They have mysteriously found my goods. (In their last letter they said that they had been destroyed). The tone of the new letter is just as dismissive and just as threatening. They asked that I decide whether I wish to continue to challenge the legality of the seizure (I don't) or if I wish to withdraw my claim (I don't). They also bang on about "their" costs, so I thought it fair to mention mine.
Here is my reply:
17 June 2011
Dear XXXXX XXXXX
I refer to your letter dated 7 June 2011. My reply is late because I was abroad on business.
You have sent me a form on which I need to select one of two options: challenge the legality of the seizure or withdraw my claim. I do not wish to withdraw my claim, nor do I wish to challenge the legality of the seizure. I believe that your officers did as they were trained to do.
However, it is clear to me from reading your letter that you did not even bother to read mine (dated 21 April 2011) in which I explained to you what my lawful standing is. I even included supporting documentation. How you missed it is beyond me. I must now insist that you take advice from a constitutional lawyer. You obviously do not understand the ramifications or the importance of my standing as a Lawful Rebel. Your statutes are meaningless to me. I have opted out. Lawfully. I am under no obligation to obey statute law. Indeed, I am obliged to ignore it.
I appreciate that the concept is alien to you, and it will mystify any lawyer who has no experience in constitutional matters. I forgive your (collective) ignorance, just this once.
I wish to attend court to obtain a ruling on this. But do you? When I win my case the publicity will be massive. My blogging friends and I have (between us) over 1.5 million daily readers. If, by some tiny chance I lose, I will appeal. All the way to the European Court if necessary. As a matter of fact, I have already won. If you had sought the advice of a constitutional expert you would know this.
Finally, a word on costs. I conditionally agree to pay your costs as long as you agree to pay mine. For my special appearance at the court, my fee is one thousand (1,000) ounces of silver per hour. I expect to be paid in bullion, not fiat currency. This is non-negotiable.
Or, you can simply send my goods back to me at the above address, accompanied by an apology.
You have seven (7) days from receipt in which to reply.
Without frivolity, ill-will or vexation,
Captain: of the Ranty family."
Let's see what happens next, shall we?
Cheers for the update CR,
I bet that they will return your goods soon, but not within 7 days and certainly without an apology.
And if they don't, you'll get your day in court.
Either way, you win! Well played sir!
The goods are unimportant.
What I need is the ruling. An acknowledgement of my status.
THEN I can really have some fun.
Spot on Captain...as always!
You won't get that nate! :-)
Just your goods back, and yes, probably not even a letter enclosed.
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile - hoping that it will eat him last".
our right under article 61 of magna carta gets a mention in the european parliment
I just published it.
nice letter ranty man, keep it up, your wining and you know it.
Fucking awesome (as always) :)
Oh nice one! You have balls of steel Captain. I am on my knees!!!
You are a brave man and I damn well hope you win!
Post a Comment