If you like what we do support us today!
(Police trying to arrest a man in Manchester for not wearing a face mask)
Section 112 /119 Equalities Act its illegal for the police to ask.
6/12/21 G-MOFO UNSAFE FLY REPORT 22025 , G-BOJZ GROUND LEVEL MY HOME UNSAFE FLY REPORTS 22026, 22027,22028
If someone is attacked by the Jews that's a sure sign of his virtue. He who is not persecuted or is praised by the Jews is useless and dangerous . Unpublished War diary Joseph Goebbels
http://www.torturedinamerica.org/ /> AIRCRAFT - Wherever a targeted individual goes they are always being tracked by aircraft . The most prevalent (and easy to see), in my case at least, is a small white propeller aircraft and less frequently a dark helicopter. Low-flying jet planes are also used to constantly remind the target they are being watched.
https://www.britishconstitutiongroup.com/ The People Retain Authority over their Government. It appears that the heads of the Police, Military, Politicians, Public Servants, media, religions, corporations and banks worldwide unfortunately may still currently support the nefarious corporate banking authoritarian 5g'SMART'/DIGITAL, depopulation, track and trace surveillance agendas and AI trans-human GMO Reset and the treacherous EU Military Unification that is being secretly and treasonously pushed through. We are all compelled by our Common Law Constitution to all effectively inform the masses asap to be aware of the Common Law Constitutional position and for all to stand under Article 61 until remedy has been obtained and our Common Law Trial and Annulment by Jury Constitution and System of Service has been fully restored.
I do not live flight near flight path (I have moved home four times since becoming a TI my new home then becomes the next 'Flight Path') air gang stalkers appear like still image (in * upload and in url below) every day prohibited airspace, my home, isolated locations, over vehicles I'm travelling in , and nearly crashing into buses cars I have been in. They always appear when I arrive at and leave any location by plummeting down to ground level directly overhead usually very aggressively in hazardous manoeuvring. They have been doing this for 15 years.
The air perps have been breaking aviation laws I.e. Unsafe flying see CAA law. I have made over TEN thousand unsafe fly reports to the CAA and not one has ever been replied to. If the perps were at legal altitude I would not/hardly notice them!
I have rang ATC they advised me to go to the police i.e. vast majority of the craft I reported have not been blipping on radar. ATC asked me if I had evidence of the craft nearly crashing into my home 5 times? (belonging to scenic air tours north east) I told them yes still images and video . ATC then told me I must go to the police. I did Police did not take me seriously even when I showed them craft with no ID time and date stamped with GPS prohibited airspace locations proof shown on my in camera TIFF files.
Problem is National Police air services have been the worst low fly breaching offenders Made at least 14,000 low fly breach reports to the CAA, 1000's of IPOC Misconduct reports , professional standards NP complaints and similar number of Freedom of information requests .
Again not one reply from NPAS. However one letter appeared from professional standards it stated that the high command of Northumbria Police were responsible for helicopter deployments it stated that ALL the helicopter deployments were within their remit . Seven Police forces have been involved in my air harassment G-NEAU, G-POLA, G-POLB, G-CPAS, G-POLX, G-POLY AND G-CPAS.
Dear Northumbria Police,
Please include at least the following information: - for the ID number
to uniquely identify the deployment or incident etc - - Time why
the helicopter was deployed on the Why the helicopter was deployed
(e.g. Report of suspicious activity, missing person, traffic accident etc)
Borough the helicopter was deployed to
The result (e.g. person located, evidence gathered etc)
I have been arrested many times by the Police put in mental hospitals twice against my will , while in custody 30 hours not allowed to see solicitors!
Police come around steal all electronics (11 MONTHS LATER MY PROPERTY STILL HAS NOT BEEN RETURNED) say I have been sending malicious communications (in their own word suspicion of a crime) and they can never prove it. Ie I won a case in front of a Jury a formal not guilty verdict of not sending a former MC. I also showed police up in court and proved they were terrorizing me with helicopters the High Command NP were ordering NPAS to buzz overhead (wherever I ventured to) usually at 20m Alt doing 150mph that's categorised as unsafe flying according to the CAA.
There was never a blip for a Police helicopter on flightradar24 (Another unlawful arrest and detained under the mental health act against my will in a mental hospital.)
While I was in custody, Police pc 2909 also wiped photographic data from 9 sd 64 gig cards evidence video and photographic of low fly breaching aircraft all SD cards now are blank. The airport police covering up crimes committed against myself.
Police said I had been sending malicious communications. I said to my Solicitor while under the section ask the police for evidence of me sending MC?
My instructions to solicitor were:
Ask Northumbria police for a stack
path of information an ip address for the so called malicious emails. They the Police could not prove it was me or could even be me who sent Malicious communications next day was released from the asylum after 14 days. I was informed just prior to being released by Consultant Gee in the Shore drift hospital that the Police were not taking any further action myself. re malicious communications.
(It was not possible for me the even phone my family the police had stolen my cell phone, and it was not until after 13 days in the hospital I was able to talk to solicitor. No one knew where I was my mother put in a missing persons. Police smash in my door looking for me at my home trash the place, then maliciously switch heating on to maximum ) When I eventually arrived home the house temperature was 40c and my house plants had died from extreme heat exposure.
NPAS TERRORIST 5G KILLERS
United States Patent Application: 20070139247 (uspto.gov)
14. The multi-functional RFDE system of claim
12, wherein the mobile vehicle is an aircraft.
15. A method of operating a multi-functional radio frequency directed energy (RFDE) system, comprising the steps of: utilizing an RFDE transmitter and at least one RFDE antenna to direct high power electromagnetic energy towards a target sufficient to cause high energy damage or disruption of the target; utilizing a targeting system to locate the target, the targeting system including a radar transmitter and at least one radar antenna for transmitting and receiving electromagnetic energy to locate the target; aiming the at least one RFDE antenna at the target based on the location of the target as ascertained by the targeting system; and integrating at least a portion of the radar transmitter or the at least one radar antenna within at least a portion of the RFDE transmitter or the at least one RFDE antenna.
0002] Radio frequency directed energy (RFDE) systems are known in the art for directing high power RF, microwave and/or millimeter wave electromagnetic energy to destroy or disrupt a target. Although RFDE systems typically serve as military weapons, RFDE systems need not be limited to weapon systems. For example, RFDE systems of the present invention may be used for non-military purposes such as destroying or disrupting foreign objects, contaminants, undesirable atmospheric conditions, or other types of targets.
 As for weapon systems, it is important to distinguish between an RFDE weapon system and an electronic warfare system. A primary difference between an RFDE weapon and an electronic warfare system is power and kill mode. An electronic warfare system makes use of a priori knowledge of a target it is designed to jam or disrupt. An electronic warfare system uses such a priori knowledge of a target's characteristics (e.g., frequency of operation, method of operation, etc.) to disrupt or confuse the target with &quot;finesse&quot;, or a relatively low amount of power.
 On the other hand, an RFDE weapon system can go after a broad range of targets (electronics, biological, ordinance, structures, etc.) due to its relatively large radiated power. A priori knowledge of the intended target characteristics is typically not required because the RFDE weapon either burns-out or overwhelms its target by the shear amount of power it radiates.
 An ongoing problem with RFDE systems is targeting--accurately pointing the RF directed energy beam at the intended target and establishing an accurate range from the system to the target. To date, the RFDE system targeting problem has been addressed by using what may be referred to as auxiliary add-on systems. These add-on systems could include a stand-alone radar system, a stand-alone laser range finder, stand-alone optical or infrared imaging system, etc. However, these add-on systems add significant cost to the RFDE system. In addition, these add-on systems add significant complexity by requiring calibration of the alignment between the RFDE system and the stand-alone targeting system.
 The RFDE weapon system 10 further includes an antenna pointing system 24 for aiming the high power antenna 14, and thus the high power electromagnetic energy beam transmitted therefrom, at the target. The pointing system 24 typically is driven by coordinate data identifying the direction and range of the intended target. Such coordinate data is provided by a stand-alone targeting system 26. As is noted above, the targeting system 26 is an add-on often in the form of a stand-alone radar system, a stand-alone laser range finder, stand-alone optical or infrared imaging system, etc. As is also noted above, however, these add-on systems add significantly to the cost and complexity of the RFDE system.
Magna Carta is a Lawful document/ Peace treaty forever
It is time for the people to invoke Article 61 — The Lawful Rebellion | by Nick Ayton | Medium
Under King John’s reign, Clause 39 of Magna Carta became the foundation of the idea that a freeman could not be imprisoned without first being found guilty in a trial by his peers. This later became the idea behind the principle of “trial by jury”:
No freeman shall be taken or [and] imprisoned or disseised or exiled or in any way destroyed, nor will we go upon him nor send upon him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers or [and] by the law of the land.
Clause 39 guaranteeing the right of a freeman to a trial by his peers before he could be lawfully imprisoned is one of the most famous clauses in Magna Carta, along with the right to habeas corpus (that the accused must be presented to the court in person for charges to be read and the trial to begin). It became the foundation stone of English and then American court procedure and a symbol of “the traditional rights of Englishmen.” Some radical legal theorists like Lysander Spooner believed that not only did the jury in a trial have the right to pronounce on the guilt or innocence of the accused but also could rule on the very justice of the laws under which the defendant was accused, thus making a trial by jury into a quite radical tool for restricting the power of the state.
The editor McKechnie had this to say about the phrase “per judicium parium” (by the judgement of his peers): every judgment must be delivered by the accused man’s “equals.” The need for “a judgment of peers” was recognized at an early date in England. It was not originally a class privilege of the aristocracy, but a right shared by all grades of free–holders;  whatever their rank, they could not be tried by their inferiors. In this respect English custom did not differ from the procedure prescribed by feudal usage on the Continent of Europe. Two applications of this general principle had, however, special interest for the framers of Magna Carta: the “peers” of a Crown tenant were his fellow Crown tenants, who would normally deliver judgment in the Curia Regis; while the “peers” of the tenant of a mesne lord were the other suitors of the Court Baron of the manor. In either case, judgments were given per pares curiae. John, resorting wholesale to practices used sparingly in earlier reigns, had set these rules at defiance. His political and personal enemies were exiled, or deprived of their estates, by the judgment of a tribunal composed entirely of Crown nominees. Magna Carta promised a return to the ancient practice.