill of Alyth as part of a farm for sale and were completely frank that the sellers could not prove they owned it.

According to the particulars, they had acquired title “from previous heritable proprietors to the Hill of Alyth without warrandice. The purchaser will be given title to the hill on the same terms.”

Mr Wightman believes the Hill of Alyth is one of a multitude of cases where common land was taken by private landowners, but without anyone acting illegally; their actions having been legitimised by laws from the 17th century.

He claims that for the past 900 years, common land has been “legally stolen” in this way, with property law serving the interests of the powerful. He believes the Hill of Alyth is the perfect modern example of this: “The whole point is that it is legal, but it clearly shouldn’t be.”

According to Mr Wightman, there were repeated attempts to divide the land on the Hill of Alyth by landlords who wanted to acquire it: “But the process stalled and, by 1843, the hill was noted as still being a commonty [a piece of land in which two or more people have a common right] in the New Statistical Account of Scotland. Since then, no further actions have been raised to divide the commonty and it therefore remains a commonty to this day.”

However neighbouring landlords had never accepted this, and went about their annexations and sales. These now have the imprimatur of SNP Scottish Ministers, albeit a process set in train by the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Scottish Executive.

The land was bought for the Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) but there is no evidence that body knew the history of the hill.

A spokesman for FCS said of the Hill of Alyth: “We are always open and willing to consider any new documentation that might support a claim of commonty. We are always open to discussing options with anyone who can demonstrate that they have legitimate rights to carry out specific activities on the national forest estate.

“While FCS titles are, on a purely historical basis, subject to any commonty rights and rights of grazing which can be substantiated, the existence of such a burden on the face of the title does not necessarily imply that such rights exist or are enforceable. The onus of proof in respect of such rights rests with any claimant.”

He said FCS had previously requested further evidence that would support this claim of commonty, but so far had not been provided with any. But he concluded: “It is likely that this issue will only be resolved once a legal decision has been taken.”

Conspirator
Posts: 1544
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:36 pm

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:51 am » by Truthseeker


Scotland and Iceland are equal when the land grab bankers want somthing they just take it .

Conspirator
Posts: 3711
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: Scotland

PostWed Dec 08, 2010 1:55 am » by Muchtyman


truthseeker wrote:Great Scots land grab’ that could end up in our courts
Published on 16 Oct 2010


David Ross, Highland Correspondent

The battle has been raging in Scotland for hundreds of years and once was fought with clubs, staves and other weapons.

Now it appears a war of words in a court of law will be required to settle a dispute that is one of the most enduring in this country’s history – ownership of the land.

The Hill of Alyth is an unlikely battleground but the tangled history of land ownership in this part of Perthshire between Kirriemuir and Blairgowrie serves to demonstrate how, despite land reform, this remains a controversial and convoluted matter, possibly involving the use of a seven-figure sum of public money.

Andy Wightman, the leading land reform campaigner, has uncovered documentary evidence to show that Scottish ministers paid nearly £3 million of public money to buy land at the Hill of Alyth – despite half of the land never belonging to the sellers.

It is common land, which the community had tried to defend for generations, on one occasion in the 18th century with “clubs and staves and other weapons”. In 1949 more than 500 turned out to take direct action. They cut down fences that had been put up on land they believed had been theirs for 600 years.

In his new book, The Poor Had No Lawyers, being serialised by The Herald and Sunday Herald, Mr Wightman traces how in the 1920s one of Scotland’s oldest aristocratic families assumed it could include parts of this land with its neighbouring properties, near the village of Alyth.

The author reveals that in 1977, when the Earl of Airlie’s trustees came to sell two parcels of this common land, they admitted in the deed of sale they had never claimed the disputed area they were selling on the Hill of Alyth was part of their property. They simply claimed it could be “construed” to be.

They also conceded in the deed “we or our predecessors in title have at various times disponed [made over or conveyed legally] parts of the subjects known as The Hill of Alyth to which we or they may have had a right but granted no warrandice [legal guarantees, including that the seller can validly transfer ownership]”.

So, despite not being able to prove they owned it, they sold it to another landowner who then sold it to the Scottish Government, whose lawyers approved the purchase.

In 1998 leading estate agents FPD Savills marketed another part of the common land on the Hill of Alyth as part of a farm for sale and were completely frank that the sellers could not prove they owned it.

According to the particulars, they had acquired title “from previous heritable proprietors to the Hill of Alyth without warrandice. The purchaser will be given title to the hill on the same terms.”

Mr Wightman believes the Hill of Alyth is one of a multitude of cases where common land was taken by private landowners, but without anyone acting illegally; their actions having been legitimised by laws from the 17th century.

He claims that for the past 900 years, common land has been “legally stolen” in this way, with property law serving the interests of the powerful. He believes the Hill of Alyth is the perfect modern example of this: “The whole point is that it is legal, but it clearly shouldn’t be.”

According to Mr Wightman, there were repeated attempts to divide the land on the Hill of Alyth by landlords who wanted to acquire it: “But the process stalled and, by 1843, the hill was noted as still being a commonty [a piece of land in which two or more people have a common right] in the New Statistical Account of Scotland. Since then, no further actions have been raised to divide the commonty and it therefore remains a commonty to this day.”

However neighbouring landlords had never accepted this, and went about their annexations and sales. These now have the imprimatur of SNP Scottish Ministers, albeit a process set in train by the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Scottish Executive.

The land was bought for the Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) but there is no evidence that body knew the history of the hill.

A spokesman for FCS said of the Hill of Alyth: “We are always open and willing to consider any new documentation that might support a claim of commonty. We are always open to discussing options with anyone who can demonstrate that they have legitimate rights to carry out specific activities on the national forest estate.

“While FCS titles are, on a purely historical basis, subject to any commonty rights and rights of grazing which can be substantiated, the existence of such a burden on the face of the title does not necessarily imply that such rights exist or are enforceable. The onus of proof in respect of such rights rests with any claimant.”

He said FCS had previously requested further evidence that would support this claim of commonty, but so far had not been provided with any. But he concluded: “It is likely that this issue will only be resolved once a legal decision has been taken.”


I know all this ..............The poor and landless always get shat apon , what's new ..?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_War

What's this got to do with the Whale murdering Icelanders ?

Morally as repulsive as the fkn Bankers ................



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook