Freeman Megamerge

Finnbar01

Sesudra wrote: »

How did you know?? I took great offence to being told I was questioning things above my paygrade and ability to comprehend!

As Finbarr says, their numbers are growing and it's only a matter of time before someone in really desperate financial straits gets sucked into their crackpot way of thinking and gets in real trouble.

That's already after happening.

berrypendel

Finnbar01 wrote: »

That's already after happening.

where?

Finnbar01

berrypendel wrote: »

where?

If you go onto the freeman sites you'll see.

Corruptable

I've no doubt that they're leading people into oblivion. You only have to look at the case of Bobby of the family Sludds (at the start of this thread) to see how they are walking people into complications and wearing out the patience of people who would otherwise be lenient towards them, if only they took their proper position as a layman and read the Court Rules or maybe buy a Law Society manual or two in terms of Criminal and Civil procedure.

It's unfortunate that they manage to confuse officials such as the Sheriff and some members of An Garda Siochana who then lack the willpower and confidence to deal with them. They simply engage anyone who confronts them into circular argument until either party finally gives up.

I know a number of people who've developed an interest in it, and it is worrying because they are seriously convinced that they in the right, and everyone else is wrong or is partaking in a conspiracy to hoodwink them as to what how the legal system works. Their growth is alarming, I've saw their posters even in small towns down the country, promoting the "turning of the seal" ceremony and other meetings and nonsense.

I am not exaggerating when I say that, and I know there are some capable and senior members that read through these boards, I feel AGS needs to examine these groups seriously in terms of Crime and Security Branch keeping an eye on their development. They are clearly intent on bringing their delusion to the forefront of the public mindset and I foresee their frustration leading to incidents of violence.

Tom Young

I would tend to agree with you.

benway

Corruptable wrote: »

I know a number of people who've developed an interest in it, and it is worrying because they are seriously convinced that they in the right, and everyone else is wrong or is partaking in a conspiracy to hoodwink them as to what how the legal system works.

This is the danger. My friend who's into this stuff is also fond of a smoke ... funny enough. I'm actually quite worried that he's going to end up getting himself convicted over this foolishness.

It's a dangerous sideshow, and it'll only operate to undermine what is, to my mind, a legitimate protest movement.

Surprisingly enough, though, I disagree with the Gardaí closely monitoring anyone unless they pose a severe danger to the public.

Grolschevik

Yes, it is actually beyond a joke now. Their apparent growth and the piggybacking on legitimate concerns and fears has the potential to cause real trouble.

There is a case for some serious public consciousness-raising about the nature of these claims. How to do it, though? A Freeman letter was actually published in the Metro yesterday. It was refuted today, but for many people, a seed will have been planted.

Perhaps we need to mention it to any journalists we know...?

Our man in Havana

Special branch should be keeping an eye on them.

Finnbar01

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Special branch should be keeping an eye on them.

That would play right into their hands.

snow ghost

I am shocked by the momentum behind this freeman thing - it is spreading like wildfire and snowballing out of control at an unprecedented level.

Something certainly appears to be stirring that I have not witnessed before now.

Corruptable

benway wrote: »

Surprisingly enough, though, I disagree with the Gardaí closely monitoring anyone unless they pose a severe danger to the public.

Though you probably see me as a vigilante zealot raving about giving homeowners more rights against burglars, I would actually be the last person to give the State more powers, but in this case I do think serious observation is warranted.

I know for a fact that they are turning up in numbers at any event against cutbacks, septic tank and water charges and the household charge and actually spouting their theories, and getting a legitimate platform in the presence of politicians, some of whom (mainly TDs from the Technical Group) actually endorsing their "interpretation" of the law because they partially quote from the Constitution and mention "common law" a lot, though the meanings they give to these is entirely different that what the established practical and academic interpretation.

It's difficult to refute them with facts because they don't accept facts, and let's face it, long winded legal arguments just aren't "sexy" in the terms that a simplistic mob mentality-based position is in terms of public and media exposure.

So it remains to be seen how to actually confront them, when they act in willful ignorance of the law and indisputable facts.

Di0genes

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Special branch should be keeping an eye on them.

For what? It's not illegal to be stupid*







*When it is, I'll personal lead the posse to arrest the Healy Rae clan and everryone who's voted for them.

Reloc8

Deleted User wrote: »

They think that the BAR stands for British Accredited Registry and that all barristers swear secret oaths of fealty to the Queen.

God bless her she's a great woman altogether though all the same.

berrypendel

Grolschevik wrote: »

Yes, it is actually beyond a joke now. Their apparent growth and the piggybacking on legitimate concerns and fears has the potential to cause real trouble.

There is a case for some serious public consciousness-raising about the nature of these claims. How to do it, though? A Freeman letter was actually published in the Metro yesterday. It was refuted today, but for many people, a seed will have been planted.

Perhaps we need to mention it to any journalists we know...?

Someone who can argue it should call Tipp FM. The presenter there seemed impressed with the guy from little I heard. Think it was the eviction /stop sheriff guy

Our man in Havana

Di0genes wrote: »

For what? It's not illegal to be stupid*







*When it is, I'll personal lead the posse to arrest the Healy Rae clan and everryone who's voted for them.

I would call it subversion.

Tom Young

I think the correct term might be contempt. The the behaviour surely is that.

Corruptable

Tom Young wrote: »

I think the correct term might be contempt. The the behaviour surely is that.

Agreed. I wouldn't call it full scale subversion as usually that involved a deliberate, pre-planned campaign with clear set political objectives as is the case with paramilitary groups, but this is much more low level.

However, there are no other bodies which have the appropriate resources to monitor these groups other than AGS. So it's either work for the SDU or for the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation.

On the whole fraud note, I found an interview with "Kev", who seems to be the founder of the Tir Na Saor/Land of the Free movement on one of their internet radio shows in which he says:

For the man in the street who actually doesn't get it, you have to think of a more simplistic way that will wake him up. You know, whatever way it is, if you do talk about the global elite...da..dee...da...he'll just think "ah yeah, conspiracy theorist", but if you say to him you know you don't have to pay your mortgage or credit card, then you have his interest!

Link to full interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5paiUrerbs

That's the type of thing they're really doing, attempting to fool vulnerable people, now obviously the whole debt issues are more from the civil side, but surely when they're giving this terrible advice to people like Bobby of the family Sludds, I would think they are in some circumstances committing an inchoate offence.

Surely, this guy that wrote the Blank of Ireland book is inciting people to commit a civil wrong.

blatantrereg

MapForJ wrote: »

cult based beliefs is more like it imo

Deleted User wrote: »

Like all good lies the Freeman philosophy is sprinkled with truths and like all good cults it uses a special language for its own purposes. The use of legal sounding terms, skewed by misinterpretations and definitions far removed from the truth, allows the Freemen to use people's general and understandable ignorance of the law to draw them in to a pseudo-religious philosophy that places them in serious risk if they were ever crazy enough to actually use the Freeman argument in Court, as has occurred with Mr. Sludds.

Yes cult is a good description I think.

I found myself drawn into arguing against the notion that global warming is a myth designed to control and exploit the masses. [This is a pretty easy argument to win tbh, because that notion is fncking crazy and all.] Rational arguments provoked anger because he thought I was getting onto him about paying some particular tax or other he'd been told he should object to.

All conversation [with the guy] comes back to freeman sh!t. All energy in social connections seems redirected into freeman sh!t. Attitude towards me becomes a unfriendly if I express skepticism or disinterest in freeman sh!t.


It's all group psychology and tapping into greed, anger, desire to belong and things in people who feel these ways.

Not to be too dramatic, but here's a quote from the "mind control" section on cults on wikipedia:

Studies have identified a number of key steps in coercive persuasion:[17][18]

1. People are put in physical or emotionally distressing situations;
2. Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
3. They receive what seems to be unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader or group;
4. They get a new identity based on the group;
5. They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.[19]

yeah I think they do all those things to various extents. Pursuading their members to break and challenge the law puts them in a particular mindset - specifically distrustful of outsiders, us against the world etc.

Finnbar01

In order to beat the freemen, just play them at their own game.

There's no need to 'stick' the gardaí unto them.

benway

Finnbar01 wrote: »

In order to beat the freemen, just play them at their own game.

Exactly. Think it's way overboard to suggest that they represent a serious threat, such that warrants Special Branch attention. At least, not right at the moment - if they start stockpiling arms that would be another story.

Personally, I'm not backing down from a row ... unusually for me ... any time that nonsense crosses my transom. In fairness, it's not hard to win the argument.

snow ghost

I'm just waiting for a banned boardsie poster to turn up on the Help Desk Forum arguing that they are a freeman of the internet and that their ivioalable rights to travel on the Web under the magna carta have been breached. They will then no doubt ask an Admin if s/he is under oath and claim that he does not 'stand under' his decision as it is the law of the sea and he is only answerable to common law. :eek:

This Bobby of the family Sludds must be a laughing stock in his local area, imagine the sniggering down the pub when people found out he was sent down.

Corruptable

snow ghost wrote: »

I'm just waiting for a banned boardsie poster to turn up on the Help Desk Forum arguing that they are a freeman of the internet and that their ivioalable rights to travel on the Web under the magna carta have been breached. They will then no doubt ask an Admin if s/he is under oath and claim that he does not 'stand under' his decision as it is the law of the sea and he is only answerable to common law. :eek:

This Bobby of the family Sludds must be a laughing stock in his local area, imagine the sniggering down the pub when people found out he was sent down.

Since you were looking for cases, the case of Stephen of the family Sutton before Judge Zaiden in the District Court in Kilcock should interest you:

Published on Monday 24 May 2010 12:42

A man who questioned the legal powers of the District Court after he was charged with driving without insurance was jailed for six months at Kilcock District Court last Thursday.


Stephen Sutton, 67 The Walk, Moyglare Hall, Maynooth, who described himself as “Stephen of the family Sutton”, was jailed for six months after the Court found he had driven without insurance in the Moyglare area of Maynooth on 3 December last.

http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man_questions_district_court_but_is_jailed_1_1940175

He basically felt that he did not have to comply with the Road Traffic Acts as they were "statute law", and not "common law", with pretty devastating personal consequences I must add.

Judge Zaidan strongly suggested he seek legal advice but Mr. Sutton opted to represent himself and said he would “waive all benefits and privileges.”

At a number of points he interupted Judge Zaidan and was told he could get seven days’ jail for contempt for making a mockery of the Court.

He replied that he would put any interuption “down to nerves”.

He said he had requested that a document of his would be passed to the judge but Judge Zaidan told Mr Sutton he would have to address the issue in public. “I do not deal with private correspondence with you or the Taoiseach,” said Judge Zaidan.

snow ghost

Stephen of the family Sutton! Imagine if they ever catch Sly of the family Stone.

Thanks for the link.

This is where this stuff goes beyond a joke and becomes dangerous - when people are for a start driving around without insurance, actually believing they don't need insurance, and secondly getting sent to prison.

What this does show is that this freeman stuff is somehow escalating on a major scale. It's spreading like wild fire.

snow ghost

"Stephen of the family Sutton before Judge Zaiden" It's like something out of a dodgy sci-fi B movie!

I have to admit this freeman stuff is the best laugh I've had in a long time.

Grolschevik

snow ghost wrote: »

"Stephen of the family Sutton before Judge Zaiden" It's like something out of a dodgy sci-fi B movie!

Yep: Dune!

benway

snow ghost wrote: »

Sly of the family Stone.

Post of the day, easily.

That link is from two years back, though, I don't think this stuff is at crisis point yet, or even close. To be honest, I can see there being a major incident, like a forced eviction, that will demonstrate how flimsy these points are.

Of course, the Gardaí, the banks, the courts and the government don't want this. I have a feeling that some of the protesters do, though, and this is why they're geeing people up with this stuff, even if there are plenty of Fremen who will be genuinely surprised to end up in the cells.

***

Corruptable wrote: »

On the whole fraud note, I found an interview with "Kev", who seems to be the founder of the Tir Na Saor/Land of the Free movement on one of their internet radio shows

Missed this above ... confirms what I already thought. Fcking cnuts, duping people - I'm personally in favour of civil disobedience, but let people know what they're getting in to. I also like the LETS system, has the potential to make life much better for people who are cash poor but time rich. Why do they have to be such cute hoors about it?

jd

snow ghost wrote: »

"Stephen of the family Sutton before Judge Zaiden" It's like something out of a dodgy sci-fi B movie!

.

I keep thinking of Judge Dredd (2000 Ad) dealing with some mutant in Cursed Earth!

Corruptable

benway wrote: »

Missed this above ... confirms what I already thought. Fcking cnuts, duping people - I'm personally in favour of civil disobedience, but let people know what they're getting in to. I also like the LETS system, has the potential to make life much better for people who are cash poor but time rich. Why do they have to be such cute hoors about it?

Good point, benway. I'm all in favour of community involvement too, but I don't see why they have to attach their ideology to it and try and claim everything. Their newest one is their claim over Billy Maguire and the "sovereign seal" of Ireland from which the State supposedly derives it's powers, and their claim on the Brehon Laws of Celtic times.

For anyone who is tired of the Inn's or Blackhalls, why not visit the freeman's spinoff - The Brehon Law Society - http://www.thebrehonlawsociety.com/index.html. I'd say the entrance exams are a hell of a lot easier than the FE-1s!

Robbo

Corruptable wrote: »

For anyone who is tired of the Inn's or Blackhalls, why not visit the freeman's spinoff - The Brehon Law Society - http://www.thebrehonlawsociety.com/index.html. I'd say the entrance exams are a hell of a lot easier than the FE-1s!

That led me to watching some of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAa393Kox-w

So we have crude, animated versions of Einstein and wartime Churchill discussing Freeman guff. Fast forward to 3:00 or so where they disclaim the whole thing. It's like some bizarre Keats & Chapman where the punchline never arrives.

Corruptable

I see that they've hijacked and confused the Anti-Eviction groups now, with the majority believing that Ben Gilroy's interpretation of the Constitution and Common Law is correct and what won out the day.

People seriously need to know that this man is talking raw sewage (outside of the possible fair procedure issue with the Registrar doubling as the Sheriff), and does not stand up to scrutiny and is therefore no substitute for proper, independent legal advice which is available for solicitors, FLAC, and the New Beginnings group who specialise in this area.