• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Freeman Movement and England

Status
Not open for further replies.
gumboot said:
The great irony of all this is that a "freeman" (being the fourth tier of peasantry in a serfdom social stucture) still paid taxes and had obligations to the government. The big difference between a freeman and serfs, bordars and villeins (the lower three tiers), was that a freeman could choose to leave their land and go work and live somewhere else.

Essentially, in the modern day we are all freemen.
Click to expand...

Ah but, are we Freemen-On-The-Land?
 
jargon buster said:
Ha yes the good old days, when freeman was shiny and new, shame its old and dull nowadays.
Click to expand...
What is ground zero for freemanism? Is there a time/place/person who started it all? I imagine it's pretty hard to pin down given the cross-pollination from the American posse comitaus/sovereign citizen movement, etc.
 
Stacey Grove said:
Coo (or should that be Kew), a friggin' University sponsored by the Freedomness Emporium and General Store!
Click to expand...
Apart from the general hilarity of the product descriptions - "Tools you can use to secure your right to smoke, own, possess, grow or sell marijuana, pot, herb, weed and sckootch" "Maxims are cool" - several of the items are, appropriately, credited to Rober Arthur Menard. Sometimes he even forgets the hyphen and colon.
 
D'rok said:
What is ground zero for freemanism? Is there a time/place/person who started it all? I imagine it's pretty hard to pin down given the cross-pollination from the American posse comitaus/sovereign citizen movement, etc.
Click to expand...


I met an American in Rome in the Summer of 1994 who was parroting 'sovereign citizen' drivel - ie you could surrender your US citizenship, not be liable for taxes, not have to have car insurance, driving licence. However my inderstanding is that 'sovereign citizen' ideas go back to the late 70's / early 80's.

FMOTL seems to have budded off from the 'sovereign citizen' concept relatively recently. It's essentially the same thing repackaged but with a few added bells & whistles - ie the obsession with trusts & 'consent'. I don't know who coined the term FMOTL but I doubt it it's much more than 5 years old. It's a child of the recession - there are more people out there who are desperate enough to fall the snake oil the likes of Menard & St Clair peddle. My guess is that it's a Canadian version of the Sovereign citizen movement but I can't be sure. The Icke FMOTL section started in May 08.

I note Rob hasn't felt the need to address the posts I made yesterday in detail. What a surprise :eek:
 
Last edited:
gtm said:
FMOTL seems to have budded off from the 'sovereign citizen' concept relatively recently. It's essentially the same thing repackaged but with a few added bells & whistles - ie the obsession with trusts & 'consent'. I don't know who coined the term FMOTL but I doubt it it's much more than 5 years old. It's a child of the recession - there are more people out there who are desperate enough to fall the snake oil the likes of Menard & St Clair peddle. My guess is that it's a Canadian version of the Sovereign citizen movement but I can't be sure. The Icke FMOTL section started in May 08.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much what I thought too.

I note Rob hasn't felt the need to address the posts I made yesterday in detail. What a surprise :eek:
Click to expand...
He seems confused about this whole "honour" thing that he's always banging on about.
 
Just curious but is this FOTL stuff international, I mean if someone in the UK declares themselves a FOTL and therefore refuses to pay car insurance etc. does that mean if they go abroad they disregard the laws in that country as they are not common law? If an American FOTL had a car accident in the UK and had no insurance would they try to use their belief in common law as a defence or does it only work* in their own country?

*I use the word work here in the loosest possible way
 
"Work", used in the loosest possible way is not actually any good.
I think the word "fail" would be an ideal replacement.
The answer is it fails everywhere, not just their own country.
 
Oh I know it fails I just wondered if they felt they were immune from laws in all countries as they claim to have opted out in one. Would love to see a FOTL try it on in a Beijing court.
 
I recall Menard once waffling on about "claims of right" and that if you sent one to the evil gubermint in whichever country you were vistiting then you would be fine.

Bearing in mind he cant even get out of Canada I suppose he hasnt tried it yet.
 
Vladd said:
Just curious but is this FOTL stuff international, I mean if someone in the UK declares themselves a FOTL and therefore refuses to pay car insurance etc. does that mean if they go abroad they disregard the laws in that country as they are not common law?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure exactly how an FOTL would go abroad in the first case. They believe that there's a basic human right to travel across borders without a passport, so they'll have a bit of a problem whenever they try it.

Dave
 
They would have trouble leaving the UK we don't have any land borders. Apart from into Eire from Northern Ireland. But then you are still stuck on an island and you can cross from one to the other without a Passport anyway.
 
The ever reliable idiot yozhik seems to have got himself into a debate about trusts over on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=6
He seems to believe that all law is based on trusts but only a few people know about it (he thinks he is one of them by the way :))
Having skimmed the material I think hes getting trusts and trust mixed up.
hes used to making up his own definitions for words.
I have a feeling he will be taking the torch from Menard shortly as Menard has now been proved to be a fraud on several occasions.
The fmotlers need someone who know can spew legal jargon and look to the uneducated like he knows what hes talking about.

Yozhik is a fitting replacement from the idiotic forerunner, and they did both join Ickes within a week so maybe they have always been a double act.
 
jargon buster said:
The ever reliable idiot yozhik seems to have got himself into a debate about trusts over on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=148955&page=6
He seems to believe that all law is based on trusts but only a few people know about it (he thinks he is one of them by the way :))
Having skimmed the material I think hes getting trusts and trust mixed up.
hes used to making up his own definitions for words.
I have a feeling he will be taking the torch from Menard shortly as Menard has now been proved to be a fraud on several occasions.
The fmotlers need someone who know can spew legal jargon and look to the uneducated like he knows what hes talking about.

Yozhik is a fitting replacement from the idiotic forerunner, and they did both join Ickes within a week so maybe they have always been a double act.
Click to expand...

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

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059529153&postcount=79
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom