The Freeman Movement and England

Status
Not open for further replies.
funk de fino said:
Post 146 is the biggest load of crap I have seen in years (outside 911 nuttery). What a balloon.
Click to expand...

Believe me (& I've been a keen student of FMOTL 'jurisprudence' for the past 12 months) - that's quite coherent by usual freeman standards. Menard is the big Freeman 'Guru' in Canada at the moment - we live in a funny old world?
 
BobHaulk said:
I did enjoy this, i particularly like the way rob the hat has to say all the time how "they" need his consent to do anything .................. that's it, in a nut shell, the whole freeman con sold by rob the hat. He appeals to the 14 year old truant hiding behind the bike sheds pretending they are rebels.Thing is when the headmaster comes to catch them what happens? I reckon someone like bones would tell him to ◊◊◊◊ off and get himself expelled, yozhik and rob the hat on the other hand would be sacred that their mum is gonna find out they smoke and meekly they trot off to the headmasters office to be punished. This scenario is the building blocks of their pathetic rebellion. Real revolutionaries they are not.
I've said it before but this time i'm finished with the freemen for good. I don't have any thing more to say about these people except maybe this, wake up you sheep, rob the hat is playing you and you mongs who buy his stuff are feeding not only his pocket but his ego and as such are his ladies
all together now
And the colored girls go
Doo, doo doo, doo doo, doo doo doo...
Click to expand...


They'd be rolling on each other before they got to the office.
 
jsfisher said:
You may be reaching a bit on this one to find fault. The phrasing has a bit of humility to it. I wouldn't go looking for any secret meaning.
Click to expand...
You don't have to invent secret meanings here - just read between the lines.
Megan (the baby's mother) was 15, there's no mention of any family and she was under the care of social workers. Pretty obviously, she was a vulnerable and troubled child. And this 36/37-year old guy impregnated her; perhaps deliberately, if this line is to be believed:
I have loved Elizabeth since before her mother knew and accepted she was pregnant.
Click to expand...
And there's this claim:
I worry a lot about Megan and used to be able to call her and find out how she is doing and offer moral and spiritual support.
Click to expand...
She's supposed to be the love of his life, but he doesn't/can't see her - why? (Was he in prison?) And he says nothing about providing financial and practical support. "Spiritual and moral support" doesn't do much for you when the baby's been crying all night and you've run out of money.

I really hope that Megan and her child have found stability and happiness since. At least they seem to be out of Menard's clutches.
 
jargon buster said:
Menards sordid past was discussed in this thread
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=150943

I like girlgyes post where she asks how does anyone know the words are attributed to Rob and than posts the letter with Robs name on it as proof it might not have been him. :D
Click to expand...

Blimey, she amaze me with her ability to find new levels of stupid. Just when you think she can't get any thicker, "poof" out comes another post.

O bugger. 19 hours into the new year and I've already broken my resolution.
 
Maybe I'm being somewhat dim or have simply misunderstood how this is being quoted but can anyone explain in a nutshell how exactly the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is meant to support the FOTL position? All seems quite reasonable on my ordinary bloke on the street reading, especially given the events of 1666.

[ e.g. at world wide web .legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11]
 
Last edited:
YouTube Vid -DISTURBING VIDEO OF UK POLICE TAKING 13 YEAR OLD CHILD FROM FATHER BY FORCE (not my title)

I came across the above clip linked from a comments section in The Independent, it seems to have FMOTL written all over it. I can't seem to find why this happened but the comments below show it's from Woo Central, police referred to as kidnappers, common law, Icke, NWO, Satanic abuse, etc. Anyone know anymore?

To be honest the most disturbing thing I found about it was the father letting this situation to develop like it did, as if it was ever going to end differently.
 
Last edited:
Grassy Knowlington said:
Maybe I'm being somewhat dim or have simply misunderstood how this is being quoted but can anyone explain in a nutshell how exactly the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is meant to support the FOTL position? All seems quite reasonable on my ordinary bloke on the street reading, especially given the events of 1666.

[ e.g. at world wide web .legislation.gov.uk/aep/Cha2/18-19/11]
Click to expand...

Whe boiled down to it's bones FMOTL is a conspiracy theory. They believe that the 'common law' was subverted & continues to this day to be subverted. They're a little vague as to who is responsible for this heinous crime but the current fashionable idea is the papacy has something to do with it. Obviously the legal profession, judiciary & politicians have a vested interest in keeping the 'true law' hidden from the unwitting general public.

The Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666 is a straightforward little bit of legislation that deals with the estates of people who 'disappear'. You can imagine this was quite a significant problem in the 17th Century what with overseas war, disease, disaster, poor communications, poor record keeping, rudimentary criminal investigation etc.

If you're 'gone' for 7 years + your heirs can have you declared dead & administer your estate. Freemen believe its a part of the subversion. They say it you fail to declare yourself 'alive' during the first 7 years of your life you & your assets fall into a trust & the government is the beneficiary. You've effectively become a 'slave' (as per the FMOTL definition of servitude).

Idiots :)
 
They say it you fail to declare yourself 'alive' during the first 7 years of your life you & your assets fall into a trust & the government is the beneficiary. You've effectively become a 'slave' (as per the FMOTL definition of servitude).
Click to expand...

Yet they also claim that registering the birth of your child is handing ownership of its fiction over to the government????

ITS A BIT OF A CATCH 22 FOR THE FREEMAN :D
 
There seems to be a new remedy/scam site posted on Ickes
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151405

Here it is
http://jedisincommerce.us/Home_Page.html

I have taken two snippets from the site
Do Not Try These Processes!
Click to expand...

All Jedi's Events are private meetings of sovereign beings, occuring in the Private, and all quests will be required to join Jedi's in Commerce in order to attend.

Either a monthly club membership, monthly class fee, or a pay per session fee applies to attend Jedi classes.


For the future online webinars, a $33 fee per class will be required in order to get the code key, and the classes will need to be accomplished in order (1, 2 3) before the secret process talked about in calls 23 and 24 will be distributed.
Click to expand...

****(note) 45 days after support is purchased, if coaching and/ or Jedi Master Support isn't activated by contacting the staff at Jedi's in Commerce: the entire amount turns into a donation to Jedi's in Commerce***
Click to expand...
I especially like the last one, so if they just ignore all incoming calls for 45 days they keep all the money :cool:

I will be dropping them an e-mail later to ask if anyone has yet accessed their bond ;)
PS EDIT THE POST HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM ICKES.
it may have been a genuine remedy after all, the mods on Ickes wouldnt want anything that actually worked.:D
 
Last edited:
jargon buster said:
Yet they also claim that registering the birth of your child is handing ownership of its fiction over to the government????

ITS A BITCH OF A CATCH 22 FOR THE FREEMAN :D
Click to expand...

Yep, the courts have no authoratah but our autourautah is recognized by the courts.
 
Thats one for Menard, he has a letter from the court which he states says he is a freeman on the land (they just returned a letter to him and it had that wrote on, in reality they were just being polite in answering him ;))

Judge "So Rob of the family Menard, what proof do you have that you are a freeman on the land?"
Rob "I have a letter from the court"
Judge "A letter from the court which you state has no authourity?"
Rob "Errrrrr..............can I go out and come back in again"?
 
They think everyone new who is a skeptic is me :)

I love watching them flail around, they are so scared they now just ban anyone new who shows any sign of a question.

they would be better of letting me sign up under JB, at least they would know who I was. ;)
 
Vladd said:
This thread shows just how paranoid they are towards new members who dare to ask questions.


But, in all fairness, good advice is posted such as (I quote from the above link):

...DO NOT GET UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE GET IN DEBATE WITH ANYONE HERE..:jaw-dropp
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom