Freeman on the land.....lawful rebellion? Anybody here?

[bambodoggy]

Interesting.....or maye you could say:

In the Uk you have all these freedoms but nobody tells you that you had them and if you try to use them then they will shout you down and tell you that you can't really do that is its an old law and we don't do that anymore.
Meanwhile, in the US you might have less freedoms but the ones you have are known to everybody and defended by all.

Funny old world isnt it

Cheers,

Bam

 

[bambodoggy]

The whole 'freeman' movement is complete and utter rubbish. Sorry, but there it is.

I get it....you think it's rubbish, you've said already that its bs and so on.....that's fine, that's what you think (what you no doubt believe to be true).
What I'm asking you is for fact on why you think this and what evidence you have to show me to prove that this is so?

As I said, no offence but you saying its bs and that it's a complete and utter load of rubbish is your opinion (and possibly quite a valid one...I don't know the answer) but it is not a basis for an academic dabate is it? I was hoping you'd come back with some form of proof to back up your claims?

Many thanks,

Bam.

 

[mrcharly]

That's a pretty good description, Bam, particularly the bit about people telling you that you can't do that.

A lot of that is the blame of the papers, journalists not getting truth get in the way of telling a good story. A classic (but extreme) example is self-defence. The law says you can't go about 'equipped' to defend yourself. However, it doesn't say you aren't allowed to pick up a poker and beat a burglar up with it.
The law doesn't say "teachers aren't allowed to touch children." but the papers give that impression. It's nonsense, a teacher can give a child a hug, physically restrain a child that is going nuts, etc. They just better be damn sure there were witnesses in case someone makes up a stupid accusation of molestation.

 

[bambodoggy]

That's a pretty good description, Bam, particularly the bit about people telling you that you can't do that.

A lot of that is the blame of the papers, journalists not getting truth get in the way of telling a good story. A classic (but extreme) example is self-defence. The law says you can't go about 'equipped' to defend yourself. However, it doesn't say you aren't allowed to pick up a poker and beat a burglar up with it.
The law doesn't say "teachers aren't allowed to touch children." but the papers give that impression. It's nonsense, a teacher can give a child a hug, physically restrain a child that is going nuts, etc. They just better be damn sure there were witnesses in case someone makes up a stupid accusation of molestation.

Lol....evils of the media hey.....you'll certainly get no argument from me there buddy

 

[Swallow]

Isn't it a paradox that the US likes to think of itself as "The Land of the Free"...

Has anyone come across a similar paradox in Australia "The Land of People who don't Whinge"?

 

[Stringmaker]

Has anyone come across a similar paradox in Australia "The Land of People who don't Whinge"?

Especially when they lose to us Poms

 

[Dave]

Anyone with an anarchistic streak, should have a listen to Stefan Molyneaux, Freedom Radio.

http://www.freedomainradio.com/

Or have a read of the free books: http://www.freedomainradio.com/FreeBooks.aspx

 

[mrcharly]

Has anyone come across a similar paradox in Australia "The Land of People who don't Whinge"?

<-- ex-australian

PMSL, you've certainly got it right.

 

[Andy BB]

When local council chiefs are paid £200k to £400k per annum, and most people in their local area, are earning £20k, there should be A LOT more people crying foul, and refusing to pay council tax...... Good luck to em.

Apparently Irelands constitution is very good.

I quite like the videos of the people refusing to be evicted by criminal bankers.

[video=youtube;PpUjl4LvQM8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PpUjl4LvQM8[/video]

Ah - a scroungers charter. Give me money, but if I don't pay it back like I promised to do, I'll find some way to default without having to pay over the security I promised.

Clearly an eco(nomic) warrior

ps - just in case any Freeman is thinking of bidding on anything I might sell on here - please let me know in advance - I don't normally bother to check funds have been received before I post stuff , but I might make an exception in some cases! (Just in case.....)

 

[Swallow]

Ah - a scroungers charter. Give me money, but if I don't pay it back like I promised to do, I'll find some way to default without having to pay over the security I promised.

Clearly an eco(nomic) warrior

ps - just in case any Freeman is thinking of bidding on anything I might sell on here - please let me know in advance - I don't normally bother to check funds have been received before I post stuff , but I might make an exception in some cases! (Just in case.....)

Where in the video does it say he doesn't have to pay back? They did not cancel the debt, they only stopped re-possession. The debt is still due, so I am having difficulty in seeing how you reached this conclusion.

 

[Andy BB]

As part of the mortgage agreement, failure to pay requires restitution by handing over the property lodged as security.

Clearly he is using any and every means possible to avoid doing what he previously agreed to do as part of the mortgage application, which he signed.

He welched on the deal, in other words.

Clearly an honourable man........

(and as Mark Anthony said "...so are they all, honourable men............." H should have gone on to say "but don't lend them any money, their word, and signature, are worthless......" )

 

[bambodoggy]

I would have thought that as the Mortgage contract was in place and entered into freely that this contract would still stand.

It seems in that vid they are disagreeing about whether the Irish constitution allows them to take the house. My approach would be that you entered the contract willingly and are still liable, you have waived your constitutional right for me not to take the house by entering this mortgage contact...end of story.

Again...nothing to do with being a freeman or not. In act if it was a freeman then he'd have broken his own account of common law on two counts: Causing loss to others and being fraudulent in a contract.
Maybe this is why the freeman movement is so distrusted by the main stream....they see it only as a group of people not wanting to play by the rules and vids like this Irish one and the other uk eviction one don't help at all...especially as they haven't actually got anything to do with being freemen?

 

[ReamviThantos]

It would be nice if after four pages of this thread that someone who has experience of these laws had been in a position to explain the actual questions posed and reiterated several times now by the OP rather than pure opinion. Nothing against this sort of pub conversation but just saying....

 

[Swallow]

As part of the mortgage agreement, failure to pay requires restitution by handing over the property lodged as security.

Clearly he is using any and every means possible to avoid doing what he previously agreed to do as part of the mortgage application, which he signed.

He welched on the deal, in other words.

Clearly an honourable man........

(and as Mark Anthony said "...so are they all, honourable men............." H should have gone on to say "but don't lend them any money, their word, and signature, are worthless......" )

Or a desperate one...






Nonetheless that is fair. But why use that to tar all people who take the title "Freeman", which he is not identified as, with the same brush though?

 

[rik_uk3]

It would be nice if after four pages of this thread that someone who has experience of these laws had been in a position to explain the actual questions posed and reiterated several times now by the OP rather than pure opinion. Nothing against this sort of pub conversation but just saying....

It died a death

 

[ReamviThantos]

It died a death

Ah then R.I.P the truth of the matter

 

[Swallow]

Rik nailed the bottom line accurately in his third post.

Makes not a jot of difference, play up and you still get locked up.

But the bottom line is quite base.

The Law, like money, or the value of money, is a collective act of the imagination. Exercising your imagination to strive for something higher is never a waste of time.

 

[ReamviThantos]

Rik nailed the bottom line accurately in his first post.

But the bottom line is quite base.

The Law, like money, or the value of money, is a collective act of the imagination. Exercising your imagination to strive for something higher is never a waste of time.

This is not the point of my post, it was to move beyond the fantasy of imagination in order to agree upon the truth as to the basis in legal understanding of the point raised by the OP in attempting to be educated towards the facts of the matter.

 

[Swallow]

This is not the point of my post, it was to move beyond the fantasy of imagination in order to agree upon the truth as to the basin in legal understanding of the point raised by the OP in attempting to be educated towards the facts of the matter.

I think you missed my point. The whole thing is imagination and it is only our agreement that makes anyone act otherwise i.e. as if there are "facts".

If the whole thing was proved beyond a doubt in the 3rd post of this thread and no-one agreed with it then they will not act accordingly and how much better off are you?

What you can get from the thread is a measure of how many people agree with it and are willing to act in accordance with it. If you look at how the law is "made" Judges set precedents by "finding the law" in other words they imagine what the law "is" for this particular case. That only comes into effect as a "law" when other people act in accordance with what the judge has found. A leader is just a wacko having a walk on his own until other people follow him/her.

 

[knifefan]

The only experience I have of the theory of being a "Freeman" were friends/aquaintances who brought the subject up in an attempt to find an obscure way of circumventing the "Law" to their own advantage... To say that the majority of these people were paranoid conspiracy theorists would be an understatement Some of whom should check what they are putting in their rizzla's!!!!