The Freeman Movement and England

[scissorhands]

You must consider the offer being given to you. You are fully entitled to accept it (to consent to it) or not. THAT IS YOUR OBLIGATION. If you decline it you can politely reply you not consent. Can't you ? Or are you a jellyfish ? Thanking them for their offer to contract with you, but that you do not require the unquantified goods and services which they are offering.

Exactly, heres a video of this process in action.
I think it works out quite well.

 

[fitzgibbon]

A summons is an "invitation"? Oh that's rich! That's thick! I'm sure the Legaltainment© goddess would double over at that 'interpetation'.

So Especially, when the local constabulary comes to enforce the court's "invitation", are you suggesting that merely telling them that you decline their kind offer would be sufficient to dissuade them from clapping you in irons?

 

[fitzgibbon]

The law which prevents it is myself. And the law of England. And, unless you are more careful, your membership of this forum.

Now go away and stop being a silly little boy.

But said law is only enforceable if I consent to it (which I haven't). Ergo, your whole enforcement mechanism is contained in your ability to prevent.

Bit weak that

 

[Especially]

Exactly, heres a video of this process in action.
I think it works out quite well.

Looks like a bunch of uniformed fascists removing a person from their home. A police state, perhaps ?

Which IS the society you want, yes ? In fact, it's the society you have made. The revenue officers do not know the law. They do not hear that the person does NOT CONSENT to contract with them.

Simple, yes ? And there it is. Plain and simple.

 

[Especially]

So much for government by consent, right ?

 

[Lothian]

Looks like a bunch of uniformed fascists removing a person from their home. A police state, perhaps ?

Which IS the society you want, yes ? In fact, it's the society you have made. The revenue officers do not know the law. They do not hear that the person does NOT CONSENT to contract with them.

Simple, yes ? And there it is. Plain and simple.

Removing someone from someone else's home to be specific.

The owners did not consent to these freemen trespassing. Who is at fault under the law?

 

[Especially]

"I'm not contracting with you! I'm not contracting with you!"

That was absolutely priceless.

Remind anyone of this?

Yes, freedom is priceless, and people are waking up all around the world to how precious it is. Government by consent is the law of the land. The rest is ignorance and revenue officers who know nothing of the law.

Thanks for showing the society you want to have.

 

[volatile]

Looks like a bunch of uniformed fascists removing a person from their home. A police state, perhaps ?

Which IS the society you want, yes ? In fact, it's the society you have made. The revenue officers do not know the law. They do not hear that the person does NOT CONSENT to contract with them.

They heard it, but they ignored it.

So we're back to what I asked you pages and pages ago: when the powers that be ignore the Common Law of England, what should a Freeman do next? I mean, it seems that even if "You are fully entitled to accept it (to consent to it) or not", the bastards in the NWO might not pay any notice.

So what happens next?

 

[Especially]

They heard it, but they ignored it.

So we're back to what I asked you pages and pages ago: when the powers that be ignore the Common Law of England, what should a Freeman do next? I mean, it seems that even if "You are fully entitled to accept it (to consent to it) or not", the bastards in the NWO might not pay any notice.

So what happens next?

Let the people see for themselves what is happening. The law is supreme. In this case and all others. Police state or no police state. These police are ignorant revenue gatherers with no knowledge of the law. Choose what society you want. That's life. Choose freedom from tyranny. Simple.

Now. Do not speak to me again. I will not reply. Let people in the USA see what we are up against here in England. Because we here in England are friends with good Americans in the USA. And always have been.

We will win and have already done so.

 

[leafman91]

LisssaLysikan,

SHOW US RIGHT HERE THE LAW WHICH ALLOWS THE USA TO IMPOSE A FEDERAL INCOME TAX !

We are still waiting. This is my fourth request.

Would you like a few hours to find it ?

I am happy to wait. In fact, I won't post on any other subject until you reply.

Hey. I realise the post is a bit late, but try the United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 2.

Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

Also, this little gem under Article 1 Section 7.

Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law.

Simply put,no?

And directly below it, exactly what the Congress can do. I'm afraid the invasion of Iraq counts. This one from Article 1, Section 8.

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

Note in particular, the part where Congress is given charge specifically of laying and collecting taxes. First line under section 8, you might find.

 

[volatile]

Let the people see for themselves what is happening. The law is supreme. In this case and all others. Police state or no police state. These police are ignorant revenue gatherers with no knowledge of the law. Choose what society you want. That's life. Choose freedom from tyranny. Simple.

Now. Do not speak to me again. I will not reply.

The law might be supreme, but what good is the law if no-one enforces it.

What is to be done about the egregious breach of The Common Law in the video? How should the jackbooted thugs be brought to task? How can they be punished? What good is The Common Law if no-one can uphold it?

What should this woman do next?

 

[Especially]

The law might be supreme, but what good is the law if no-one enforces it.

What is to be done about the egregious breach of The Common Law in the video? How should the jackbooted thugs be brought to task? How can they be punished? What good is The Common Law if no-one can uphold it?

What should this woman do next?

But we DO uphold the law. And that is the vital difference.

We are more than they. And we are growing fast in number every day. In England, the USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and elsewhere. We are the lawful answer to the New World Order. Choose whom you will serve. Your God given rights or the robocop tyranny that is corporate government. These cases are a demonstration of what happens in society if the people serve governments rather than vice versa.

As for the rest of that woman's story, why not research it and post it here ?

Simple.

 

[Lothian]

Especially. I am confused. You said that Volatile could not enter your house as you did not consent. The woman in the video entered somone's house who did not consent.

What should the owner do under the law?

 

[D'rok]

And what case is this ? Do you even know ?

I do now. And it couldn't possibly be any funnier.

"SQUATTERS have been evicted from a National Trust property they had occupied in Abinger Hammer since the end of June, after they failed to leave by a date ordered by the county court. By Thursday afternoon, all eight of them - including former MI5 whistleblower and self-proclaimed Messiah, David Shayler - had either been dragged away from Hackhurst Farm or left of their own accord.

The first three squatters to be hauled down Hackhurst Lane included Mr Shayler, who said: “Being the leader they wanted to get me out first. We are now homeless. We don’t have a roof over our heads, but I am Jesus Christ so I don’t mind.""


http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2055961_squatters_evicted_from_hackhurst_farm


Seriously, this just made my day.

 

[volatile]

But we DO uphold the law. And that is the vital difference.

We are more than they. And we are growing fast in number every day. In England, the USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and elsewhere. We are the lawful answer to the New World Order. Choose who you will serve. Your God given rights or the robocop tyranny that is corporate government.

Simple.

That's all very nice, dear.

But it doesn't really answer my question. Given that, no matter what The Magical Law of Old London Town might say, the police and courts and gaols clearly don't care. All the FMOTL words in the world, whatever force you believe they should have, do not work. That video is proof.

The Ancient Law of King Arthur and the Celts of England is being overridden by these jackbooted thugs. So, what should we do? What should the woman in the video do next? To whom can she appeal? Who will enforce the Decent and Proper Law of the Land of Albion?

Would you like some coco?

 

[Especially]

That's all very nice, dear.

But it doesn't really answer my question. Given that, no matter what The Magical Law of Old London Town might say, the police and courts and gaols clearly don't care. All the FMOTL words in the world, whatever force you believe they should have, do not work. That video is proof.

The Ancient Law of King Arthur and the Celts of England is being overridden by these jackbooted thugs. So, what should we do? What should the woman in the video do next? To whom can she appeal? Who will enforce the Decent and Proper Law of the Land of Albion?

Would you like some coco?

We, the people of the nation, in whom was and is sovereignty. Since we are the keepers of the law. In England, as in the USA, and in Canada and elsewhere. Get used to it. Because we will prosper and you will not. You are the willing stooges of the New World Order. And we are the law abiding good people of our nation.

 

[volatile]

We, the people of the nation, in whom was and is sovereignty. Since we are the keepers of the law. In England, as in the USA, and in Canada and elsewhere. Get used to it. Because we will prosper and you will not.

Right, that's fine. I agree.

So what do we do? Practically and pragmatically. What can this woman do next? Tell me.

 

[Lothian]

Not as often as you, it seems. Since I believe in my own sovereignty and surrender it to no man. It's my God given right under the law of the land.

There is no God, so he can not give you rights.

 

[Lothian]

We, the people of the nation, in whom was and is sovereignty. Since we are the keepers of the law. In England, as in the USA, and in Canada and elsewhere. Get used to it. Because we will prosper and you will not. You are the willing stooges of the New World Order. And we are the law abiding good people of our nation.

It is law abiding to squat in someone else's property under your law of the land?

 

[Especially]

There is no God, so he can not give you rights.

This is true. For You. And therefore you have NO RIGHTS. Stay there and see what happens to you next.

As for those who disagree with freedom they choose differently. They have their gods. Their lords. To whom they have surrendered even their own consent. They are, by definition, slaves. With no power of consent or not of consent.

So you reap what you sow. Life is choice. Be free.