The Freeman Movement and England

Status
Not open for further replies.
LightinDarkness said:
The newest pearl dropped in the David Icke forum is hilarious - basically, the FOTL woos have determined that all government agencies are "third parties" and that you can simply decline to benefit from any of them.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91011
Click to expand...

What I liked about that forum is the assertion that police, councils and so on cannot send you a bill. They can and do and the bills are enforceable by courts. And I am not talking about police fines - police here bill organisers of concerts and other events for the security they provide.
 
commandlinegamer said:
tsig said:
Oh I like how he was "offered" prison.:D
Click to expand...

Well, we Brits still value courtesy you know.
Click to expand...

But the home office does see fit to charge victims of miscarriages of justice for board and lodgings whilst in prison, or at least to reduce the compensation by an amount equivalent to board and lodgings.

for example the Birmingham six

And at quite an expensive rate too:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-505428/Victim-false-rape-claim-pay-12-500-bed-board-jail.html

A man wrongly jailed when a woman cried rape has failed to prevent being charged £12,500 for his "board and lodging" while in prison.

Warren Blackwell, 38, spent three years in jail as a convicted sex attacker until his 'victim' was unmasked as a fantasist.

It was revealed he has been awarded £252,500 compensation for his lost years - but minus the estimated cost of his food and accommodation while behind bars.
Click to expand...


Yes I know it is the fail, but in this situation I do have independent recollection of these stories, and they are pretty much as described.
 
I saw a sticker on a phone box in beautiful downtown Lotnob the other day, with the V-for-Vendetta Guy Fawkes mask, the promise to "Free yourself from police harrassment", and a link to www.fmotl.com. I couldn't resist taking a look, and found it to be predictably dripping with stupid. From the "Fundamentals" page, just feast your eyes on this masterful example of the fallacy of equivocation.

3) In a democracy, 'a majority' does not depend on 'large numbers'. A majority can be as low as ONE. And that ONE must, of itself, (therefore) carry sufficient empowerment to put any motion into practice. (The US Supreme Court has 9 Members. A 5 - 4 majority carries any ruling. That's 'democracy')
Click to expand...

Yes, folks, the margin of majority is the same thing as the majority itself.

The logic doesn't get any better later on.

Dave
 
The hilarity continues:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=91747

So, a FOTL woo apparently did not pay his mortgage. He pursued all available FOTL woo "commercial remedies", and STILL the mortgage company sent someone into secure the home and kick them out. The FOTL doesn't understand how this could be and thinks the next step is to sue the police since they aided the mortgage company in securing the home.

Or..how about pay the mortgage? How about you stop using fake legal declarations to get out of paying for things?

Nah, thats just too simple. Just another example of a FOTL "success" story.
 
Last edited:
I still don't get why the contract with the bank or mortgage company does not count as "contracting with" ?
 
Toke said:
I still don't get why the contract with the bank or mortgage company does not count as "contracting with" ?
Click to expand...

The way FOTL mythology works is that one can randomly revoke your decision to contract at any time. Even if you admit that you chose to enter into a contract with the government (say, in order to use the roads), you can decide you no longer consent to contract when you get a speeding ticket for using such roads.

Also, their is a vein of FOTL mythology which uses standards which don't exist in law to determine what a contract is. In reality contracts can be written, verbal, etc. In the real law contracts exist as long as both parties understand their obligations and terms. In FOTL woo contracts can only exist if they are written, both parties have to sign it, etc - all sorts of things which don't have to occur in reality for a contract to exist.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough: so he revoked the contract and the mortgage company did too: and took the house they owned. What is the problem??
 
LightinDarkness said:
The way FOTL mythology works is that one can randomly revoke your decision to contract at any time. Even if you admit that you chose to enter into a contract with the government (say, in order to use the roads), you can decide you no longer consent to contract when you get a speeding ticket for using such roads.

FOTL mythology also uses standards which don't exist in law to determine what a contract is. In reality contracts can be written, verbal, etc. In the real law contracts exist as long as both party understands its obligations and terms. In FOTL woo contracts can only exist if they are written, both parties have to sign it, etc - all sorts of things which don't have to occur in reality for a contract to exist.
Click to expand...

The inconsistency bother me, I am sure they would complain if the bank went FOTL and decided to do a unilateral renegotiating of the mortgage. :D

(I wonder if any banker have tried that when receiving the FOTL magic letters)
 
Toke said:
The inconsistency bother me, I am sure they would complain if the bank went FOTL and decided to do a unilateral renegotiating of the mortgage. :D

(I wonder if any banker have tried that when receiving the FOTL magic letters)
Click to expand...

Almost certainly not. For the same reason that when someone else makes a blunder in chess, you don't immediately turn around and deliberately blunder in response. Not if you want to win, at least.
 
drkitten said:
Almost certainly not. For the same reason that when someone else makes a blunder in chess, you don't immediately turn around and deliberately blunder in response. Not if you want to win, at least.
Click to expand...

I realise it would look rather silly, and it may not be a place with much room for jokes.
 
Toke said:
I realise it would look rather silly, and it may not be a place with much room for jokes.
Click to expand...

I'm sure there is a satirical point about improvident banking in there, but it is too cheap a shot even for me.
 
It all makes sense now. The FOTL are in fact winning cases all over the world and that is the root of the banking crisis :eye-poppi
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom