Reply to: Section 58 - what the victims are up against

[vetran]

I suspect little is really changing in reality here. They have probably been running through red lights for years, but in the past if they were caught, their boss would just put in a call to the Chief Inspector and the ticket would be cancelled.

Nowadays, the police are applying the strict law to the letter - and throwing common sense out of the window. Look at the cases of organ donor transports being issued with speeding tickets.

So HMRC want to carry on doing what they have always done anyway.

so previous criminal activity means the law should be changed to make it legal for HMRC to speed.

whereas BN58 suggests HMRC can make previously legal things illegal and charge back taxes based on this new reality.

I'm not even affected by this and I still find it offensive.

[vetran]

To go back to the original story (and ignoring all the irrelevant section 58 nonsense), I always thought lying to a judge was A Big Deal, and therefore the people that said there were 300 cases of this companies' lorries being found to be empty whereas there were in fact only 3, should be in prison by now.

+1

I would expect all those materially involved in falsifying the case to be either imprisoned, dismissed or demoted depending on the severity of their actions.
I would expect the victim's MP and the judge who was lied to to be instrumental in this.

It is a big deal, I agree partially to BP's worry that HMRC want more powers and are abusing their current ones without redress.
I suggest if HMRC were unfailing exact & honourable then an extension of their powers would appear reasonable, they in this case obviously aren't.

[VectraMan]

But to go back to your original point, I think the state does need an eye keeping on it. There are many people who would like to see unfair powers given to the state, and these people should be resisted. Personally I am in favour of a small state but not no state.

But who keeps an eye on the state? You obviously can't rely on the police, and the press only care about reporting on who has the skimpiest bikini in the jungle.

To go back to the original story (and ignoring all the irrelevant section 58 nonsense), I always thought lying to a judge was A Big Deal, and therefore the people that said there were 300 cases of this companies' lorries being found to be empty whereas there were in fact only 3, should be in prison by now.

[KentPhilip]

At least you did not deny being a virgin.

Well it was me wot said it in the first place!

But to go back to your original point, I think the state does need an eye keeping on it. There are many people who would like to see unfair powers given to the state, and these people should be resisted. Personally I am in favour of a small state but not no state.

[BrilloPad]

blah blah blah

At least you did not deny being a virgin.

[centurian]

They want ability to run red lights for covert surveillance.

I suspect little is really changing in reality here. They have probably been running through red lights for years, but in the past if they were caught, their boss would just put in a call to the Chief Inspector and the ticket would be cancelled.

Nowadays, the police are applying the strict law to the letter - and throwing common sense out of the window. Look at the cases of organ donor transports being issued with speeding tickets.

So HMRC want to carry on doing what they have always done anyway.

[KentPhilip]

Okay. You picked an obscure bit of my argument and twisted it. I will bite. But only because I feel sorry for you. And because I live 100 yards from Kent.

Well actually I don't live in Kent. So I feel sorry for you living 100 yards from it

Try protesting against anything and she how much freedom you get.

I don't know, there have been several high profile demonstrations by the students and the public sector workers in recent months. They seem to have been able to get their point across in the media (albeit the left-wing BBC).

On a more visible note there are unmarked police cars everywhere. And the inability to protest outside parliament.

Every time I have been pulled over by the police in recent years has been by a marked police car. So there can't be all that many unmarked cars around.
I slightly agree about the parliament thing. Though perhaps it has something to do with not wanting a repeat to the red paint vandalism done to Churchill's statue 10 years ago during a protest. There are a lot of statues in Parliament Square.

Most importantly is MPs that are more out of control than ever.

What, for nicking a few dodgy expenses? Hardly the end of the world is it, compared to the national debt.

And most important is an HMRC that are out of control. Act like the SS or Stasi. They went ability to run red lights for covert surveillance.

I think if HMRC want to do you for tax evasion I don't think an inability to run red lights or drive within the speed limit is going to stop them.

And why should people riot? Well only a virgin could ask that. Look at Yugoslavia. Until 1989 it was quite a nice civilized country - at least on the surface. My bother went there with the paras in 1991/1992. In just 2 years there was carnage. You want the stories of butchered children? When he came back he was a changed person. This was not like WW2 you know where there were some sort of moral code that you fought against men.

Here children and women were the target. Do you want that to happen here? I would like to keep a veneer of respectibilty upon society.

Is there any evidence that government corruption in the UK is going to lead to butchered children here?
I don't think so. If anything the excessive political correctness endemic in society will serve to protect children against harm, to an excessive extent. Any hint of physical danger to a child in the UK inevitably results in a response to protect the child from that, even to the extent of putting them into care. Which is a point you raise in your later post.

[BrilloPad]

Would you care to provide some specific examples of freedoms that the public has lost, and why you feel these warrant rioting in the streets?

And another one :-

Alps massacre survivors 'kidnapped by social services' - Telegraph

Now the law does say that child should be cared by their family where possible. The SS are happy to ignore the law as they cannot be prosecuted. They are above the law.

In my own case the SS told me they were happy to ignore the law as "it is too difficult to implement". I have that in writing. I have NO recourse. Surely the recourse should to have them put against the wall and shot.

[BrilloPad]

My Gran has often said that had they known how the country would be given away in subsequent years they would never have fought and all her friends who never returned had thrown their lives away for nothing.

+1

And my grandfather (who lost 2 brothers at Gallipoli) always felt the UK caused WW2 anyway. By the treaty of Versailles. It was not Weimar that sent Germany into depression. It was trying to keep up payments.

And who won WW2 anyway? Look where Germany and Japan are now.

[BrilloPad]

Would you care to provide some specific examples of freedoms that the public has lost, and why you feel these warrant rioting in the streets?

Okay. You picked an obscure bit of my argument and twisted it. I will bite. But only because I feel sorry for you. And because I live 100 yards from Kent.

Try protesting against anything and she how much freedom you get.

On a more visible note there are unmarked police cars everywhere. And the inability to protest outside parliament.

Most importantly is MPs that are more out of control than ever. A prime minister office that behaves like an executive office. Their lack of accountability has led to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Which leads to economic instability.

And most important is an HMRC that are out of control. Act like the SS or Stasi. They went ability to run red lights for covert surveillance.

And why should people riot? Well only a virgin could ask that. Look at Yugoslavia. Until 1989 it was quite a nice civilized country - at least on the surface. My bother went there with the paras in 1991/1992. In just 2 years there was carnage. You want the stories of butchered children? When he came back he was a changed person. This was not like WW2 you know where there were some sort of moral code that you fought against men.

Here children and women were the target. Do you want that to happen here? I would like to keep a veneer of respectibilty upon society.

[escapeUK]

Quite why we fought the second world war is beyond me - we should have joined hitler. This country would probably have more freedom now. But all that is irrelevant for the porpoises of section 58.

It was because back then people believed the indoctrination from the government and the media, never realising they were lied to

My Gran has often said that had they known how the country would be given away in subsequent years they would never have fought and all her friends who never returned had thrown their lives away for nothing.

[KentPhilip]

...thanks to the failure of joe public to riot in the streets at the loss of their basic freedoms...

Would you care to provide some specific examples of freedoms that the public has lost, and why you feel these warrant rioting in the streets?

[BrilloPad]

Nope, that doesn't really work for me. This article does not show the same people using an off-shore tax scheme, it show someone wrongly accused of criminal fraud.

Completely off topic and nothing to do with Section 58.

Its shows that HMRC are prepared to lie and cheat and fabricate evidence - which is what has happened in section 58. However in the case of section 58 they lied to parliament and not just to a few plebs.

There are a few more things that it says in the article which are not relevant to section 58. That the guilty HMRC and liquidators are promoted. Like the presumption of guilt until innocence. But for the purposes of section 58 they can be ignored. I already know we live in a state controlled third world dictatorship that is rapidly going downhill thanks to the failure of joe public to riot in the streets at the loss of their basic freedoms and sit on their lard arses in front of their flat screen TVs watching football and drinks lager. Quite why we fought the second world war is beyond me - we should have joined hitler. This country would probably have more freedom now. But all that is irrelevant for the porpoises of section 58.

[Sysman]

How one family were brought to their knees by the taxman - Telegraph

Completely off topic and nothing to do with Section 58.

[cojak]

Nope, that doesn't really work for me. This article does not show the same people using an off-shore tax scheme, it shows someone wrongly accused of criminal fraud.

The protest against retrospective taxation I'm completely at one with. People do not have time-machines and HMRC should be better at their jobs to shut illegal tax schemes down. Any one continuing with such schemes should expect to pay their tax back.