• 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.

Merged Freeman on the Land in America/lawful rebellion/sovereign citizens

BStrong said:
That's exactly correct.

The only difference is a 4 year old doesn't have access to the civil legal system on their own. The corporation I'm employed by is now being sued in small claims, and I am as an individual as well.

I haven't spoken w/ the arresting officer yet, but I'd be surprised if he hasn't at the very least been on the recieving end of a civilian complaint.
Click to expand...

Would you like to flesh that out? (I am aware that may not be possible, given an ongoing legal process).
 
BStrong said:
I've just become familar with this FOTL foolishness, through a business related incident.

Without going into detail ( I can't) an individual claiming FOTL status is threatening legal action against my employer.

Basic gist is that the individual in question is not subject to any rules said individual does not approve of and agree to, but all other individuals and entities that said individual comes into contact with are subject to all of said individual's rules...whether they are aware of said rules or not.

Didn't work well with the arresting officer, and didn't work with us.
Click to expand...

You know, I've been looking for a "two sentence" version of explaining FOTL lunacy, and I think this just about does it. It just about sums up what people who believe they are Freeman on the Land think they can do.

Unfortunately for them...what they think...and what reality is....are always two different things.
 
Hi guys i just wanted to say. That ive recently confirmed my hypothesis, that all FMOTL were actually molested as children. I've had various FMOTL email me to confirm they too were molested. I will not of course be posting any of their names or details. Just take my word for it.
 
mushy said:
Hi guys i just wanted to say. That ive recently confirmed my hypothesis, that all FMOTL were actually molested as children. I've had various FMOTL email me to confirm they too were molested. I will not of course be posting any of their names or details. Just take my word for it.
Click to expand...
That's not true, not clever and certainly not funny, do you have anything to say beyond declaring your own idiocy?
 
I think my sig now fully debunks the withdrawal of consent theory.
Click to expand...

I think Menard's own current sig at DIF debunks himself:
(Bold is mine)

Let me try and explain the difference to you: Rob is right. The government is a con trick. A few people are making money off the suffering of others. If, to get that message to the gullible, Rob has to violate the rules of the Law Society, I consider that a price worth paying.
Click to expand...

ETA: And you really do have to be incredibly gullible to believe Conman: of the Menard Family's message.
 
Last edited:
can a member on Ickes try and persuade this guy to come over here and tell us how he doesnt pay for anything
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059993842&postcount=21

Wrong ,Wrong Wrong I have two trusts and a LLC I do not pay for anything.


The biggest misinformation is about the CQV trust, dont waste your time chasing down this dead dog.

Ever since incorporated my own trust , the CQV has been dead and I opperate through my private trust (estate). The CQV is owned and opperated through your government and you get to use it as a privilege not a right.

You have to act as an independent and not part of the public trust.

The whole secret is to be independant. Everybody I know who opperates as an independent does NOT contact or take any benefits from the CQV for anything and I mean anything.



Everything from that trust is a benefit privilege and your screwed before you start.

I know people who have opperated outside of the public trust for 7 years.

Your government is a corporation face it and you are subjected to the company rules just like any other company. Why is this so hard to understand.


People have this underlying need to belong to something. WHY?
Click to expand...

I do find his last line rather strange, surely if he doesn't pay for anything then that money is coming from somewhere, isn't that something that he belongs to?

PS it looks like willie1959 and freelove are about to start scamming the gullible over there, both new people and both pushing the same idea, they appear to be creditors in commerce salesmen
 
Last edited:
mushy said:
It is true.
Click to expand...

st8759_I20see20you20troll.jpg
 
abaddon said:
Would you like to flesh that out? (I am aware that may not be possible, given an ongoing legal process).
Click to expand...

I will when I'm able to.

Short form: Mongo no like rules. You make Mongo follow rules. Mongo no follow rules. Mongo go bye-bye. Mongo sue.
 
BStrong said:
I will when I'm able to.

Short form: Mongo no like rules. You make Mongo follow rules. Mongo no follow rules. Mongo go bye-bye. Mongo sue.
Click to expand...

Mongo sue? When Mongo doesn't believe in the legal system? When Mongo says it has no authority over him?

Stupidity. It's what's for breakfast.
 
Jim,you need to keep up,he will form his own de jure court to with a jury of freemen.
Its Ok though bstrong,should just put in a letter of conditional acceptance to attend court and a fee schedule of $1 billion dollars to take part in the process.

If mungo is a man of his word and true to the freeman philosophy he will have to agree or the case is quashed. ;)
 
jargon buster said:
Jim,you need to keep up,he will form his own de jure court to with a jury of freemen.
Its Ok though bstrong,should just put in a letter of conditional acceptance to attend court and a fee schedule of $1 billion dollars to take part in the process.

If mungo is a man of his word and true to the freeman philosophy he will have to agree or the case is quashed. ;)
Click to expand...

I try to keep up, but even light doesn't travel at the speed of stupid!
 
ok so I am clearing out some FOTL links from my favorites and this piece of info came into my lap.

This is from "the redemption manual", and cites a supreme court case, which believe it or not, actually contains the text which it cites.:p

it goes like this

America hasn't been a sovereign nation with lawful government in more than a century. Some even argue that there never have been lawful governments as "every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by, his fellowman without his consent." [CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.] And the key phrase there is WITHOUT HIS CONSENT. You must voluntarily give your consent to enter into contracts with these corporations.
Click to expand...

Link to the case

http://montgomerymaryland.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/cruden-v-neale-2-n-c-338-1796-full-text.doc

Not saying it proves anything but could be a source where some of this FOTL rhetoric originated from
 
therival58 said:
Link to the case

http://montgomerymaryland.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/cruden-v-neale-2-n-c-338-1796-full-text.doc

Not saying it proves anything but could be a source where some of this FOTL rhetoric originated from
Click to expand...



Quite possibly, and of course, true to form, they'd be ignoring this part which comes just before that:

When a change of government takes place from a monarchical to a republican government, the old form is dissolved.--Those who lived under it, and did not choose to become members of the new, had a right to refuse their allegiance to it, and to retire elsewhere. By being a part of the society subject to the old government, they had not entered into any engagement to become subject to any new form the majority might think proper to adopt. That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state.
Click to expand...

(emphasis mine)Which is, of course, exactly what we've been telling them all along!


Also, note the date: 1796. When they were still sorting out the legal ramifications of the US War of Independence. In fact, the majority of the decision seems to deal with just that sort of issue.


ETA: Oh, god, I just noticed exactly how carefully they quote mined this...

It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There every man is independant of all laws, except those prescribed by nature.He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow-men without his consent.
Click to expand...

Notice how they dropped the word "There", which clearly refers back to "mankind in their natural state"? The entire passage they quote refers only to people in their "natural state", which is expressly not being part of a larger society with recognized government.
 
Last edited:
another "success" for a freeman it appears.
The comment from Herald Holmes says it all
http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=174756
A Merritt "freeman" will sit in jail through the Canada Day holiday weekend after he refused to acknowledge to the court his name.

Lance Thatcher was arrested in Merritt Wednesday. He is charged with breach of probation for failing to report to a probation officer as required.

In Kamloops court Thursday, Thatcher refused to acknowledge he was, in fact, Lance Thatcher.

"Are you referring to me?" he said.

"I know who you are, I've dealt with you before," said Judge Chris Cleaveley.

"Are you a mind reader, sir?" Thatcher continued.

"Stop. That's just nonsense," Cleaveley replied.

"What evidence do you have that I have that name?" Thatcher said.

Prosecutor Stephen Lawhead said the Crown opposes Thatcher's release on bail pending a trial of the charges, saying it is likely he will not appear for future court appearances and might commit other criminal offences.

The judge asked if Thatcher should be examined by psychiatric experts.

Lawhead said accused individuals must consent to such examinations. As well, there seems no basis beyond Thatcher's refusal to provide his name to conclude he is not mentally fit.

In the end, the authorities decided to give Thatcher the weekend to consider his position. He will be brought back to court Monday.

Thatcher's behaviour suggests he subscribes to beliefs touted by the Freemen Association of Canada, a group that says Canadians have been enslaved by government. They also purport to be governed by the "common law," not the Criminal Code or other Canadian legislation, which they describe as "admiralty law."

Freemen say they do not consent to be governed by such law, and believe they do not have to pay taxes or engage in many other forms of government bureaucracy, including registering vehicles or obtaining driver licences.

He has a past history with Merritt authorities and has refused to co-operate with law enforcement officials several times
Click to expand...
http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/article/...ritt-freeman-to-spend-holiday-weekend-in-jail

herald wrote
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1060008154&postcount=9

This is proof that the man acting as judge is intimidating another, he could have just as easily thought about it at home..

More proof people acting in the legal system are crook's..
Click to expand...
 
some more lunacy from Lance Thatcher
http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/article/20100209/KAMLOOPS0101/302099986/assessment-needed-judge-rules
Everyone is entitled to his beliefs, no matter how odd society might find them, a judge said Monday.

Despite that, provincial court Judge Stella Frame ordered Lance Edward Thatcher to be held in custody so his mental health can be assessed to determine if he is fit to stand trial.

The man was arrested last week in Merritt after he failed to attend court as required. He is charged with a series of incidents including ramming a police vehicle with his truck, uttering threats and dumping garbage on a person at the local dump.

When he was last arrested, Thatcher refused to allow officers to take his fingerprints or photograph and refused to identify himself, even though he was well known to police.

Thatcher told the court he is “a free living human being under no dominion but to any other than God.” As such, he cannot be held against his will in this kind of fashion.

He also told the court there is no such person as “Lance Edward Thatcher.”

“It’s my belief and understanding no one can have a true name. In the province of B.C., for anyone to have a name in capital letters, it belongs to a person, a fictional entity.

“I stand before you in flesh and blood, a man created by God. I’m not a fictional entity.

“You need my consent.”

Judge Frame said it is clear Thatcher’s beliefs are outside societal norms, but that is not the reason he is being detained for an assessment.

Frame said the man’s behaviour over the past 18 months raise legitimate concerns about his mental health.

As Thatcher refuses to say much, it is reasonable to order an assessment to determine if his refusals to comply with the state’s lawful requests are simply stubbornness or something more.

Thatcher will be held in custody pending an assessment at the Forensic Psychiatric Centre in the Lower Mainland. The report must be completed within 30 days
Click to expand...

This is the reason that this freeman nonsense needs addressing in the courts and some heavy sentences handed out to the gurus who promote it.
It would appear that some serious criminals are now latching onto it and believing it to be their "get out of jail free card" (oh the irony)

Maybe its the reason Menard has gone away to live in the woods, he has twigged (sorry) that it is now getting serious and his tomfoolery is about to be clamped down on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom