The Freeman Movement and England

[Mojo]

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059529153&postcount=79


No, that's "private person (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=5199037#post5199037)".

[Stacey Grove]

The Trust debate has moved from the sublime to the ridiculous:-

I like this:
mark1963 wrote:
Because trusts have been so well hidden and all that is discussed is contracts, that's all that folks know about. The grand deception.
This trust stuff is so well hidden the only people that know about it is half a dozen posters on the Icke site. Now all they have got to do is to convince the judiciary that their discovery is the truth.

[D'rok]

I like this:
mark1963 wrote:

This trust stuff is so well hidden the only people that know about it is half a dozen posters on the Icke site. Now all they have got to do is to convince the judiciary that their discovery is the truth.Trust (hah!) the Icke loons to up the ante. We've got to go deeper! Statutory law is actually contract law, but contract law is actually trusts!

Why stop there? Peel back another layer of the onion of deception, oh ye valiant FOTLers! What deep, dark conspiracy lies beneath the mask of trusts!

[tsig]

I like this:
mark1963 wrote:

This trust stuff is so well hidden the only people that know about it is half a dozen posters on the Icke site. Now all they have got to do is to convince the judiciary that their discovery is the truth.

yosick explains it all:

The more education you are exposed to, the less you know.

I expect his knowledge is unlimited.

[gtm]

Perhaps FMOTL is the true conspiracy? Promoted by con men to extract cash from morons?

[Rogue1stclass]

There are rogues, and then there are rogues, if you take my meaning.

Han Solo, Menard is not!

Turns out, it was gas, not offense.

A true rogue doesn't get offended unless it suits his interests to pretend to be so. Not that I particularly like being compared even accidentally to this clown...

[jargon buster]

Yozhik is showing off yet again over on Ickes.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=11
But hey ... I should be flattered.
Being insulted by JREF members is actually an expression of being intimidated and fearful ... otherwise the cowards would be here, debating the points directly, rather than cowering around a Weetabix bowl, beating the monkey into submission.

I was there, until they all conspired to get me banned.
Maybe thats why posters from here dont want to bother signing up and debating with people on Ickes. its all one sided moderation.
Yozhik, if your reading this come and sign up here, theres no bias moderation on this site.
Oh, and you keep asking Rumpole if he has done any research, can you just clear up where and what he should be researching, not youtube videos and commercial redemption sites by any chance.

Oh and by the way , stop waffling on about the whys and wherefores of what you believe trusts to be and how they are used and tell your fellow freemen how they can use your information to enrich their lives.
Is your information and research you have done any use to anyone, or is it just unsubstantiated idiocy spewed onto the page?

[Sledge]

You've almost got to admire the balls of someone willing to say something so stupid. Ban all dissenting voices, then complain that dissentors won't come and debate with you. Brilliant!

[cocana]

You've almost got to admire the balls of someone willing to say something so stupid. Ban all dissenting voices, then complain that dissentors won't come and debate with you. Brilliant!

You've touched on what for me has become the most pertinent point.

Menard, Yozhik, Girlgye, Herald Holmes, Mark1963. They hold court there like freeman royalty and spout complete rubbish, but the usual suspects (often from their own circle) are there to lap it up though. Oh, plus Bones.

Then they proclaim victory over the "naysayers" while conveniently forgetting the "ban dissenters" witch hunt that left only a few rational voices on the forum. This is a victory for the freemen though. Not exactly an inspiring precedent for life in Freeman Valley, eh...?

I think I'm going to make it my new year's resolution to keep away from that forum. The lack of thought there has gone beyond comedy to slightly worrying/mildly disturbing.

"The lunatics have taken over the asylum......"

[Stacey Grove]

I think I'm going to make it my new year's resolution to keep away from that forum.
if you are who I think you are, I do hope you reconsider.
Your input there is first class..er.. that is if you are who I think you are:D

[cocana]

if you are who I think you are, I do hope you reconsider.
Your input there is first class..er.. that is if you are who I think you are:D

I could never reveal my identity now could I?!

:)

[gtm]

I think I'm going to make it my new year's resolution to keep away from that forum. The lack of thought there has gone beyond comedy to slightly worrying/mildly disturbing.

"The lunatics have taken over the asylum......"

+ 1

To my mind they've got even crazier since I started lurking in the Spring.

[cocana]

+ 1

To my mind they've got even crazier since I started lurking in the Spring.

Absolutely agreed. The turning point came when the gurus were pushed on some basic tenets of the law and their beliefs. Since then we've had bannings and, most of all, insane ramblings which have reach far beyond "normal" levels for that freeman forum. They've lost the plot completely now and this latest thing about trusts is a prime example.

O blimey, thanks to you there's another identity to work out now...! ;)

[gtm]

Absolutely agreed. The turning point came when the gurus were pushed on some basic tenets of the law and their beliefs. Since then we've had bannings and, most of all, insane ramblings which have reach far beyond "normal" levels for that freeman forum. They've lost the plot completely now and this latest thing about trusts is a prime example.

O blimey, thanks to you there's another identity to work out now...! ;)

God, the 'Trusts' Aaaaaah :jaw-dropp

They got that from the American commerce & sovereign movements. So much of their theories has been demolished that they have to go looking for new 'tech' - for example, we very rarely hear about maritime law these days.

[cocana]

God, the 'Trusts' Aaaaaah :jaw-dropp

They got that from the American commerce & sovereign movements. So much of their theories has been demolished that they have to go looking for new 'tech' - for example, we very rarely hear about maritime law these days.

O yes, maritime law is everything. That one was a real giggle. Girlgye still has her jaws around that bone even now, so someone needs to wind her up a bit. She rarely fails to take the bait, although she has been slightly more restrained of late.

Next time she shoots off more 'legal' jibber jabber.....

[Horatius]

"The lunatics have taken over the asylum......"




It's the David Icke forum. The lunatics have owned the asylum since the day it opened its doors.

[cocana]

Meanwhile we have Herald Holmes. If someone tees them up he never fails to drive them off.

It would appear that roads, infrastructure and other benefits of statehood are not benefits after all and must be proved to be such. Can't post the link but I'm sure people who dip into the DI Forum will spot what I've seen.

If you dug a 20" deep hole for him, he'd jump in just to spite you! :D

[cocana]

It's the David Icke forum. The lunatics have owned the asylum since the day it opened its doors.

:D

[D'rok]

O yes, maritime law is everything. That one was a real giggle. Girlgye still has her jaws around that bone even now, so someone needs to wind her up a bit. She rarely fails to take the bait, although she has been slightly more restrained of late.

Next time she shoots off more 'legal' jibber jabber.....Don't they ever clue in to the fact that they each have mutually exclusive "truths" about what law really is?

[jargon buster]

O yes, maritime law is everything. That one was a real giggle. Girlgye still has her jaws around that bone even now, so someone needs to wind her up a bit. She rarely fails to take the bait, although she has been slightly more restrained of late.
Ah yes the hysterical Mary Gye, always value for money, she actually accused me of trying to make her commit suicide?????
She also just recently accused me of having "unyielding cruelty" when debating. :confused:
Cant she simply log of or just ignore a comment?

yozhiks going to run away or make a total fool of himself again in a minute.
Rumplestitskin has asked him for some sources of information on his "trusts" theory.
Now if he posts any links to any legally recognised publications hes done for, he could however post some links to some freeman/redemption sites but if he does.......well you get the picture.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=13

[gtm]

Meanwhile we have Herald Holmes. If someone tees them up he never fails to drive them off.

It would appear that roads, infrastructure and other benefits of statehood are not benefits after all and must be proved to be such. Can't post the link but I'm sure people who dip into the DI Forum will spot what I've seen.

If you dug a 20" deep hole for him, he'd jump in just to spite you! :D

He's an troubled teenager who must be a terrible worry to his parents. He should enroll in Freedomskewl University to kick start his career.



http://www.freedomskewl.com/Welcome

[D'rok]

He's an troubled teenager who must be a terrible worry to his parents. He should enroll in Freedomskewl University to kick start his career.



http://www.freedomskewl.com/WelcomeA degree from FK U would be entirely appropriate, methinks.

[Vladd]

Do you mean this?
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059530871&postcount=4

[cocana]

That's the one!

[gtm]

A degree from FK U would be entirely appropriate, methinks.

I wonder what the bar passage stats are like?

[cocana]

I wonder what the bar passage stats are like?

Heaven help us if he got through.

He's done it again now....

[jargon buster]

As usual yozhik fails to deliver anything of substance.
rumpel ... comprehend the absurdity of your proposition.

If I were to tell you where to research, it would be nothing more than a template for self referencing.

Go and read 'Book X' and then 'Document Y' would be a blueprint for the same information from multiple sources being used as supporting 'evidence' for the same conclusion. Go figure.

It would be self perpetuating, with a premise in the quantitative elements in contradistinction to the qualitative.

Which is precisely the flaw in the arguments you and your ilk offer; that being, you all reference the same self governing, self authorising, self referencing, self perpetuating 'authority'.

"Go read the law books"
"Refer to case law"

They're derived from the same source.

Worse yet, those who 'uphold' the law are 'schooled' in the same dogma, lecture the same dogma, advise according to the same dogma, are governed by the same dogmatic figureheads, the same 'schools' and possess the same unquestioning desire and ritualistic faith in the Temple from which the dogma is spewed.

It's cyclic and has no external reference point.

You're an intelligent being of life.
Capable of making your own decisions and demonstrating a level of free will ... yes?

"Go and do some research" should not present any form or hint of an issue or problem to you. However, should you find yourself having to refer to the same books, the same documents, or referencing the same perceived and indoctrinated authorities, then maybe, just maybe, that highlights the insular nature of your 'education', not an absurdity in the challenge itself.

Live a little.
Step outside the box ... the water's fine.

So he cannot give any direction to anything except "go and do your own research"??????
So I used the only thing available to me at the moment and typed "trusts" into Google and pressed "Im feeling Lucky" , what do you know "Wikipedia" page on trust law.
Thanks Yozhik, you are a beacon of light in the dark of these troubled times.

PS maybe I restricted my search by typing in "trusts" :rolleyes:

[cocana]

As usual yozhik fails to deliver anything of substance.


So he cannot give any direction to anything except "go and do your own research"??????
So I used the only thing available to me at the moment and typed "trusts" into Google and pressed "Im feeling Lucky" , what do you know "Wikipedia" page on trust law.
Thanks Yozhik, you are a beacon of light in the dark of these troubled times.

PS maybe I restricted my search by typing in "trusts" :rolleyes:

:D

Yes, the obvious response has to be "OK then, Yozhik, where did you do your research? What are your sources?"

[Mojo]

As usual yozhik fails to deliver anything of substance.


So he cannot give any direction to anything except "go and do your own research"??????
So I used the only thing available to me at the moment and typed "trusts" into Google and pressed "Im feeling Lucky" , what do you know "Wikipedia" page on trust law.
Thanks Yozhik, you are a beacon of light in the dark of these troubled times.

PS maybe I restricted my search by typing in "trusts" :rolleyes:


Should be entertaining if he ever gets to court:

Judge: "Do you have any authority for that proposition?"
FOTLer: "Go and do some research, m'lud."

[LightinDarkness]

Do you mean this?
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059530871&postcount=4

What the freeloaders on the land don't seem to process is that society was here first before they formed their legal mythology. If they want to be free of society, leave. As that crackpot sits there typing that hes enjoying the following benefits:

(1) The Internet: Even if your paying for internet access, the entire thing was invented from government sponsored research and much of the infrastructure has been built up from government grants. In FOTL paradise we would never have had the internet to begin with, and if someone ever did come up with it the cost per person would be obscene.
(2) Fire Protection: The whackjob is living in an area with fire service. If something catches on fire, the government will come to put it out.
(3) Police Protection: Thanks to the evil government, he can sit there and post on the internet and not get gang raped because of that little thing called "the law."
(4) Emergency Medical Benefit: If, while spreading freeman propaganda on the internet, our freeman here happens to have a heart attack - he will get picked up by a government subsidized ambulance and taken to a government subsidized hospital (even in the US, many hospitals have subsidies).
(5) Electricity: Yep, that comes from the mean ole' government too. And whats worse is that the rate the freeloader on the land is paying is subsidized because, like the internet, utility infrastructure was largely built out by government dollars.

Our freeloader on the land benefits from all that without even stepping outside of his door - when things like roads, sidewalks, etc. come into play. Yet for all of their screaming about how they want to be free, NONE OF THEM ARE LEAVING THE EVIL SOCIETY THAT THEY GET SO MUCH BENEFIT FROM! I wonder why?

[jargon buster]

Yes, the obvious response has to be "OK then, Yozhik, where did you do your research? What are your sources?"

And the only answer that will have any validity and hold any sway in court is.........the legal textbooks, which he has already poo pooed as "dogma"
He could just say , I made it all up, though I think thats beyond him.

[Stacey Grove]

It has to be Mary Croft. He's just defended her.
It's a shame you make such glaring assumptions.

Did Mary ever make a claim?
Has she endorsed the thread or the information contained within it?
Have you spoken to Mary about it?
Asked her directly?

Or have you prejudged her, based on your own self referencing, self perpetuating, self governing education?

Interesting you should also mention 'spells'.
Coming from someone who seems to be so sympathetic to an industry based on rituals and spells, with deep rooted association and affiliation with Luciferians ...

Fascinating.

[jargon buster]

http://spiritualeconomicsnow.net/

Alas I think you are correct

[cocana]

What the freeloaders on the land don't seem to process is that society was here first before they formed their legal mythology. If they want to be free of society, leave. As that crackpot sits there typing that hes enjoying the following benefits:

(1) The Internet: Even if your paying for internet access, the entire thing was invented from government sponsored research and much of the infrastructure has been built up from government grants. In FOTL paradise we would never have had the internet to begin with, and if someone ever did come up with it the cost per person would be obscene.
(2) Fire Protection: The whackjob is living in an area with fire service. If something catches on fire, the government will come to put it out.
(3) Police Protection: Thanks to the evil government, he can sit there and post on the internet and not get gang raped because of that little thing called "the law."
(4) Emergency Medical Benefit: If, while spreading freeman propaganda on the internet, our freeman here happens to have a heart attack - he will get picked up by a government subsidized ambulance and taken to a government subsidized hospital (even in the US, many hospitals have subsidies).
(5) Electricity: Yep, that comes from the mean ole' government too. And whats worse is that the rate the freeloader on the land is paying is subsidized because, like the internet, utility infrastructure was largely built out by government dollars.

Our freeloader on the land benefits from all that without even stepping outside of his door - when things like roads, sidewalks, etc. come into play. Yet for all of their screaming about how they want to be free, NONE OF THEM ARE LEAVING THE EVIL SOCIETY THAT THEY GET SO MUCH BENEFIT FROM! I wonder why?

Hypocrites indeed.

I think the flavour of that is coming out nicely in their posts.

[jargon buster]

I think Yozhik is dafter than Menard
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137803
When given the answer that a bill of sale is proof of ownership of a vehicle he responds in all seriousness with
Who issues the bill?
Who is the holder?
What proof exists the bill has been satisfied?

Im sure he must know the answer to those questions himself

[cocana]

I think Yozhik is dafter than Menard
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=137803
When given the answer that a bill of sale is proof of ownership of a vehicle he responds in all seriousness with


Im sure he must know the answer to those questions himself

He's in serious danger of getting dafter still on the "Walking the Walk" thread.

[gtm]

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059531319&postcount=56

In particular this line:-

I had to buy his car of my mum so she had the money to bury him..

H2pogo could have dipped his hand in his pocket & paid for his own fathers funeral.

[jargon buster]

Why the need for the car to change hands???

jeez.... a guy with money in the bank to pay to bury his dad takes his dead dads car away from his grieving mother.

Way to go honourable freeman H2Pogo

[cocana]

Harsh, but O so true....

[jargon buster]

Yes , harsh maybe but you can rest assured I would have spit it in his face if I had been over there.
Unyielding cruelty, girlgye may just have a point.

[D'rok]

H2pogo could have dipped his hand in his pocket & paid for his own fathers funeral.Where's the benefit in that?

Jeez, I think you guys need to do more research into contract law.

[cocana]

As if by magic, Girlgye appears with the "reverse proof" reasoning -

Stead v Miller 1877 do not apply in this case. Yes Trusts need to be administratively workable and if proven then that they are indeed workable Trusts that lawful opinion fails and in particular whereupon the party wishes to renegue on their part in that said Trust.

Would the rule against perpetuities apply to the Sovereign also?

I doubt, moot point. You have no proof and cannot proof it one way the other. In short you do not know.

Once it's paid it's gone. How so? Who says? Is that a fact? Prove it to me.


Nothing if not predictable. Even better for her that it dodges the subject matter of the thread at the same time.

[gtm]

As if by magic, Girlgye appears with the "reverse proof" reasoning -



Nothing if not predictable. Even better for her that it dodges the subject matter of the thread at the same time.


There are as yet undiscovered tribes in the Amazonian rain forest who have a better grip on Steed v Miller than Girlgye ever will.

[cocana]

Very true.

She's always miffed, but I think she's more miffed today because Rob has said that freemen shouldn't claim benefits and didn't change his position when she politely sought to challenge him on it. Look out world, Mary's on the war path again.

[jargon buster]

I just pity the poor unfortunate who will at some point have to share a cell with her.

[Vladd]

Maybe HM Prison service could sort out a Freeman wing in one of Her Majesty's corporate hotels.

[LightinDarkness]

Does anyone else notice that girlgye seems to be acting more and more...unhinged...as time goes on? Shes never been all there really, and really you can't be totally sane to buy this freeman stuff whole sale and go to jail for it and STILL think its true, but as I read her writing over time it seems to be devolving and becoming less coherent and more the ramblings of a genuinely mentally ill person.

[tsig]

Does anyone else notice that girlgye seems to be acting more and more...unhinged...as time goes on? Shes never been all there really, and really you can't be totally sane to buy this freeman stuff whole sale and go to jail for it and STILL think its true, but as I read her writing over time it seems to be devolving and becoming less coherent and more the ramblings of a genuinely mentally ill person.

I was about to say she's starting to act more and more like an amped up rat in a cadge.

[tsig]

Why the need for the car to change hands???

jeez.... a guy with money in the bank to pay to bury his dad takes his dead dads car away from his grieving mother.

Way to go honourable freeman H2Pogo

He's a freeman, what's he owe his mother anyway...oh wait.

The amazing thing is he's proud of it.

[cocana]

Does anyone else notice that girlgye seems to be acting more and more...unhinged...as time goes on? Shes never been all there really, and really you can't be totally sane to buy this freeman stuff whole sale and go to jail for it and STILL think its true, but as I read her writing over time it seems to be devolving and becoming less coherent and more the ramblings of a genuinely mentally ill person.

I don't recall a time when she has ever come across as sane. She has really got a bee in her bonnet on the freeloader issue though. The weight of opinion went against her, even Rob went against her, and she got the total arse with that. Shame.

;)

[jargon buster]

I think it is a safe assumption that Ms Gye is living on state handouts.
Im sure this is the reason she so staunchly defends the position of others accepting them.
Oh and she is unhinged by the way.
She constantly complains who exhausted she is answering everyones questions and "researching", this researching nonsense consists of trawling freeman/commercial redemption sites.
The secretive law society could easily outwit the freeman researchers by just not posting stuff op the web, because thats the only place they look.

[cocana]

What, you mean true researchers get off their backsides and trawl for all the evidence?! My word that's anathema to a freeman.

[gtm]

I think it is a safe assumption that Ms Gye is living on state handouts.
Im sure this is the reason she so staunchly defends the position of others accepting them.
Oh and she is unhinged by the way.
She constantly complains who exhausted she is answering everyones questions and "researching", this researching nonsense consists of trawling freeman/commercial redemption sites.
The secretive law society could easily outwit the freeman researchers by just not posting stuff op the web, because thats the only place they look.


You've touched on an interesting point. How does a Freeman 'research'? Quite often one of the little tinkers will proudly announce he's been 'researching' & unleash a pile of pseudo legal manure on his adoring audience. I agree most of them recycle stuff they find on other freeman / sovereign citizen / commerce sites but the 'Gurus' are expected to come up with fresh dung in order to maintain their 'Guru' status.

I suspect there is a fair bit of cross fertilization from other conspiracy theories. For example over on Icke the new 'fashionable' clod of faeces is the idea that the Roman Catholic Church have some how or other enslaved us via some kind of super secret trust. This was done by Boniface V111 via the Unam Sactam Bull. This is good old fashioned anti clericalism & has been around for centuries.

[Mojo]

You've touched on an interesting point. How does a Freeman 'research'? Quite often one of the little tinkers will proudly announce he's been 'researching' & unleash a pile of pseudo legal manure on his adoring audience. I agree most of them recycle stuff they find on other freeman / sovereign citizen / commerce sites but the 'Gurus' are expected to come up with fresh dung in order to maintain their 'Guru' status.


You see the same sort of thing happening with homoeopaths. Most of them only ever seem to read what other homoeopaths have written. While there are a few out there producing new material (much of which is then misinterpreted, or is the result of misinterpretation itself), most of them just rely on whatever other homoeopaths say. If you ask for a source for a claim, you will (if they bother to cite a source at all) just be directed to the same information on another homoeopath's website. I suspect that this means that most of them are quite unaware that their claims are wrong.

[jargon buster]

You've touched on an interesting point. How does a Freeman 'research'? Quite often one of the little tinkers will proudly announce he's been 'researching' & unleash a pile of pseudo legal manure on his adoring audience.

If you trace back all their "research" it must originally source from a law/legal textbook.
They however can only misquote and misrepresent the meaning of the said books to achieve any success.
Yozhiks "trusts" thread is a classic example, he constantly dodged the issue of where he got the information for the basis of his argument because to reveal that it was from a legal/lawful source would have destroyed his argument, and also revealing it didnt come from a recognised source would have had the same effect.

not very bright is yozhik

[gtm]

You see the same sort of thing happening with homoeopaths. Most of them only ever seem to read what other homoeopaths have written. While there are a few out there producing new material (much of which is then misinterpreted, or is the result of misinterpretation itself), most of them just rely on whatever other homoeopaths say. If you ask for a source for a claim, you will (if they bother to cite a source at all) just be directed to the same information on another homoeopath's website. I suspect that this means that most of them are quite unaware that their claims are wrong.


The same garbage repeated on various different sites gives it the illusion of legitimacy.

[Mojo]

The same garbage repeated on various different sites gives it the illusion of legitimacy.


The trouble is that it all falls over when it comes up against the real world. For example a claim that four out of five comprehensive systematic reviews are positive for homoeopathy has been going around the internet for years, but when it was submitted as evidence to a parliamentary committee it was rapidly shot down.

Of course, homoeopaths have claimed that this is because the committee was in on the conspiracy. ;)

[gtm]

If you trace back all their "research" it must originally source from a law/legal textbook.
They however can only misquote and misrepresent the meaning of the said books to achieve any success.
Yozhiks "trusts" thread is a classic example, he constantly dodged the issue of where he got the information for the basis of his argument because to reveal that it was from a legal/lawful source would have destroyed his argument, and also revealing it didnt come from a recognised source would have had the same effect.

not very bright is yozhik

Naaah, wikipedia at best. None of them own a legal text book or can be bother to borrow one from the library - too much like hard work.

I blame Blacks (no good freeman can do without a copy) for alot of this. They look at an entry, get over excited & then 'research' the term / maxim & come up with a typically ludicrous conclusion.

[cocana]

Here's some classic Yozhik critical analysis, from "Government and the Rule of Law Exposed":

Originally Posted by rumpole
They be ye olde Roman Law maxims (& about as much use as a chocolate teapot)







According to who or what?
Use of whom?
In which context?


Or given your narrow focus in your replies on this forum, would it be safe to assume that you are speaking purely from a 'law' stand point and your statement would be more accurately phrased as;

"they are older Roman Law maxims which have served their use and have now been judged by the judiciary and the courts to be of no use to current legal procedures and have no further relevance to jurisprudence or legal process ..."

Which of course will be followed up by the cursory, stock standard justification of;
"Society progresses ... the law and its processes need to reflect that evolution ..."
Is that fairly accurate, if not in words, then in general principles?

Criticising the law for moving with the times. How dare those lawyer types! What ARE you saying Yozhik? Maybe it's something like this:

"Lets have some latin please and lots of it. Damn those freemen for previously saying that the law is incomprehensible, we want it to be more incomprehensible, that's the answer. And we'll have a good old moan about at being even more incomprehensible from the re-introduction of latin at some later date.

While we're at it, let's bring in some good old laws eh?! Lets have some dunking stools and gallows. Debtors prison and the colonies too, for those who don't act honourably with their finances. O hang on, that screws most freemen. Ummmm, oh I don't know. What was I saying?"

[cocana]

Naaah, wikipedia at best. None of them own a legal text book or can be bother to borrow one from the library - too much like hard work.

I blame Blacks (no good freeman can do without a copy) for alot of this. They look at an entry, get over excited & then 'research' the term / maxim & come up with a typically ludicrous conclusion.

Yup.

Doesn't inspire confidence that Girlgye thinks Halsbury's Laws is "Hansburys" so I'm pretty confident that she's never even seen a volume, let alone read one. Then again her misspelling is not exactly the only reason for concluding that she has never done any legal research.

[jargon buster]

The same garbage repeated on various different sites gives it the illusion of legitimacy.

An ideal example of this is the term "an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in law" that they throw around.
If you google "unrebutted affidavit" it only shows results on various freeman/commercial redemption sites.
Now to an individual with a scrap of intelligence that should set alarm bells ringing as to its validity, but oh no, not the freeman convert he sees various sources and sees it as the truth.

I just love the idea that you can send an affidavit to a third party and he doesnt rebut it prior to court then they can produce the affidavit in court and its "game set and match".
They also write "without predjudice" on the bottom of them all without realising its implications as well.:rolleyes:

[talkie toaster]

I wonder if Yozik is single.

Can you imagine the converstaions with his partner.

"Would you like a cup of tea dear"

"Well do you mean "I" as in me personally as a sentient being and not a figment of a corporate straw man or "I" as in the person/individual with all assumed god given rights.

"Just you really dear, I'm making a cup of tea just wondered if you'd like one"

"Is that cup as the meaning of the container or cup as in......."

Sound of door slamming

"of course that raises the question of trusts, in me accepting a cup of tea from you where is the trust, who is the beneficiary of the....hello....hello....have you gone love...hello!"

[cocana]

i wonder if yozik is single.

Can you imagine the converstaions with his partner.

"would you like a cup of tea dear"

"well do you mean "i" as in me personally as a sentient being and not a figment of a corporate straw man or "i" as in the person/individual with all assumed god given rights.

"just you really dear, i'm making a cup of tea just wondered if you'd like one"

"is that cup as the meaning of the container or cup as in......."

sound of door slamming

"of course that raises the question of trusts, in me accepting a cup of tea from you where is the trust, who is the beneficiary of the....hello....hello....have you gone love...hello!"

lol!!

:d

[Sledge]

What is the "without prejudice" thing supposed to mean anyway?

[jargon buster]

Excellent post talkie toaster, I was thinking along those lines the other day reading his posts, I think someone should post him a link to that. ;)

[cocana]

What is the "without prejudice" thing supposed to mean anyway?

Can't be used in court proceedings. Hence that blinding freeman logic - "an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in court" and they mark it "without prejudice"....

:jaw-dropp

[jargon buster]

If you write "without prejudice" on any letters between you and a third party in an attempt to settle a dispute they cannot be used in any later legal proceedings.

edit: oops thanks cocana

[Sledge]

I want to say "that's the most retarded thing I've ever heard," but it's just par for the course with FOTL.

[Horatius]

The same garbage repeated on various different sites gives it the illusion of legitimacy.



The echo chamber effect is endemic to pretty much all the CTs I've looked at. Every so often, one of the CT proponents will post a list of "quotes" that claim to prove that various people have "admitted the truth" about their favourite theory, and these lists are inevitably just cut-and-paste jobs from other CT sources. Every time I've bothered to track down the original source for any selected quote (once going so far as to pay out of pocket for a reprint of an article!), it turns out the quote either almost certainly never existed (that is, they're only found on CT websites, usually quoting the very same list!), was seriously altered, or was taken so far out of context as to completely change the intended meaning.

And yet, none of the CTists promoting such lists has ever bothered to do the same, despite their constant crowing about how much "research" they've done.

[Horatius]

Can't be used in court proceedings. Hence that blinding freeman logic - "an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in court" and they mark it "without prejudice"....

:jaw-dropp

If you write "without prejudice" on any letters between you and a third party in an attempt to settle a dispute they cannot be used in any later legal proceedings.

edit: oops thanks cocana



Now that's some high-quality foot-shooting, right there!

[cocana]

At some point someone needs to start a thread or a webpage in the Colemanballs spirit.

Freemanballs, yep that should do it.

The without prejudice one is great

Practically any of the strawman stuff would be a dead cert too

I'm also partial to a good laugh about their maritime law theories, standing in the "dock" being a prime example

The berth (oow, "berth" - maritime again!) certificate is a treasury stock receipt stuff should make an appearance too. "But there's an email from the government confirming that this isn't true." "Ah yes, but that denial proves the conspiracy"

[jargon buster]

The freemen always like to throw in this little gem from Edward Mandell House

http://www.freedompool.org/HouseQuote.htm
NOW BEAR IN MIND IT WAS SAID IN A PRIVATE MEETING BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE.
1.Who wrote it down?
2. How accurate was the transcript if it existed at all?
A classic example of repeaters who never use rationale and logic because the information suits the agenda.

[cocana]

The freemen always like to throw in this little gem from Edward Mandell House

http://www.freedompool.org/HouseQuote.htm
NOW BEAR IN MIND IT WAS SAID IN A PRIVATE MEETING BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE.
1.Who wrote it down
2. How accurate was the transcript if it existed at all.
A classic example of repeaters who never use rationale and logic because the information suits the agenda.

Ha ha ha! Yes, that's a brilliant example!

[Mojo]

Doesn't inspire confidence that Girlgye thinks Halsbury's Laws is "Hansburys" so I'm pretty confident that she's never even seen a volume, let alone read one.


Have any of them referred to "Archibald" yet?

[Mojo]

Naaah, wikipedia at best. None of them own a legal text book or can be bother to borrow one from the library - too much like hard work.

I blame Blacks (no good freeman can do without a copy) for alot of this. They look at an entry, get over excited & then 'research' the term / maxim & come up with a typically ludicrous conclusion.


Also, remember that they can't be bothered to buy a copy or go to a library (not that many libraries in the UK would stock an American law dictionary) so they are relying on the editions freely available on the internet, which are about a century out of date.

[Horatius]

The freemen always like to throw in this little gem from Edward Mandell House

http://www.freedompool.org/HouseQuote.htm
NOW BEAR IN MIND IT WAS SAID IN A PRIVATE MEETING BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE.
1.Who wrote it down?
2. How accurate was the transcript if it existed at all?
A classic example of repeaters who never use rationale and logic because the information suits the agenda.



That looks like the Freeman version of the "Mike the NJ EMT (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=74291)" e-mail the 9/11 truthers were all salivating over a few years back.

Isn't it just so convenient for one of THEM to have summed up the entire basis for the FoTLer's beliefs in such a neat little package? Who knew that real-life Super-villains actually do give away their plans in well-written monologues?

:rolleyes:

[cocana]

Have any of them referred to "Archibald" yet?

Girlgye should be familiar, but unsurprisingly....

[Mashuna]

Yup.

Doesn't inspire confidence that Girlgye thinks Halsbury's Laws is "Hansburys" so I'm pretty confident that she's never even seen a volume, let alone read one. Then again her misspelling is not exactly the only reason for concluding that she has never done any legal research.

Maybe it's a new mashup book, combining Halsbury's with Hansard. Now you can check what laws those scheming politicians are discussing.

[cocana]

Has Girlgye just taken wackiness to a new level? Ladies and gentlemen I give you the following from the "Mary Croft Appointing the Judge as Trustee" thread:

The patriot Movement has been going officially for 40 years.
There are people around alot longer than Menard, Croft and the latter Frank O Collins.

However, I went in and discussed this stuff before it became fashionable a la Croft and O Collins
At that time Croft et al were talking about using the BC as a payment for set off.

Suggest you trawl through here on the resource section just like everyone else is told they have to.

As I said to Mark when he asked me. Go and study this yourself. In English Case Law. Then go and watch some cases and even so put it to the judge yourself.

I did and am firmly convinced they relied on Equity methods to wriggle out of the questionning just as the beautiful example elucidated. MikeD can vouch for it.

As you know they stole the tape off me.

An Equity Court is a Trust
The judge is the Fiduciary
The Victim is the benfeficiary
and the contestants are the Trustees.
The Crown (who is the Crown) is the Grantor.

Prove me wrong.
Your case law is ******** and you know it.

:jaw-dropp

I'm having trouble catching my breath! The court process is one gigantic trust. Yeah, right Girlgye. Take another pill soon, please.

Still, she's inviting someone to prove that she's talking bollocks. Well that won't be hard. Who is up for it?

Trouble is that she is so convinced about her insane ramblings that nothing is going to shake her. She even says,

Prove me wrong.
Your case law is ******** and you know it.

This is simply beautiful and a brand new Freemanball right there. Proof = no proof, Girlgye = gospel.

[Stacey Grove]

At last we have finally learned where yozhik has done his research: Mary and Frank.

[Stacey Grove]

I'm having trouble catching my breath! The court process is one gigantic trust.

How fiendishly evil. Even those corrupt oath swearing judges are unaware of this deep dark secret set in place by... who actually set it in place?

[cocana]

How fiendishly evil. Even those corrupt oath swearing judges are unaware of this deep dark secret set in place by... who actually set it in place?

Has to be the Romans. They're the flavour of the week it seems.

Also, to what end has this trusts conspiracy been deployed? Like, WTF! An evil judicial conspiracy to get money and property paid over to people who make claims for it in court? SOOOOOO eviiiiiiiiiiiiillllllllllllllll!!

Can we also take her comments again, line by line, just to fully absorb the lunacy:

An Equity Court is a Trust

WTF (again)?!

The judge is the Fiduciary

What about the "contestants"?

The Victim is the benfeficiary

Presumably she means beneficiary. What about when the Defendant is successful? To be fair, I suppose she might mean that Defendants are "Victims" as well

and the contestants are the Trustees.

O, hang on, the Claimant and Defendant are trustees as well as beneficiaries. What about the judge? Say again Mary. Totally flummoxed now.

The Crown (who is the Crown) is the Grantor.

Well, I'm glad the Crown is the Crown. Big relief. Oh, but the Crown is the Grantor too. What exactly is the Crown granting? Don't tell me, the Crown is granting some rights to money or property through the court to the Claimant and the Defendant, who then as trustees and presumably in consultation with the judge/trustee/fiduciary decide to award it to one or other of themselves.

O yeah Mary, that makes sense. :boggled:

[D'rok]

I suppose someone has, at some point, tried to explain to her that there is no such thing as a separate Equity court anymore?

Not that it would have any effect.

[cocana]

I suppose someone has, at some point, tried to explain to her that there is no such thing as a separate Equity court anymore?

Not that it would have any effect.

Yep, that one was tried long ago. You are absolutely correct with your assessment too - she wasn't having any of it.

Your powers of prediction are quite something. The force is strong in you. :)

[Stacey Grove]

Has to be the Romans.
Of course. Everything boils down to those blighters.




Well, I'm glad the Crown is the Crown. Big relief. Oh, but the Crown is the Grantor too. What exactly is the Crown granting? Don't tell me, the Crown is granting some rights to money or property through the court to the Claimant and the Defendant, who then as trustees and presumably in consultation with the judge/trustee/fiduciary decide to award it to one or other of themselves.

Hold on, hold on, you may have just discovered the secret of accessing the bond.:jaw-dropp
I've come over all emotional.:D

[D'rok]

Yep, that one was tried long ago. You are absolutely correct with your assessment too - she wasn't having any of it.

Your powers of prediction are quite something. The force is strong in you. :)
These are not the trusts you are looking for (waves hand).

[cocana]

Of course. Everything boils down to those blighters.




Hold on, hold on, you may have just discovered the secret of accessing the bond.:jaw-dropp
I've come over all emotional.:D

To be fair, I have to give Mary some credit for that one.

It's all so easy, it seems. All we need to do is get a group of us together, running both sides of a dispute, each side claiming a sensationally huge sum and it gets granted to us through the court trust.

Gee thanks Mary. We're millionaires in the making and you were the key. :rolleyes:

[gtm]

I suppose someone has, at some point, tried to explain to her that there is no such thing as a separate Equity court anymore?

Not that it would have any effect.

Ah ha. Actually there is one (but I doubt girlgye was thinking about it)

http://courts.state.de.us/Chancery/index.stm

It's a sort of legal coelacanth.

[sophia8]

The freemen always like to throw in this little gem from Edward Mandell House

http://www.freedompool.org/HouseQuote.htmThis reads like an addendum to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It even uses the same hands-rubbing bwahahah the cattle chattel will never guess our brilliant plan! type of language.

[D'rok]

Ah ha. Actually there is one (but I doubt girlgye was thinking about it)

http://courts.state.de.us/Chancery/index.stm

It's a sort of legal coelacanth.Well I'll be...

I had no idea. This is kind of awesome.

[cocana]

Don't forget we do still have the Chancery Division of the High Court in the UK as well, although our courts have administered common law and equity concurrently for 130+ years.

[D'rok]

Ah ha. Actually there is one (but I doubt girlgye was thinking about it)

http://courts.state.de.us/Chancery/index.stm

It's a sort of legal coelacanth.
This is fascinating for a law nerd:

http://courts.state.de.us/Chancery/history.stm

and the obligatory...

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

[cocana]

PS - Sorry, slightly off topic but going back to my Freemanballs of earlier, I forgot the obvious Rob Menard classic

I use logic and reason

[tsig]

Has Girlgye just taken wackiness to a new level? Ladies and gentlemen I give you the following from the "Mary Croft Appointing the Judge as Trustee" thread:



:jaw-dropp

I'm having trouble catching my breath! The court process is one gigantic trust. Yeah, right Girlgye. Take another pill soon, please.

Still, she's inviting someone to prove that she's talking bollocks. Well that won't be hard. Who is up for it?

Trouble is that she is so convinced about her insane ramblings that nothing is going to shake her. She even says,



This is simply beautiful and a brand new Freemanball right there. Proof = no proof, Girlgye = gospel.

Looks like a straightforward bid for leadership. Note:

The patriot Movement has been going officially for 40 years.
There are people around alot longer than Menard, Croft and the latter Frank O Collins.


That seems to be an Appeal to Ancient Authority.

Will Rob take this laying down or foaming over? Will he find a Higher Authority?

Lesson to be learned:

"Never get between a freeman and their freeloading.

[tsig]

To be fair, I have to give Mary some credit for that one.

It's all so easy, it seems. All we need to do is get a group of us together, running both sides of a dispute, each side claiming a sensationally huge sum and it gets granted to us through the court trust.

Gee thanks Mary. We're millionaires in the making and you were the key. :rolleyes:

Ay, ye may win the judgment but who's to pay?

[cocana]

Ay, ye may win the judgment but who's to pay?

According to Mary's analysis, the Crown. Genius. Maybe. Possibly. I think. :boggled:

[gtm]

This is fascinating for a law nerd:

http://courts.state.de.us/Chancery/history.stm

and the obligatory...

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

Yes, note the extremely unsubtle dig at the English Courts of Chancery in the Delaware blurb. I think a pompous email is in order setting them right.

As for legal oddities here in England we can ace the Delawarians on all fronts. We have a Court of Chivalry

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

& we also have various consistorial courts that deal with ecclesiastical law.

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

We also have odd ball legal professionals. Check out these guys!

http://www.scrivener-notaries.org.uk/

The freemen ascribe almost superhuman powers to Notaries so the mind boggles as to what will happen when they find out about the scriveners.

[jargon buster]

At last we have finally learned where yozhik has done his research: Mary and Frank.

thats worse than I originally thought :eek:
He has contacted two separate people and took their word at face value without any further "research" whatsoever.??????
Well, he is a "would be" freeman after all, and thats common practice.

[D'rok]

Yes, note the extremely unsubtle dig at the English Courts of Chancery in the Delaware blurb. I think a pompous email is in order setting them right.
The role of procedural and doctrinal inflexibility in the decline of England's Chancery Court contrasts with the determination of Delaware's Chancellors over two centuries to eschew broad rules in favor of specific holdings and carefully crafted remedies that address the particular circumstances of the case at hand.
Indeed. I say, and all that.


As for legal oddities here in England we can ace the Delawarians on all fronts. We have a Court of Chivalry

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

:eye-poppi Last convened in 1954?

& we also have various consistorial courts that deal with ecclesiastical law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistory_court
They probably have kickass robes

We also have odd ball legal professionals. Check out these guys!

http://www.scrivener-notaries.org.uk/

The freemen ascribe almost superhuman powers to Notaries so the mind boggles as to what will happen when they find out about the scriveners.Scriveners. That even sounds vaguely Harry Potterish. Fevered FOTL imaginations will love this.

[D'rok]

I think this nicely sums up the Freeman dream:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149835

Dude runs away from his debts in England and ends up in Spain. That didn't work out and now he has to return to Blighty. So, obviously, he needs FOTL legal expertise on how to avoid his creditors when he gets back.

[gtm]

I think this nicely sums up the Freeman dream:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149835

Dude runs away from his debts in England and ends up in Spain. That didn't work out and now he has to return to Blighty. So, obviously, he needs FOTL legal expertise on how to avoid his creditors when he gets back.

Provided he has the wit to read the right post he should be fine :D

BTW don't knock the Harry Potter Lawyers - I'm reliably informed by my city cronies that Scriveners make pot loads of money (even more than Patent Agents). Being an embittered hack I'm inclined to set the freemen on them :D

[D'rok]

Provided he has the wit to read the right post he should be fine :D
What happens if an action was brought while he was abroad, despite his absence? Is that possible? Does that vitiate the statutory limitation period?

BTW don't knock the Harry Potter Lawyers - I'm reliably informed by my city cronies that Scriveners make pot loads of money (even more than Patent Agents). Being an embittered hack I'm inclined to set the freemen on them :D
Please do! I get no end of entertainment from this stuff.

[jargon buster]

The freemen ascribe almost superhuman powers to Notaries so the mind boggles as to what will happen when they find out about the scriveners.

Ah yes, the notaries they hold in such esteem whos authourity is derived from the Notaries Act which they dont acknowledge as a real law.

[gtm]

What happens if an action was brought while he was abroad, despite his absence? Is that possible? Does that vitiate the statutory limitation period?


Please do! I get no end of entertainment from this stuff.

They could have served a Claim Form on his last known & then obtained a default judgement when he failed to file a Defence. They'd have 6 years from when they obtained the Judgement to enforce.

Credit Card Companies write cases like this down as a bad debt & then assign them to Debt Collectors for a fraction of the real sum owed. For freeman this gives rise to the ridiculous 'defence' that they have no contract with the debt collectors & therefore don't have to pay. This is naturally wrong. The curtains went up on the contract upon default. All thats left is the debt & that can be sold on without 'consent' or silliness like Novation Agreements (note to self - tell freemen about Novation :jaw-dropp).

[jargon buster]

yozhik seems to be nursing a bulge in his trousers over on Ickes accusing me of being an idiot.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=16

He now claims to have done further research on his "Trusts theory" alongside taking the word of Mary and Frank and that I failed to notice that he had mentioned this.

Now yozhik, I know you are reading this, please tell everyone on David Ickes where you did your other research?

You either took it from Commercial Redemption/Freeman sites or the legal/lawful textbooks you claimed to be indoctrinated dogma.
So which is it?

By the way, were you and this guy separated at birth?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Logic
Here is an example; Mr Logic is in charge of the till at the local off-licence

Armed Robber: No nonsense. Just give me all your money.

Mr Logic: I shall commence by pointing out to you that my demeanour is not one which could be described as nonsensical. Consequently I can attest you have no cause to reprimand me on your first point. On to your second point: Bearing in mind the potentially lethal situation in which I find myself, to wit: your presence in conjunction with the presumably loaded firearm which is presently levelled at my cranium, I will comply with your request comprehensively, albeit reluctantly. Here, twenty-seven pence.

Armed Robber: Twenty-seven pence? **** off. There's more than that in the till.

Mr Logic: Indeed, undoubtedly so. However your request was for *my* money. The currency in the till belongs to a third party and is therefore not "my money". However, if you are still desirous of said money I would suggest that you re-phrase your original statement to recognise and incorporate this important distinction.
You are opposite sides of the same coin, Mr logic is always right.
PS if anyone is posting over there please link this for him :)

[jargon buster]

a little insight into the workings of Mary Gye.
After a little spat with her sidekick yozhik, she posted this
I wasn't aiming at you Matt.
After all you should know THERE IS NO CONTEST IS THERE? And mean that sincerely albeit cynically.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=16
mmmm....wasn't that subtle?
Revealing his name to the forum and as such exposing his underbelly to the trolls, sorry skeptics.
It would appear she does want the top dog position after all.

[D'rok]

yozhik seems to be nursing a bulge in his trousers over on Ickes accusing me of being an idiot.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=16

He now claims to have done further research on his "Trusts theory" alongside taking the word of Mary and Frank and that I failed to notice that he had mentioned this.

Now yozhik, I know you are reading this, please tell everyone on David Ickes where you did your other research?

You either took it from Commercial Redemption/Freeman sites or the legal/lawful textbooks you claimed to be indoctrinated dogma.
So which is it?

By the way, were you and this guy separated at birth?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Logic

You are opposite sides of the same coin, Mr logic is always right.
PS if anyone is posting over there please link this for him :)

Proxy-up and head on over. Do it for the LOLs.

[cocana]

yozhik seems to be nursing a bulge in his trousers over on Ickes accusing me of being an idiot.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=16

He now claims to have done further research on his "Trusts theory" alongside taking the word of Mary and Frank and that I failed to notice that he had mentioned this.

Now yozhik, I know you are reading this, please tell everyone on David Ickes where you did your other research?

You either took it from Commercial Redemption/Freeman sites or the legal/lawful textbooks you claimed to be indoctrinated dogma.
So which is it?

By the way, were you and this guy separated at birth?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Logic

You are opposite sides of the same coin, Mr logic is always right.
PS if anyone is posting over there please link this for him :)

He's caught between a rock and a hard place as it is. He reads this forum, that much he has demonstrated already. Now he either needs to pull out his retracted balls and answer the question or sit there frustrated.

Or maybe unload them on the weetabix that he's so fond of.

:)

[D'rok]

They could have served a Claim Form on his last known & then obtained a default judgement when he failed to file a Defence. They'd have 6 years from when they obtained the Judgement to enforce.

Credit Card Companies write cases like this down as a bad debt & then assign them to Debt Collectors for a fraction of the real sum owed. For freeman this gives rise to the ridiculous 'defence' that they have no contract with the debt collectors & therefore don't have to pay. This is naturally wrong. The curtains went up on the contract upon default. All thats left is the debt & that can be sold on without 'consent' or silliness like Novation Agreements
Understood. Gracias
(note to self - tell freemen about Novation :jaw-dropp).The silly bastards are way ahead of you:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059526075&postcount=37

[Stacey Grove]

Now yozhik, I know you are reading this, please tell everyone on David Ickes where you did your other research?

You either took it from Commercial Redemption/Freeman sites or the legal/lawful textbooks you claimed to be indoctrinated dogma.
So which is it?


My money's on more nutjob sites. yozhik's a complete idiot.

[Horatius]

We also have odd ball legal professionals. Check out these guys!

http://www.scrivener-notaries.org.uk/

The freemen ascribe almost superhuman powers to Notaries so the mind boggles as to what will happen when they find out about the scriveners.



Qualifying examinations for Scrivener notaries are set by the Scriveners Company (“the Worshipful Company of Scriveners of the City of London”).


I don't know if that will make them scream "A-ha! Told you so!", or run in terror.....

[jargon buster]

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149694&page=15

I think you're missing the point of a "society". What is a society, but a group that has specific rules that must be followed by its members? What do you think a statute is? A RULE OF A SOCIETY that has been given the force of law BY CONSENT of the governed (members).

All aboard!!!!!
Its the freeman merry-go-around.

[jargon buster]

yozhik is flailing around again
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149421&page=2

he wrote
If they'd been able to 'research' and think outside their self referencing world for just one moment, they could have picked that bit of info up from the 'Freedom Movement' YEARS ago.


So he is just parroting freeman sites, its all clear now.
He "researches" freeman sites and cross references them against legal lawful avenues and then dismisses the real stuff and goes with the freeman drivel taken from the valid law sites that has been tweaked to suit an agenda.

Well done yozhik

[D'rok]

yozhik is flailing around again
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149421&page=2

he wrote


So he is just parroting freeman sites, its all clear now.
He "researches" freeman sites and cross references them against legal lawful avenues and then dismisses the real stuff and goes with the freeman drivel taken from the valid law sites that has been tweaked to suit an agenda.

Well done yozhikThe "Freedom Movement" is basing its "research" on equity on an obscure court in Delaware? Sheesh. They're even dimmer than I thought. Is that where they try all their test cases? Kind of inconvenient if you have to travel there from elsewhere and all you've got is a WFS laissez passer and a dole cheque.

Never mind that equity and common law were merged in the UK in 1875 and pretty much every other common law jurisdiction immediately followed suit. There's one minor jurisdiction that didn't! See, you ignorant shills!

[D'rok]

yozhik is flailing around again
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149421&page=2

he wrote


So he is just parroting freeman sites, its all clear now.
He "researches" freeman sites and cross references them against legal lawful avenues and then dismisses the real stuff and goes with the freeman drivel taken from the valid law sites that has been tweaked to suit an agenda.

Well done yozhikAh, so since this Yozhik chap and the other legal beagles over at Icke's are so on the ball, they must have known about this Delaware court long before we did here. I wonder how they found out about it?

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1058850373&postcount=123

:eek:

[Ladewig]

The freemen always like to throw in this little gem from Edward Mandell House

http://www.freedompool.org/HouseQuote.htm
NOW BEAR IN MIND IT WAS SAID IN A PRIVATE MEETING BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE.
1.Who wrote it down?
2. How accurate was the transcript if it existed at all?
A classic example of repeaters who never use rationale and logic because the information suits the agenda.

After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

I apologize for the triteness but this really does follow the form so popular with the kids these days.

1. construct imaginary funds by creating a lien.
2. keep the lien secret or you will have to surrender all the imaginary funds.
3. ?????
4. PROFIT!

[jargon buster]

Well, Im feeling pretty pleased with myself this morning after reading Yozhiks post over on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149904
They ban me from debating and then start threads about me when Im gone, I only need girlgye to start one now and thats the "big three" :)

Yozhik has now claimed to have researched freeman redemption sites, legal lawful textbooks and some "other" sources to form his opinions on his "trusts" theory.

He has clearly stated that he believes any legal/lawful sources are simply "dogma" and therefore useless.
So by that rationale his information can only come from freeman sites and "other" sources.
So given that all freeman/redemption sites use legal/lawful references for their study they can be discounted as dogma also.

Question is yozhik, where is this "other" source of your "research"

You see you have built a rod for your own back with your inane ramblings because anything you wish to use to defend your position in a court of law you must be able to credit a LEGAL/LAWFUL REFERENCE.

We both know thats never going to happen dont we , because your are just a delusional keyboard wannabe pretend lawyer.
Its just the poor unfortunates that lurk on Ickes who may actually be daft enough to take your word as truth that will end up in the mire.

If you have any bottle at all "MATT" you will come and sign up over here and we can all discuss your trust theory.

By the way , Im lurking back on Ickes as I have three log ons ready to go, hell we may have even spoke already ;)

[cocana]

It's brilliant. Played them superbly

[cocana]

He still doesn't have the balls to reveal the sources of his "other" research though!

[cocana]

Today could be real fun as Rob has decided to pitch in and support his lad. Come on Rob, work the crowd baby. :D

[BobHaulk]

Well, Im feeling pretty pleased with myself this morning after reading Yozhiks post over on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149904
They ban me from debating and then start threads about me when Im gone, I only need girlgye to start one now and thats the "big three" :)

Yozhik has now claimed to have researched freeman redemption sites, legal lawful textbooks and some "other" sources to form his opinions on his "trusts" theory.

He has clearly stated that he believes any legal/lawful sources are simply "dogma" and therefore useless.
So by that rationale his information can only come from freeman sites and "other" sources.
So given that all freeman/redemption sites use legal/lawful references for their study they can be discounted as dogma also.

Question is yozhik, where is this "other" source of your "research"

You see you have built a rod for your own back with your inane ramblings because anything you wish to use to defend your position in a court of law you must be able to credit a LEGAL/LAWFUL REFERENCE.

We both know thats never going to happen dont we , because your are just a delusional keyboard wannabe pretend lawyer.
Its just the poor unfortunates that lurk on Ickes who may actually be daft enough to take your word as truth that will end up in the mire.

If you have any bottle at all "MATT" you will come and sign up over here and we can all discuss your trust theory.

By the way , Im lurking back on Ickes as I have three log ons ready to go, hell we may have even spoke already ;)
Damn you asky i was cutting my ties with the freemen but upon reading the link you've provided i'm being compelled to comment.
Can i say how funny i find yozhik, no really, i find his his constant levels of stupid quite entertaining, herald homes is also ridiculously stupid, brilliant. Girlgye on the other hand reminds me of the kind of chick who liked Kate Bush when she was a teenager but when all her friends moved on to uni and the like, she became a crusty and now as middle age beckons she knows that she's wasted her life so she now posts what she thinks is arty prose. The fools at ickes are a sad bunch after all they buy every single conspiracy theory you can think of, from the queens a lizard to 9/11 to chemtrails,fluoride, vaccinations you know the stuff. Ickes such sick **** he even has cancer cures, i mean what kind of folk are they that they'd stoop so low as to make money from those dying from cancer.
So yozhik come over, you hide over at the site that extorts money from those dying from cancer and you have the hard neck to claim the high moral ground, truth is mate you're an undereducated fool who is scared to come here because you don't have mod protection.
I know you won't come and i don't blame you, after all you know feck about the law or anything else and you'd be exposed as the fantasist you are,still maybe it's for the best because you provide comedy gold with every post you make, keeping those who read you amazed and stunned at the level of your stupidness.

[Pikachu]

"Without prejudice" makes me laugh in my job. It does not make letters inadmissable in Criminal Cases. Alongside the Freemen I have to deal with net-lawyer educated road traffic defendants. Both have the same misconception and get very upset when we use their letters against them.

I've been to the Court of Arms - shown round the College of Arms and given tea by the charming Portcullis Pursuivant. It does actually have a bar btw.

[talkie toaster]

Couldn't resist a follow up...apologies......


2 hours later, Mrs Yozik returns home.

“…….so taking Blacks’ definition of trust, oh hello love you’re back, I was just researching trusts and whether me accepting a cup of tea, sorry haven’t got round to Freemanly defining cup or indeed what classes as tea, in the sense of ownership and…what’s this?”

Takes sheet of paper from Mrs Yozik’s shaking hand.

“Aaah a fee schedule for the last 10 years of our relationship, 10 million pounds for having to listen to me whine on and on and on and on, 5 million pounds for injury caused by tripping over 2nd edition of Blacks’ law dictionary resulting in stubbed toe and £1000 for helping me out of the linguistic feed back loop I got into over trying to define the semantics of semantics…..I have 3 days to not reply and deem it legal and binding…I think, love, you’ll find that…….what are you doing now, isn’t that the Ainsley Harriet carving knife I bought you last Christmas?...”

“Oh, you’ve had the handle engraved, I think you’ll find though it should say ‘without prejudice’ rather than ‘extreme prejudice’…..ok , here’s an interesting development, if I choose not to consent to accept this knife sticking out of my chest where does that put us in the whole tricky area of contractual obligations…further research is called for I think….whoooo feeling a bit faint, I think I will have that cup of tea love……did I tell you that Jargon Buster has been on the web again……I gave him a piece of my mind…very funny love , yes I can spare it….well I gave him what for on a totally different website….see how he likes that.

“Whilst I was out dear, I called in Sainsbury’s, got a nice Raspberry Torte cake, would you like a slice with your tea?”

“Sorry love can’t research Torts right now got to look at contracts and whether this knife should be classed a benefit…..here’s one for you…..who owns the knife?...I bought it but gave it to you…..so who owns it….me?...you?....the DVLA?....tricky…”

[jargon buster]

I see a book in the pipeline :D
Maybe there is a living to be made from this freeman nonsense after all.

[sophia8]

I think this nicely sums up the Freeman dream:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149835

Dude runs away from his debts in England and ends up in Spain. That didn't work out and now he has to return to Blighty. So, obviously, he needs FOTL legal expertise on how to avoid his creditors when he gets back.I like how that thread is entitled "Staying Off The Grid" and yet so far nobody has come up with any actual advice for doing so (apart from a vague reference to finding "alternative accommodation").
Don't know about US FOTLERs, but the UK lot are clearly all mouth and no trousers, more concerned with getting out of paying council tax than real freedom.

[cocana]

Couldn't resist a follow up...apologies......


2 hours later, Mrs Yozik returns home.

“…….so taking Blacks’ definition of trust, oh hello love you’re back, I was just researching trusts and whether me accepting a cup of tea, sorry haven’t got round to Freemanly defining cup or indeed what classes as tea, in the sense of ownership and…what’s this?”

Takes sheet of paper from Mrs Yozik’s shaking hand.

“Aaah a fee schedule for the last 10 years of our relationship, 10 million pounds for having to listen to me whine on and on and on and on, 5 million pounds for injury caused by tripping over 2nd edition of Blacks’ law dictionary resulting in stubbed toe and £1000 for helping me out of the linguistic feed back loop I got into over trying to define the semantics of semantics…..I have 3 days to not reply and deem it legal and binding…I think, love, you’ll find that…….what are you doing now, isn’t that the Ainsley Harriet carving knife I bought you last Christmas?...”

“Oh, you’ve had the handle engraved, I think you’ll find though it should say ‘without prejudice’ rather than ‘extreme prejudice’…..ok , here’s an interesting development, if I choose not to consent to accept this knife sticking out of my chest where does that put us in the whole tricky area of contractual obligations…further research is called for I think….whoooo feeling a bit faint, I think I will have that cup of tea love……did I tell you that Jargon Buster has been on the web again……I gave him a piece of my mind…very funny love , yes I can spare it….well I gave him what for on a totally different website….see how he likes that.

“Whilst I was out dear, I called in Sainsbury’s, got a nice Raspberry Torte cake, would you like a slice with your tea?”

“Sorry love can’t research Torts right now got to look at contracts and whether this knife should be classed a benefit…..here’s one for you…..who owns the knife?...I bought it but gave it to you…..so who owns it….me?...you?....the DVLA?....tricky…”

Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, I'm sure Yozhik will approve!

[cocana]

I like how that thread is entitled "Staying Off The Grid" and yet so far nobody has come up with any actual advice for doing so (apart from a vague reference to finding "alternative accommodation").
Don't know about US FOTLERs, but the UK lot are clearly all mouth and no trousers, more concerned with getting out of paying council tax than real freedom.

There is another thread which really brought that into relief this week. When Girlgye was challenged to consider the possibility of giving up her benefits she went into meltdown. She wasn't the only one.

That sort of attitude says so much.

[jargon buster]

Awww... now yozhik wants to make friends....a bit like the schoolyard bully who has been socked on the nose.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149904&page=6

[BobHaulk]

Awww... now yozhik wants to make friends....a bit like the schoolyard bully who has been socked on the nose.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149904&page=6

Menard seems to think that by exposing his lies we are stoping him helping people because it's us who want to help them instead? He's even dimmer than i imagined.

[Sledge]

I like how that thread is entitled "Staying Off The Grid" and yet so far nobody has come up with any actual advice for doing so
I always enjoy the irony of people who want to be "off the grid" posting on the internet.

[D'rok]

I always enjoy the irony of people who want to be "off the grid" posting on the internet.Dude, Neo got off the grid...and then he got back on and PWNED IT!

Do some research.

[jargon buster]

H2pogo has given the OP some advice as to staying off the grid
I heard that if you evade debt with banks for over five years then approach them and make them an offer they have to accept the offer..

Now i dont have a clue if its true..but it might be worth looking into..

once you put the kids into school you will have to registrar..If you home schooled and dont claim any benefits then i dont see why you would have to as long as you found your own accommodation.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149835

:D
Is that bad advice or no advice at all?

[Horatius]

H2pogo has given the OP some advice as to staying off the grid


http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=149835

:D
Is that bad advice or no advice at all?



as long as you found your own accommodation


So, is he advocating going and living in the forest, or something? Building a shack out on the moors? A really spiffy Dumpster behind the Marks & Spencer?

[Sledge]

So live in a cave for five years and you're good to go? Wow, I wonder why more people don't do that!

[jargon buster]

The latter, the other options would require some actual work to achieve.

[talkie toaster]

Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, I'm sure Yozhik will approve!

If I remain sober enough over Christmas I'm sure there is mileage to be had in Menard, GirlGye, Yozhic and Bones playing a festive game of Monoploy:

" I appreciate that it's our God given right to free will and choice to consent to, or otherwise but we can't all be the Little Dog can we, there's only one and I'm it, no, that doesn't mean I am forcing you to consent to be the Top Hat you can choose to accept, or not....................."

[D'rok]

Oh dear. Yozhik approves of my Matrix citation. I'm embarrassed that I can't come up with an example of bollocks research that even FOTLers can recognize as bollocks. It's a failure of imagination on my part - or a failure to properly appreciate the depths of silliness that passes for scholarship over there.

I must try harder.

[Horatius]

So live in a cave for five years and you're good to go? Wow, I wonder why more people don't do that!


You know, there's material here for a series of comics.., The FoTLer real estate agent....I'll get back to you on this.


If I remain sober enough over Christmas I'm sure there is mileage to be had in Menard, GirlGye, Yozhic and Bones playing a festive game of Monoploy:

" I appreciate that it's our God given right to free will and choice to consent to, or otherwise but we can't all be the Little Dog can we, there's only one and I'm it, no, that doesn't mean I am forcing you to consent to be the Top Hat you can choose to accept, or not....................."



"I didn't "land" on Boardwalk, I'm merely "travelling over" your "walk" on my way to "pass" Go. In fact, that means you owe me $200!"

[Dave Rogers]

Oh dear. Yozhik approves of my Matrix citation. I'm embarrassed that I can't come up with an example of bollocks research that even FOTLers can recognize as bollocks.

Poe's Law can be a real bitch sometimes.

Dave

[sophia8]

I heard that if you evade debt with banks for over five years then approach them and make them an offer they have to accept the offer..

Now i dont have a clue if its true..but it might be worth looking into..

In a word - no. :D

once you put the kids into school you will have to registrar..If you home schooled and dont claim any benefits then i dont see why you would have to as long as you found your own accommodationHomeschooling the kids is feasible - if you're well-organised. But unless you want to teach yourself medicine, it might be a good idea to register them with a doctor. And you'll have to do without a vehicle, since that means taxing, insurance and so on.
Accomodation could be hard to find. Most landlords require references and few property-sellers are willing to accept a suitcase full of cash. (Speaking of which, he'll have to keep a close eye on all that cash hell have stuffed in the mattress. If somebody nicks it, will he really go to the police?)
He could look for a rural commune-type place where he can try "living off the land", but he'll have trouble finding one that will accept him. The people who live in them are invariably pretty picky about who their neighbours are. Plus, living off the land is bloody hard work.
Quite frankly, somebody who makes a habit of piling up debts and then running away to hide out in another country doesn't strike me as the type who will stick around to grow food, rear and tend animals, teach his own kids, build his own house, put together his own power sources, trudge around finding cash-in-hand work etc etc....

[Mongrel]

I read the "Find your own accommodation" phrase as "Find somewhere empty and squat"

[cocana]

If I remain sober enough over Christmas I'm sure there is mileage to be had in Menard, GirlGye, Yozhic and Bones playing a festive game of Monoploy:

" I appreciate that it's our God given right to free will and choice to consent to, or otherwise but we can't all be the Little Dog can we, there's only one and I'm it, no, that doesn't mean I am forcing you to consent to be the Top Hat you can choose to accept, or not....................."

Worse still for them, CLUEDO.

"It was Miss Scarlet in the library with the lead piping"

"But it couldn't be Miss Scarlet because that's just her strawperson and you haven't proved who her real flesh and blood person is"

[jargon buster]

Or alternatively

It was Rob Menard from a safe distance, via a third party, in the courtroom .

[talkie toaster]

Or alternatively

It was Rob Menard from a safe distance, via a third party, in the courtroom .


http://images.zaazu.com/img/laughing-smiley-male-smiley-laugh-smiley-emoticon-000288-medium.gif

[Horatius]

You know, there's material here for a series of comics.., The FoTLer real estate agent....I'll get back to you on this.




Here we go....


Starting a new series about Freemen on the Land trying to find "off-grid" accommodations.


http://upload.stripgenerator.com/strip/77/28/54/00/00/full.png

[BobHaulk]

Tommy Sheridan should have declared himself a freeman on the land and now he wouldn't be facing jail

[cocana]

I'm waiting for Yozhik and Herald Holmes to consider that one. According to their beliefs he is above the rule of law (being an MP) and therefore he should have got off.

I'm sure Girlgye will invent a conspiracy to cover that one though. He offended TPTB, or didn't roll his trouser leg up at the right time or something. Maybe he even inadvertently contracted himself into maritime jurisdiction and was the author of his own misfortune. I'm sure they'll enlighten us soon.

[deeper]

I'm sure someone has brought this up before but this is what I can't get my head around.

If FMOTL theory worked in practice, it would be just like following a recipe, everyone could do it, just follow these steps and become a Freeman. If it was the case then we could all be Free overnight and the world would be a better place if Rob just posted all the info contained in his very expensive product on the internet for everyone to see and act on. I think it's right that he claims that the only thing we lack is The Knowledge to set us Free and he has that Knowledge.

Rob wouldn't need the money because he would be a Global Hero and have the gratitude of entire countries for freeing them from slavery. What's up with that?

Come on Rob, you could start the revolution in a matter of a dozen mouse clicks. For all of our sakes just do it, forget about charging for your DVDs, we'll see you never want for anything ever again.

[jargon buster]

Rob just posted all the info contained in his very expensive product on the internet for everyone to see and act on.


It doesn't work, it says so on the pack, he has to put a disclaimer on it that it cannot be used as legal advice.
If you still buy it after that then you deserve all you get

[deeper]

It doesn't work, it says so on the pack, he has to put a disclaimer on it that it cannot be used as legal advice.
If you still buy it after that then you deserve all you get

Yeah, I realise that :), but if I was a believer I would be asking that same question and demanding that he take that action for the good of mankind and ultimately for the benefit of himself. With regards to the disclaimer, does he mention that much? If not then maybe he should have the disclaimer in his sig.

[jargon buster]

I find it even stranger that a man who claims to be able to ignore any statute he chooses feel the need to cover himself legally by adding a disclaimer :confused:

[fromdownunder]

FMOTL, while true, can never defeat THE MAN, because THE MAN controls the Judicial Sytem with its fake legislation and its fake precedents and its fake Judiciary. While it ias true that the Common Law is as the FMOTL think it is, the Courts are controlled by THE MAN and will never admit it. So, right or wrong, go to court, espouse FMOTL beliefs = FAIL.

Thus, resistance is futile.

Thus sayeth The Borg.

Norm

[Ladewig]

FMOTL, while true, can never defeat THE MAN, because THE MAN controls the Judicial Sytem with its fake legislation and its fake precedents and its fake Judiciary. While it ias true that the Common Law is as the FMOTL think it is, the Courts are controlled by THE MAN and will never admit it. So, right or wrong, go to court, espouse FMOTL beliefs = FAIL.

No. That's not what they believe. If it were, then at least it would be internally consistent. On every FMOTL site one can find stories of THE MAN being defeated by saying the magic words.

- I told the judge that I knew what the gold fringe meant and he turned white and ran out of the room.

- When the bailiff called my case, I said, 'I refuse to enter into a contract with the court.' The judge then said, 'case dismissed' and that was that.


- [Australian version] I then demand that the magistrate provide a copy of his Commission, his instrument of appointment, issued by the Governor. He could not so he dismissed the case.

[jargon buster]

While it ias true that the Common Law is as the FMOTL think it is

No it isnt.

[cocana]

Update on Girlgye's "the court is a trust" theory. It now involves travelling priests or something.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059538065&postcount=165

WTF?!

[Vladd]

Update on Girlgye's "the court is a trust" theory. It now involves travelling priests or something.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059538065&postcount=165

WTF?!

Not just travelling priests but time travelling priests

[D'rok]

While it ias true that the Common Law is as the FMOTL think it isI hope you are joking here.

[Mojo]

Update on Girlgye's "the court is a trust" theory. It now involves travelling priests or something.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059538065&postcount=165

WTF?!


The only party to hold an Ecclesiastical authority...the Clerk.


Perhaps they can attach some significance to the fact that notaries are regulated by the Faculty Office of the Archbishop of Canterbury (http://www.facultyoffice.org.uk/Page2.html).

[jargon buster]

but if I was a believer I would be asking that same question and demanding that he take that action for the good of mankind and ultimately for the benefit of himself.

Even if by some miracle it did work, it would ultimatly destroy itself, it has to have a system it can thrive off, FMOTL is a parasite, it needs a host and society is that host.

[Horatius]

No it isnt.

I hope you are joking here.



2 points for fromdownunder. That puts us into Sudden death overtime!

[TSR]

Don't know about US FOTLERs, but the UK lot are clearly all mouth and no trousers, more concerned with getting out of paying council tax than real freedom.

.
In these parts, it's called "all hat, no cattle."
.

[D'rok]

2 points for fromdownunder. That puts us into Sudden death overtime!I'm losing my ability to distinguish between FOTLism and parody.

I think the solution to my problem is composed of 50% rum and 50% eggnog. Or maybe that's the source of my problem?

[deeper]

Even if by some miracle it did work, it would ultimatly destroy itself, it has to have a system it can thrive off, FMOTL is a parasite, it needs a host and society is that host.

But they can't admit that to themselves, can they?

Also, has anyone here ever seen Rob's official study pack?

[TSR]

I'm losing my ability to distinguish between FOTLism and parody.

I think the solution to my problem is composed of 50% rum and 50% eggnog. Or maybe that's the source of my problem?

.
Nah, it's a common law fact that rum focuses the mind and improves one's judgement -- I recommend more...
.

[D'rok]

.
Nah, it's a common law fact that rum focuses the mind and improves one's judgement -- I recommend more...
.Done!

[TjW]

.
Nah, it's a common law fact that rum focuses the mind and improves one's judgement -- I recommend more...
.

Eggnog, though, can be a source of salmonella.

[tsig]

Eggnog, though, can be a source of salmonella.

And the rum kills bacteria so be generous with the rum.

[Kid Eager]

Eggnog, though, can be a source of salmonella.

If you're putting salmon in eggnogg you're doing it wrong. Pass the shiraz, please...

[TSR]

If you're putting salmon in eggnogg you're doing it wrong. Pass the shiraz, please...
.
No no no -- you're misunderstanding. Sam and Ella. The Johnsons, from next door. They always come over and drink all my eggnog. But do they ever invite *us* over? No, I don't think so....
.

[Mojo]

The Johnsons, from next door. They always come over and drink all my eggnog.


Eddie C. Campbell had the same problem, just not with the neighbours.

j4awlXfnNAc


See verse three.

[TSR]

Eddie C. Campbell had the same problem, just not with the neighbours.

j4awlXfnNAc


See verse three.

.
Just goes to show, you should never trust a man who drives a sleigh and plays with elves...
.

[LightinDarkness]

I think girlgye is one of those people who have a pet conspiracy theory that isn't complete until it goes back to the Vatican. You know the types - they are just like other woos except the Vatican is behind everything. Thats probably why shes so obsessed with canon law, "ecclesiastical authority," etc.

I mean its totally bizarre and has no basis in fact. But then again...this is FOTL...nothing makes logical sense because its mythology.

[Mojo]

Just goes to show, you should never trust a man who drives a sleigh...


...while under the influence of sherry (and mince pies).

[TSR]

...while under the influence of sherry (and mince pies).

.
mmmmmmm, mince pies....
.

[catsmate1]

.
mmmmmmm, mince pies....
.
Aaaaargh, heartburn.
But worth it.:)

[jargon buster]

The barnpots on Ickes are clamoring to get another new member (loonytunes) banned because they think its me.:D
Yozhik has run away from him/her already:rolleyes:
I really feel for new people coming to the site for the first time, girlgye always rips into them if they show any sign of a question.
I suppose its for the best though, it will probably put of any newbies before they get hooked on Menard's nonsense.

Its win win for sanity
its easy enough to control Ickes freemen without actually being on there

[tsig]

The barnpots on Ickes are clamoring to get another new member (loonytunes) banned because they think its me.:D
Yozhik has run away from him/her already:rolleyes:
I really feel for new people coming to the site for the first time, girlgye always rips into them if they show any sign of a question.
I suppose its for the best though, it will probably put of any newbies before they get hooked on Menard's nonsense.

Its win win for sanity
its easy enough to control Ickes freemen without actually being on there

They fear even the suspicion of your sockpuppet!

Well done!

We should all join the forum. Look out freemen, any newbies will likely be from JREF. :degrin:

[BobHaulk]

I wont be joining again, it's just as funny to read their stuff without needing to contribute. When i got banned i rejoined once but it wasn't as much fun as before, then i got banned again so sod it. Let others enjoy winding them up i've had enough.
Reading through some of the new posters it seems that it is mainly jrefers who are joining, that should be a concern for them since it means without jrefers no one is joining.
The freemen are finished for me it's ickes cancer woo that is attracting me now. I've had cause to look into cancer on account of a relative of mine recently being diagnosed with a terminal cancer. You think the freemen are low well the cancer cure people are disgusting.

[deeper]

it's ickes cancer woo that is attracting me now.

Got a link for that? Ta.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

[...] that should be a concern for them since it means without jrefers no one is joining.


It should be, but it sounds like they enjoy their intellectual inbreeding.

[jargon buster]

There's no one on there at all at the moment, they are all conspicuous by their absence.

It cant just be because they think Im there, surely they cant have that little faith in their beliefs.
Its just a few internet pretend lawyers engaged in mental masturbation.

[cocana]

O this one should be fun. The "UK is a profit making institution with subsidiaries" theory is being resurrected. Lo and behold Girlgye is running it too. http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150515

It's bordering on embarrassing that they haven't even noticed that "corporation" in the UK does not have the same meaning as it does in the US.

[Mojo]

O this one should be fun. The "UK is a profit making institution with subsidiaries" theory is being resurrected. Lo and behold Girlgye is running it too.


Oh, I see. The theory.

For a moment there I was worried that you meant she was running the UK. :eek:

[cocana]

I hope you are all keeping up with girlgye's insights. Here's another (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059549961&postcount=152) -

1st of all well done mate. I understand your nerves.

Word of caution. NEVER OPEN THE WINDOWS. Ever. Much as they like to hide it the common law still exists for these men and women and some know it some don't.

Speak through them, fine.

He says he isn't going to speak to him unless it is with a solicitor. That would be wrong because you then contract with your strawman and allow a public Equity servant to apply the Road Traffic Act. No solicitor not even Nick Freeman can negotiate the Road Traffic Act. You say no corporate govt has power of you and then give consent.

You try and ask a Solicitor to serve as a witness and see what happens. He/she won't. They will merely walk away from you as they have sworn an oath to allegiance to the Queen and given she has sworn an oath to uphold a PLC you can pretty much figure what the outcome of that is.

He has others if you want to look up his name. A vehicle, a name and a licence, is contract.

We are still at the stage where they are using thuggery by using the fact that they believe the Earth is Defacto and they have all rights to bully who ever walks upon the UK.


Never open your windows to a police officer. Maybe they're vampires or something. :eek:

Speak to them through a window and you shall be fine. :rolleyes:

Avoid contracting with your strawman and allowing Public Equity Servants to apply the Road Traffic Act. WTF?! :eek:

The Road Traffic Act is all powerful. :eye-poppi

Don't consent to that power. [hang on GG, you said it was all powerful] :confused:

Ask a solicitor to be a witness because they can't. :confused: [maybe something to do with an advocate not being a witness at the same time, but let's enjoy her "oath to the Queen" conspiracy anyway]

A vehicle, a name and a licence, is a contract. :confused: [Really? They're not just a vehicle, a name and a licence then?]

The Earth is Defacto and they have all rights to bully who ever walks upon the UK. Totally WTF??!!! :jaw-dropp

[cocana]

I'd only just finished the above post when girlgye came up with another classic. I'm sure old Micklemus will be trembling over this (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059549983&postcount=56) -

His law is Equity. Bank Regs and slavery.
Allegiance to the Queen and judges who swear to serve those corporate interests.

He simply does not understand that there is anything else but remains here just incase to steal the idea, claim at his own and change what he considers to be loopholes in the original Act which I don't doubt he doesn't receive any payment for but never know what grace and favour may await him for his efforts.


That must be it - Micklemus has lurked there in readiness to pounce and claim freeman ideas as his own. :eek:

[gtm]

The freemen have been rendered speechless (aside from the usual petty insults & windbaggery) by a microsopic British colony of child molesters:-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150329&page=14

A horrible decision for freemen for a whole load of reasons (from post 132 onwards). Enjoy :)

[Spindrift]

No. That's not what they believe. If it were, then at least it would be internally consistent. On every FMOTL site one can find stories of THE MAN being defeated by saying the magic words.

- I told the judge that I knew what the gold fringe meant and he turned white and ran out of the room.

- When the bailiff called my case, I said, 'I refuse to enter into a contract with the court.' The judge then said, 'case dismissed' and that was that.


- [Australian version] I then demand that the magistrate provide a copy of his Commission, his instrument of appointment, issued by the Governor. He could not so he dismissed the case.
From NewsRadio - Jimmy James in court suing a kid who sold him fake movie memorabilia.

Skip to 2:36

VFHL4edFa2Q&NR

It's really Masonic not FMOTL but the principal is the same.

ETA: Embedding is disabled for the clip but you can still get there.

[HandyRandy]

Hi! I am new here and am examining the whole freeman movement. It is getting huge in my area, and every body in my school is talking about it, so I thought I would check it out.

They folks on the Icke forum, they do not seem silenced to me at all. Are we looking at the same forum?

Is this movement growing as quickly in other areas as it is in Ontario?

[jsfisher]

I call shenanigans.

[gtm]

Hi! I am new here and am examining the whole freeman movement. It is getting huge in my area, and every body in my school is talking about it, so I thought I would check it out.

They folks on the Icke forum, they do not seem silenced to me at all. Are we looking at the same forum?

Is this movement growing as quickly in other areas as it is in Ontario?


Yipee - We have a live one :jaw-dropp

Everybody in your school is talking about it? Whats wrong with chaing girls & drinling cider like decent teenagers do?

[Ladewig]

Hi! I am new here and am examining the whole freeman movement. It is getting huge in my area, and every body in my school is talking about it, so I thought I would check it out.

They folks on the Icke forum, they do not seem silenced to me at all. Are we looking at the same forum?

Is this movement growing as quickly in other areas as it is in Ontario?

There appear to be many different flavors of FMOTL. What are the principles of the Freeman movement that you have encountered?

[Horatius]

Yipee - We have a live one :jaw-dropp

Everybody in your school is talking about it? Whats wrong with chaing girls & drinling cider like decent teenagers do?



Hey, I'll chaing a girl if you explain what that is, but drinling cider just sounds creepy.

[catsmate1]

Yipee - We have a live one :jaw-dropp

Everybody in your school is talking about it? Whats wrong with chaing girls & drinling cider like decent teenagers do?
Chasing? Chaining? We must know.................:D

[tsig]

Yipee - We have a live one :jaw-dropp

Everybody in your school is talking about it? Whats wrong with chaing girls & drinling cider like decent teenagers do?

He's learned the harsh lesson of life "You can have Freedom or you can have Girls".:D

[tsig]

Hey, I'll chaing a girl if you explain what that is, but drinling cider just sounds creepy.

Never drin while chainging.

[Horatius]

Never drin while chainging.



But I can still flin while flooodleing, right?

[Elizabeth I]

But I can still flin while flooodleing, right?

No, because flooodleing is per se illegal, so you can't do anything while flooodleing.

[cocana]

Hi! I am new here and am examining the whole freeman movement. It is getting huge in my area, and every body in my school is talking about it, so I thought I would check it out.

They folks on the Icke forum, they do not seem silenced to me at all. Are we looking at the same forum?

Is this movement growing as quickly in other areas as it is in Ontario?

Welcome to the forum

Once upon a time when I was at school I wanted to be a professional footballer. It didn't happen. When I was a bit older I thought there would be a massive revolution. That didn't happen either.

Presumably you get to see and hear about Rob Menard quite a bit in your area? How nice for you.

When you further your research beyond freeman propaganda your views will probably change, but keep us posted and do let us know when you have contracted yourself out of all lawful authority.

GTM made a good point though. Surely wine, women and song are higher on your priority list? Make hay while the sun shines; your pitch fork soon goes rusty!

[Kid Eager]

handyrandy = Rob Menard? There's my 2011 prediction... Trust me, I'm a consultant! ;)

[tsig]

No, because flooodleing is per se illegal, so you can't do anything while flooodleing.

It might be per se illeagal but it is OK ad hock and if you look at it from the de jure point it might even be mandatory depending on the de facto facts.

In Nomine Illigitamos Sanctus.

[tsig]

Welcome to the forum

Once upon a time when I was at school I wanted to be a professional footballer. It didn't happen. When I was a bit older I thought there would be a massive revolution. That didn't happen either.

Presumably you get to see and hear about Rob Menard quite a bit in your area? How nice for you.

When you further your research beyond freeman propaganda your views will probably change, but keep us posted and do let us know when you have contracted yourself out of all lawful authority.

GTM made a good point though. Surely wine, women and song are higher on your priority list? Make hay while the sun shines; your pitch fork soon goes rusty!

Those look better than police, judges and jails that the freemen have to offer.

[cocana]

handyrandy = Rob Menard? There's my 2011 prediction... Trust me, I'm a consultant! ;)

With you there

;)

[cocana]

Those look better than police, judges and jails that the freemen have to offer.

O heavens yes. Last thing I was thinking about at school was the intricacies of the legal system. Then again I think that was the last thing that freemen were thinking about judging by what we've seen. :D

I did enjoy chaing girls though!

[Mojo]

The freemen have been rendered speechless (aside from the usual petty insults & windbaggery) by a microsopic British colony of child molesters:-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150329&page=14

A horrible decision for freemen for a whole load of reasons (from post 132 onwards). Enjoy :)


Looks as if yozhik has finally managed to get his head around a basic principle of common law: Oh well ... **** ... if the judges and lords say it ... and case law records it ... it MUST be true. Who are we to question self referencing bollox?

[gtm]

Chasing? Chaining? We must know.................:D


Perhaps not my finest post although in my defence I did compose it on the train home after a few after work 'refreshments' using my 'smart' phone.

For the record I meant 'chasing' :blush:

Perhaps HandyRandy has recently enrolled at 'Freeskewl University'? This might explain the otherwise highly improbable interest in FMOTL at the 'school' he attends.

[cocana]

Looks as if yozhik has finally managed to get his head around a basic principle of common law:

He's in so many knots at the moment that I'm unsure if he'll ever straighten himself out. Here's hoping that the new year brings him new beginnings though.

[BobHaulk]

The freemen have been rendered speechless (aside from the usual petty insults & windbaggery) by a microsopic British colony of child molesters:-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150329&page=14

A horrible decision for freemen for a whole load of reasons (from post 132 onwards). Enjoy :)

I did enjoy this, i particularly like the way rob the hat has to say all the time how "they" need his consent to do anything .................. that's it, in a nut shell, the whole freeman con sold by rob the hat. He appeals to the 14 year old truant hiding behind the bike sheds pretending they are rebels.Thing is when the headmaster comes to catch them what happens? I reckon someone like bones would tell him to feck off and get himself expelled, yozhik and rob the hat on the other hand would be sacred that their mum is gonna find out they smoke and meekly they trot off to the headmasters office to be punished. This scenario is the building blocks of their pathetic rebellion. Real revolutionaries they are not.
I've said it before but this time i'm finished with the freemen for good. I don't have any thing more to say about these people except maybe this, wake up you sheep, rob the hat is playing you and you mongs who buy his stuff are feeding not only his pocket but his ego and as such are his ladies
all together now
And the colored girls go
Doo, doo doo, doo doo, doo doo doo...

[cocana]

..

[cocana]

I've said it before but this time i'm finished with the freemen for good. I don't have any thing more to say about these people except maybe this, wake up you sheep, rob the hat is playing you and you mongs who buy his stuff are feeding not only his pocket but his ego and as such are his ladies


I could not agree with you more, which is why I have made it my new years resolution to step back from this stuff. It seems to me that freemen just enjoy being ignorant. Freeman mentality = stick your fingers in your ears and shout "la la la" to any voice of reason and then slag 'em off of course. Nothing will get through to them, ever. Failure is merely a case of the system being corrupt in their eyes. The absence of evidence to justify their beliefs is merely the system trampling on them to maintain control.

They have brainwashed themselves into believing that they are the bringers of a new dawn for humanity and, let's face it, if someone has a god complex, the voice of man is not going to make a difference.

They are total barnpots, but thankfully most people can see that anyway, so I'm with you - they've wasted enough of my time as well.

Hopefully I can stick to my resolution but the addiction to observing their sheer wallyness is strong! :D

[jargon buster]

handyrandy = Rob Menard? There's my 2011 prediction... Trust me, I'm a consultant!

he used to be nicknamed georgy porgy, maybe hes stepped it up a bit

[Captain_Swoop]

Never Flim while you are Flamming.

Menard needs to learn this :)

[LightinDarkness]

Uh-oh. It seems as though the quote from the judge showing how its terrible, horrible statute law that allows one to remove consent from being a citizen (by leaving the country - not by simply declaring they do not consent and enjoying the benefits of citizenship) has got the kooks trying to quickly cover that up and ignore it.

They are also acting hysterical over the Pitcairn FOTLers. See this shining example of a logical fallacy from Menard:


Good thing too cause those who are not Freemen are far more likely to molest children, evidenced by the actions of the subjects of the Crown. You know, those who while being subjects of the crown, did molest children. Now however those who are subject to the Crown, try to claim that the people molesting the children were Freemen, and not subjects of the Crown. But did the Crown not act against them? Is that not evidence they were not Freemen, but were in fact subjects? And were they not subjects willing to molest children?


So apparently, according to Menard, anytime the government acts against self-proclaimed Freemen that means they cannot be real freeman. So I guess Menard has just admitted that he and his entire troop of cult followers - each of whom the government has acted against in some way and for whom no government agency has ever acknowledged as a freeman - are not real freemen.

He just stepped in it...again. The hysterics to get out of this one should be lovely.

[Captain_Swoop]

those who are not Freemen are far more likely to molest children

He knows this because?

It all seems like they think they are 'True Scotsmen'

[jargon buster]

Its great how he stumbles from one disaster into another oblivious to his own stupidity.
He consistently contradicts himself and trips over his own words.

Hes also run away from a thread about ownership of a legal fiction created at birth.
he says in his video that when you register a child you hand over ownership of its "person" he cant however pinpoint when you actually acquired ownership of it in the first place in order for you to be able to give it away :D
Surely before registration the "person" doesn't exist, so you cant "own" it prior to registration.

Hopefully he will return with the answer.

[Sledge]

Why wouldn't a Freeloader molest children? I thought the whole point was to not be bound by those pesky laws.

[jargon buster]

Menard's already knee deep in controversy over his activities with a 15 year old girl
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/elizabeth/

[Mashuna]

Good thing too cause those who are not Freemen are far more likely to molest children, evidenced by the actions of the subjects of the Crown. You know, those who while being subjects of the crown, did molest children. Now however those who are subject to the Crown, try to claim that the people molesting the children were Freemen, and not subjects of the Crown. But did the Crown not act against them? Is that not evidence they were not Freemen, but were in fact subjects? And were they not subjects willing to molest children?

So you can tell that these people weren't Freemen, because if they were Freemen they'd have got away with molesting children?

[funk de fino]

The freemen have been rendered speechless (aside from the usual petty insults & windbaggery) by a microsopic British colony of child molesters:-

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150329&page=14

A horrible decision for freemen for a whole load of reasons (from post 132 onwards). Enjoy :)

Post 146 is the biggest load of crap I have seen in years (outside 911 nuttery). What a balloon.

[Stacey Grove]

Why wouldn't a Freeloader molest children?
Because a freeman only acts in an honourable way. Well, that's what they always say.

[Paul]

Menard's already knee deep in controversy over his activities with a 15 year old girl
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/elizabeth/
He really does have a colossal ego doesn't he.

It's all about the children - buy my book - look at me, look at me - ooh look, more about me.


Then there's the spectacularly inept letter which he somehow thinks will make him seem reasonable.

[gtm]

Post 146 is the biggest load of crap I have seen in years (outside 911 nuttery). What a balloon.

Believe me (& I've been a keen student of FMOTL 'jurisprudence' for the past 12 months) - that's quite coherent by usual freeman standards. Menard is the big Freeman 'Guru' in Canada at the moment - we live in a funny old world?

[tsig]

I did enjoy this, i particularly like the way rob the hat has to say all the time how "they" need his consent to do anything .................. that's it, in a nut shell, the whole freeman con sold by rob the hat. He appeals to the 14 year old truant hiding behind the bike sheds pretending they are rebels.Thing is when the headmaster comes to catch them what happens? I reckon someone like bones would tell him to feck off and get himself expelled, yozhik and rob the hat on the other hand would be sacred that their mum is gonna find out they smoke and meekly they trot off to the headmasters office to be punished. This scenario is the building blocks of their pathetic rebellion. Real revolutionaries they are not.
I've said it before but this time i'm finished with the freemen for good. I don't have any thing more to say about these people except maybe this, wake up you sheep, rob the hat is playing you and you mongs who buy his stuff are feeding not only his pocket but his ego and as such are his ladies
all together now
And the colored girls go
Doo, doo doo, doo doo, doo doo doo...


They'd be rolling on each other before they got to the office.

[sophia8]

Menard's already knee deep in controversy over his activities with a 15 year old girl
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/elizabeth/
He was born in 1963, so he was 36 or 37 when he got busy impregnating this 15-year old girl in early 2000.
Those evil social workers - deciding he wasn't fit to be a father!

[jargon buster]

i find this bit of the letter rather telling

I have been Megan’s friend since we met and I have never done anything intentional to hurt her.
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/elizabeth/
nothing "intentional" to hurt her???
hardly the same as not hurting her is it?

[jsfisher]

i find this bit of the letter rather telling

.
http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/elizabeth/
nothing "intentional" to hurt her???
hardly the same as not hurting her is it?

You may be reaching a bit on this one to find fault. The phrasing has a bit of humility to it. I wouldn't go looking for any secret meaning.

[sophia8]

You may be reaching a bit on this one to find fault. The phrasing has a bit of humility to it. I wouldn't go looking for any secret meaning.You don't have to invent secret meanings here - just read between the lines.
Megan (the baby's mother) was 15, there's no mention of any family and she was under the care of social workers. Pretty obviously, she was a vulnerable and troubled child. And this 36/37-year old guy impregnated her; perhaps deliberately, if this line is to be believed:I have loved Elizabeth since before her mother knew and accepted she was pregnant.
And there's this claim:I worry a lot about Megan and used to be able to call her and find out how she is doing and offer moral and spiritual support. She's supposed to be the love of his life, but he doesn't/can't see her - why? (Was he in prison?) And he says nothing about providing financial and practical support. "Spiritual and moral support" doesn't do much for you when the baby's been crying all night and you've run out of money.

I really hope that Megan and her child have found stability and happiness since. At least they seem to be out of Menard's clutches.

[jargon buster]

Menards sordid past was discussed in this thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150943

I like girlgyes post where she asks how does anyone know the words are attributed to Rob and than posts the letter with Robs name on it as proof it might not have been him. :D

[cocana]

Menards sordid past was discussed in this thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150943

I like girlgyes post where she asks how does anyone know the words are attributed to Rob and than posts the letter with Robs name on it as proof it might not have been him. :D

Blimey, she amaze me with her ability to find new levels of stupid. Just when you think she can't get any thicker, "poof" out comes another post.

O bugger. 19 hours into the new year and I've already broken my resolution.

[jargon buster]

Its looks like Ickes have banned poor old loonytunes.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151111

looks like they didn't like the fact that the freemans interpretation of "Common Law" doesn't actually exist. :D

[Grassy Knowlington]

Maybe I'm being somewhat dim or have simply misunderstood how this is being quoted but can anyone explain in a nutshell how exactly the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is meant to support the FOTL position? All seems quite reasonable on my ordinary bloke on the street reading, especially given the events of 1666.

[ e.g. at world wide web .legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11]

[deeper]

YouTube Vid -DISTURBING VIDEO OF UK POLICE TAKING 13 YEAR OLD CHILD FROM FATHER BY FORCE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEUb9ZR_UD4) (not my title)

I came across the above clip linked from a comments section in The Independent, it seems to have FMOTL written all over it. I can't seem to find why this happened but the comments below show it's from Woo Central, police referred to as kidnappers, common law, Icke, NWO, Satanic abuse, etc. Anyone know anymore?

To be honest the most disturbing thing I found about it was the father letting this situation to develop like it did, as if it was ever going to end differently.

[gtm]

Maybe I'm being somewhat dim or have simply misunderstood how this is being quoted but can anyone explain in a nutshell how exactly the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is meant to support the FOTL position? All seems quite reasonable on my ordinary bloke on the street reading, especially given the events of 1666.

[ e.g. at world wide web .legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11]

Whe boiled down to it's bones FMOTL is a conspiracy theory. They believe that the 'common law' was subverted & continues to this day to be subverted. They're a little vague as to who is responsible for this heinous crime but the current fashionable idea is the papacy has something to do with it. Obviously the legal profession, judiciary & politicians have a vested interest in keeping the 'true law' hidden from the unwitting general public.

The Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is a straightforward little bit of legislation that deals with the estates of people who 'disappear'. You can imagine this was quite a significant problem in the 17th Century what with overseas war, disease, disaster, poor communications, poor record keeping, rudimentary criminal investigation etc.

If you're 'gone' for 7 years + your heirs can have you declared dead & administer your estate. Freemen believe its a part of the subversion. They say it you fail to declare yourself 'alive' during the first 7 years of your life you & your assets fall into a trust & the government is the beneficiary. You've effectively become a 'slave' (as per the FMOTL definition of servitude).

Idiots :)

[jargon buster]

They say it you fail to declare yourself 'alive' during the first 7 years of your life you & your assets fall into a trust & the government is the beneficiary. You've effectively become a 'slave' (as per the FMOTL definition of servitude).


Yet they also claim that registering the birth of your child is handing ownership of its fiction over to the government????

ITS A BIT OF A CATCH 22 FOR THE FREEMAN :D

[jargon buster]

There seems to be a new remedy/scam site posted on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151405

Here it is
http://jedisincommerce.us/Home_Page.html

I have taken two snippets from the site
Do Not Try These Processes!

All Jedi's Events are private meetings of sovereign beings, occuring in the Private, and all quests will be required to join Jedi's in Commerce in order to attend.

Either a monthly club membership, monthly class fee, or a pay per session fee applies to attend Jedi classes.


For the future online webinars, a $33 fee per class will be required in order to get the code key, and the classes will need to be accomplished in order (1, 2 3) before the secret process talked about in calls 23 and 24 will be distributed.

****(note) 45 days after support is purchased, if coaching and/ or Jedi Master Support isn't activated by contacting the staff at Jedi's in Commerce: the entire amount turns into a donation to Jedi's in Commerce***
I especially like the last one, so if they just ignore all incoming calls for 45 days they keep all the money :cool:

I will be dropping them an e-mail later to ask if anyone has yet accessed their bond ;)
PS EDIT THE POST HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM ICKES.
it may have been a genuine remedy after all, the mods on Ickes wouldnt want anything that actually worked.:D

[tsig]

Yet they also claim that registering the birth of your child is handing ownership of its fiction over to the government????

ITS A BITCH OF A CATCH 22 FOR THE FREEMAN :D

Yep, the courts have no authoratah but our autourautah is recognized by the courts.

[jargon buster]

Thats one for Menard, he has a letter from the court which he states says he is a freeman on the land (they just returned a letter to him and it had that wrote on, in reality they were just being polite in answering him ;))

Judge "So Rob of the family Menard, what proof do you have that you are a freeman on the land?"
Rob "I have a letter from the court"
Judge "A letter from the court which you state has no authourity?"
Rob "Errrrrr..............can I go out and come back in again"?

[Vladd]

Its looks like Ickes have banned poor old loonytunes.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151111

looks like they didn't like the fact that the freemans interpretation of "Common Law" doesn't actually exist. :D

As they kept calling looneytunes JB they must have really thought he was you.

[jargon buster]

They think everyone new who is a skeptic is me :)

I love watching them flail around, they are so scared they now just ban anyone new who shows any sign of a question.

they would be better of letting me sign up under JB, at least they would know who I was. ;)

[Vladd]

This thread shows just how paranoid they are towards new members who dare to ask questions.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150273

[Grassy Knowlington]

[QUOTE=Vladd;6724950]This thread shows just how paranoid they are towards new members who dare to ask questions.


But, in all fairness, good advice is posted such as (I quote from the above link):

...DO NOT GET UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE GET IN DEBATE WITH ANYONE HERE..:jaw-dropp

[Vladd]

Isn't that the point of a forum though? to debate or is it just to hero worship the senior members?

[gtm]

I knew that'd get your attention but it's true:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1059568099#post1059568099

Post 67 onwards.

Some bits are slightly crazy but I agree with most of it.

[Stacey Grove]

Yup it appears that even girlgye isn't falling for that one.
What is mark1963 on? I like this bit:

They left earth because their planet only orbited our area of the solar system every 3600 years. They are due a visit soon and woe-betide the bloodlines if they find the planet as it is now.

[gtm]

Yup it appears that even girlgye isn't falling for that one.
What is mark1963 on? I like this bit:

It was bound to happen sooner or later. A freeman was always going to ask why? Who 'stole' the common law & then substituted statue law?

The answer is laughably easy. It was the Vatican aided by the Jesuits who were funded by the descended from aliens Farnese family. Simple when you know how isn't it :D

[sadhatter]

Hi! I am new here and am examining the whole freeman movement. It is getting huge in my area, and every body in my school is talking about it, so I thought I would check it out.

They folks on the Icke forum, they do not seem silenced to me at all. Are we looking at the same forum?

Is this movement growing as quickly in other areas as it is in Ontario?

Are we living in the same ontario brother? Around here even my ct'er friends havn't heard much about the fotl crap.

[Stacey Grove]

gtm wrote:
It was bound to happen sooner or later. A freeman was always going to ask why? Who 'stole' the common law & then substituted statue law?

The answer is laughably easy. It was the Vatican aided by the Jesuits who were funded by the descended from aliens Farnese family. Simple when you know how isn't it
I wonder if these aliens are to blame for these Trusts that mark1963 keeps going on about?
I find it ironic (considering his view on statute law) that he is a Health and Safety Manager.

[gtm]

gtm wrote:

I wonder if these aliens are to blame for these Trusts that mark1963 keeps going on about?
I find it ironic (considering his view on statute law) that he is a Health and Safety Manager.

Trusts must be of alien origin. Can't be anything else. Perhaps, the same goes for those 'inalienable' common law rights freemen are so keen on?


Marks' Boss:- So Mark can we send the men out with those balsa wood ladders I got cheap from China?

Mark:- Yep, the Health & Safety at Work Act is a statute & we don't have to comply with it unless we consent.

Marks' Boss:- T'riffic.

[jargon buster]

drhemp wrote on Ickes
All people are welcome on here to post and it's not the job of the mods to censor posts we may or may not agree with. As long as it's civil and doesn't descend into personal abuse or attacks on other members, then people are free to voice an opinion.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151596&page=2

Thats bordering on a stundie.
I got banned over there posting as steven1 posting pro freeman on the land and never insulted anybody.
When I posted as asky, I never resorted to personal attacks , I occasinally responded in kind when I was abused.
They have the likes of girlgye and bones on there verbally attacking people with foul language and homophobic insults and nothing is done about it.

they really need to take a long hard look at themselves.
And freemen are meant to be honourable :D

[Jake Dale]

yep, bias can be hard to see.

[jargon buster]

girlgye wrote on Ickes
We are bored with Jeff the racists antics just read the post and you will see it is him.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151596&page=2

poor jimmythebee, his days are now surely numbered, she thinks its me :D

Sorry jimmy, its nighty night on Ickes for you :rolleyes: