The Freeman Movement and England

[Lothian]

On the contrary, we are all imprisoned but hardly know it. This is just one example. And people are getting back their own sovereignty.

Ok, we have established that your arguments don't work (as in don't keep you out of jail). Some people may elect to exchange their liberty for their sovereignty but I don't see it a big vote winner.

There is an argument that we are all imprisoned and that the law (as commonly applied) keeps us captive, but most people want the laws we have and don't want people sponging off the rest of us. They are happy to exchange a loss of freedom for the benefits.

If you were right and there is no legal justification for taxes people would soon insist that taxes were enforced. I don't know if you have had the chance to speak to many Brits but we like or free education, our NHS, our bins emptied etc. and we think that people should, subject to means testing contribute to them if they are to remain at liberty in our society.

Perhaps rather than wasting time arguing over your understanding of a law that you accept is not applied you tell us what your alternative is to compulsory taxation.

 

[volatile]

*Ahem*

Assume I do everything you say I need to do in order to be considered under the Law of England. What happens if the judge locks me up anyway?

 

[fromdownunder]

If no such code existed there could be no international commerce.

Rubbish! Have you never heard of smuggling goods over borders?

Keep digging that hole.

Norm

 

[D'rok]

Anyone want a chuckle? http://www.fmotl.com/HowToGetOutOfDebt.htm

:-D

Good lord. That URL should be HowToCommitCreditCardFraudReallyBadlyAndProbablyEndUpInJailOrWithALienOnEverythingYouOwn.htm

 

[volatile]

Good lord. That URL should be HowToCommitCreditCardFraudReallyBadlyAndProbablyEndUpInJailOrWithALienOnEverythingYouOwn.htm

I thought the parenthetical "somehow" in the sentence "If you (somehow) end up in court" was touchingly sweet! Didn't you?

 

[tsig]

Good lord. That URL should be HowToCommitCreditCardFraudReallyBadlyAndProbablyEndUpInJailOrWithALienOnEverythingYouOwn.htm

But they would only lock up your legal persona.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Especially, let me lay out a hypothetical scenario for you. There will be a question at the end, which I hope you will be honest and brave enough to answer.

Here's the scenario:

1. You receive your property tax statement, or your income tax form, or whatever document the statute-givers [I'm sorry, I don't know your term for those who pass statutes and the people who work for them, so I hope you will understand my using this phrase in this context] use to communicate with you that they believe you owe them money.
   
   
2. You demand that they present an itemized invoice of services for which you are paying.
   
   
3. Being evil persons operating under Admiralty law instead of common law, the statute-givers refuse your quite reasonable demand.
   
   
4. Because you have been given no explanation of the benefits you will receive in return for your tax payment, you refuse to pay.
   
   
5. Being evil persons with all the force of the police and the military behind them, the statute-givers come to your house, and, despite your explanations that you are subject to common law, not statute, you are arrested, handcuffed, and taken off to jail. The statute-givers have the guns, you see.
   
   
6. After some time in jail, you are brought to trial. You refuse to answer to your name, you refuse to "stand under" Admiralty law, you take every step the Freeman philosophy prescribes for how a Freeman should behave under these circumstances.
   
   
7. However, the judge is an evil person, an occult Jesuit Mason Knight of Columbus Jew who answers only to Her Royal Majesty Elizabeth Windsor, the Queen of England, and the Pope in Rome; and the jury (if there is one) is composed of brainwashed sheep who don't understand that statute is not the same as common law. So you are found guilty of tax evasion, even though you have spoken all the correct words, you have refused to submit to the corrupt Admiralty court, and, again, you have followed every step in the Freeman guidebook. You are sentenced to a term in prison.
   
   
8. The statute-givers and their corrupt police still have the guns, so you are taken to prison. You, again, say all the correct phrases, you announce that you are not subject to statute but only to common law, you explain that you declined to enter into a contract to pay taxes.
   
   
9. None of it works, because you are in the clutches of a corrupt system (or maybe just well-intentioned but uninformed people who haven't had the whole thing completely explained to them.)
   
   
10. So, in spite of the fact that you have done everything you believe you should have done, here you are in prison for an extended stay.

That was the scenario.

Here's the question: what do you do now? What is the next step under the Freeman plan? To whom do you appeal?

 

[fromdownunder]

This thread has been so much fun tonight, it has kept me up until 4:30AM. I must now reluctantly go to bed. I'm ******. I hope the hilarity continues, and I will return for more fun sometime tomorrow.

One last comment though, so as I will not be infracted.

Apart from the sheep that really believe in their FOTL masters (and finish up in jail, as evidenced in the other thread), do people generally follow this IN PRACTICE, as opposed to people who do it as some form of intellectual masturbation.

Norm

 

[fromdownunder]

But they would only lock up your legal persona.

Sorry, one more post before bed. One of the few times I am truly ROTFLMAO. Thanks.

Norm

 

[volatile]

Especially, let me lay out a hypothetical scenario for you.

Thanks for taking the time to lay out in detail that which I have been asking for a few pages now! I look forward to hearing the response.

 

[Especially]

Elizabeth 1,

In reply to your question -

In spite of the fact that you have done everything you believe you should have done, here you are in prison for an extended stay. That was the scenario. Here's the question: what do you do now? What is the next step under the Freeman plan? To whom do you appeal ?

The missing part is you have not told us the charges. Don't you think you should provide them ?

There are none. Since no man or woman has made any contract with them in the first place.

 

[Elizabeth I]

Thanks for taking the time to lay out in detail that which I have been asking for a few pages now! I look forward to hearing the response.

So do I, but let's neither of us hold our breath. I look so unattractive in cyanosed blue.

ETA: Aaaand we're answered (above). With a dishonest sidestep. I think we can close the book on Especially.

p.s. I did offer a hypothetical charge: tax evasion.

 

[D'rok]

I thought the parenthetical "somehow" in the sentence "If you (somehow) end up in court" was touchingly sweet! Didn't you?

You bet! Same with "(I did say … "In theory")" after assuring the faithful that their credit rating would remain intact.

But they would only lock up your legal persona.

It's like trying to kill Lord Voldemort when he's get his soul locked up in a magical FOTL horcrux. Can't be done!

 

[volatile]

Elizabeth 1,

In reply to your question -

In spite of the fact that you have done everything you believe you should have done, here you are in prison for an extended stay. That was the scenario. Here's the question: what do you do now? What is the next step under the Freeman plan? To whom do you appeal ?

The missing part is you have not told us the charges. Don't you think you should provide them ?

Read it again - "So you are found guilty of tax evasion". The court, despite your magic words, deems you guilty of tax evasion. So what do you do? What, ultimately, do you hope to achieve by following the FOTL philosophy, given that words are not magic, and, by your own logic, those against whom you struggle are corrupt and evil?

 

[jimbob]

Elizabeth 1,

In reply to your question -

In spite of the fact that you have done everything you believe you should have done, here you are in prison for an extended stay. That was the scenario. Here's the question: what do you do now? What is the next step under the Freeman plan? To whom do you appeal ?

The missing part is you have not told us the charges. Don't you think you should provide them ?

There are none. Since no man or woman has made any contract with them in the first place.

Because you have been given no explanation of the benefits you will receive in return for your tax payment, you refuse to pay.

Being evil persons with all the force of the police and the military behind them, the statute-givers come to your house, and, despite your explanations that you are subject to common law, not statute, you are arrested, handcuffed, and taken off to jail. The statute-givers have the guns, you see.

I think that tax evasion or or something similar would be the charge.

Assume that you are tried for tax evasion, then will you follow Elizabeth I's argument and answer her question?

 

[fromdownunder]

Assume that you are tried for tax evasion, then will you follow Elizabeth I's argument and answer her question?

Still awake. No he will not. He has not got an answer. He can only go by what his FOTL masters have told him. And they do not have an answer either.

Norm

 

[Elizabeth I]

Read it again - "So you are found guilty of tax evasion". The court, despite your magic words, deems you guilty of tax evasion. So what do you do? What, ultimately, do you hope to achieve by following the FOTL philosophy, given that words are not magic, and, by your own logic, those against whom you struggle are corrupt and evil?

I think that tax evasion or or something similar would be the charge.

Assume that you are tried for tax evasion, then will you follow Elizabeth I's argument and answer her question?

Still awake. No he will not. He has not got an answer. He can only go by what his FOTL masters have told him. And they do not have an answer either.

Norm

And, if you think about it, the actual charge is beside the point. The issue is that, despite someone's having done everything he should have done under Freeman belief, he is still at the mercy of the existing system and locked up at their pleasure. That being the case, what does he do next?

 

[Especially]

Ok, we have established that your arguments don't work (as in don't keep you out of jail). Some people may elect to exchange their liberty for their sovereignty but I don't see it a big vote winner.

There is an argument that we are all imprisoned and that the law (as commonly applied) keeps us captive, but most people want the laws we have and don't want people sponging off the rest of us. They are happy to exchange a loss of freedom for the benefits.

If you were right and there is no legal justification for taxes people would soon insist that taxes were enforced. I don't know if you have had the chance to speak to many Brits but we like or free education, our NHS, our bins emptied etc. and we think that people should, subject to means testing contribute to them if they are to remain at liberty in our society.

Perhaps rather than wasting time arguing over your understanding of a law that you accept is not applied you tell us what your alternative is to compulsory taxation.

But we have established no such thing ! I am not in jail because I have broken no law. And nor are you. Those who break the law are in jail. So can we stop arguing about irrelevancies ?

Under the law a person is entitled to consent or not consent to commercial contracts being offered to them, even those which come in the form of a bill. You seem to accept this. Which is great. In that case what law has been broken ? None.

You have to invent some malicious system. Because only a malicious system would jail a person who is appealing to the law. Yes ?

In that case, don't you see you are arguing in circles ? If the malicious system exists we should not contract with it. But if it does not exist why should we worry about it ?

It also seems to me that people have the right to contract to have their bins opened, or to use the NHS, or to swim in swimming pools, or use public libraries if they wish to pay for them in that way and do not have their own alternatives. Isn't that fair and reasonable ?

What exactly is the problem here ?

A man or a woman can choose these things. They may consent to them. Great ! But they may not. Great ! In that case, what's the problem ? Why the coercion ? Why the fiction of it being 'the law' when, in fact, it is nothing but a commercial contract dressed up as 'the law' ?

You see my point ? We are living in the Nanny State and I don't want to live in the Nanny State.

 

[Especially]

*Ahem*

Assume I do everything you say I need to do in order to be considered under the Law of England. What happens if the judge locks me up anyway?

You have not told us under what law a judge would lock a person up who simply declines the goods and services being offered to them.

You are saying we have no choice, no consent at all. Aren't you ?

But that is NOT true. We do have choice. And whatever you choose is fine with me.

 

[Especially]

And, if you think about it, the actual charge is beside the point. The issue is that, despite someone's having done everything he should have done under Freeman belief, he is still at the mercy of the existing system and locked up at their pleasure. That being the case, what does he do next?

But you are completely ignoring the point.

Do you wish to live in a society where a person can be locked up simply by declining a commercial offer ? When his/her appeal is based on his/her right under the law to consent or not to that same offer ?

Do we ever stop to think about the automaton-style arguments being advanced here which remove from you your own liberty ? We are unthinkingly becoming robots. With no real choices at all. That is dangerous, tyrannical stuff, isn't it ?