what is YOUR opinion of this?

[SXGuy]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

I think what there intentions are, is to seperate themselves from their legal fiction, and by doing so, evaid debt, under statue law, or at least, avaid being tried in the first person.

Ive seen instances where people have stood in the dock and represented themselves as a 3rd party, all sorts of funny stuff.

One person id like everyone to read up on though is a guy called John Harris, he has hell of alot of knowledge on the subject, and he explains exactly what everything means, and where it came from.

One talk he does is really interesting, and its about how, we have lost the "bobby" on the street and been replaced by enforcement officers, which is really just another name for debt recovery agents, i.e get a penalty or offence (break the law) pay the fine (recover the debt).

Statue law, from what i gather, is something that we all adhear to, because we elect the people who we deem to govern over us, to create these laws, and if you like, are unsigned contracts of law, we need not accept them, because we accepted them through electing our representitives. Now the bit that gets interesting is whether we have the same right, to not reconise those laws or opt out of them as and when we see fit.

Penalty notices for example, is a notice of intent, you must either pay the fine within 14 days, or it doubles, failure to pay at all may result in court action. There argument is that under these penalty notices, they refer to you as a "person" however in legalise terms, a person means something different from what we believe it to be, its not a human being, therefore its not you per se who owes the money, but your legal fiction. So by replying to these notices with a ton of questions asking them to clarify whether they mean me as a human, or me as a legal fiction, 9 times out of 10, will get the notice revoked, because they do not have the right information to provide you with, or can not answer the questions.

Another example is your Car, when you register the car, you are the registered keeper, the owner remains the DVLA, therefore you could argue, that when you receive a speeding fine, if its refers to the owner, you could say that the DVLA is responsible for the fine, not you.

LOL its all funny stuff.

[BBoo]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

I think what there intentions are, is to seperate themselves from their legal fiction, and by doing so, evaid debt, under statue law, or at least, avaid being tried in the first person.

Ive seen instances where people have stood in the dock and represented themselves as a 3rd party, all sorts of funny stuff.

One person id like everyone to read up on though is a guy called John Harris, he has hell of alot of knowledge on the subject, and he explains exactly what everything means, and where it came from.

One talk he does is really interesting, and its about how, we have lost the "bobby" on the street and been replaced by enforcement officers, which is really just another name for debt recovery agents, i.e get a penalty or offence (break the law) pay the fine (recover the debt).

He also talks about how you can get substantial annual payments out of the government, or as he puts it, UK PLC as a shareholder. Cloud Cuckoo Land methinks.

I agree it's interesting, but more interesting from the perspective of gaining an understanding how the legal system came about, than anything else.

What nearly everyone fails to realise is that if you do this Freeman of the Land crap properly, you opt out officially from UK PLC. Well that's fine. That means the Freeman is not entitled to any benefits, pension, free health care, right to travel on a road without paying a toll etc...

Freeman vs Normal - give me normal any time. If I get knocked over, I want treatment to keep me alive. You can't pick and choose which bits you'd opt out of - it's all or nothing. Otherwise we'd all be choosing to opt out of paying tax, NI contributions, Car Tax, etc... etc... Just doesn't work! Never has, never will, interesting yes, in the sense that Niddy has talked about chopping legs off as interesting.

Those You Tube videos - how many of the people fighting for their rights get off? You never actually hear the true end of any them. They may win a battle, but you can bet your last dollar they will sure as hell have lost the war.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Another example is your Car, when you register the car, you are the registered keeper, the owner remains the DVLA

Whaaat? Gerrout....

I bought the wife a car, thus I am the registered owner, she is the registered driver.

DVLA have sweet eff all to do with MY car.

[garlok]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Thanks BBoo. All of this material is interesting as you say but contains an awful lot of contradictions. David Icke was another such advocate of the "Freeman on the Land" principle and perhaps is just as worthy of a read as the gentleman mentioned above.

I have looked several times into Saxon Law and we have to remember that it was the first Saxon King that laid down written law in the vernacular language of the day. Most has never been reppealed in actual fact. Therefore I think I have said this before Niddy, you and I theoretically could convene a village elders court at which must be a double headed battle axe, under the shelter of the village oak and bring to to trial any transgressor against our community, i.e any banker/DCA we choose. if found guilty, the sentence is mandatory ---- DEATH. The prisoner only has two choices, beheading with the said battle axe present at the hearing or hanging forthwith from the boughs of the oak under which the heraing has been held.

Very sadly I don't think we would get awy with that in the modern day and age but would benefit most of the members of our AAD community.

regards
Garlok

[BBoo]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Therefore I think I have said this before Niddy, you and I theoretically could convene a village elders court at which must be a double headed battle axe, under the shelter of the village oak and bring to to trial any transgressor against our community, i.e any banker/DCA we choose. if found guilty, the sentence is mandatory ---- DEATH.

Ah, now your talking - that I could live with. Can I produce the first ten mile long line of transgressors compiled of bankers, bailiffs, debt collectors etc..?

Please can I do the first list?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Please can I do the first list?

[BBoo]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Even the basis of the whole Freeman thing is dubious. 1215 King john signs the Magna Carta under duress, immediately writes to the Pope asking to be absolved of his promises, dies and it is actually his son, Henry III who confirmed the magna Carta in his father's name.

As the signing was unquestionably under duress, it follows that its very contents must be questionable.


Oh, sod this serious stuff, let's start beheading some bankers!

[mk_chatham]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

Love the idea!
How about organising a raid in the City, where we would round up as many *ankers as we can and take them to AAD HQ to be stoned in public by all AAD members!

Before that, of course, we would send them all letters threatening this

in big red text



MK

[SXGuy]

Re: what is YOUR opinion of this?

He also talks about how you can get substantial annual payments out of the government, or as he puts it, UK PLC as a shareholder. Cloud Cuckoo Land methinks.

Well if you check companies house, or the other site i forget the name, you will see pretty much every goverment department is a ltd company, even our MP's all trade under their ltd name.

What nearly everyone fails to realise is that if you do this Freeman of the Land crap properly, you opt out officially from UK PLC. Well that's fine. That means the Freeman is not entitled to any benefits, pension, free health care, right to travel on a road without paying a toll etc...

i agree with you there lol

Those You Tube videos - how many of the people fighting for their rights get off? You never actually hear the true end of any them. They may win a battle, but you can bet your last dollar they will sure as hell have lost the war.

Well i saw one, where the person in the dock asked the judge if he had swon in as he should swear his oath before sitting, otherwise he can not reconise his authority, the judge refused to answer, and as such the guy arrested the judge, with the help of about 80 people outside the court room.

Theres more to this story, but the upshort is, the police were called and arrested people for breach of the peace and released the judge, although they were interested to hear his opinion of the law.

I should also add, this video has been removed a number of times by youtube, but someone every so often re uploads it and you can catch it before its down again. There is also a cartoon depiction of the event on there.

However, i will say, that i have not heard more about what happend after.

Thanks BBoo. All of this material is interesting as you say but contains an awful lot of contradictions. David Icke was another such advocate of the "Freeman on the Land" principle and perhaps is just as worthy of a read as the gentleman mentioned above.

David icke, i think thats a whole other thread starter lol, dont get me started with david icke, id talk all day.