The Freeman Movement and England

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hans said:
Wasn't he the 'President' of the State of Franklin? <LOL>
Click to expand...

This?

The State of Franklin, known also as the Free Republic of Franklin or the State of Frankland (the latter being the name submitted to the Continental Congress when it considered the territory's application for statehood[1]), was an unrecognized autonomous United States territory created in 1784 from part of the territory west of the Appalachian Mountains that had been offered, by North Carolina, as a cession to the federal government (to help pay off debts related to the American Revolutionary War)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Franklin
 
heres a taste of freedom from a poster on Ickes
http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost.php?p=1059967694&postcount=17
So it's really a choice only you can make, you have to decide what's best for you. I live alone, my parents and friends know what I'm doing,
I have special things in place so I know when to answer the door and when not to.
No passport, no drivers license, no picture I.D. so unless my grandma comes back from the grave during the zombie apocalypse lol then they
have no way of attaching me to THE name.

Will I go to prison, more than likely but hey I could do with a break from my neighbour and her annoying kids, loud music, arguments
and slamming doors.
I'll get 3 meals a day, internet access, a library, a gym, sounds like a holiday to me lol so bring it on.
Click to expand...

Hey this freeman lifestyle sounds great, bring it on.
 
He does say he lives alone, I wonder if he gave his birth name when he applied for the lease?
The guys full of BS, landlords and councils only lease properties to people they can trace.(proof of ID)

freeloader on the land is more like it. :rolleyes:
 
He may live in a place he inherited or rents/uses from a relative or is just squating
 
FOTL Ranty moves closer to his day in court.

Dear XXXXX XXXXX

I refer to your letter dated 7 June 2011. My reply is late because I was abroad on business.

You have sent me a form on which I need to select one of two options: challenge the legality of the seizure or withdraw my claim. I do not wish to withdraw my claim, nor do I wish to challenge the legality of the seizure. I believe that your officers did as they were trained to do.

However, it is clear to me from reading your letter that you did not even bother to read mine (dated 21 April 2011) in which I explained to you what my lawful standing is. I even included supporting documentation. How you missed it is beyond me. I must now insist that you take advice from a constitutional lawyer. You obviously do not understand the ramifications or the importance of my standing as a Lawful Rebel. Your statutes are meaningless to me. I have opted out. Lawfully. I am under no obligation to obey statute law. Indeed, I am obliged to ignore it.

I appreciate that the concept is alien to you, and it will mystify any lawyer who has no experience in constitutional matters. I forgive your (collective) ignorance, just this once.
Click to expand...

What reasonable man could do more?

My favourite bit:

Finally, a word on costs. I conditionally agree to pay your costs as long as you agree to pay mine. For my special appearance at the court, my fee is one thousand (1,000) ounces of silver per hour. I expect to be paid in bullion, not fiat currency. This is non-negotiable.
Click to expand...

I understand that silver currently costs $33 an ounce, which values this FOTL's time as $33,000 an hour.

Without frivolity, ill-will or vexation,

(my mark)

Captain: of the Ranty family."

Let's see what happens next, shall we?
Click to expand...

Yes, let's.
 
jeffwode said:
Yes, let's [see what happens next].
Click to expand...


170604dfe123bb2cb1.jpg
 
Scoot Meevo said:
I know there's meant to be an assertion that Common Law is true law. From what I gathered, Common Law in the UK is determined by the establishing of precedents. By nature, this would mean it is a law which accommodates an evolution of sorts, keeping it relevant to the conditions of the time? If that's the case then harking back to a 700+ year old version must be almost redundant.
Click to expand...

You are correct that Common Law is based on precedent. When a court makes a decision in a particular matter, that decision is binding on all courts at the same or a lower level, in dealing with cases in which the facts are similar. Hence it is a system of judge-made law.

The age of a precedent is not important - some relevant cases are hundreds of years old, eg Pinnel's case, in contract law.

However, Common Law is only one of the two sources of English law*. The other source is Parliamentary statute. Contrary to what the OP says, these are also valid laws, and indeed they trump the Common Law. Any law at Common Law can be overridden by an Act of Parliament. The constitutional formula is that "the Queen in Parliament is supreme". A law passed by both houses of Parliament, and receiving the royal assent, cannot be overridden by any judge, only by a subsequent Act of Parliament that repeals it.

I haven't previously heard of the Freemen movement, but based on the OP's rant, they have less knowledge of English law than a 16-year-old who has passed GCSE Law.

(* NB I notice you live in Scotland. Scots Law is slightly different - it is a hybrid system, also incorporating elements of Roman law.)
 
Now,now plutonium, writing things like that means you are either in on the law societies trickery or are not yet awake. :rolleyes:
 
I bring forth good news:

You have received an Spam Notice at David Icke's Official Forums
Click to expand...

Not only did I get one an spam notice but three! Awesome.

My first an Spam Notice:

Dear grammarian,

You have received an infraction at David Icke's Official Forums.

Reason: Insulted Other Member(s) - First Notice
-------
We take a serious view on accusations on this forum, your account will be suspended if you insist on posting with your troll like behaviour.
-------

This infraction is worth 3 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1059968977

With some minor exceptions:

Menard scams $1million, is the default leader therefore declares shagging underage girls is not unlawful, and they all go and buy big cannons to defend themselves from the ebil gibberment


...... Wonder how that story ends.

All the best,
David Icke's Official Forums
Click to expand...


My second an Spam Notice:

Dear grammarian,

You have received an infraction at David Icke's Official Forums.

Reason: Provocative Trolling - First Notice
-------
If you continue with your trolling of this forum, your account will be suspended very quickly.
-------

This infraction is worth 3 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1059968576

Umm..... this is a silly forum filled with silly people who believe silly things, with the odd conman like Menard thrown in for good measure.

Why in Queen E-Lizard the Second's name would I want to, or care about befriending muppets who are daft enough to believe crap and scams?

You do understand that silly forums on the intertubes are not actually a substitute for real life?

Postcounts and "Forum Friends" are meaningless, and if you believe them to be otherwise you have just made the whacka-doodle-ometer hit 15.

All the best,
David Icke's Official Forums
Click to expand...

My third an Spam Notice:

Dear grammarian,

You have received an infraction at David Icke's Official Forums.

Reason: Provocative Trolling - Second Notice
-------
Reading through your posts, one can easily see why you are here, not for much longer though.
-------

This infraction is worth 5 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1059965033

What is freedom?
It's the thing that the paranoid-schizophrenics protest they don'y have, whilst listening to Alex Jones and reading Icke-Woo.
All the best,
David Icke's Official Forums
Click to expand...

---
All within 8 minutes.
Thing is, I don't consent to their rules :rolleyes: and Menard is still a conman.
 
Last edited:
A fourth an Spam Notice ... Groovy:

Dear grammarian,

You have received an infraction at David Icke's Official Forums.

Reason: Repeated Abuse Of Forum
-------
All your posts have some sort of ridicule, insults, and generally just trolling this forum.
-------

This infraction is worth 10 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1059980827

She is being given licence to grant Statutes here for the purposes of a money making banking Franchise owned pretty much wholesale by the Rothschilds and which to create a Gi-nourmous Ponzi scheme so greedy so powerful and so psychopathically unrelenting to begger belief .
Click to expand...


Just out of interest can you pinpoint the moment in time when you deicided to believe every daft conspiracy tale out there? Is there no scam or conspiracy-nonsense you will not fall for?

You truly are a conman's dream come true.
If you had any money I'm sure you'd be giving it to Menard.
Then again if you had any money you wouldn't be endlessly searching for ways to blame your mistakes and failures in life on others.

It doesn't matter one iota whether or not there was a lump of rock under the coronation throne. Only a fool would believe tales stating otherwise. (How does the Coronation Stone in Kingston-upon-Thames fit into this silly conspiracy story then?).

And btw, the quack you are now promoting in your sig is.... a conman!

All the best,
David Icke's Official Forums
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ComfySlippers said:
I bring forth good news:



Not only did I get one an spam notice but three! Awesome.

My first an Spam Notice:




My second an Spam Notice:



My third an Spam Notice:



---
All within 8 minutes.
Thing is, I don't consent to their rules :rolleyes: and Menard is still a conman.
Click to expand...

Didn't you consent to their rules when you signed up and agreed to the rules? just like you did here on JREF?

Do you fell better now you have Martyred yourself on the Icke Forum?
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
Didn't you consent to their rules when you signed up and agreed to the rules? just like you did here on JREF?

Do you fell better now you have Martyred yourself on the Icke Forum?
Click to expand...

Well they don't have my consent in ink :rolleyes:

I honestly couldn't give a flying saucepan about Icke Forum. It is a cauldron of insanity, who's only purpose in life is to be a source of hilarity for anyone capable of tying their own shoe-laces.

(I am not in any way knocking the sterling efforts of those who post there with well constructed contributions demonstrating very clearly how the whole FOTL-Scam is just that.)
 
My Dad was in the UK freemasons for a few years. He joined because he thought he could get some contacts for his business. He said that the reality was it was a club for mainly lonely old men who wanted company and the sumit of their political power was sending out a bit of money here and there to widows of dead members. My Dad left, disillusioned that there were no Soprano style deals going on.
 
Didn't you consent to their rules when you signed up and agreed to the rules? just like you did here on JREF?
Click to expand...

You can withdraw your consent to the rules at any time dontcha know?

So if Menard is right you couldnt be banned from a forum for not following the rules.;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom