Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Freeman is a crock...

  1. #1
    Administrator Ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Thanked 1,292 Times in 777 Posts

    Freeman is a crock...

    The entire Freeman of the land (FMOTL) movement is a crock...

    And their argument is that the elitists rule, rape and plunder the general masses...and basically, that's the truth of it...but... we live in this world and it's what we've got to work with.

    Remembering, all who read this, visit this forum or similar online mediums, live a relatively good life in terms of the basics... I doubt none of above description were born, raised and lives in South Sudan or of any similar 3rd world status.

    All here have or should have, power, clean water, food, vehicle, income, medical access, social welfare access and many many community area's one can visit and rely on for all manner of assistance if things get tough...

    Yet we have a Freeman movement made up of 1st world citizens who whinge, bleat and moan about how their sovereign selves are being exploited...

    We had a group here of such folk. 8t88, Eagles, DDay and others, who hammered on about the freeman nonsense, spouting terms that they'd picked up elsewhere from other freeman muppets. Terms like, natural law construed as common law...Eagles was a right screecher when it came to 'language interpretation' and a self professed law expert who preferred to engage in muppetry than being a useful citizen...

    Below quoted text is an example of the muppetry looney tunes that FMOTL use...and applies to Eagles who's used the same looney tunes language and in typical fashion, a groupthink mentality ensued in agreement and worse, thinking she was smart ...the evidence is all over this forum.

    A lot of freeman ideas revolve around bizarre interpretations of entries in Black's Law Dictionary — a favourite reference for freemen — and inventing or seeing distinctions where there are none to support their beliefs (such as "policeman" versus "police officer," "understand" versus "stand under," words in CAPITALS having a different legal meaning to those in lower-case, etc.). A lot of pareidolia with words and concepts is used to derive and justify ideas in freeman theory.
    Well, the entire movement is a crock and a complete waste of time and those that voice support for this movement are a waste of space...

    No freeman arguments have ever succeeded in court; some courts have even explicitly ruled that the term "freeman on the land" has no legal significance when the argument is raised. Actually using the arguments gets people into worse trouble, including fines, asset seizures, contempt convictions and criminal records, and the few cases touted as "successes" are almost entirely for reasons unrelated to the freeman arguments. However, this doesn't stop freemen from claiming that it works.

    The general concept behind a democracy is that the law applies to everyone. Freemen believe they can contract out of the laws and therefore they don't have to pay income tax. What I find crazy is they will happily consume hospitals, send their kids to schools and drive on the damn roads that taxpayers pay for. Lazy whining useless muppets all of them.

    Some of these folk signed mortgage contracts to then whing later that it doesn't apply to them anymore since they became a convert to FMOTL and now 'educated' in common law, maritime law etc and were duped into borrowing..."so according to FMOTL I owe the bank nothing and want the property for free...

    Some are issued driving infringements for being muppets behind the wheel yet think they can get off paying using the FMOTL muppertry as a defense...

    FMOTL 'ers like to use this kind of muppetry...

    Notice of understanding and intent and claim of right[edit]

    A notice of understanding and intent and claim of right is a made-up pseudolegal document freemen use in an attempt to declare sovereignty. (American freemen generally use the term "Affidavit of Truth" to describe this document.) They will sign such a document, sometimes with a notary, and then send it to the Queen and sometimes various other figures such as the Prime Minister and police chiefs. (American freemen file the document with the court system. If their local court refuses to accept the filing, they will attempt to file it with as many courts as necessary until someone accepts it.)

    It usually consists of a series of lines beginning "Whereas it is my understanding" followed by an assertion which is untrue or completely illogical. Various parts will state their bizarre interpretation of the law and their understanding that they do not consent to it. They are typically much like this example:

    I, Veronica: of the Chapman family, hereinafter known as Veronica: Chapman, a flesh and blood human being in possession of a sovereign and individual spirit, a living soul, do hereby make Oath and state the following is My Truth and My Law:
    Whereas it is my understanding that in terms of earthly existence there is no species more supreme than a living, breathing, imaginative human being blessed with a living soul, and...

    Whereas it is my understanding a living soul who chooses by free will not to be a member of any society can be referred to as a Freeman-on-the-land, and

    Whereas it is my understanding a Freeman-on-the-land remains entirely and solely under Common Law jurisdiction, and
    Whereas I Veronica: Chapman am a Freeman-on-the-land, and ...


    Fee schedule

    The notice of understanding is typically followed by a "fee schedule" or "penalty schedules," listing a series of acts and associated penalties the freeman will attempt to levy against the government for perceived transgressions. If the state arrests or incarcerates a freeman against their will, they will then attempt to charge the state a fee for this action. This does not work out in practice and has attracted penalties in return.

    My beef with these muppets is that unless you're living in some 3rd world slum hole, then you need to STFU...and go out and do something worthwhile in your community...
    Last edited by Ross; 12-01-2017 at 09:09 PM.
    ***Fred Coleman, Founding Partner, Beloved Friend***
    who passed away 11/10/2016
    Rest in Peace

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Ross For This Useful Post:

    Zook_e_Pi (12-02-2017)

  3. #2
    Senior Member Zook_e_Pi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    On the way to Tiperary (via shortcut through the Tum Tum trees)
    Thanked 1,302 Times in 713 Posts

    Re: Freeman is a crock...

    Libertarianism, anarchism, communism, capitalism, socialism, fascism, corporatism, etc. ... really ... any economic system that espouses either an overwhelming structure or at the other end, an underwhelming structure, is doomed to be a crock.

    Balance offers stability and solutions. Imbalance offers instability and problems. Too much leaning towards individualism (or collectivism) creates an imbalance between the needs of the individual and the needs of the collective.

    Freeman muppetry doesn't understand the needs of the collective and often devolves into enfranchised individuals failing to comprehend a very simple fact: the franchise is founded on a collective petition against the ruling minority. The muppetry doesn't recognize this built-in tension, and that leads to the assumption that the ruling minority is operating without checks and balances. That assumption is wrong. The checks and balances are there, in many forms and functions. Truthseeking endeavors are one such form and function. Raising awareness to the abuses, forces the ruling minority to scale back on the abuse. Etc. It's not the final solution but an intermediate step to a solution.

    That said, the muppetry thinks it has found solutions by disconnecting from the collective and connecting to many imagined freedoms, NONE OF WHICH EXIST WITHOUT THE COLLECTIVE PETITION.

    Genuinely disenfranchised individuals also take to freeman muppetry, but as exceptions. The rule is that disenfranchised individuals look for recourse in collective movements first because that requires the least effort. Failing that, most of these disenfranchised individuals settle under the oppression and become willing slaves to the system. But some push out to the periphery and join the sparsely populated ranks of natural freemen and freewomen, e.g. muppets weighed down by a shared affinity for imagined freedoms and, of course, their own inadequacies. A third class of disenfranchised individuals neither settle nor become permanently detached from reality. Instead, this third class forges ahead with a rational understanding of the system and its corruptions, and of what can be done about it, if anything. Most truthseekers fall into this third class of disenfranchised individuals. The remaining truthseekers are different from the third class in only one aspect: degree of enfranchisement.

    I chuckle when I hear the murmur of the muppets; and wince when they holler. For they've yet to pass the first test of enlightenment: the recognition of balance. Balance, in this case, is understanding the COLLECTIVE PETITION on par with a desire to accumulate individual freedoms.

    To wit, individual freedoms are only possible under a collective petition, else a minority will always seek to rule over others without the latter's consent.

    Last edited by Zook_e_Pi; 12-02-2017 at 04:41 AM.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Zook_e_Pi For This Useful Post:

    Ross (12-02-2017)

  5. #3
    Administrator Ross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Thanked 1,292 Times in 777 Posts

    Re: Freeman is a crock...

    Quote Originally Posted by Zook_e_Pi View Post
    That said, the muppetry thinks it has found solutions by disconnecting from the collective and connecting to many imagined freedoms, NONE OF WHICH EXIST WITHOUT THE COLLECTIVE PETITION.
    Well said Zook...Good post.

    What's rather paradoxical is that these 1st world living folk (FMOTL ers) who have ample access to all things that make a life easy...and I'm not talking abundance in the realm of wants versus needs, spend an awful lot of time pursuing an illusionary search for their own disenfranchised justice. The amount of self inflicted grief some of these idiots go too in the 'energy spent department', fighting the legal system using the ridiculous notion of natural law as common law (using legal terminology written back in 1230 AD) and adding in the maritime law/sovereign being nonsense as a defense and justification to get around their responsibilities. Such as paying back debt with terms you chose to agree with using the legal framework set out in the terms.

    below is an example of this ridiculous notion and apparent FMOTL argument one could use to break the contract you signed in good faith and signed under the legal set out framework. This example is between Myself, DDay and Eagles.

    The argument is based on loaning credit...from thin air, which means it doesn't exist so no loan to repay.

    DDay posts:

    Try asking your bank to produce actual accounting documentation for a loan.

    They won't give it to you, they can't, because if they did it would show how the "money" they allegedly loaned you was created out of thin air.

    Or you could also ask them to provide a copy of the contract for a loan, with wet ink signatures from both parties (the bank and yourself).

    Again, they won't produce this because they can't, no such document exists.

    They never sign these contracts, because OUR signature is all they need to create the "money" for the loan.

    Only problem (for the banks) is that if no legitimate, binding contract exists, then technically no loan exists.

    No contract = no loan = no obligation to repay.

    There are quite a few folks nowadays asking their banks to show proof of claim on alleged debts.

    In many cases these alleged debts are being discharged, because the banks are unable to bring sufficient evidence to support their claims.
    The last sentence, I ask him to provide the evidence of 'In many cases these alleged debts are being discharged'

    He didn't...because he couldn't. That statement was either plucked out of fresh air or he regurgitated it from a FMOTL er without proof of statement.

    I then posted this in reply:

    Only in VERY rare circumstances...usually from proven 'brokers' purposeful fudging of income figures which was rife in the past. Direct lending from bank to purchaser under normal lending practices will not get you off the it were. You signed, you owe, or lose the right to fulfill the contract due to an inability to pay.
    I then countered his post from my own experiences from a commonsense rational and importantly moral perspective:

    Ok, so you sign your 'mortgage' loan contract, I have 4 from previous home purchases...and if you need to borrow to purchase a home, then that's what you have to do...nothing weird or odd about that.

    You are contracting by signing a 'mortgage loan document' as an obligation to re-pay the loan including interest as out-layed in contract.

    Where those funds come from is irrelevant to you, What is relevant is your re-payment schedule as termed in the loan contract...even then, in all my contracts, state that said bank can recall that loan at anytime for any reason regardless of the terms laid out, it's there in plain English and easy to understand. It's a VERY rare occurrence that this happens in normal lending.

    The bank owns the property...until the contract is fulfilled...nothing weird or odd about that. Says so in doco, in plain English AND makes perfect sense.

    The documentation is all that the bank needs with your signature. It is an official bank doco so no bank sig is required.

    Now, you the borrower sign this, knowing full well your obligation. If you don't like the terms then don't borrow...simple enough.

    Fortunately, these days, the bank has zero rights to my property. I fulfilled my contract and now own an unencumbered property.
    It didn't take long for the 'Eagles law firm' to interject... with this: My answers are in bold.

    Lol...what did they loan you?


    Did you ever ask what they loaned you.

    Didn't need to, I already knew LOL

    Did you ever ask why they called it a loan closing when you continued making payments making it apparent the loan wasn't closed as far as you were concerned.

    No, and didn't see it termed that way...however, I understood my obligation, to re-pay loan as agreed, of which I did and now am the the owner of the property with a 'freehold title'

    Did you ever contact a credit company that said the account was closed but then proceeded to pay them payments anyway?

    Why would I? I only re-paided my agreed term as stated in contract

    If they loaned you nothing of substance, then there is nothing to recall.

    They gave me the loan on meeting the loan criteria, where that credit came from is of no concern or relevance to me. The only relevance was my ongoing ability to re-pay as I agreed to do on signing 'loan contract' of which I did and now have fulfilled my agreed obligation

    If they loaned you nothing of substance what you are paying back?

    Ummm, your being silly with that statement. They loaned me credit (substance) so I could purchase a property, which I did and re-paid termed agreement and now am the rightful owner of an unencumbered property. Of course I was clever how I repaid. Using diligent monetary discipline.
    So above is indicative of the arguments presented by the FMOTL ers to forgo their consented, agreed to, signed documentation, in this case a loan contract for the purchase of property.

    Then we have the muppets who don't want to contribute their share of levies/taxes for roadside rubbish removal, maintenance of roading, public transport infrastructure, sewage, water access, hospitals...they're a damn joke and hide behind language jargon promoting themselves as smart...I'm damn sure Lawyers, Judges and judiciary personnel get rather peeved at the waste of court time and I hope they find time for a chuckle after hours.
    Last edited by Ross; 12-02-2017 at 11:59 AM.
    ***Fred Coleman, Founding Partner, Beloved Friend***
    who passed away 11/10/2016
    Rest in Peace

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Ross For This Useful Post:

    Zook_e_Pi (12-02-2017)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts