Freeman on the Land in America/lawful rebellion/sovereign citizens

[LightinDarkness]

Just been watching the various videos and, without wishing to sound too right wing, it's time one of these idiots was made an example of before any more half-wits are incited to storm the courts. Preferably, jail terms for Roger the Dodger Hayes and that manipulative bucket of lard Ray St Clair. St Clair will have got a real buzz out of 'seizing the court'. How are the police going to stop this happening next time?

Still, I liked the guy holding up the 'Humans 1, Illuminati 0' sign in court. If you're going to go for some woo you might as well go all out.

Wow, you mean the Freeloaders won against a group that doesn't exist! They must be feeling good. Maybe next they'll take the fight to the aliens, or some other conspiracy group that has no relationship to reality.

That IS the lovely thing about fighting against conspiracy boogeymen that don't exist - your always guaranteed a victory!

[jeffwode]

Great success!

News just coming in to me says that one of Mondays, protesters has been sent down for 2 weeks for ‘contempt of court’. Fair play Mike we all hold them in contempt and they had to pick on someone to vent their spleen on and it was you!

http://nominedeus.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/protester-given-2-weeks-for-contempt-of-court/

Six of these imbeciles were arrested, two released, one in jail and three yet to be dealt with.

[jeffwode]

The jailed man appears to be Mike Whitby of the Liverpool BNP.

http://unitedwrexham.co.uk/2010/12/05/mike-whitby-political-heavyweight/

Nice company these FOTLs keep. Whitby's the white haired bloke with glasses in the court 'seizure' video (BTW, note the wry smiles of the two coppers at 5.21)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G8JL4oDRx54#at=323

[gtm]

The jailed man appears to be Mike Whitby of the Liverpool BNP.

http://unitedwrexham.co.uk/2010/12/05/mike-whitby-political-heavyweight/

Nice company these FOTLs keep. Whitby's the white haired bloke with glasses in the court 'seizure' video (BTW, note the wry smiles of the two coppers at 5.21)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G8JL4oDRx54#at=323

It looks like a sizable contingent came from Merseyside BNP were in attendance. The revolting Peter Tierney was certainly there (google him). You tell a lot about a person or organisation by the company they keep :mad:

[Stacey Grove]

It looks like a sizable contingent came from Merseyside BNP were in attendance.

Indeed.

http://liveraf.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/the-british-constitution-group-in-birkenhead/

[LightinDarkness]

Just look at the lunacy in that blog...I love this part:

May I suggest to any readers out there that we all send Mike a postcard every day for the next week congratulating him on his stance and assuring him we will be there for his next appearance to support him and show the courts ‘our’ collective contempt for their illegal and unlawful actions!


So, by fighting the MAN based on legal mythology the guy goes to jail, and in response the FOTLers are going to...send him postcards. What? According to their mythology, the court has acted illegally and MUST run out of the court room/declare them sovereign/whatever when they do the right legal magic, and they all agree they did the right legal magic.

So if doing the FOTL legal magic right ends up, AT BEST, with throwing your members in jail for contempt...how exactly is that a victory again?

[carlitos]

Bi-winning!

[jeffwode]

Writing postcards to a man in prison who supposedly can't be sent to prison would certainly make most people question their beliefs.

There's a certain pathos to this one...

Lisa Freedom says:
March 9, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Should we address postcards to Mike Whitby or Detainee ‘B’

Detainee B? How small is this prison that can only hold 26 inmates? Try to 'The freeman known as Mike of the family Whitby'. Failing that 'Idiot, Liverpool' should do it.

[tsig]

Just look at the lunacy in that blog...I love this part:


So, by fighting the MAN based on legal mythology the guy goes to jail, and in response the FOTLers are going to...send him postcards. What? According to their mythology, the court has acted illegally and MUST run out of the court room/declare them sovereign/whatever when they do the right legal magic, and they all agree they did the right legal magic.

So if doing the FOTL legal magic right ends up, AT BEST, with throwing your members in jail for contempt...how exactly is that a victory again?

That's OK the FOTL's best legal minds are at work.

informedminds says:
March 9, 2011 at 3:09 pm

Was it civil or criminal contempt? – I ask, but I’ve little doubt that it was civil, AND
undocumented AND unverified AND absolutely no evidence of a contract produced upon which he was obligated to perform. They are pathetic behind their ragged veil of assumed legitimacy, and WE are portrayed as the lunatic fringe too, there’s irony for you.

[Brian1709]

Writing postcards to a man in prison who supposedly can't be sent to prison would certainly make most people question their beliefs.

There's a certain pathos to this one...

Lisa Freedom says:
March 9, 2011 at 4:52 pm
Should we address postcards to Mike Whitby or Detainee ‘B’

Detainee B? How small is this prison that can only hold 26 inmates? Try to 'The freeman known as Mike of the family Whitby'. Failing that 'Idiot, Liverpool' should do it.

She could avoid confusion by sending a donation to the BNP.

[Stacey Grove]

So, by fighting the MAN based on legal mythology the guy goes to jail, and in response the FOTLers are going to...send him postcards. What?

That's how pathetic they are.
They believe that the numbers will be so great that the prison will be unable to cope with the deluge of mail.
Another victory.

[jargon buster]

send him a postcard????
And stick a stamp on and subsidise the ROYAL MAIL.

[timhau]

send him a postcard????
And stick a stamp on and subsidise the ROYAL MAIL.

No, just leave the card in a mailbox with "I do not consent to postage fees" written in the space The Man wants the sane sheeple to put their valuable stamps.

[Ladewig]

Detainee B? How small is this prison that can only hold 26 inmates? Try to 'The freeman known as Mike of the family Whitby'. Failing that 'Idiot, Liverpool' should do it.

You've never been to Liverpool, have you?

[Mojo]

No, just leave the card in a mailbox with "I do not consent to postage fees" written in the space The Man wants the sane sheeple to put their valuable stamps.


You strike a cruel blow against British philately.

[Stacey Grove]

You strike a cruel blow against British philately.

Well, as the fishmonger's daughter once said: "Philately will get you nowhere!"

[geni]

Still I'm curious. Where did they get over 100 people from? Most web based movements can't manage that. Did they manage to tap into a local EDL group or something?

[zooterkin]

Still I'm curious. Where did they get over 100 people from? Most web based movements can't manage that. Did they manage to tap into a local EDL group or something?

Did you miss these posts?

The jailed man appears to be Mike Whitby of the Liverpool BNP.

http://unitedwrexham.co.uk/2010/12/05/mike-whitby-political-heavyweight/

Nice company these FOTLs keep. Whitby's the white haired bloke with glasses in the court 'seizure' video (BTW, note the wry smiles of the two coppers at 5.21)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=G8JL4oDRx54#at=323

It looks like a sizable contingent came from Merseyside BNP were in attendance. The revolting Peter Tierney was certainly there (google him). You tell a lot about a person or organisation by the company they keep :mad:

[geni]

Are the BNP usualy able to field that number of people though? People tend to be kinda touchy about being openly involved with it. Thats why the EDL seemed more likely.

[Grassy Knowlington]

Are the BNP usualy able to field that number of people though? People tend to be kinda touchy about being openly involved with it. Thats why the EDL seemed more likely.

Is the BNP or EDL linked with Lawful Rebellion & the British Constitution Group?

[D'rok]

Truest words ever spoken by an FOTLer:

I feel like my brain is made of "freeman mush"

http://forum.worldfreemansociety.org/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=9192


See the link for evidence that his self-assessment is spot on.

[Stacey Grove]

Truest words ever spoken by an FOTLer:



See the link for evidence that his self-assessment is spot on.

Am I reading this right?

If that court is not afraid of the truth there should be no objection to my entering the truth into the record. Either the court is about truth and justice or it's not. The intent of my appearance is to clear up any misunderstandings for anyone who does not understand what a CQV trust is, how performance bonds are created and what is actually securing our debt in this, the land of the FREE.
His intention is to educate the court on it's misunderstandings?

[Horatius]

I have a judge flat out lying to me and telling me it's a republic and it's a court of law.


Wow, those bastards!

[D'rok]

Am I reading this right?


His intention is to educate the court on it's misunderstandings?Public service, freeman-delusion style.

Wow, those bastards!Yeah, it's like Agent Smith telling Neo that submitting to the Matrix is freedom.

(Sadly, that seems to be pretty much exactly how many of these loons see the world).

[dudalb]

Public service, freeman-delusion style.

Yeah, it's like Agent Smith telling Neo that submitting to the Matrix is freedom.

(Sadly, that seems to be pretty much exactly how many of these loons see the world).

"V For Vendetta" is also big with these kooks.

[LukeB]

Maybe if they watched some better movies....

[patchbunny]

Looks like those sovereign citizens are at it again, this time in Alaska.

Alaska militia charged in kidnap-murder plot (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42041567/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/)

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Five Fairbanks-area residents involved in a loose-knit militia group have been arrested in connection with a plot to kidnap or kill Alaska state troopers and a local judge, federal and state authorities said on Friday.

The group includes Francis "Schaeffer" Cox, the 26-year-old leader of the so-called "citizen sovereignty" movement, which considers individuals to be sovereign nations not subject to any state or federal laws.

Cox and his associates had developed an extensive plan to launch their attacks, the troopers said in a statement.

They had already conducted extensive surveillance on Fairbanks-area troopers, locating the homes of two troopers, and acquired a large cache of weapons, some of them illegal, according to the statement.

According to prosecutors, the weapons amassed by the group included machine guns, multiple assault rifles, multiple pineapple grenades, at least one grenade launcher, dozens of high-powered rifles and pistols and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

More at the linked site.

*****

Wonder how things will go if he refuses to contract with the court.

[D'rok]

Big news! The Illimuminati have finally been revealed by the tireless research of an FOTLer warrior. The Illumintati is...CANADA! And its nefarious tool of world slavery is..The Government of Canada's terminology and linguistic data bank.

The Corporations Act is the Supreme Act of Canada.....the USA....and every other single country on the planet save, for the ones you can count on the fingers of one hand.
The Official language of terms used in contracts around the entire world comes from Canada.
Corporations world wide rely exclusively on Canada to produce the style & terms used in every national, international and private contract which may be disputed at the Hague or any other U.N. sponsered court.

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059746940&postcount=44

I have seen the enemy, and he likes bacon and hockey!

[therival58]

does anyone know where to access volume 19 of CJS (Corpus Juris Sec.)? I won't pretend to know what that is, but it's quoted here:

In Volume 19, CJS (Corpus Juris Sec.) § 968 one finds the statement that “The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a State.” The above case is cited as the authority.
http://www.reddit.com/r/CommonLaw/comments/79ra9/is_the_us_a_corporation/

This is very strange and doesnt even make sense so I would like to know the context.

[therival58]

Big news! The Illimuminati have finally been revealed by the tireless research of an FOTLer warrior. The Illumintati is...CANADA! And its nefarious tool of world slavery is..The Government of Canada's terminology and linguistic data bank.

I have seen the enemy, and he likes bacon and hockey!

Maybe Robert Menard is involved then, eh?

[Horatius]

does anyone know where to access volume 19 of CJS (Corpus Juris Sec.)? I won't pretend to know what that is, but it's quoted here:


http://www.reddit.com/r/CommonLaw/comments/79ra9/is_the_us_a_corporation/

This is very strange and doesnt even make sense so I would like to know the context.



I'll say it doesn't make sense. Near the beginning, he states, "The legal definition of a "foreign corporation" is different from the colloquial use of the phrase." But by the end of the essay, he's talking about the US as a foreign corporation, in the entirely colloquial sense of the term, and drawing the usual FoTLer conclusions on that basis. So he's not even being internally consistent.

This is pseudo-scholarship. It has the outward appearance of scholarship, but lacks the rigour of real scholarship.

[therival58]

I'll say it doesn't make sense. Near the beginning, he states, "The legal definition of a "foreign corporation" is different from the colloquial use of the phrase." But by the end of the essay, he's talking about the US as a foreign corporation, in the entirely colloquial sense of the term, and drawing the usual FoTLer conclusions on that basis. So he's not even being internally consistent.

This is pseudo-scholarship. It has the outward appearance of scholarship, but lacks the rigour of real scholarship.

But what is "Corpus Juris Sec"?

BTW, look at this link he quotes the same quote from CJS except this time its in volume 20, not 19:p
http://www.sovereign-citizenship.net/04_usinc.html

the statement by former Speaker James Traficant, Jr. is interesting though

"It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent, H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.” --United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33

This thread claims the original speech "was altered in the official US records to conceal the truth".
http://www.dailypaul.com/70415/u-s-congressional-record-march-17-1993-vol-33-page-h-1303

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17157750/ExCongressman-James-Traficants-Statement-in-the-Congressional-Record-March-17-1993-Vol-33-Page-H1303
I'm not sure how they can substantiate that claim.

[jargon buster]

therival58
you avoided my previous post asking you what your stance was and now seem to post pro fmotl links and pretend you want verification of the content.
Just come clean and we can then discuss things properly rather than from a false premise.

[therival58]

therival58
you avoided my previous post asking you what your stance was and now seem to post pro fmotl links and pretend you want verification of the content.
Just come clean and we can then discuss things properly rather than from a false premise.

JB,

I'm not masquerading my opinion the fact is if you google CJS 20 or 19 all you come up with are pro FOTL sites, and I wanted to point out that they seem to flip flop between volumes 19 and 20 of CJS for that "foreign corporation" quote.

And in all honestly, I just came across that "supposed" quote by Rep. Traficant from the 1993 U S Congressional Record.

I won't lie when I say I wanted others to see it and see if they're heard it touted before.

But if you get the impression I am FOTL advocate masquerading as a skeptic, let me shoot that down right away. If I find sources non-FOTL I will be sure to post them

[jargon buster]

stop dodging the question
What is your stance on the FMOTL concept and do you believe it has validity in law.

[Horatius]

But what is "Corpus Juris Sec"?

BTW, look at this link he quotes the same quote from CJS except this time its in volume 20, not 19:p
http://www.sovereign-citizenship.net/04_usinc.html




I have no idea what that is, I'll leave that for people who might actually know about it. I was just commenting on the obvious contradictions in his post. Even if that's a real source, and a real quote, his conclusions are internally inconsistent.



the statement by former Speaker James Traficant, Jr. is interesting though



This thread claims the original speech "was altered in the official US records to conceal the truth".
http://www.dailypaul.com/70415/u-s-congressional-record-march-17-1993-vol-33-page-h-1303

http://www.scribd.com/doc/17157750/ExCongressman-James-Traficants-Statement-in-the-Congressional-Record-March-17-1993-Vol-33-Page-H1303
I'm not sure how they can substantiate that claim.


That's a classical example of what Neil deGrasse Tyson was talking about in this quote I posted to another thread:


Neil deGrasse Tyson had a good twitter post (http://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/56010861382336513) on this last week:


Conspiracy theorists are those who claim coverups whenever insufficient data exists to support what they're sure is true.



They know it's a real quote, but they can't prove it because it was "covered up". :rolleyes:

What really saddens me is that there are people out there who actually seem willing to accept an argument like that.

[Horatius]

JB,

I'm not masquerading my opinion the fact is if you google CJS 20 or 19 all you come up with are pro FOTL sites, and I wanted to point out that they seem to flip flop between volumes 19 and 20 of CJS for that "foreign corporation" quote.



If you get involved in researching conspiracy theory claims, you'll see a lot more of that. It's the CT echo chamber effect; one guy, somewhere, somewhen, made up a quote, and because it supports their world view, fellow CTers cut and paste the quote to all of their websites, with none of them bothering to check to see if it's accurate, or even real.

Every now and then, we see someone post a list of quotes that "proves" some CT or other, and every time I've tried to track any of these quotes to their original source, I've found two things: 1) large numbers of CT sites that have the exact same quotes and citations, and 2) the original source is either fake, mis-quoted, altered, or taken so far out of its original context as to completely alter its meaning.

[jargon buster]

One of the best examples is "unrebutted affidavit", just Google it and see for yourself.

[therival58]

stop dodging the question
What is your stance on the FMOTL concept and do you believe it has validity in law.

If you want an answer, I will give it to you:

As of now, I do not see sufficient evidence to support the "Freeman of the Land" legal claims.

[dafydd]

If you want an answer, I will give it to you:

As of now, I do not see sufficient evidence to support the "Freeman of the Land" legal claims.

Or any evidence.

[therival58]

I would like to discuss the issue of sovereignty.

FOTLers often use the term "Freeman" and "Sovereign" synonymously.

They will say that "no one is above the law", and the constitution protects our "Sovereign" status, with our "leaders" (president, police officers, members of congress), being the servants, serving us. But, (according to FOTLers, our status as "sovereign" has been eroded over time).

According to the 1856 edition of Bouvier's law dictionary, Sovereign, and Sovereignty are defined as follows:


SOVEREIGNTY.The union and exercise of all human power possessed in a state; it is a combination of all power; it is the power to do everything in a state without accountability; to make laws, to execute and to apply them: to impose and collect taxes, and, levy, contributions; to make war or peace; to form treaties of alliance or of commerce with foreign nations, and the like. Story on the Const. §207.

2. Abstractedly, sovereignty resides in the body of the nation and belongs to the people. But these powers are generally exercised by delegation.

3. When analysed, sovereignty is naturally divided into three great powers; namely, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary; the first is the power to make new laws, and to correct and repeal the old; the second is the power to execute the laws both at home and abroad; and the last is the power to apply the laws to particular facts; to judge the disputes which arise among the citizens, and to punish crimes.

4. Strictly speaking, in our republican forms of government, the absolute sovereignty of the nation is in the people of the nation; (q. v.) and the residuary sovereignty of each state, not granted to any of its public functionaries, is in the people of the state. (q. v.) 2 Dall. 471; and vide, generally, 2 Dall. 433, 455; 3 Dall. 93; 1 Story, Const. §208; 1 Toull. n. 20 Merl. Reper. h. t.

SOVEREIGN. A chief ruler with supreme power; one possessing sovereignty. (q. v.) It is also applied to a king or other magistrate with limited powers.

2. In the United States the sovereignty resides in the body of the people. Vide Rutherf. Inst. 282.


So if I am reading that right, its clear that FOTLers tout definition #1 of 'Sovereignty' as their unofficial slogan. But they miss definition #2

[Elizabeth I]

So if I am reading that right, its clear that FOTLers tout definition #1 of 'Sovereignty' as their unofficial slogan. But they miss definition #2
From the little I've heard about footlers, they misinterpret Definition No. 2 as applying to each individual personally ("in the body of the people"), in each person's body, so that your sovereignty resides in your body, my sovereignty in mine, etc.

But I think they also deny that they are people, so I could be wrong and their craziness could be based on something else entirely.

[Bosozoku]

But what is "Corpus Juris Sec"?



Corpus Juris Secundum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpus_juris_secundum) is a legal encyclopedia. Similar to Black's Legal Dictionary, it is not a binding legal authority. It is just a kind of handy restatement of the law. I tried to look up the citation you were discussing, but I couldn't find anything. But rest assured, it doesn't say what the Freemen says it does.

For what it's worth, I once heard a story that one particular law firm said they would fire any associate who cited CJS in their legal briefs.

[Horatius]

For what it's worth, I once heard a story that one particular law firm said they would fire any associate who cited CJS in their legal briefs.



...because CJS is giving away the Real Secrets(tm) they want covered up! :boxedin:

[Bosozoku]

Just for kicks, I went ahead and looked this up. The proper citation is 19 C.J.S. Corporations § 968.

The basic proposition here seems to be that, for the purposes of a particular state taxation statute, the United States is considered a "foreign" (out of state) corporation rather than a "domestic" (in state) corporation. The question came up because New York enacted a state taxation statute which allowed them to tax domestic (in state) corporations when they inherited property. Someone died and bequeathed the United States property, and New York argued that the United States government was an in-state corporation and that they could tax them on that inheritance. The state court and Supreme Court held that the United States was an out of state corporation for the purposes of this statute.

I think the confusion here is that the Freemen are saying that because the United States government sometimes functions as a corporation, the United States is only a corporation. This case kind of shows that sometimes we have to apply corporate law to transactions entered into by the United States government. There is no court or statute saying that the United States government has ceased to be a body politic.

[Horatius]

Just for kicks, I went ahead and looked this up. The proper citation is 19 C.J.S. Corporations § 968.

The basic proposition here seems to be that, for the purposes of a particular state taxation statute, the United States is considered a "foreign" (out of state) corporation rather than a "domestic" (in state) corporation.



Do they give any clear definitions of these terms? The Fotlers seem to have concluded that "foreign" is automatically "not American". Was this the usage the court intended? I expect not.


Hmmm....

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/foreign

for·eign (fôrn, fr-)
adj.
1. Located away from one's native country: on business in a foreign city.
2. Of, characteristic of, or from a place or country other than the one being considered: a foreign custom.
3. Conducted or involved with other nations or governments; not domestic: foreign trade.
4. Situated in an abnormal or improper place in the body and typically introduced from outside: a foreign object in the eye.
5. Not natural; alien: Jealousy is foreign to her nature.
6. Not germane; irrelevant.
7. Subject to the jurisdiction of another political unit.


I expect they were using #7 there....The US is not subject to the jurisdiction of New York State, after all.

[Horatius]

for·eign [ fáwrən ]


adjective
Definition:

1. of another country: relating to, from, or located in a country or countries other than your own
She speaks three foreign languages.

2. dealing with another country: dealing with or involved with a country or countries other than your own
foreign policy

3. coming from outside: introduced from outside into a place where it does not belong, often in the human body

4. uncharacteristic: not usually associated with a particular person or thing
Such outbursts are quite foreign to her nature.

5. irrelevant: not related or relevant ( formal )
observations that are foreign to the matter in hand

6. law beyond jurisdiction: being beyond the jurisdiction of an area or a country
foreign waters


http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/foreign.html

[Bosozoku]

The cases cited in C.J.S. didn't specifically define what they meant by "foreign" corporation, and I suspect that was because the writers thought it was obvious from the context. In the legal sense, "foreign" also means out of state. Here is the Black's definition of "foreign corporation":

foreign corporation. (18c) A corporation that was organized and chartered under the laws of another state, government, or country . . . [for example,] in Arizona, a California corporation is said to be a foreign corporation.

Thankfully the Black's definition clarifies by example that "foreign" means "out of state" as well as "out of country." You'd figure the FOTLers would know this, given that they love to misquote Black's.

As I said earlier, Black's isn't binding legal authority. However, this comports with the accepted legal definition of "foreign corporation" as I understand it, and this was the understanding of that definition in the cases cited by C.J.S. I'm sure you're as shocked as I am that the Freemen got this one wrong.

[Horatius]

Oh, a Black's reference! Imagine all the FoTLer brains melting trying to get around that one! :D

[tsig]

Oh, a Black's reference! Imagine all the FoTLer brains melting trying to get around that one! :D

It'd be a mighty small puddle.

[jargon buster]

You'd figure the FOTLers would know this, given that they love to misquote Black's.
They are quite specific as to which edition to use when the definition fits the agenda of the day.

[therival58]

Just for kicks, I went ahead and looked this up. The proper citation is 19 C.J.S. Corporations § 968.

The basic proposition here seems to be that, for the purposes of a particular state taxation statute, the United States is considered a "foreign" (out of state) corporation rather than a "domestic" (in state) corporation. The question came up because New York enacted a state taxation statute which allowed them to tax domestic (in state) corporations when they inherited property. Someone died and bequeathed the United States property, and New York argued that the United States government was an in-state corporation and that they could tax them on that inheritance. The state court and Supreme Court held that the United States was an out of state corporation for the purposes of this statute.

I think the confusion here is that the Freemen are saying that because the United States government sometimes functions as a corporation, the United States is only a corporation. This case kind of shows that sometimes we have to apply corporate law to transactions entered into by the United States government. There is no court or statute saying that the United States government has ceased to be a body politic.

Cool, thanks for finding the context!:cool:

[Horatius]

Cool, thanks for finding the context!:cool:



See, that's why I leave those bits for the people who know what they're talking about.

[therival58]

AH, this is a good summary of everything. So they say it comes from the 14th amendment? Has anyone heard other "strawman" origins? :confused:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52856826/Capitus-Diminutio-Legalese-Statutes-and-Corporate-Law


Split from here (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=155358).

[jargon buster]

So they say it comes from the 14th amendment?

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

yes your right therival58 it did, thats obvious when you read it.

[cocana]

AH, this is a good summary of everything. So they say it comes from the 14th amendment? Has anyone heard other "strawman" origins? :confused:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52856826/Capitus-Diminutio-Legalese-Statutes-and-Corporate-Law

The point is being probed on Icke's at the moment. Only thing is that Yozhik seems hell bent on producing evidence that contras the very point he's making.


http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=165445&page=22

[cocana]

And don't forget to read this one - http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059843994&postcount=243 - it's a hoot. It would appear to be a stundie contender too.

Man is not a human being, apparently. I seem to recall Grndslm running that argument too and informing us that he wasn't human.

Poor chaps, the pair of them.

[Paul]

The point is being probed on Icke's at the moment.I think probed gives it far too much credit, some people are demonstrating that they are too stupid to understand that extending the common meaning does not remove it.

[Stacey Grove]

And don't forget to read this one - http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059843994&postcount=243 - it's a hoot. It would appear to be a stundie contender too.

Man is not a human being, apparently. I seem to recall Grndslm running that argument too and informing us that he wasn't human.

Poor chaps, the pair of them.

LOL
yozhik wrote on Ickes:

Whilst a human being may legally be a person, it is inherently flawed to then state that a human being IS a man or woman.

IF ... a man has a person, and
IF ... a person is a human being and a human being is a person,
THEN ... a man has a human being.

It does not support the conclusion that a man IS a human being.
Isn't it disturbing that these people are walking amongst us?

[cocana]

LOL
yozhik wrote on Ickes:


Isn't it disturbing that these people are walking amongst us?

He doesn't know when to stop for breath. He's just done it again -

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059844033&postcount=244

The natural person IS a legal personality.


PRECISELY!

But I guess he now needs to go back and explain how a natural person isn't a person = isn't a human being = not man or woman = not himself, so as to be consistent with his previous post.

What a menard, as they say!

:D

[cocana]

I'm now struggling to keep track of his idiocy. Try this one -

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059844130&postcount=246

There are two types of person;
1. natural [YES] [a man considered as an individual] [UH, YES], and
2. artificial [YES] [to him considered as related to others] [UH?].

One describes that person which mimics man; the other pertains to that which operates as an aggregate or collective [WHAT'S GOING ON?].

Rights are annexed [the act of attaching, uniting, or joining together in a physical sense; consolidating.] to the persons; not the living man [NOOOOOOOOO!!!].



He's winning, he's almost there, the tape is in sight..... Oh no he's tripped over his laces again.

[Toke]

Those guys would have flunked even as scriptwriters for matrix.

[therival58]

yes your right therival58 it did, thats obvious when you read it.

sorry but what are you referring to by "it"?

By "It" I was referring to where the FOTLers get the idea of strawman and the american people becoming "corporate slaves", and according to what I posted they believe this whole thing originates from the 14th amendment.

See here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4xV4MTnCdc

Maybe your post was sarcasm, forgive me if it was.:o

[jargon buster]

sorry but what are you referring to by "it"?
the 14th amendment of course, when you read it the strawman theory jumps off the page.

[therival58]

the 14th amendment of course, when you read it the strawman theory jumps off the page.

It must be the fatigue but I am not seeing it. When you say the strawman theory "jumps out" reading the 14th amendment, I am only seeing it *vaguely* in section 1. What else am I missing JB? :confused:

[jargon buster]

Keep reading it, maybe let your eyes relax, a bit like one of those magic eye books.

[therival58]

Keep reading it, maybe let your eyes relax, a bit like one of those magic eye books.

hey maybe there is a legal conspiracy here - an ignorant simpleton like me cannot see through the legalese in the 14th amendment that secretly means we all have a strawman:D

[abaddon]

hey maybe there is a legal conspiracy here - an ignorant simpleton like me cannot see through the legalese in the 14th amendment that secretly means we all have a strawman:D

Note to therival58: the world is much much bigger than the United States of Arrogance

[Brian1709]

hey maybe there is a legal conspiracy here - an ignorant simpleton like me cannot see through the legalese in the 14th amendment that secretly means we all have a strawman:D

It's quite simple really. Read the 14th amendment and watch the video which you linked. Which do you believe? Does the amendment define US citizenship or is it a huge conspiracy to sell all Americans into slavery by the artful captitalization of United States and by using the term subject to jurisdiction.

It's your choice.

[Sledge]

Those guys would have flunked even as scriptwriters for matrix.

Let's not go crazy here.

[abaddon]

It's quite simple really. Read the 14th amendment and watch the video which you linked. Which do you believe? Does the amendment define US citizenship or is it a huge conspiracy to sell all Americans into slavery by the artful captitalization of United States and by using the term subject to jurisdiction.

It's your choice.

Your 14th amendment is entirely irrelevant. I do not live in the US of Arrogance, nor does most of the population of this planet.

Feel free to explain why your rules obviate any others.

[Brian1709]

Your 14th amendment is entirely irrelevant. I do not live in the US of Arrogance, nor does most of the population of this planet.

Feel free to explain why your rules obviate any others.

It was a reply to therival58.

[therival58]

the FOTLers concept of strawman and the american people becoming "corporate slaves" originates from the 14th amendment.

See here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4xV4MTnCdc


hey maybe there is a legal conspiracy here - an ignorant simpleton like me cannot see through the legalese in the 14th amendment that secretly means we all have a strawman:D

It's quite simple really. Read the 14th amendment and watch the video which you linked. Which do you believe? Does the amendment define US citizenship or is it a huge conspiracy to sell all Americans into slavery by the artful captitalization of United States and by using the term subject to jurisdiction.

It's your choice.

So you're telling me that the language in the 14th amendment is worded to actually accommodate and make the case for the FOTLers claims? The video posted discussed how the original definition of 'citizen' was to be a citizen of a US state, thus maintaining individual sovereignty there, not a citizen of the district of columbia federal government.

If that is the case, what about the supremacy clause? Doesn't that provision in the constitution trump this idea?

[Slayhamlet]

Your 14th amendment is entirely irrelevant. I do not live in the US of Arrogance, nor does most of the population of this planet.

Feel free to explain why your rules obviate any others.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that you were part of the conversation. Had you followed it you'd know that they were discussing an American FOTL claim from the start. Perhaps you're confused by the thread title? Some thread drift is allowed here, especially when we're 138 pages in. There's only so much FOTL in the world; no point in limiting the discussion to one country.

[therival58]

By the way, on the discussion of 14th amendment and citizenship, can anyone get full text copies of these court cases?

"The 14th Amendment creates and defines citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States, except by first becoming a citizen of some state."

United States v. Anthony (1874), 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (No. 14,459), 830.

"Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state."

Crosse v. Board of Supervisors of Elections (1966) 221 A.2d 431 p.433

Gardina v. Board of Registrars, 160 Ala. 155, 48 S. 788, 791 (1909)

[jargon buster]

So you're telling me that the language in the 14th amendment is worded to actually accommodate and make the case for the FOTLers claims?
therival58
Its actually down to you to make your mind up, read the 14th Amendment and watch your video, then make up your mind, why do you want people to tell you what to believe?

If that is the case, what about the supremacy clause? Doesn't that provision in the constitution trump this idea?
What about the supremacy clause and what impact does that have on the FMOTL idea?

[therival58]

therival58
Its actually down to you to make your mind up, read the 14th Amendment and watch your video, then make up your mind, why do you want people to tell you what to believe?


I'm not entirely convinced by the FOTL interpretation of the 14th amendment but I won't completely dismiss it either. The video brought up some interesting points regarding how it established the people under the 'jurisdiction' of the US government which is opposed to the 9th and 10th amendments.

I'll have to see some court cases to verify this.


What about the supremacy clause and what impact does that have on the FMOTL idea?

here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause
Striking similarities exist between the supremacy clause and the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

Both of these are parts of the Federal Constitution that define the Federal Government's supremacy over the States regarding laws that have been delegated to the federal government in accordance with the Tenth Amendment. A difference between the two, however, is that whereas the Supremacy Clause deals with the relationship between the Federal Government and the states, the Fourteenth Amendment deals with the relationships among the Federal Government, the States, and the citizens of the United States.

basically, from what I understand, FOTLers assert that before the 14th amendment, citizenship was considered in accordance with a state one resides, not the entire US (e.g. citizen of the sovereign state of Virginia). But according to the interpretation of the supremacy clause, federal law reigns supreme, so they would be considered "Citizens of the United states" regardless.

[Brian1709]

So you're telling me that the language in the 14th amendment is worded to actually accommodate and make the case for the FOTLers claims? The video posted discussed how the original definition of 'citizen' was to be a citizen of a US state, thus maintaining individual sovereignty there, not a citizen of the district of columbia federal government.



Not at all. I was just saying make your own mind up. Sorry if I was unclear.

[Horatius]

By the way, on the discussion of 14th amendment and citizenship, can anyone get full text copies of these court cases?

"The 14th Amendment creates and defines citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the United States, except by first becoming a citizen of some state."


United States v. Anthony (1874), 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (No. 14,459), 830.





This is a beautiful example of the CT echo chamber effect. Google that exact phrase, and you'll find numerous CT type sites with the exact same quote. Well, actually it's a "quote mine" and a slightly inaccurate one, because they exclude the parts that follow directly after it:



The 14th Amendment created and defined citizenship of the United States. It had long been contended, and had been held by
many learned authorities, and had never been judicially decided to the contrary, that there was no such thing as a citizen of the
United States, except as that condition arose from citizenship of some State. No mode existed, it was said, of obtaining a
citizenship of the United States except by first becoming a citizen of some State. This question is now at rest. The 14th Amendment defines and declares who should be citizens of the United States, to wit: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The latter qualification was intended to exclude the children of foreign representatives and the like. With this qualification every person born in the United States or naturalized is declared to be a citizen of the United States, and of the State wherein he resides.


http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/anthony/courtinstr.html


From the context, it's clear that the quoted portion found on CT sites was discussing the situation as it existed prior to the ratification of the 14th amendment. But from the later parts, it's clear that the judge was saying that this was no longer the case, due to the 14th amendment. Far from supporting the notion that there's no citizenship aside from being citizen of a particular state, he's explicitly saying that such is no longer the case.

The really sad part is, in not having the intellectual curiosity or capacity to bother finding out if the quote is at all accurate, they miss out on some material that would be even better for supporting the Fotler mythos, such as this:

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/anthony/sentencing.html

Judge Hunt -(Ordering the defendant to stand up), "Has the prisoner anything to say why sentence shall not be pronounced?"

Miss Anthony- Yes, your honor, I have many things to say; for in your ordered verdict of guilty, you have trampled under foot
every vital principle of our government. My natural rights, my civil rights, my political rights, my judicial rights, are all alike
ignored. Robbed of the fundamental privilege of citizenship, I am degraded from the status of a citizen to that of a subject; and
not only myself individually, but all of my sex, are, by your honor's verdict, doomed to political subjection under this, so-called,
form of government.

Judge Hunt- The Court cannot listen to a rehearsal of arguments the prisoner's counsel has already consumed three hours in
presenting.

Miss Anthony- May it please your honor, I am not arguing the question, but simply stating the reasons why sentence cannot,
in justice, be pronounced against me. Your denial of my citizen's right to vote, is the denial of my right of consent as one of the
governed, the denial of my right of representation as one of the taxed, the denial of my right to a trial by a jury of my peers as
an offender against law, therefore, the denial of my sacred rights to life, liberty, property and-

[Horatius]

"Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state."


Crosse v. Board of Supervisors of Elections (1966) 221 A.2d 431 p.433

Gardina v. Board of Registrars, 160 Ala. 155, 48 S. 788, 791 (1909)



This one is a bit more complex. But of course they brush all that under the rug

http://md.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19660701_0040168.MD.htm/qx

The facts are not in dispute. The appellant was born in the West Indies and immigrated to the United States in June of 1957. He and his family established their residence in Crisfield, Maryland. Upon reaching his eighteenth birthday, and upon signing his Declaration of Intention to become a citizen

[243 Md Page 558]

of the United States under the federal Naturalization law, he enlisted in the United States Army, served for approximately three years and was given an honorable discharge in 1960. He established his residence in Salisbury, Maryland, and matriculated at the Maryland State College from which he was graduated in 1964. He then entered the University of Maryland Law School and has successfully completed his first year. In May of 1964 he established his home in Baltimore City, where he has since resided. On April 29, 1966, he became a naturalized citizen of the United States and a registered voter of the State of Maryland. On May 26, 1966, the appellant filed his candidacy for the office of Sheriff of Baltimore City with the Board of Supervisors of Elections of Baltimore City. His Certificate of Nomination was notarized and accepted, as was his filing fee of $150. He received the usual material given to all candidates who file for public office. On June 4, 1966, he received a letter from the Board advising him that he did not qualify as a candidate for the office of Sheriff because he did not become a citizen of the United States until April 29, 1966, and that under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution he did not become a citizen of the State of Maryland until that date. The Board acted on the advice of its counsel, the Attorney General of Maryland, and returned the application to the appellant together with the filing fee.

The court below held and the Board contends that the appellant did not become a citizen of Maryland, under the provisions of the Maryland Constitution, until he became a citizen of the United States, and is therefore ineligible to be Sheriff of Baltimore City because he was not a United States citizen at least five years preceding the election. We disagree.

Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state. United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549 (1875); Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36, 73-74 (1873); and see Short v. State, 80 Md. 392, 401-02, 31 Atl. 322 (1895). See also Spear, State Citizenship, 16 Albany L.J. 24 (1877). Citizenship of the United States is defined by the Fourteenth Amendment and federal statutes, but the requirements for citizenship

[243 Md Page 559]

of a state generally depend not upon definition but the constitutional or statutory context in which the term is used. Risewick v. Davis, 19 Md. 82, 93 (1862); Halaby v. Board of Directors of University of Cincinnati, 162 Ohio St. 290, 293, 123 N. E. 2d 3 (1954) and authorities therein cited.

The decisions illustrate the diversity of the term's usage. In Field v. Adreon, 7 Md. 209 (1854), our predecessors held that an unnaturalized foreigner, residing and doing business in this State, was a citizen of Maryland within the meaning of the attachment laws. The Court held that the absconding debtor was a citizen of the State for commercial or business purposes, although not necessarily for political purposes. Dorsey v. Kyle, 30 Md. 512, 518 (1869), is to the same effect. Judge Alvey, for the Court, said in that case, that "the term citizen, used in the formula of the affidavit prescribed by the 4th section of the Article of the Code referred to, is to be taken as synonymous with inhabitant or permanent resident."

There is no express requirement in the Maryland Constitution that sheriffs be United States citizens. Voters must be, under Article I, Section 1, but Article IV, Section 44 does not require that sheriffs be voters. A person does not have to be a voter to be a citizen of either the United States or of a state, as in the case of native-born minors. In Maryland, from 1776 to 1802, the Constitution contained requirements of property

[243 Md Page 561]

ownership for the exercise of the franchise; there was no exception as to native-born citizens of the State. Steiner, Citizenship and Suffrage in Maryland (1895) 27, 31.

The Maryland Constitution provides that the Governor, Judges and the Attorney General shall be qualified voters, and therefore, by necessary implication, citizens of the United States. Article II, Section 5, Article IV, Section 2, and Article V, Section 4. The absence of a similar requirement as to the qualifications of sheriffs is significant. So also, in our opinion, is the absence of any period of residence for a sheriff except that he shall have been a citizen of the State for five years. The Governor, Judges and Attorney General in addition to being citizens of the State and qualified voters, must have been a resident of the State for various periods. The conjunction of the requisite period of residence with state citizenship in the qualifications for sheriff strongly indicates that, as in the authorities above referred to, state citizenship, as used in the constitutional qualifications for this office, was meant to be synonymous with domicile, and that citizenship of the United States is not required, even by implication, as a qualification for this office. The office of sheriff, under our Constitution, is ministerial in nature; a sheriff's function and province is to execute duties prescribed by law. See Buckeye Dev. Corp. v. Brown & Schilling, Inc., 243 Md. 224, 220 A.2d 922 (1966), and the concurring opinion of Le Grand, C.J. in Mayor & City Council of Baltimore v. State ex rel. Bd. of Police, 15 Md. 376, 470, 488-90 (1860).


Under the Fourteenth Amendment all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside, but we find nothing in Reum or any other case which requires that a citizen of a state must also be a citizen of the United States, if no question of federal rights or jurisdiction is involved. As the authorities referred to in the first portion of this opinion evidence, the law is to the contrary.


...but of course, that's not quite as pithy.

[abaddon]

I'm not sure where you got the idea that you were part of the conversation. Had you followed it you'd know that they were discussing an American FOTL claim from the start. Perhaps you're confused by the thread title? Some thread drift is allowed here, especially when we're 138 pages in. There's only so much FOTL in the world; no point in limiting the discussion to one country.

The thread title was The Freeman Movement and England until it was derailed with this irrelevant 14th amendment rot, and the mods had to intervene and split out the 14th Amendment stuff to a separate thread. This thread.

Did you fail to read the thread title at the time you posted?

[therival58]

The thread title was The Freeman Movement and England until it was derailed with this irrelevant 14th amendment rot, and the mods had to intervene and split out the 14th Amendment stuff to a separate thread. This thread.

Did you fail to read the thread title at the time you posted?

Yes, it said the Freeman movement AND England, not IN Englnad, which to me implied a discussion of both the Freeman movement in general, and its relations to England, BUT NOT LIMITED to just England.

[jargon buster]

well done therival58, you are now a fully fledged FMOTL, spinning the meaning of words and phrases to suit an agenda, great stuff.

it only took over 5,400 posts for someone to interpret it that way, what was everyone else thinking

[abaddon]

well done therival58, you are now a fully fledged FMOTL, spinning the meaning of words and phrases to suit an agenda, great stuff.

it only took over 5,400 posts for someone to interpret it that way, what was everyone else thinking

Was it that many? Sweet enola gay!

[therival58]

well done therival58, you are now a fully fledged FMOTL, spinning the meaning of words and phrases to suit an agenda, great stuff.

it only took over 5,400 posts for someone to interpret it that way, what was everyone else thinking

I suppose I should have read the first few pages to understand the thread was just on England, but given how much larger it is compared to other FOTL threads, I thought it was for general discussion of FOTL with the main focus on England, but not limited to other freeman topics.

anyway let's not make a mountain out of an anthill. lesson learned.

[jargon buster]

I sense the OP in the England thread was American anyway so its easy to make that assumption.

[Mojo]

So you're telling me that the language in the 14th amendment is worded to actually accommodate and make the case for the FOTLers claims? The video posted discussed how the original definition of 'citizen' was to be a citizen of a US state, thus maintaining individual sovereignty there, not a citizen of the district of columbia federal government.


Even if this were the case, it wouldn't help the basic FOTLer argument that they are immune from any law that they don't consent to, or the "personal sovereignty" stuff. All it would mean was that they would be citizens of one state (the local state) rather than another (the federal state).

[zooterkin]

Browsing through old issues of popbitch, I came across this from October last year (I think the story itself is a little older):

Bob Inglis, of South Carolina, lost a
vicious Republican primary fight with a
right-wing insurgent named Trey Gowdy
to stand for a Congressional seat.

Inglis said he was amazed that when
he was out canvassing he kept meeting
voters who were convinced that the
numbers on their Social Security cards
meant that they had been bought at birth
by a secret bank.


FOTLers?

[Sledge]

Even if this were the case, it wouldn't help the basic FOTLer argument that they are immune from any law that they don't consent to, or the "personal sovereignty" stuff. All it would mean was that they would be citizens of one state (the local state) rather than another (the federal state).

At best, it wouldn't make any difference. My understanding of American law is that federal law supercedes state law (hence recent cases ruling Chicago gun laws unconstitutional, for instance). If someone insisted that they only recognised the laws of their state, and their state says (as they have to) that they recognise federal law, the individual would still have to recognise federal law to remain within state law.

I am not a lawyer, so that may well be bollocks. I apologise to any lawyers who suffer headaches as a result.

[Spindrift]

Apparently Lindsay Lohan could have gotten out of trouble. Here's a comment posted on the story about her going to jail.

Well we knew that would happen. The corrupt court stands to make to much money off the bond they create on this case. To bad people don't know who they are and how they really have this system rigged against everyone. Her first mistake was hiring an attorney and her second mistake was not knowing who she really is, but oh well, 99% of the population makes the same mistake, If she knew the truth and who she is and what she is not, she would have walked away and the case would be dismissed.


http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/b238102_lindsay_lohan_sentenced_120_days_in.html#i xzz1KMObryTv

It's probably only time before some celeb tries to pull the FMOTL bs and it gets wide exposure.

[jargon buster]

ahem...

http://www.gambling911.com/Wesley-Snipes.jpg

Converted hotlink to regular link. Please see Rule 5.

[therival58]

The site globalistagenda.org claims Canada is a corporation because it is labeled as a company under the US Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) website and files an annual financial reports to the SEC.

My question is, why would the country of Canada be filing annual financial reports with the SEC and why is it called a company?:confused: Do other countries do this?

http://globalistagenda.org/lawMore.htm


The Corporation of Canada (http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000230098&owner=include&count=40)

The above link is to the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the United States. You can see for yourself that Canada is in fact a corporation that files an annual financial report to the SEC. This could have been listed under Finance or Law but the fact is that all law is in fact contract or equity law and thus they are really one and the same. The law of the land is really corporate, equity, contract law.

[jargon buster]

My question is, why would the country of Canada be filing annual financial reports with the SEC and why is it called a company?
Who cares?
Do other countries do this?
google is your friend :)

[Horatius]

The site globalistagenda.org claims Canada is a corporation because it is labeled as a company under the US Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) website and files an annual financial reports to the SEC.

My question is, why would the country of Canada be filing annual financial reports with the SEC and why is it called a company?:confused: Do other countries do this?

http://globalistagenda.org/lawMore.htm



Except if you look at the forms listed on the site they link you to, they're labelled quite clearly:


FORM 18-K/A
AMENDMENT NO. 2
For Foreign Governments and Political Subdivisions Thereof


Canada puts out bonds and borrows money on the open market. Why wouldn't the SEC want a full report of their financial activities, at least so far as they take place on US-controlled markets?

[Skeptic]

Your 14th amendment is entirely irrelevant. I do not live in the US of Arrogance, nor does most of the population of this planet.

And for that reason you are, most likely, not liable to pay USA federal income tax (with some exceptions -- e.g., non-USA citizens working for a US corporation or similar situations).

Feel free to explain why your rules obviate any others.

They don't. He is simply talking about the law in the USA. He is not claiming this is the law elsewhere...

[Bosozoku]

Canada puts out bonds and borrows money on the open market. Why wouldn't the SEC want a full report of their financial activities, at least so far as they take place on US-controlled markets?

That's correct - if you issue a bond in the United States, it must meet SEC requirements, whether you are a regular corporation or a government.

What the FOTL crowd does not seem to understand is that governments need to enter into business transactions every now and again. Because of this, they sometimes have to act as corporations. All very simple, and easily understood by 99.9% of the country. FOTLers, however, seem to think that by virtue of occasionally acting a corporation, that a government ceases to act as a governing body. There is not one authority to suggest this is true, and yet they hinge many of their "legal theories" on this.

[therival58]

Except if you look at the forms listed on the site they link you to, they're labelled quite clearly:

Canada puts out bonds and borrows money on the open market. Why wouldn't the SEC want a full report of their financial activities, at least so far as they take place on US-controlled markets?

Ok I didn't look closely enough thanks for clarifying

[therival58]

There is not one authority to suggest this is true, and yet they hinge many of their "legal theories" on this.

well now they're putting out animated public service announcements so everyone can be confused. :p

Infomatic Films Presents "Meet your Strawman"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

[Bosozoku]

I don't know what to say about that video other than that anyone who watches it and follows through with its advice will end up in debt up to their eyeballs or in jail. It's so insane that there's no point in bothering to address the "argument" it puts forward.

It's like trying to tell a person walking on the street proclaiming that they are Napoleon Bonaparte that they are wrong. What's the point? If they think it's true, then they are crazy and nothing you can say will convince them they are wrong.

[Hektor]

I am a newbie to this whole FMOL stuff. However watching that video made my head hurt. Honestly, if our true representative government was replaced by an evil corporation, then why would they have to create a legal fiction to make money off of you? Couldn't they just do what they do in all dictatorships and just use their monopoly on legal violence to force compliance? Not only that but if they are so corrupt, why would they have to play by the freeman get out of jail/debt/taxes free card? Wouldn't the very definition of corruption imply that the government in that case would just ignore the "real freeman law"?

[therival58]

Not only that but if they are so corrupt, why would they have to play by the freeman get out of jail/debt/taxes free card? Wouldn't the very definition of corruption imply that the government in that case would just ignore the "real freeman law"?

That's why the whole thing doesn't make sense.

[tsig]

well now they're putting out animated public service announcements so everyone can be confused. :p

Infomatic Films Presents "Meet your Strawman"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME7K6P7hlko

When are you going to start putting those ideas into practice?

[therival58]

When are you going to start putting those ideas into practice?

that would be pretty challenging since I have not found any legal evidence to support the video's claims. It does cite Black's Law dictionary but that seems to be the only source FOTLers use. (and its a dictionary)

[Sledge]

I am a newbie to this whole FMOL stuff. However watching that video made my head hurt. Honestly, if our true representative government was replaced by an evil corporation, then why would they have to create a legal fiction to make money off of you? Couldn't they just do what they do in all dictatorships and just use their monopoly on legal violence to force compliance? Not only that but if they are so corrupt, why would they have to play by the freeman get out of jail/debt/taxes free card? Wouldn't the very definition of corruption imply that the government in that case would just ignore the "real freeman law"?

You will never receive answers to these questions. The effect they have on footles is like garlic to a vampire.

[Mojo]

that would be pretty challenging since I have not found any legal evidence to support the video's claims. It does cite Black's Law dictionary but that seems to be the only source FOTLers use. (and its a dictionary)


And an American one at that (the film appeared to be from and relating to the UK). And they always seem to cite out of date editions of it.

[tsig]

that would be pretty challenging since I have not found any legal evidence to support the video's claims. It does cite Black's Law dictionary but that seems to be the only source FOTLers use. (and its a dictionary)

They might claim it's Black's Law but it seems to me it's Brownhole Law.

[tsig]

And an American one at that (the film appeared to be from and relating to the UK). And they always seem to cite out of date editions of it.

They never seem to get that citing a law dictionary to prove the law doesn't apply to you is a bit bizarre.

What they really need to cite are some natural laws like:

The strong eat the weak.

Ignorance is bliss

[SpitfireIX]

Ignorance is bliss


Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise.

--Thomas Gray [italics mine]

[LightinDarkness]

Another sovereign citizen "win"!:


ALBANY -- An anti-government group member apologized Friday for using bogus legal papers to intimidate and attack government officials in Ulster County.

Ed Parenteau was sentenced to 21 months in federal prison for filing false property liens against police officers, an assistant county prosecutor and a town justice. The 53-year-old Chenango County resident said he regretted the scheme and promised to help federal authorities investigate other so-called "paper terrorists."


Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/default/article/Phony-paper-case-apology-1379324.php#ixzz1MLHEsMNJ

Now how exactly can this be? He did the right legal paperwork ritual: he filed false liens against every government official that interfered with his god given right to do whatever he wants (in this case, it was after he was caught trespassing).

But what do you know...the sovereign guru behind this lately victory is none other that Tim Turner, President of the Republic for the united States (we have whole thread about him too!). How is it that the "president" could charge for this information and it not be true?

[tsig]

Where ignorance is bliss, 'tis folly to be wise.

--Thomas Gray [italics mine]

The Where is fotland.:)

[Disbelief]

My wife was watching "Parking Wars" over the weekend, and they were towing some guys car in Detroit. He was going over the usual excuses and suddenly blurted out, "I am a sovereign." In the end, his car was towed.

[jargon buster]

"I am a sovereign." In the end, his car was towed.

You will find all their stories end like that

[dafydd]

My wife was watching "Parking Wars" over the weekend, and they were towing some guys car in Detroit. He was going over the usual excuses and suddenly blurted out, "I am a sovereign." In the end, his car was towed.

No wonder,he was claiming that he was a small defunct gold coin.

[Disbelief]

You will find all their stories end like that

I know, I just started laughing. My wife was trying to figure out what he was saying, and I had to explain how he thought he could use the magic words.

[MNBrant]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

[Cleon]

I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

:nope:

[PGH]

I agree with the green fella. I'm going to keep making fun of them and see if that works out.

[MNBrant]

Well it does sound like the government is going to do something about them. Wonder what it is? Does it involve mancatchers and battering rams?

[kookbreaker]

Well it does sound like the government is going to do something about them. Wonder what it is? Does it involve mancatchers and battering rams?

Do you burn down your house because you saw a flea?

Read the relevant threads in the Conspiracy forum. You'll see that this movement is a bad joke and has no traction.

[e-sabbath]

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/sovereign_citizen_apolgizes_after_trillion-dollar.php

Welp, this would count as a failure, right?

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110513/NEWS/110519910/-1/SITEMAP

Standard 'put liens on the property of everyone I dislike' routine. Wins jailtime and fines.

Edit: I see LightInDarkness got this too.

Edit2: Heeey.

But Parenteau said he realizes the teachings got him in trouble. He even pledged to cooperate in investigations against Turner.
"I'll tell people not to get involved with this guy because he's trouble," Parenteau said.
Federal authorities would not say whether Turner is under investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorney Rick Belliss would only say that other sovereigns are operating in New York and the public is likely to "see other prosecutions at some point."

http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110514/NEWS/105140332


Run, Timmy!

[kookbreaker]

My wife was watching "Parking Wars" over the weekend, and they were towing some guys car in Detroit. He was going over the usual excuses and suddenly blurted out, "I am a sovereign." In the end, his car was towed.

"I'm a sovereign!"

"Great, the space you were parked in isn't. Have fun getting your car back!"

[fromdownunder]

He was going over the usual excuses and suddenly blurted out, "I am a sovereign." In the end, his car was towed.

But he did not fail. They simply did not hear what he said

After all in parking space, no one can hear you scream.

Norm

[SpitfireIX]

But he did not fail. They simply did not hear what he said

After all in parking space, no one can hear you scream.

Norm


:hit:

[KingMerv00]

Well it does sound like the government is going to do something about them. Wonder what it is? Does it involve mancatchers and battering rams?

Nah. They'll punish them when they break the law and point and laugh when they open their mouths.

[KingMerv00]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

You do yourself a disservice when you mischaracterize your political opponents. You waste time fighting phantom foes.

[theprestige]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement.
Not really, no.

Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily.
If they're paying taxes, then no, you're not doing their work for them.

Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws.
We're already punishing them for the crimes they commit. What else is there to do?

I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it.
Put a stop to what? Paying taxes and being punished when they commit crimes? Why would we want to put a stop to those things? Also, last time I checked, these were not valid reasons to prohibit congregation.

There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?
Education didn't work too well, what makes you think re-education would work any better?

[MNBrant]

Wait there's more! The director of the FBI thinks that sovereign citizens are the top domestic terror threat and plans to spend billions to see what they are up to. Here's the link if you don't believe me. It from the vaunted CBS news. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/15/60minutes/main20062666.shtml

[Arisia]

I'm going with the 'point and laugh' crowd.

[KingMerv00]

Wait there's more! The director of the FBI thinks that sovereign citizens are the top domestic terror threat and plans to spend billions to see what they are up to. Here's the link if you don't believe me. It from the vaunted CBS news. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/15/60minutes/main20062666.shtml

Where did you get "billions" from?

In any event, I don't think the sovereign citizen movement is inherently terroristic. They are, however, inherently wrong. They spread pseudolaw and often encourages illegal activities.

If you want to believe in sovereign citizenship, fine. Just don't break the REAL law.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

I just point and laugh. It's so much easier.

[Cleon]

Wait there's more! The director of the FBI thinks that sovereign citizens are the top domestic terror threat and plans to spend billions to see what they are up to. Here's the link if you don't believe me. It from the vaunted CBS news. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/15/60minutes/main20062666.shtml

I read that story earlier today. Help me out here, where exactly does it say that the FBI is going to spend billions of dollars to keep tabs on the SCM? I seem to have missed that.

[MNBrant]

Where did you get "billions" from?

In any event, I don't think the sovereign citizen movement is inherently terroristic. They are, however, inherently wrong. They spread pseudolaw and often encourages illegal activities.

If you want to believe in sovereign citizenship, fine. Just don't break the REAL law.

The US government doesn't know how to spend mere millions. Its pretty clear from the article that the billions being spent to pretend to look for Osama are now going to be used to look for sovereign citizens. There are 300k of them after all. thats like a small city.

[KingMerv00]

Where did you get "billions" from?

Help me out here, where exactly does it say that the FBI is going to spend billions of dollars to keep tabs on the SCM?

The US government doesn't know how to spend mere millions.

Of course they do. Do you actually want me to find a federal program that costs less than 1 billion?

Its pretty clear from the article that the billions being spent to pretend to look for Osama are now going to be used to look for sovereign citizens.

How is that clear?

I'll ask again, where did you get "billions" from? To me, it sounds like you just pulled it out of thin air because it sounded impressive.

[MNBrant]

Of course they do. Do you actually want me to find a federal program that costs less than 1 billion?



How is that clear?

I'll ask again, where did you get "billions" from? To me, it sounds like you just pulled it out of thin air because it sounded impressive.


Geezus you are persistent. I am talking about the spy budget which is a black budget and yes it is both redundant and stupid. It spends billions without oversight. You know citizen informants don't work for free don't you. And you will need alot of them to keep an eye on a 300k strong secret society.

[Cleon]

Geezus you are persistent. I am talking about the spy budget which is a black budget and yes it is both redundant and stupid. It spends billions without oversight. You know citizen informants don't work for free don't you. And you will need alot of them to keep an eye on a 300k strong secret society.

So you're making **** up.

[MNBrant]

So you're making **** up.

Nope I provided a link. Go to the link. The sovereign citizen movement is the next be fat target the FBI is going after.

[Cleon]

Nope I provided a link. Go to the link. The sovereign citizen movement is the next be fat target the FBI is going after.

You did provide a link. The link does not say that the director of the FBI plans to spend billions to watch the SCM. You made that up. Ergo, you're making **** up.

[KingMerv00]

Geezus you are persistent.

Because I'm waiting for evidence. Skeptic boards are like that.

I am talking about the spy budget which is a black budget and yes it is both redundant and stupid. It spends billions without oversight. You know citizen informants don't work for free don't you. And you will need alot of them to keep an eye on a 300k strong secret society.

Your link made no mention of a black budget. Therefore, you presented no evidence.

[Bikewer]

Being in law enforcement, I'm rather concerned about these nutcases. They seem to have a particular problem with law enforcement, and there have been a number of violent confrontations with individuals in this movement.
There was a recent case where several law enforcement officers were killed or wounded before the individuals were stopped.
Time magazine ran a cover article on these folks a couple of months back; they have some very strange ideas and not only about taxation. One is that county sherrifs constitute the highest law-enforcement authority in the US, and essentially anything but such sheriffs and their deputies are not legitimate.
They especiallly hold the FBI and other federal enforcement agencies in contempt and often demand that local sheriffs prohibit such agents from entering their counties or to arrest them if they do.
I don't know how large the total number of these folks is; it seems unlikely that any significant numbers could be attracted to such lunatic ideology..... But who knows.

[MNBrant]

Being in law enforcement, I'm rather concerned about these nutcases. They seem to have a particular problem with law enforcement, and there have been a number of violent confrontations with individuals in this movement.
There was a recent case where several law enforcement officers were killed or wounded before the individuals were stopped.
Time magazine ran a cover article on these folks a couple of months back; they have some very strange ideas and not only about taxation. One is that county sherrifs constitute the highest law-enforcement authority in the US, and essentially anything but such sheriffs and their deputies are not legitimate.
They especiallly hold the FBI and other federal enforcement agencies in contempt and often demand that local sheriffs prohibit such agents from entering their counties or to arrest them if they do.
I don't know how large the total number of these folks is; it seems unlikely that any significant numbers could be attracted to such lunatic ideology..... But who knows.

Yeah there are however quite a few different groups. In fact you could probably say that every group is different. Now about the 300k membership figure. Whats that about? The meetings I have gone to run about 7-10 at most. I do remember them having meetings running like a hundred but most of the people who ran those are in jail or died of old age. The people who are in these groups tend to be older aged folks on social security or near retirement age. They perhaps owe some back taxes but most wouldn't have the means to pay at any rate. That is not to say that all are in this situation though. Heck there might be 300k people out there who believe this now that I think about it. I think you are referring to the freeman. I have heard some things about them but really don't have the interest in wiking them right now. Most of the jokes made about these people are pretty ignorant in my view as these people are usually losing their home or other type of property when they go to court. I really don't see what there is to laugh about.

[Travis]

Considering a Sovereign Citizen group was just busted while in the planning stages of a horrible terrorist attack I'd say that it is very prudent to consider them a huge terrorist threat.

[leftysergeant]

Sovereign Citizens and FOTLs are just members of two different branches of the same movement. Both place themselves above the law.

All of the whacktards are dangerous because they are delusional and many of them pack.

Yes, they are potential terrorists. Even if they do average only one full brain between three of them, most of the bloody drongos own firearms.:eek: Comes the RaHoWa, I hardly see those firearms being used to preserve the constitution.

They are, if not outright racists who would like to start the RaHoWa, what William Oierce called "useful idiots" who would be easy to bring into the fight on the wrong side.

[Halcyon Dayz]

I read that story earlier today. Help me out here, where exactly does it say that the FBI is going to spend billions of dollars to keep tabs on the SCM? I seem to have missed that.
Keeping tabs on weirdos is part of the FBI's job description.
So it should come from their regular budget.

[Random]

Sovereign Citizens and FOTLs are just members of two different branches of the same movement. Both place themselves above the law.

All of the whacktards are dangerous because they are delusional and many of them pack.

Yes, they are potential terrorists. Even if they do average only one full brain between three of them, most of the bloody drongos own firearms.:eek: Comes the RaHoWa, I hardly see those firearms being used to preserve the constitution.

They are, if not outright racists who would like to start the RaHoWa, what William Oierce called "useful idiots" who would be easy to bring into the fight on the wrong side.

Well, I wouldn’t say that they place themselves above the law. They are usually quite firm on the subject of obeying the law. The real law.

The real law that says you cannot be arrested if you clearly state that you refuse to do business with the police officer. The real law that says that you cannot be prosecuted for a crime if the flag in the courtroom has a gold fringe (unless the crime happened at sea of course). The real law that says that your birth certificate is a negotiable bond worth millions of dollars and declares you to be the property of the Queen of England. The real law that says that if you send a letter to a complete stranger saying that they owe you a billion dollars, and they don’t respond, that means they actually owe you that money. The real law that says you can opt out of the United States of America, but still live there and take advantage of all its benefits, like a homeless man who decides to move into your basement against your wishes.

They are delusional fruitcakes who think the law says whatever they want it to say, but they don’t really place themselves above the law.

[Mojo]

What to do with the sovereign citizen movement


How about some sort of "reality TV" show?

[BenBurch]

How about some sort of "reality TV" show?

"Survivor Mid-Atlantic"

[TraneWreck]

The OP is being purposefully vague about what the "sovereign citizen movement" actually entails.

There is no necessary connection between the white supremecy militia movement and the Free Man on the Land folds, but there is an incredible amount of carry over. Often, the FMOTL language is used by anti-government extremists to justify their position.

White supremecy separatists were responsible for the worst non-9/11 attack in US history. Violence commited by these groups has recently achieved its highest levels since the mid-90's.

Again, I'm sure there are some FMOTL, sovereign citizen folks who are just crazy, they don't mean anyone harm, but that anti-government language is used by people who do perpetrate real crimes. The FBI should be looking at them just like they should be looking at any groups using the language of Islamic extremism.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I don't know much about the "sovereign citizen movement" but I can't think of anything that would be more dangerous than suspending or doing away with the First Amendment, which is what MNBrandt is suggesting.

As Kookbreaker said, that's like burning down the house because you saw a flea.

[leftysergeant]

Again, I'm sure there are some FMOTL, sovereign citizen folks who are just crazy, they don't mean anyone harm, but that anti-government language is used by people who do perpetrate real crimes. The FBI should be looking at them just like they should be looking at any groups using the language of Islamic extremism.

Both radical extremist Muslims and SCs and the similar nutbars are a potential threat and should both be under intense scrutiny.

I consider the SCs more dangerous, in a way than the radical Muslims because they can more easily pass for us. Hard to fight them when they fight in small cells.

[Alferd_Packer]

Do you burn down your house because you saw a flea?


My wife would.

[MNBrant]

I just talked to a member of the patriot movement today and he has never heard of the sovereign citizen movement. Are you sure these guys even exist, or were they made up by the southern poverty law center, (yes I know people in that group too), and the FBI. I am sure that if the FBI and CIA throughs enough billions into this it is possible to make some fringe of the group look bad. Please someone try to win this arguement with me. There must be some point I missed somewhere.

[KingMerv00]

I am sure that if the FBI and CIA throughs enough billions into this it is possible to make some fringe of the group look bad.

This again? Where do you get "billions" from?

[MNBrant]

This again? Where do you get "billions" from?

What do you think are the costs? According to the FBI there are at least 300 of these peoples including their children and second cousins. I would probably say that a good informant costs 100$ a day. How are you going to recoup the money, or is this another way to sell gee whiz defense contracts?

[Cleon]

I just talked to a member of the patriot movement today and he has never heard of the sovereign citizen movement. Are you sure these guys even exist, or were they made up by the southern poverty law center,

If you're not sure they exist, how did you go to their meetings?

Yeah there are however quite a few different groups. In fact you could probably say that every group is different. Now about the 300k membership figure. Whats that about? The meetings I have gone to run about 7-10 at most. I do remember them having meetings running like a hundred but most of the people who ran those are in jail or died of old age. The people who are in these groups tend to be older aged folks on social security or near retirement age. They perhaps owe some back taxes but most wouldn't have the means to pay at any rate. That is not to say that all are in this situation though. Heck there might be 300k people out there who believe this now that I think about it. I think you are referring to the freeman. I have heard some things about them but really don't have the interest in wiking them right now. Most of the jokes made about these people are pretty ignorant in my view as these people are usually losing their home or other type of property when they go to court. I really don't see what there is to laugh about.

Unless, again, you're just making **** up.

[KingMerv00]

What do you think are the costs?

I don't know...What? Did you expect me to pull a number out of my butt just to sound better? That would be goofy.

It isn't hard to show that your claim of "billions" is off target, though. The budget for the FBI is 7.9 billion (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/quick-facts/quickfacts). If by "billions without oversight" you mean a mere 4 billion, you are suggesting the FBI is ready dump more than half of their budget on an organization* that, according to you, doesn't exist.

*Edit: I shouldn't have used the word "organization". I doubt the SCM is centralized to be considered "organization". Rather, they are a scattered group of people with similar, nonsensical beliefs.

[leftysergeant]

If by "billions without oversight" you mean a mere 4 billion, you are suggesting the FBI is ready dump more than half of their budget on an organization that, according to you, doesn't exist.

Makes perfect sense compared to the crap that spews from the mouth of a typical SC.

[dropzone]

I know a woman who doesn't pay taxes but keeps a separate bank account that Uncle Sam periodically cleans out.

The lesson to everybody but her is that, if you are true to your beliefs, even if you are an old lady, you either pay up or you do time for them.

But she still thinks she's "stickin' it to the Man." I'd say, :rolleyes:, but eyes can't roll that fast.

[KingMerv00]

But she still thinks she's "stickin' it to the Man." I'd say, :rolleyes:, but eyes can't roll that fast.

Doesn't she end up paying more to the man that way?

[JoeTheJuggler]

Doesn't she end up paying more to the man that way?

The difference is that they have to take the money rather than her giving it. I guess she sees that as some sort of win in principle.

[hud]

Apparently the FOTL have infiltrated our police force, although it didn't work out well for this particular officer.

From the article:

Following the advice of his older brother, he filed a set of strange documents, declaring himself "a flesh and blood, living, breathing, biological man," and an "American National Sovereign." The documents seemed to say he was no longer a citizen and didn't have to follow any laws. "I, one Thomas Michael Laughlin Senior, Free man ... "

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/link-to-sovereign-citizen-movement-costly-for-police-officer/1169433

FOTL woo must be more convincing than I have been led to believe.

Is this one of those "success stories" I hear about? :p

[MNBrant]

I don't know...What? Did you expect me to pull a number out of my butt just to sound better? That would be goofy.

It isn't hard to show that your claim of "billions" is off target, though. The budget for the FBI is 7.9 billion (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/quick-facts/quickfacts). If by "billions without oversight" you mean a mere 4 billion, you are suggesting the FBI is ready dump more than half of their budget on an organization* that, according to you, doesn't exist.

*Edit: I shouldn't have used the word "organization". I doubt the SCM is centralized to be considered "organization". Rather, they are a scattered group of people with similar, nonsensical beliefs.

I think your numbers are off. I am thinking the total spy budget to be upwards of 70 billion. That doesn't even include the black budget. I do know thats alot of money. You did miss my point though. Almost of these people are in the court system in to save their property. I would think a plan to spend money to know the idle day to day conversations of these people to be a bit silly. The only reason they would do it is to keep their black budget operating cap up.

[Cleon]

I think your numbers are off. I am thinking the total spy budget to be upwards of 70 billion.

Making **** up again.

[MNBrant]

My bad, I only guessed. Its only 50b plus the CIA plus alot of other black ops stuff. I don't have the exact number mine was only an estimate. Here's a link. http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/30-105454.aspx Not really trying to make a cia black op page here though. Black ops do actually exist in the US.

This how I would spend the money to spy on these citizens. You got 300k of them meeting in groups of 7-10 so you need probably one informant per 5 at a cost of 500$ a week for a total of 3000000 a week for a total of 1.56 billion. Probably double that for internet, email, and phone internet which brings the total to 3.12 billion. I suppose you would have misc expenses including seal teams and the like for 3 million. so the total black op budget for this could suck up as much as 3.15 billion. I suppose there could be some cost cutting and savings but if what you are trying to do is preserve black op spending cap that is not something you would want to do.

[KingMerv00]

Almost of these people are in the court system in to save their property.

What people? A minute ago you implied they didn't even exist and it was all FBI sleight of hand.

[KingMerv00]

My bad, I only guessed. Its only 50b plus the CIA plus alot of other black ops stuff. I don't have the exact number mine was only an estimate. Here's a link. http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/30-105454.aspx

Your unsourced, anonymous forum post is not evidence. In any event, you said the FBI budget. As I've mentioned, that's about 7.9 billion.


This how I would spend the money to spy on these citizens. You got 300k of them meeting in groups of 7-10 so you need probably one informant per 5 at a cost of 500$ a week for a total of 3000000 a week for a total of 1.56 billion. Probably double that for internet, email, and phone internet which brings the total to 3.12 billion. I suppose you would have misc expenses including seal teams and the like for 3 million. so the total black op budget for this could suck up as much as 3.15 billion. I suppose there could be some cost cutting and savings but if what you are trying to do is preserve black op spending cap that is not something you would want to do.

Or maybe they plan to crack down on the SCM without monitoring every group nationwide simultaneously. When you hear a commerical on TV that says the police will be cracking down on speeders, do you honestly think they plan to catch every speed on every highway? Of course not. They put some money into it but they don't break the bank.

[BenBurch]

What do you think are the costs? ...

Whatever they are, a bargain.

[sarge]

Do you burn down your house because you saw a flea?

Read the relevant threads in the Conspiracy forum. You'll see that this movement is a bad joke and has no traction.

WARNING: Dangerously off-topic post!

I just noticed your signature and followed the link. We share an (maybe two) interest other than arguing - I am an amatuer observer AND I fly an RC Fokker. That's my backyard observatory in my avatar.

[MNBrant]

Whatever they are, a bargain.

The costs have been unsustainable for quite a few years now. I wonder whats holding the whole thing together.

[Checkmite]

Not really trying to make a cia black op page here though. Black ops do actually exist in the US.

There are no "black ops".

We are tracing your IP. Please stand by.

[MNBrant]

There are no "black ops".

We are tracing your IP. Please stand by.

I just watched a movie that referred to the NSA as no such agency. Have you noticed that hollywood is painting the CIA and NSA in a really bad light? I wonder if any of that is deserved. For me, its already hard for me to move around the world because govt agents track my movements. On the other hand I am a schizophrenic so that might explain it too. One thing for certain is I do watch alot of movies about spys.

[Chaos]

Oh my FSM... do you have any idea how freaking retarded you sound, making crap up and using Hollywood movies as evidence?

[jayh]

I just watched a movie that referred to the NSA as no such agency. Have you noticed that hollywood is painting the CIA and NSA in a really bad light? I wonder if any of that is deserved. For me, its already hard for me to move around the world because govt agents track my movements. On the other hand I am a schizophrenic so that might explain it too. One thing for certain is I do watch alot of movies about spys.

The term No such agency came about years ago when it's existence was actually denied by our (truth telling) government. After Bamford's Puzzle Palace and other sources surfaced it became difficult to deny its existence. A secret, government funded agency that bypasses or ignores laws is far more dangerous than any group of nutcases.

Having grown up in the cold war, the fact that presumably mainstream Americans are suggesting 're-education' camps is terribly frightening.

Presumably in a free society, you are entitled to your beliefs, even wacky beliefs without being criminally investigated simply for them. You are also entitled to your beliefs even if others who the FBI chooses to broadly classify as similar to you happen to do bad actions.

[KingMerv00]

Having grown up in the cold war, the fact that presumably mainstream Americans are suggesting 're-education' camps is terribly frightening.

Where are mainstream people are saying this?

Presumably in a free society, you are entitled to your beliefs, even wacky beliefs without being criminally investigated simply for them. You are also entitled to your beliefs even if others who the FBI chooses to broadly classify as similar to you happen to do bad actions.

You are entitled to your beliefs but you might be in trouble if you encourage people to not pay taxes or resist the police.

[KingMerv00]

On the other hand I am a schizophrenic so that might explain it too.

That explains it perfectly. Sorry for any previous snide remarks.

[MNBrant]

That explains it perfectly. Sorry for any previous snide remarks.

explain yourself.

I should explain that what I mean by being watched by foreign agents overseas usually involves a knock at the door asking what I am doing in their country. Its just paranoid I guess.

[JoeTheJuggler]

What a very strange thread this is.

[MNBrant]

The term No such agency came about years ago when it's existence was actually denied by our (truth telling) government. After Bamford's Puzzle Palace and other sources surfaced it became difficult to deny its existence. A secret, government funded agency that bypasses or ignores laws is far more dangerous than any group of nutcases.

Having grown up in the cold war, the fact that presumably mainstream Americans are suggesting 're-education' camps is terribly frightening.

Presumably in a free society, you are entitled to your beliefs, even wacky beliefs without being criminally investigated simply for them. You are also entitled to your beliefs even if others who the FBI chooses to broadly classify as similar to you happen to do bad actions.

Its true actually though I don't know why. I seem to be entitled to say anything, even go too far, and nothing seems to happen. Nobody noticed when I said that my patriot friend had no idea what a sovereign citizen was. I presume those are the people you are talking about aren't you?

[Eddie Dane]

"Survivor Mid-Atlantic"

"The rough guide to Somalia"

[hgc]

...
Please someone try to win this arguement with me. There must be some point I missed somewhere.


I can't tell that you've presented an argument. Can you sum it up with a clear set of assertions?

[MNBrant]

I can't tell that you've presented an argument. Can you sum it up with a clear set of assertions?

Why don't you just ask me to post the link? Your some kind of govt spook aren't you? http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/22/60minutes/main20064396.shtml?tag=cbsnewsSectionContent.1 I actually don't know this guy. I was just making simular accusations about the same time he was busted, but in my case I was just pulling stuff off of google.

[hgc]

Why don't you just ask me to post the link? Your some kind of govt spook aren't you? http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/22/60minutes/main20064396.shtml?tag=cbsnewsSectionContent.1 I actually don't know this guy. I was just making simular accusations about the same time he was busted, but in my case I was just pulling stuff off of google.


Can you sum up your argument? I can't engage in an argument if I don't know what claim I am supposed to dispute. No links. Use your words. Try doing 3 bullet points, each one a brief assertion of fact.

[MNBrant]

Can you sum up your argument? I can't engage in an argument if I don't know what claim I am supposed to dispute. No links. Use your words. Try doing 3 bullet points, each one a brief assertion of fact.

My argument presupposes that you actually know something and are not just a knuckleheaded skeptic

I have a friend who is a patriot who has never heard of this movement

after clicking on this link from a respected news source. I discovered that the NSA is wasting billions on stuff to spy on you that doesn't work and are putting guys away who complain about it.

Wow, 3. Freedom aint free if it actually costs something to get the free item. Simple economics.

[hgc]

My argument presupposes that you actually know something and are not just a knuckleheaded skeptic

I have a friend who is a patriot who has never heard of this movement

after clicking on this link from a respected news source. I discovered that the NSA is wasting billions on stuff to spy on you that doesn't work and are putting guys away who complain about it.

Wow, 3. Freedom aint free if it actually costs something to get the free item. Simple economics.


Why did you start a thread about something that doesn't exist? You, apparently, had heard of this non-existent "sovereign citizen movement," yet your friend had not. Is he just ignorant, or are you imagining things? Or both?

Come now, answer the question directly. Your answer shouldn't require NSA spending data.

- Knuckleheaded Skeptic

[Cleon]

Why did you start a thread about something that doesn't exist? You, apparently, had heard of this non-existent "sovereign citizen movement," yet your friend had not. Is he just ignorant, or are you imagining things? Or both?

I'm still wondering how he's been to meetings if he doesn't know if they exist. :confused:

I guess I'm just another knuckleheaded skeptic. :rolleyes:

[MNBrant]

I just wiki'd it. There is not sovereign citizen movement. There is a sovereign citizen concept, but like I said, Ever tax protester group is different. The only ones getting it right are probably FBI Agent provocateurs of which there already are plenty probably, so no need for more.

[hgc]

I just wiki'd it. There is not sovereign citizen movement. There is a sovereign citizen concept, but like I said, Ever tax protester group is different. The only ones getting it right are probably FBI Agent provocateurs of which there already are plenty probably, so no need for more.


Good! Assertions!

a) No sovereign citizen movement; yes sovereign citizen concept. Evidence: wiki.
b) Sovereign citizen is a tax protest group(?).
c) FBI provocateurs and MNBrant know this to be true.

You get no argument from me.

[ApolloGnomon]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

May I suggest reading your US Constitution?

Your 1st Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

If you take away the right for dipsticks to peaceably assemble, you potentially take it away from everyone.

May I also suggest reading the Declaration of Independence? This country was founded on the rights of the people to chose their government, by force if necessary.

They may be self-destructive morons, but the very existence of the "sovereign citizen" movement is a symptom of a healthy nation with immense freedom.

[KingMerv00]

I just wiki'd it. There is not sovereign citizen movement. There is a sovereign citizen concept, but like I said, Ever tax protester group is different. The only ones getting it right are probably FBI Agent provocateurs of which there already are plenty probably, so no need for more.


The FBI creates a movement, agent provocateurs for that movement, and spends "billions" on a threat that they created.

Makes no sense at all.

[Cleon]

The FBI creates a movement, agent provocateurs for that movement, and spends "billions" on a threat that they created.

Makes no sense at all.

Well, it makes as much sense as MNBrant going to the meetings of a movement that he says doesn't exist:

Yeah there are however quite a few different groups. In fact you could probably say that every group is different. Now about the 300k membership figure. Whats that about? The meetings I have gone to run about 7-10 at most. I do remember them having meetings running like a hundred but most of the people who ran those are in jail or died of old age.

[Stacko]

Well, it makes as much sense as MNBrant going to the meetings of a movement that he says doesn't exist:

This might help explain how he's pulling that off. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=206853)

[sadhatter]

I just talked to a member of the patriot movement today and he has never heard of the sovereign citizen movement. Are you sure these guys even exist, or were they made up by the southern poverty law center, (yes I know people in that group too), and the FBI. I am sure that if the FBI and CIA throughs enough billions into this it is possible to make some fringe of the group look bad. Please someone try to win this arguement with me. There must be some point I missed somewhere.

Lets strip away what this is about, to show you i am not just ******* on you because of your subject matter.

You just said

" A person i know, who i will not name, has not heard of something, therefore i think that it is a hoax."

If i gave you the same kind of statement, would you be likely to take it at face value, and believe it?

If not your hypocritical in expecting others to believe it.

If so, your critical thinking ability is lacking to the point, where it is much more important that you sharpen it up, that mess about on internet forums.

[sadhatter]

I think your numbers are off. I am thinking the total spy budget to be upwards of 70 billion. That doesn't even include the black budget. I do know thats alot of money. You did miss my point though. Almost of these people are in the court system in to save their property. I would think a plan to spend money to know the idle day to day conversations of these people to be a bit silly. The only reason they would do it is to keep their black budget operating cap up.

The amazing black budget, it cleans floors, starts barbeques , does your taxes, watches your kids, and all while being totally and completely invisible!

Get yours today.

I say the sovereign citizen movement has a black budget. They have vast amounts of wealth from their tendency to weasel out of debts that the members are contributing to in order to purchase vast amounts of weaponry. Hence they should be shut down.

See how easy it is to make a point when you can pull magical premises out of thin air?

[leftysergeant]

I just wiki'd it. There is not sovereign citizen movement. There is a sovereign citizen concept, but like I said, Ever tax protester group is different.

The concept is taught within various identifiable movements and groups as well. This includes the militias. I have heard John Trochmann refer to the concept in the context of M.O.M..

Trochmann should already be on the watch lists.

[Without Rights]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

Re-education camps to teach them Government is good? Wow.

How about you punish their crimes and respect their freedom of thought and speech. Like Government could "teach" people to trust them. If you ban assembly for them you would get a law allowing Government to ban assembly for all groups they see fit. Communism is bad. Freedom is good.

[MNBrant]

The concept is taught within various identifiable movements and groups as well. This includes the militias. I have heard John Trochmann refer to the concept in the context of M.O.M..

Trochmann should already be on the watch lists.

I should let all you folks know that while I am using humour this is a serious discussion and I am not going to hold your hand and feed you all the facts. I really don't care.

Oh they are referring to the militia movement as sovereign citizens. I am on the site and see the KKK logo. No wonder my patriot friend has never heard of it even though they are studying common law and all that. These people are currently 300k strong? Let me wiki that. Oh this is all a scam. They are getting upset over 9 members of some trailer park militia called the Hutaree. I believe this is one of those cases where they infiltrated some low browed trailer park militia then, then suggested they go kill some police and thoughtfully provided the weapons in some kind of sting. I haven't checked but thats how these things run.

[leftysergeant]

I believe this is one of those cases where they infiltrated some low browed trailer park militia then, then suggested they go kill some police and thoughtfully provided the weapons in some kind of sting. I haven't checked but thats how these things run.

That's what they all say. That takes the pressure off of other terrorist cells. That's why they are set up as small cell operations.

[RLBaty]

How about some sort of "reality TV" show?




Maybe a movie?

See promotion at:

http://resurrectionpictures.org/projects/creation/

In recent days Dr. Dino has been using his Sovereign Citizen (SC) tactics in his criminal case in filing multiple motions making claims common to the SC cause.

None have worked so far.

He was also promoting such before he got sent up the river.

His wife was recently in Tax Court, but I have seen no reporting regarding how she prosecuted her case; though she did advise the Court that she didn't want her husband, Dr. Dino, and his frivolous claims and antics anywhere near her proceedings.

Dr. Dino's separate, civil, U.S. Tax Court case has yet to be scheduled for trial.

[MNBrant]

That's what they all say. That takes the pressure off of other terrorist cells. That's why they are set up as small cell operations.

I wouldn't exactly call them either a cell or smart, however they were infiltrated by a smart FBI agent who told them it was a good idea to kill police officers and offered to procure weapons for them.

[Cobalt]

http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/nn64/cb8673/trollthreads.jpg

[hgc]

No wonder my patriot friend has never heard of it even though they are studying common law and all that.

Your "patriot friend" should get a refund on his tuition.

[leftysergeant]

I wouldn't exactly call them either a cell or smart, however they were infiltrated by a smart FBI agent who told them it was a good idea to kill police officers and offered to procure weapons for them.Got evidence that does not come from a Nazi or tinfoiler site?

[MNBrant]

Got evidence that does not come from a Nazi or tinfoiler site?


It was awhile ago. I really don't have time right now to chase it down. I do remember it being a sting involving an undercover FBI cop who offered to procure the weapons. Whether they put the idea into their heads, I would have to go look that up.

[Polaris]

There has been alot of talk about the sovereign citizen movement. Yes I am doing their work for them. They pay taxes though not voluntarily. Some do commit crimes such as putting leins on judges for which they are punished. Surely there is more that can be done to these scofflaws. I am thinking in terms of making it unlawful for them to congregate. Maybe that will put a stop it it. There is of course also re-education camps to consider.What does the CIA and FBI think about this?

Slightly OT, but this kind of thinking, i.e., "it's illegal but we think it's really super-ultra-bad too so we're going to really make Them pay", is what leads to a good bit of draconian laws.

[MNBrant]

Slightly OT, but this kind of thinking, i.e., "it's illegal but we think it's really super-ultra-bad too so we're going to really make Them pay", is what leads to a good bit of draconian laws.

I guess what they mean by sovereign citizens are freeman and neo-nazi's. To boost the numbers they included everyone who has ever been to patriot meeting. I am probably one of them. It's kind of like the blacklisting of communists. Maybe the next step will be some kind of govt panel. I wonder when the ACLU is going to step in? This isn't the 1950's after all.

[hgc]

One thing I've learned about (non-existent) sovereign citizens: They don't like it when you run out of crawfish. Not one bit.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/sovereign_citizen_opens_fire_on_store_because_it_r .php

Kelly allegedly called the seafood market to order crawfish and became "incredibly irate" when an employee said the store didn't have any, according to a Sheriff's Office report.

From 4:50 p.m. to 5:20 p.m., Kelly called the market 11 times, according to the business' caller ID. The later calls went unanswered because the business closed at 5 p.m., investigators said.
...
The book "The Sociopath Next Door" was also found. Kelly told law enforcement that he is a sovereign citizen (someone who believes that almost all forms of government in the U.S. are illegitimate), and that he doesn't have to follow the law.

[mstreeonfire]

One thing I've learned about (non-existent) sovereign citizens: They don't like it when you run out of crawfish. Not one bit.

You can take our lives but you cannot take our fr...I mean CRAWFISH!!

[therival58]

Check out page 20 from another "How to" FOTL guide. They say not to interact with them because you are a "statutory taxpayer" and they are noble sovereigns, but then say to join the forum :D

http://sedm.org/Forms/Procs/PathToFreedom.pdf

Please DO NOT contact us or even offer to pay us to complete any of the steps in this section. You and only you must complete the steps in this section entirely on your own without our assistance or that of any member. The reason for this is that:

1.) Our Member Agreement forbids us from interacting with those who are statutory "taxpayer", "U.S. citizens,", "U.S. residents," or federal instrumentalities.

2.) You are presumed to be a non-member, statutory "taxpayer", "U.S. citizen", "U.S. resident", and/or federal instrumentality unless and until you have unrebutted evidence in your administrative record with the government that demonstrates otherwise and which is admissible in a court of law. That evidence, in fact, is generated by executing the steps in this section BEFORE either demanding our services or "USING" any materials other than those needed to complete these steps.

3.) If we interacted with or help people attempting to complete the steps, some malicious, malingering, and LYING public servant would be hired as a mole, come in and procure help from us, and then accuse us on the court record of interfering with the lawful administration of the tax laws, and do so UNLAWFULLY in a foreign state outside of their jurisdiction. We therefore need and politely request your assistance in staying out of harm's way and from being accused of violating or intending to violate any law.

For reference, this was organized btw by sedm.org, the "Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry" :p

[Bosozoku]

In other words, what they're doing is dangerously close to unauthorized practice of law and they don't want to be sued. Funny that they're so sure that FOTL is correct, and yet they put up this lame and probably invalid legal disclaimer.

[therival58]

In other words, what they're doing is dangerously close to unauthorized practice of law and they don't want to be sued. Funny that they're so sure that FOTL is correct, and yet they put up this lame and probably invalid legal disclaimer.

Indeed. But wait! I'm reading further, get a load of page 51

Section 6 - Defending your BELIEFS against criticism by others

As you learn the truths found on our website, you will inevitably butt heads with ignorant and presumptuous people who may:

1.) Attempt to criticize and discredit the information we present.
2.) Have strong opinions they cannot justify or defend rationally with evidence.
3.) Falsely tell you that what you are doing violates the law, and yet they have never read the law for themselves in most cases.

The freedom community, unfortunately, is plagued with personalities who all have strong egos and often economic agendas. The table below summarizes the major government organizations and freedom personalities who are likely to try to attack our research and materials, along with authoritative resources you can use to respond to often presumptuous, irrational, and ignorant attacks they will no doubt attempt to make in order to unjustly and fraudulently discredit our materials and research and thereby unduly elevate their own importance and credibility:

I'm sorry, but WHAT?? Maybe they should re-read their stuff, eh?

In addition to the above, the following resource contains memorandums of law on most major 'freedom' subjects. Most of these memorandums end with a series of admissions. These documents are very useful to use as weapons against people who are arguing about a specific subject covered by the memorandum because you can print these documents on double sided paper and then hand them to the person who is attacking you and demand that they either rebut the admission at the end and the content of the document within 30 days, or else they agree with you.

SEDM Forms/Pubs Page, Section 1.5: Memorandums of Law
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

The above claims to present past law cases proving their claims, although I looked through a couple and its mostly SEDM jargon.

[tsig]

In other words, what they're doing is dangerously close to unauthorized practice of law and they don't want to be sued. Funny that they're so sure that FOTL is correct, and yet they put up this lame and probably invalid legal disclaimer.

Apparently they're sovereigns as long as the law allows.:)

[therival58]

Ok I finished reading the "guide", haven't found anything. The majority of it seems to comprise of links to their other documents, one of which is a "TSA Defense package" with a script to talk to a TSA agent to get out of the security procedures. I'm all for reforming the TSA and its security measures at airports, but what they propose passengers to say to agents seems very misguided.

I'd like to close out for now by posting this "testimony" from this Puerto Rican woman who posted a thread on ATS about moving "off the grid." She claims to have moved with her kids from the bronx to the mid west after 9/11 and claims to have become a FOTLer in the process.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread596591/pg1

Here are some of her insights on being a freeman.

Thank you for that question. As a matter of fact, when I decided to really get off the grid I knew that as long as I kept to myself, signed the paper work for my home and land, as quietly, BTW I signed everything as a freeman , and of course, no one bothered to notice, that if there was ever a time for me to stand up, and keep my land due to any unforeseen authority, that everything that I have signed for wasn't under my corporate name. Ms. XXXXX but as Ms. Xxxx, also I have made sure that if at anytime, I was to be called into court for any reason, that my paper work, signature, and information is under the sovereignty of myself as a free person.

I am currently in the process of filing my UCC-1 documents to make sure that all of the properties I own, including myself, will be within my rights to be a freeman on MY land.

Also, I have learned how to represent myself in most situations that may call for myself being called into any situation that would try to tread on my rights, the rights of my pursuit of happiness, and my rights to be free.


Also as an added incentive I would like to post the freeman/straw-man information that also helped me to know that my decision to start getting off the grid was correct.

This is for easy reference, and to help with anything that you may look into for the future, but wanted to make sure that it is YOURS!!!!! Knowing that you cannot lose, in a venture that you may worry about, this could help with your decision.
http://www.cyberclass.net/strawman.htm
http://www.natural-person.ca

For financial questions.
www.natural-person.ca/pdf/mary_croft pdf


You are so welcome. For all of those people that say that the freeman thing is
hard.. its is, but when you go further, and further into it, it begins to anger you, because we see how we have been fooled, but as you go on, it inspires you, to know that the only thing this society has given to them from us, can be easily taken away.

We all began to play a game, most of us don't know about it, but when you realize that, when we bought into the game, that those that wanted us to remain slaves, left the rules in the box.

Finding out about being truly sovereign is the only way to really begin to see that when this type of information is in your hand, if you to choose to ignore it, then it is simply your choice to do so.

Peace to you.. and good luck

BTW the links I posted above, are VERY easy to understand. Written by laymen for laymen. I will also try to link some videos.

Another deluded FOTLer? Maybe she thinks being a FOTLer and getting "off the grid" are the same thing?:p

[ComfySlippers]

For those new to this nonsense, I would like to point out that jargon buster (http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=36890), and others, have devoted much time over some years into trying to convince some very paranoid and deluded people that FOTLism is a con, and a dangerous one at that.

Prision sentences and hefty fines are the only FOTL-Wins.

Wether it be called FOTL, Sovereign Citizen or whatever, it's all basically the same con.
All of the Gurus have been jailed since this silly con was invented some 40 or 50 years ago. America, UK, Canada... all the same con.

Discussion on JREF about Robert Menard (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=176799) ; A Canadian conman peddling this silliness for financial profit, despite being told he is not allowed to do so.

You can view the FOTLers insanity over at, ahem, David Icke Forum (http://forum.davidicke.com/forumdisplay.php?f=60)

FOTL-woo is more than your average CT as it actually causes real-life harm, financially and... well....

CBS: 60 Minutes May 15, 2011 4:58 PM (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366128n)

You can watch Menard's free stuff on his YouTube Channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/mrmitee).

You can buy his "Get into Jail Free" Course packs here:
The Freedomness Emporium & General Store (http://shop.worldfreemansociety.org/)

[MNBrant]

I an concerned about the sovereign citizen movement. They are starting to listen to religious speeches on tapes for hours on end. I feer indoctrination is going on there. I am trying to get my friend out and walk a bit before he passed out on these things.

[pchams]

therival58, are you and Jargon Buster classmates?
You seem to have similar adolescent queries and mindsets.

[therival58]

therival58, are you and Jargon Buster classmates?
You seem to have similar adolescent queries and mindsets.

I don't think so, no. If my posts resemble JB's in any way, its just a coincidence.

[KingMerv00]

Watching Freemen explain the law is like watching an 4 year old build a particle collider from Play-Doh. They are so wrong, I don't even know where to begin.

[jargon buster]

therival58, are you and Jargon Buster classmates?
You seem to have similar adolescent queries and mindsets.
pchams, what prompted you to label my posts adolescent?
Would you like me to go through your posts and come up with a psychological profile for you?
If not I suggest you mind your own business and add to the threads content rather than trying to analyse the posters themselves. ;)

[jargon buster]

I'd like to close out for now by posting this "testimony" from this Puerto Rican woman who posted a thread on ATS about moving "off the grid." She claims to have moved with her kids from the bronx to the mid west after 9/11 and claims to have become a FOTLer in the process.

errr..its just a woman who upped sticks and moved out to the country.
This has nothing to do with FMOTL in the way Menard and his ilk mean it.
They want to ignore the law and live amongst others who abide by it.
Menards idea of FMOTL is a parasitic point of view, he couldnt sell a lifestyle that was actually difficult, why would a freeloader want to up sticks and move away from his food source?
Menard doesn't have the balls to move out into the sticks (although he keeps promising too) without taking a support group of loons with him.(Freeman Valley)

[therival58]

errr..its just a woman who upped sticks and moved out to the country.
This has nothing to do with FMOTL in the way Menard and his ilk mean it.
They want to ignore the law and live amongst others who abide by it.
Menards idea of FMOTL is a parasitic point of view, he couldnt sell a lifestyle that was actually difficult, why would a freeloader want to up sticks and move away from his food source?
Menard doesn't have the balls to move out into the sticks (although he keeps promising too) without taking a support group of loons with him.(Freeman Valley)

Whether she's a FOTL in the manner of Menard or not she still asserts the FOTL stuff is 100% true and references Mary Croft's online book "How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic Cash-Consficatory Agency Known to Man" as the source of her success to becoming a "freeman/freewoman."

[jargon buster]

that doesnt make her a freeman on the land, that makes her deluded.
Anyone daft enough to have tried Crofts nonsense has found out the hard way if its valid or not.

Its embarrassment that stops many of the freeman failures from voluntarily racking up on the web.

[therival58]

that doesnt make her a freeman on the land, that makes her deluded.
Anyone daft enough to have tried Crofts nonsense has found out the hard way if its valid or not.

Its embarrassment that stops many of the freeman failures from voluntarily racking up on the web.

I'm actually reading Croft's book now, it's a real hoot.

What if you found out that everything you ever needed or wanted was already paid for? – that you didn’t owe anyone anything?

When you go into a store to buy a book and you pay in whatever manner you choose, what do you get for the payment? No, not the book; you get a receipt. The evidence for this is that the dollar amount on the receipt matches precisely the dollar amount on your payment. It is an exact exchange. The book is not even part of the equation. It was pre-paid; all you did was go to the store to claim and retrieve it. In order to understand the concept of ‘pre-paid’, imagine this:

Suppose you want to open a restaurant and you just need another $10,000 and so you ask a friend to lend it to you. Knowing that there is no money and the currency your friend has is essentially worthless compared to what he truly wants in his life, he sure wouldn’t mind lending it to you. So after a couple of months you ashamedly go to him and say that there is no way you can ever pay him back, what with interest and all, yet you are so ingratiated to him you tell him that he can eat in your restaurant any time he wants – for free. Not only that but also you would be so grateful if he would because, alas, it would assuage your guilt. All he is required to do when the waiter presents him with an itemization of his meal is to sign it; he is not required to pay for his meal – its ‘prepaid’.

In the same way, our bills are already paid and, in fact, the corporate entity which is billing us would be only too grateful if we would take advantage of our having prepaid them because then they wouldn’t have to pay the tax on the $$$ we send them. So all that is required of us is to sign the invoice and return it to them. The telephone company is funded by the government; you and I, and everyone who has a birth certificate or socialist number have funded the government. So, we have an ‘exemption’ the same way your friend is exempted from paying for his meals at your restaurant. Why is the telephone company sending us a statement (not an invoice) with a ‘amount owing’ on it? We paid up front. All goods and services are now
lawfully ours just for the asking.

:D

[Mojo]

So all that is required of us is to sign the invoice and return it to them.


What happened to red ink, a 45 degree angle, and "accepted for value"?

[Tolls]

So...does that mean I can go and pick up a nice Jag from the dealer down the road, since it's apparently mine already, without any money?

[Grassy Knowlington]

So...does that mean I can go and pick up a nice Jag from the dealer down the road, since it's apparently mine already, without any money?

Yes. Give it a go today and let us know how you got on.

PS I might want to open a resturant, can you ask the Jag dealer to lend me £10,000 whilst you're there?

[Grassy Knowlington]

What happened to red ink, a 45 degree angle, and "accepted for value"?

Things have moved on from the old days. There'll soon be a FMOTL Debit Card to make all this painless and quick. Everyone's initial balance is about $600,000 I believe.

Late News....

Themed FMOTL Debit Cards will be available. The initial choice is:

Art - Watercolour 'Chemtrails on a Summer's Morning'
Architecture - HAARP Facility
Astronomy - Planet Niburu seen through mist

Perhaps readers can suggest other suitable themes.

[Tolls]

Yes. Give it a go today and let us know how you got on.

PS I might want to open a resturant, can you ask the Jag dealer to lend me £10,000 whilst you're there?

No problem.
I'm sure they'll be happy to oblige since the £10k is just useless anyway.

[Tolls]

Yes. Give it a go today and let us know how you got on.

PS I might want to open a resturant, can you ask the Jag dealer to lend me £10,000 whilst you're there?

Well, I tried, but the chap there was really rather rude.
I would have brought up the £10k loan for your restaurant, but they were frog-marching me out of the building by that point.

Does that class as a FOTL success, or do I actually have to be arrested?

[Grassy Knowlington]

Well, I tried, but the chap there was really rather rude.
I would have brought up the £10k loan for your restaurant, but they were frog-marching me out of the building by that point.

Does that class as a FOTL success, or do I actually have to be arrested?

You were manhandled so that shows some success but would have been far more of a victory if you'd been arrested, had then gone to court, wasted their time with Strawman/Magna Carta/No-consent/Oaths ramblings and then been handed down a fine that you duly paid and you posted all this on DIF and/or similar and received lots of 'well-done mate, that showed 'em' type posts.

Shame about the Jag though.

[jargon buster]

I just got back from the same dealership and they are getting wise, the car salesman said he would be happy to let me have a car as long as I gave him my house as it was in fact not my house but his, as he had already pre-paid for it when he was born (birth certificate)
Dont worry I was quick to counter this and said that I had abandoned my birth certificate and as such had no contract with the government and did not consent to him taking my house, he then pointed out that if I had abandoned my birth certificate then I am therefore not a shareholder and I had no entitlement to the pre-paid Jag.

I think I might just buy a second hand run around instead.

Oh and the 10 grands out as well.

[Grassy Knowlington]

I just got back from the same dealership and they are getting wise, the car salesman said he would be happy to let me have a car as long as I gave him my house as it was in fact not my house but his, as he had already pre-paid for it when he was born (birth certificate)
Dont worry I was quick to counter this and said that I had abandoned my birth certificate and as such had no contract with the government and did not consent to him taking my house, he then pointed out that if I had abandoned my birth certificate then I am therefore not a shareholder and I had no entitlement to the pre-paid Jag.

I think I might just buy a second hand run around instead.

Oh and the 10 grands out as well.

This is no good at all! Perhaps we should set up a bank....donations deposits please!

[TjW]

This is no good at all! Perhaps we should set up a bank....donations deposits please!

In my grandpa's day, they called the bank where they kept the sort of deposits made by FOTL an "outhouse".

[ComfySlippers]

I just got back from the same dealership and they are getting wise...

Yes. They have started to advertise their personal-conveyances as "vehicles" and offering "test-drives" instead of test-travels....

Like... we don't see what they're up to!

[Grassy Knowlington]

Yes. They have started to advertise their personal-conveyances as "vehicles" and offering "test-drives" instead of test-travels....

Like... we don't see what they're up to!

& I suppose they now insist on some sort of proof of (strawman) identify on the groundless basis that 'insurance' (= a donation to the NWO) is needed before you can set off!

[Mojo]

I think I might just buy a second hand run around instead.


That has been suggested in the comments to this: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_do_i_de_register_my_own_auto

Solution, buy cheap cars that you don't care about losing, be prepared to replace it every year.

[Tolls]

& I suppose they now insist on some sort of proof of (strawman) identify on the groundless basis that 'insurance' (= a donation to the NWO) is needed before you can set off!

This stuff's scarily easy to make up...

That has been suggested in the comments to this: http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_do_i_de_register_my_own_auto

And that's just plain scary.

[jargon buster]

This stuff's scarily easy to make up...
Menard has proved that.

Looking back it is clear where Menard lost his UK audience on Ickes.
He made a post saying that in order to become a freeman you had to refuse all benefits from the state, now bearing in mind they are his target audience it was all downhill from there.

He should have gone with the "its all paid for by your parents" or "the government is making money from your bond so its already your money you just need to claim it".

Its easy enough to make this stuff up but at least you should know your audience first.

[therival58]

This is off topic to the current discussion but still FOTL related. A while ago while doing research on FOTL I came across a forum posting this tidbit from the US Register of Debates dated February 15th, 1825. The title of the section is "Unclaimed Stock Dividends," referencing specifically "U.S. Stock."

I was wondering if anyone knows what exactly they were referring to? This would fall under the "US is a corporation" CT, even though this was before 1871.

http://i55.tinypic.com/25foydf.gif
http://i52.tinypic.com/21pi6w.gif

[jargon buster]

I was wondering if anyone knows what exactly they were referring to?
No idea mate, what did you find out, I cant be arsed looking so why dont you spoon feed us what you have.

[therival58]

No idea mate, what did you find out, I cant be arsed looking so why dont you spoon feed us what you have.

well "U.S. Stock" may be shorthand for stock in the Second Bank of the United States, but reading through both pages it's still pretty ambiguous

[jargon buster]

yup..maybe...keep reading and let us know what you decide.

[Grassy Knowlington]

well "U.S. Stock" may be shorthand for stock in the Second Bank of the United States, but reading through both pages it's still pretty ambiguous

The "US Stock" market appears, to my uneducated and perhaps simplistic viewpoint, to be concerned with the public trading of shares ("US Stock") in USA based or registered corporations. Was the essence any different in 1825?

[GreyArea]

CBS' 60 Minutes recently had a report on the "sovereign citizens". There is an article here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/15/60minutes/main20062666.shtml), and the video segment can be seen here (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366128n&tag=segementExtraScroller;housing).

Then, Talking Points Memo talked to some of the movement's "gurus" to see why they think the government is illegitimate. The article quotes part of last year's ADL report, saying:
The theories all share the belief that many years ago an insidious conspiracy infiltrated the U.S. government and subverted it, slowly replacing parts of the original, legitimate government (often referred to by sovereigns as the "de jure" government) with an illegitimate, tyrannical government (the "de facto" government).

TPM clarifies this with an example. One of the movement's lecturers claims that the Food and Drug Act usurped the Declaration of Independence's recognition that every man is a sovereign like a king. And the Act did this because its language "means that the government deems man to be an animal" and "animals are not 'endowed by their Creator.'"

Read more from this clown, and even nuttier examples, here (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/the_government_in_genocide_tpm_talks_with_some_sov ereign_citizens.php?ref=tn). There is plenty there for skeptics, rationalists, historians, legal scholars, atheists, and (arguably) evolutionists to hoot at.

It would be merely amusing if these ideas were just crackpot yarns. However, there is a violent and dangerous element to this particular political fringe, as the 60 Minutes report notes. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration's DHS has backed off from pursuing or reporting on it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/homeland-security-department-curtails-home-grown-terror-analysis/2011/06/02/AGQEaDLH_story.html).

People need to take the threat seriously. News coverage, as well as asking what do we do about the sovereign citizen movement on a skeptics' forum, are only parts of a process of educating and motivating people to combat ahistorical conspiracy talk. But law enforcement also needs to play a role in confronting the people who instigate physical harm because of such nonsense.

[16.5]

In a hilariously lulz worthy article, the owner of Giordano's Pizza Chain in Chicago sees his Freeman on the Land stunt cost him his business and even his ability to eat pizza at his own restaurants.

Enjoy!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0612-giordanos--20110611,0,1118609.story

[dropzone]

The pizza was over rated. Pretty much pizza pudding in a shell. He deserves whatever he gets because REAL Chicago pizza is a fairly thin crust, good sauce, too much sausage, and enough mozzarella to cause a heart attack. So much of each that SOME people won't look askance when you dab at the top with a napkin to draw off some of the fat.

[akama1]

In a hilariously lulz worthy article, the owner of Giordano's Pizza Chain in Chicago sees his Freeman on the Land stunt cost him his business and even his ability to eat pizza at his own restaurants.

Enjoy!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0612-giordanos--20110611,0,1118609.story

Wow... just wow. He has had the wool pulled over his eyes by Home, and not only doesn't realise it, but is diving in head first. What a way to waste years of work.

[16.5]

The pizza was over rated. Pretty much pizza pudding in a shell. He deserves whatever he gets because REAL Chicago pizza is a fairly thin crust, good sauce, too much sausage, and enough mozzarella to cause a heart attack. So much of each that SOME people won't look askance when you dab at the top with a napkin to draw off some of the fat.

Oh no you dint! j/k. Actually their "thin" crust is fantastic.

This was a major front page article in Sunday's Chicago Tribune.

The guy from Arizona is properly exposed as a major scumbag.

[Bosozoku]

So much gold in that article, I hardly know where to start!

Home is defiant. He said he is outraged by what happened to the Apostolous and is trying to get the pizza chain back for them.

"My claim is solid, legal and secured," Home said. "I will be in control of the business. You can count on it."

Home is, in case you didn't read the article, the Freeman whose advice got the owner (Apostolou) banned from his own business. In other words, a man you can count on!

"He's a man who cares about people, who helps people save their homes from illegal foreclosures," Apostolou said of Home. "He asked me to come out there. He said, 'I can save you.'"

I wish I could do as poorly as these guys do and still have people think that I was some sort of wizard who could make their debts disappear. This guy fired his lawyers and yet still thinks the guy whose advice directly cost him his business is the guy who is going to save him.

[MNBrant]

CBS' 60 Minutes recently had a report on the "sovereign citizens". There is an article here (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/05/15/60minutes/main20062666.shtml), and the video segment can be seen here (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366128n&tag=segementExtraScroller;housing).

Then, Talking Points Memo talked to some of the movement's "gurus" to see why they think the government is illegitimate. The article quotes part of last year's ADL report, saying:


TPM clarifies this with an example. One of the movement's lecturers claims that the Food and Drug Act usurped the Declaration of Independence's recognition that every man is a sovereign like a king. And the Act did this because its language "means that the government deems man to be an animal" and "animals are not 'endowed by their Creator.'"

Read more from this clown, and even nuttier examples, here (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/the_government_in_genocide_tpm_talks_with_some_sov ereign_citizens.php?ref=tn). There is plenty there for skeptics, rationalists, historians, legal scholars, atheists, and (arguably) evolutionists to hoot at.

It would be merely amusing if these ideas were just crackpot yarns. However, there is a violent and dangerous element to this particular political fringe, as the 60 Minutes report notes. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration's DHS has backed off from pursuing or reporting on it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/homeland-security-department-curtails-home-grown-terror-analysis/2011/06/02/AGQEaDLH_story.html).

People need to take the threat seriously. News coverage, as well as asking what do we do about the sovereign citizen movement on a skeptics' forum, are only parts of a process of educating and motivating people to combat ahistorical conspiracy talk. But law enforcement also needs to play a role in confronting the people who instigate physical harm because of such nonsense.

My understanding is that there are no sovereign citizen guru's out there. Watching a 60 minutes episode on it is something like watching howard sterns hollywood hooker squares. Yes you see hookers but have no idea what they do or even if they are real women.

I have serious doubts that a real one would show his face on tv either. I really dont have enough information to know what you saw.

[Tolls]

It makes you wonder how he managed to stay in business for 20+ years.

[John Albert]

I find it sad. Giordano's isn't great pizza, but it's been a decent standby on occasion.