The Freeman Movement and England

[jargon buster]

Hello HandyRandy or is it Rob (the name suits if it is)
Read the post before
I

f you withdraw consent, it matters not what the government accepts. They can treat you however they want, but that doesn't mean you need to consent to their treatment, does it??

Like I said... you can take it like a biz-natch, or you can go down kicking and screaming. One is consensual, the other is not.

Does that sound like a man who believes his withdrawal of consent has any validity?
thats when I posted the link here, its moved on since then
Stay with it Rob, you could even sign up there, you wont though of course.

 

[grndslm]

Maybe.

This site gets very high google ratings.

Any rational thinking that gets results is a good thing.

At least the gullible get to see some rational thought.

Precisely.

And I very much doubt it is possible to "turn a hardcore freeman".

They are to far invested in a false belief.

It is, however, worth trying to convert the undecided.

That's like asking me not to believe in God. It's not logical for me to think that matter, energy, forces, created themselves. It's logical for me to think that the material world is not truly reality, and the spiritual world *is* reality.

Until there's PROOF that there is no God, I will continue believing what is my reality. There can never be PROOF on the side of an atheist, however, so no need for me to take that hypocritical position.

i know i am just a lurker here and have been acused of bieng the Menard guy, but i am kinda confused.

jargon buster says:



but i read the post, and it says he does not admit.


did he admit or not?

it looks to me like he didnt.

Do you folks on this forum take this:
I'm not admitting anything.
to mean this:
admits his withdrawal of consent has no legal/lawful standing.

Just trying to figure this out...
Trying to figure out if I shood listen to what jargon buster says, once he is caught in a lie is all...

Edited by LashL: 

Edited.

One more time for you all... I reject jargon buster's reality, and I substitute my own. That's the beauty of life and liberty.

Edited. Do not change another member's user name in order to insult.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[jargon buster]

do you wish to discuss freeman on the land as HandyRandy?
please illuminate us with your views.
Why is it so important for you to try and make me a liar?

Edited. Do not make sockpuppet accusations in thread. If you think someone is utilizing a a sockpuppet account, please just report it to the Moderating Team.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[jargon buster]

I reject jargon buster's reality, and I substitute my own. That's the beauty of life and liberty.

Edited by LashL: 

Edited quote of moderated content

good for you, maybe you are more suited to Ucadia, they hold all their cards in the belief in something that isnt true.

 

[grndslm]

Read the post before

If you withdraw consent, it matters not what the government accepts. They can treat you however they want, but that doesn't mean you need to consent to their treatment, does it??

Like I said... you can take it like a biz-natch, or you can go down kicking and screaming. One is consensual, the other is not.

Does that sound like a man who believes his withdrawal of consent has any validity?

You need to offer examples, because your wording is too vague. Nobody knows wtf you are talking about.

WHAT CONSENT?

I do not consent to the government, yes. The government can steamroll me after I withdraw consent, expecting me to eventually "re-consent", yes. Does that mean that I have not withdrawn consent... or will not continue to fight for my rights??

Edited to remove gratuitous insult. I suggest that you read the Membership Agreement to which you agreed when you signed up here.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL

 

[jargon buster]

and again grndslm
Your withdrawal of consent is irrelevant, its just you talking, the government will deal with you if you break the law.
Its one thing saying you have withdrawn consent and actually doing it by ignoring statutory legislation with impunity.

 

[grndslm]

and again grndslm
Your withdrawal of consent is irrelevant, its just you talking, the government will deal with you if you break the law.
Its one thing saying you have withdrawn consent and actually doing it by ignoring statutory legislation with impunity.

Tell the Egyptians their consent is irrelevant.

Edited by LashL: 

Removed gratuitous insult.

P.S. - I ignore statutory legislation every day by smoking big fat blunts of cannabis. I do this with impunity. How great it is to not fear The Man.

How great it is that when The Man takes down the greatest American Law forum... I don't just roll over with my thumb up my ass, but instead, I create a forum to keep the Spirit alive.

 

[jargon buster]

Edited by LashL: 

Removed inappropriate content.

For a lurker you seem to know a lot about other forums.

Edited by LashL: 

Removed inappropriate content.

I had to deflect on other forums to stop them banning me, you wont get banned here so its not even an issue.

what are your views on Freeman on The land?

By the way here are your first two posts on this forum

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?

s that not what the goverment does? Make up the rules as they go along, I mean?

Hi i am Randy. i am 27, seperated dad of an awesome little boy(he is my life) i am learning impaired (dyslexia) buy still do my best and i have a rent-a-husband type business where i fix little things around the house for single woman and moms. i am on the fence with this whole freeman stuff but i know people at my school who got there student loans writen off. i am trying to get my diploma for wind turbine technician and live at home with my mom and dad and if i can get my student loan paid off i will. i also have watched some videos, and they make sense to me. At least some of it. Some of the other stuff i do not understand, but on my birth certificate there is words on the back that say revenue receipt, so i wonder i do not trust the government, and think they are hiding something but how could this freeman stuff be real? We can't just say no to the government can we? i mean that would be too easy and someone would have told us about it before. Lawyers would be doing it all the time if it was true.

anyway, happy new year! i came here cause you guys do not agree with the freeman stuff, and i wanted to see all sides before deciding. i hope to make friends here who can help me figure this stuff out.

happy new year!

Edited by LashL: 

Edited to remove personalization.

 

[HandyRandy]

Tell the Egyptians their consent is irrelevant.

You are a very weak, weak individual.

P.S. - I ignore statutory legislation every day by smoking big fat blunts of cannabis. I do this with impunity. How great it is to not fear The Man.

How great it is that when The Man takes down the greatest American Law forum... I don't just roll over with my thumb up my ass, but instead, I create a forum to keep the Spirit alive.

good point. couldnt the president just tel them their consent did not matter? why did they not go home when told that? maybe just maybe cosent does matter.

and for 'the government' are they people or not? if they are, then they are not 'the government' without consent, so the argument that consent does not matter is obviuosly wrong, cause consent was needed for the people in the government to become the government. without consent they are not 'the government'.

 

[jargon buster]

the egyptians revolted, its what you have to do if you want your consent to matter.

Now have you got the Canadians behind you

Edited by LashL: 

See modbox above re: sockpuppet accusations

 

[Stacey Grove]

P.S. - I ignore statutory legislation every day by smoking big fat blunts of cannabis.

People break the law every day but that is hardly proof that a FOTL defence would be successful in court.
So you smoke cannabis, so what?

 

[jargon buster]

Smoking big fat blunts is mandatory for freeman on the land, its vital in dumbing you down enough to accept its theories.

 

[D'rok]

Of course consent matters. The Egyptians (and much of the Arab ME in general) want what all of us in Western liberal democracies have - i.e., a government that gets its authority from the consent of the governed.

Now the FMOTL jackasses corrupt this principle (consent) into a selfish, childish mantra of personal entitlement. Guess what? Consent of the governed doesn't mean individual consent and/or a line item personal veto on the laws of the democratically elected legislature. You are not sovereign; The people are.

Thankfully, even those in Western liberal democracies who are marginalized by the majority enjoy the blessings of the rule of law under which their rights are protected by Bills and Charters of Rights. We live in enlightened societies where the majority rules without crushing the rights of the minority.

That's why those who are not free want what we have.

No go and smoke as much drugs as you want. If you get caught, you will be punished for it. If you don't like that, work to get the laws changed. That's what you have the freedom to do. Lucky bastard.

 

[Stacey Grove]

FFS, grndslm if the fact that you can smoke dope unhindered is your proof of the validity of the FOTL theory, I'm not convinced you have a thorough understanding of FOTL

 

[grndslm]

Thankfully, even those in Western liberal democracies who are marginalized by the majority enjoy the blessings of the rule of law under which their rights are protected by Bills and Charters of Rights. We live in enlightened societies where the majority rules without crushing the rights of the minority.

Too bad you don't realize that your corporate government is not bound by the constitution, bills/charters of rights.

They ignore that and require your consent.

Go to a municipal court here... you are required to sign a sheet of paper at the arraignment, regardless of your plea. Your best choice is TO NOT PLEA AT ALL. DON'T SIGN ANYTHING!!

U.S. and MS Bill of Rights say that *ALL* alleged criminal offenders have the right to a trial by jury. The judge accepts an oath to uphold the constitution / bill of rights before all else. GUESS WHAT!! He ignores it, because he's running a business... not a government. The bill of rights is ******* useless without YOUR INCESSANT DEMAND FOR YOUR RIGHTS.

Edited by Rat: 

Edited to remove profanity. Do not evade the autocensor

 

[grndslm]

FFS, grndslm if the fact that you can smoke dope unhindered is your proof of the validity of the FOTL theory, I'm not convinced you have a thorough understanding of FOTL

Again... continuity gap, people.

Quote me where I said that that was my proof of the validity of the FOTL "theory". Dear God, PLEASE!!

He said I couldn't ignore statutes with impunity.

I proved HIM wrong. I did not attempt to prove anything at all about anything at all related to Freemen.

 

[Andy_Ross]

To compare FMOTL with the Egyptian protest is an insult tot the Egyptians.
WHere are the FMOTL protesting in the street and putting their asses where the bullets are?

 

[D'rok]

I will not be punished for it, because it's decriminalized. I can only be written a ticket...

Are you in California by chance? If so, how was decriminalization accomplished? Oh yeah...democratically - i.e., BY THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

AND ONLY IF I consent to giving them my name. They can't arrest me for not giving my name.

Fail. If a cop wants to give you a ticket, you will get a ticket whether you consent to it or not.

Most people here smoke, so I have not a whole lot to worry about. Cops treat weed here mostly the same as they do in Cali, except we don't have stores we can walk into, safely and all.

So you're not in California then. What does "most" people mean? How was decriminalization accomplished in your jurisdiction, hmm?

And you're right that the people are sovereign... NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

Exactly.

I would disagree that that consent of the governed does not mean consent of the individual, however.

And you'd be wrong. Wrong in the sense that you promote - i.e., the ability to have a line item veto on laws that you don't like. Sorry, the rule of law doesn't work that way.

You should read some U.S. Supreme Court cases. The older the cases you find, the more obvious it is that our entire country is founded on liberty of the individual.

Law school grad here. Hi.

P.S. - Very hypocritical to say that FMOTL is the one being childish. You're not very objective, are you?

It's a factual observation. Your lot has a ton of growing up to do. You compare your "plight" to that of the Egyptians and have the delusion that your "battle" is as noble as that of the people in the streets of Cairo.

Grow up.

 

[D'rok]

To compare FMOTL with the Egyptian protest is an insult tot the Egyptians.
WHere are the FMOTL protesting in the street and putting their asses where the bullets are?

Damn strait.

 

[Stacey Grove]

He said I couldn't ignore statutes with impunity.

I proved HIM wrong. I did not attempt to prove anything at all about anything at all related to Freemen.

No, that would be all statutes.
Which country are you in?