• 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.
cocana said:
She's lost the plot completely. Been drinking too much of her own urine or something. Total paranoia.

It's good to watch them argue amongst themselves though. Doesn't even need any encouragement at the moment! ;)
Click to expand...
inevitable. the law is what they say it is.

cannibalism on the land
 
Last edited:
Apologies if this question has been flogged to death before or is just plain stupid but given the lynchpins for FMOLT go back to the Magna Carta (or earlier?) and the stated importance of the meaning of words in courts then does 'freeman' mean exclusion of FMOTL 'rights' for women?
 
Grassy Knowlington said:
Apologies if this question has been flogged to death before or is just plain stupid but given the lynchpins for FMOLT go back to the Magna Carta (or earlier?) and the stated importance of the meaning of words in courts then does 'freeman' mean exclusion of FMOTL 'rights' for women?
Click to expand...

Demonstrably not. On the Icke forum for example, girlgye has achieved as much success as any male "freeman" in her dealings with the court system.
:rolleyes:
 
jargon buster said:
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.
Click to expand...

If you're pro freeman you can even threaten to lynch other Icke forum members with immunity.
In this thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152100
mark1963 wrote:
It will be my pleasure to acquaint all three of you with lampposts some day soon.
Click to expand...
and a few posts later:
It's because of attitudes like yours that we live in a ◊◊◊◊ society and it will be a pleasure when the time comes to acquaint you with the nearest lamppost. Your existence is better off being spent in the spirit world.

You low low low thing.
Click to expand...
Even though one of the members mark1963 threatened has announced he has reported the posts, no action is taken and the text remains.
These freemen always spout "cause no harm", but they are always the first to resort to threats and insults.
 
Last edited:
smoke and mirrors offered this site http://inclusion.semitagui.gov.co/S...ame.htm#1.__What_English_grammar_experts_say_ as a source of research for the OP in this thread http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152201
A quick search of the sites author gives all this http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&expI....+Epperly,&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=de610b7113b09eab

obviously Mr Epperley gives his unbiased slant on the capital letters theory :D

PS Epperley has had his freeman "successes"
http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/980/980.F2d.737.html
The United States requests sanctions in the amount of $2,500 against the Epperlys for bringing this appeal. Because the Epperlys' arguments on appeal are entirely without merit, we grant the United States' request and impose sanctions in the sum of $2,500. See Fed.R.App.P. 38; 28 U.S.C. § 1912; and Wilcox v. Commissioner, 848 F.2d 1007, 1009 (9th Cir.1988).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
bones the freeman loser with loads of kids and living off state benefits wrote
the csa are total scum bags, i feel sorry for fathers who are being stung for excessive amounts of money when they too are struggleing .

having a set 15% net reduction of ones wages is totally wrong as one could be earning 150 a week and another could be earning 950 a week.

and why should a man pay for a child when the *********** mother does the dirty and leaves for another guy??

its there choice, you like the way the grass looks but dont like the taste , **** you' you left now deal with it...

i look at things very simply, if you cant afford to look after the child let the other parent take custody.

my own experience is from above, self employment is the key !!! i pay **** all and i wont pay any, she took my son away for 18 months without contact and eventually when i got responsability she left the country...


all without my permission, cafcass and the court system stinks of revenue..
Click to expand...

it would appear that in bones eyes if you split from your partner the child automatically becomes none of your concern financially.

also he pays nothing to his child from his previous relationship, an honourable freeman indeed
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059593443&postcount=13

PS If he hadnt been such a loser maybe she would have stuck around, it wont be long before hes on his own again.
 
Last edited:
jargon buster said:
bones the freeman loser with loads of kids and living off state benefits wrote


it would appear that in bones eyes if you split from your partner the child automatically becomes none of your concern financially.

also he pays nothing to his child from his previous relationship, an honourable freeman indeed
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059593443&postcount=13

PS If he hadnt been such a loser maybe she would have stuck around, it wont be long before hes on his own again.
Click to expand...

Yup.

What a prime example of the freeloader mindset to say that the child only remains the father's responsibility until the parents split up. To be fair, that sort of attitude doesn't just apply to freemen but we do see examples of their hypocrisy and irresponsibility all the time.
 
jargon buster said:
bones the freeman loser with loads of kids and living off state benefits wrote


it would appear that in bones eyes if you split from your partner the child automatically becomes none of your concern financially.

also he pays nothing to his child from his previous relationship, an honourable freeman indeed
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059593443&postcount=13

PS If he hadnt been such a loser maybe she would have stuck around, it wont be long before hes on his own again.
Click to expand...

So freeman means being free from any responsibility or accountability for your actions. It's even someone else's responsibility to feed your kid or even your self if you're free man.


I think these freemen would be the fist to join the ranks if a dictator were to arise.
 
girlgye is turning it up a notch to spit in the face of the naysayers
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152782

She has started a thread to show the successes of freemen and mortgage foreclosures
Ok growing weary by the day of these 'weeds' coming on here saying that we have little success blah blah blah. So I am going to produce a thread on the real facts about the success of mortgage foreclosure and the vast vast array of successes.

I'm sorry to those of you who have lost your homes.

I salute those of you, and in particular, the judges, who weighted down on justice and merit.

I salute all those Freemen/Patriots/Redemptionists who worked tirelessly in the bankground to help such successes.

You know who you are.

http://www.consumerwarningnetwork.co...e-note-how-to/
Click to expand...

so an OP with no success stories and an apology to those who have lost their homes????

PS shes just posted a second post with the link she put in the OP (I think shes drunk again)

She is now adding quotes without a source, its no wonder when you actually check them out
 
Last edited:
jargon buster said:
girlgye is turning it up a notch to spit in the face of the naysayers
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=152782

She has started a thread to show the successes of freemen and mortgage foreclosures


so an OP with no success stories and an apology to those who have lost their homes????

PS shes just posted a second post with the link she put in the OP (I think shes drunk again)

She is now adding quotes without a source, its no wonder when you actually check them out
Click to expand...

Even her fellow posters show doubts
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059594595&postcount=10
She will probably claim this Brasso is you JB
 
I sense brasso is giving her a backhanded compliment.
There's not one decision in the entire thread that is based on freeman theory.
Its just statements randomly plucked from the net.
 
All of the cases she cited appear to have been litigated by actual attorneys and achieved actual beneficial results, so I can say with confidence that not a single Freeman argument was advanced.

No sane attorney would ever step foot in a court and tell the judge that he doesn't have jurisdiction over his client. In the US (and I'm sure Canada and England are the same), if an attorney makes an argument he knows has no legal basis he can be disciplined and even disbarred. Now, this is really hard to accomplish and rarely happens. However, I'm willing to bet a judge will make an exception for an attorney who says his client should get off the hook for all of his debts because he is a Sovereign Citizen who doesn't consent to our laws. Just a hunch.
 
Bosozoku said:
All of the cases she cited appear to have been litigated by actual attorneys and achieved actual beneficial results, so I can say with confidence that not a single Freeman argument was advanced.

No sane attorney would ever step foot in a court and tell the judge that he doesn't have jurisdiction over his client. In the US (and I'm sure Canada and England are the same), if an attorney makes an argument he knows has no legal basis he can be disciplined and even disbarred. Now, this is really hard to accomplish and rarely happens. However, I'm willing to bet a judge will make an exception for an attorney who says his client should get off the hook for all of his debts because he is a Sovereign Citizen who doesn't consent to our laws. Just a hunch.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've read through the cases she's cited and I don't see the relevance to freeman snake oil.

She's a complete fruit cake and she seems to be getting a wide birth from even the freeman dribblers these days. I see she's now laid into Rumpole for only looking to legal authorities for the history of common law -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1059593966&postcount=22

Good grief woman you do post some daft remarks. I particularly liked -

the law more than I do, become a little bit too overeducated for your own good.
Click to expand...

Girlgye the legal guru, priceless!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom