Freeman Megamerge

GerardKeating

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

It would be considered as an act of default and international lenders would refuse to lend money to the new state.

Its no different to if 60% of the Irish people elect a politicla party to power who make a policy decision to not pay our foreign debts and other obligations and to provide immunity to the state against domestic debts. The same result would be achieved with the same consequences.

If a portion of a state ceded from the "Mother" state, is there any internationally approved mechanism for it taking it's "share" if any international debt's that the mother country held, for example when Eritrea ceded from Ethiopia, or perhaps the breakup of Yugoslavia.

Pro Hoc Vice

GerardKeating wrote: »

If a portion of a state ceded from the "Mother" state, is there any internationally approved mechanism for it taking it's "share" if any international debt's that the mother country held, for example when Eritrea ceded from Ethiopia, or perhaps the breakup of Yugoslavia.

Well that all depends on the "mother states" attitude if it's an agreed split then it will be included in any agreement or treaty. If the mother state does not agree then it would be in my opinion impossible to maintain that the "daughter state" owes a share as it does not agree that state exists.

http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?mot692

That shows what was agreed in one example.

"The government in Khartoum is legally obligated to honor the entire debt despite the secession of South Sudan in July 2011 following the results of a referendum held six months prior to that under the terms of the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) which allowed Southerners to decide whether to remain united with the north or create their own independent state."

Torakx

Wow, great responses there.
A lot to consider.
I really laughed hard when I found out the name I picked at random already having been sought after by the IRA LOL
I honestly have spent little time reading Irish political history.
My starting point is that book on Irish law and it's history and practice.

However my own idea is probably a lot different to the one proposed by politicians and unrecognized armies.
We are moving into the era of corporate rulers and are already in some form corporate entities.
Corporations are running countries in the background.
So I thought, why not make a corporation(or something similar) for those people in the state that are not served by those elected.
That should be at least 40% of the population in this country and that's being very conservative I think.

Maybe this entity does not have to become a country. It may only need to have a lot of people with a combined purpose, to exercise a political and financial will.
It may have a strong effect on the recognized state and force politicians to begin to choose between corporate sponsorship and the people they represent.
For example, if such an entity had donations and memberships, it could find, cultivate and hire all sorts of advice, representation, education etc etc.
There are already groups organized to help defend land and property grabs from foreign investors.
But many of these helpful groups are separated by intent.
It seems sensible to combine them. I think..

It sounds like a union now.
It could even have a state of the union address every year to update members.
Hmm.. that also sounds familiar

On some recent replies.
I would think any split would not be agreeable at all with the current state.
Personally I visualize it as a community growing inside of the state and eventually having so many benefits and good intentions, it will become a major part in expressing and acting on the will of the people of the land.
Maybe 20 years later, it would eventually turn into the state...

Another route might be the idea of Brehon law as a way to reinstate the native Irish, within this state we call IRELAND.
If such a community grew, how can you deny them their native rights and history?
I believe it's possible for the courts to work perfectly fine if they stop using commercial law to prosecute citizens and just kept it to business affairs.
The threat of Brehon law might go some way to rectifying the courts.

As you might have guessed by now, my intent is to search for a way to give the people of Ireland their land and resources.
Which seems the best method so far?
Please don't suggest voting haha!

From replies it looks like creating a new state is a difficult route that has already got a legacy.
In the long term I think maybe a union of some kind would be more secure from political and financial attacks. While still having the ability to grow, effect change and bring support for the most vulnerable.

Really at the end of the day, the most important part for me, is the unification of those who are left behind( I guess about 40-60% of the country) and a resurgence of organized community activity.
There are people right now trying to break into abandoned houses all over the country, in order to help those families living on the streets.
These people risk legal action against them and physical violence from gardai.
Who will defend them in court? A court appointed barrister? No offence to barristers here intended. I view the system and it's process, not so much the persons trained and educated within it.

Again thanks for all replies and clarifications!

Pro Hoc Vice

Torakx wrote: »

Wow, great responses there.
A lot to consider.
I really laughed hard when I found out the name I picked at random already having been sought after by the IRA LOL
I honestly have spent little time reading Irish political history.
My starting point is that book on Irish law and it's history and practice.

However my own idea is probably a lot different to the one proposed by politicians and unrecognized armies.
We are moving into the era of corporate rulers and are already in some form corporate entities.
Corporations are running countries in the background.
So I thought, why not make a corporation(or something similar) for those people in the state that are not served by those elected.
That should be at least 40% of the population in this country and that's being very conservative I think.

Maybe this entity does not have to become a country. It may only need to have a lot of people with a combined purpose, to exercise a political and financial will.
It may have a strong effect on the recognized state and force politicians to begin to choose between corporate sponsorship and the people they represent.
For example, if such an entity had donations and memberships, it could find, cultivate and hire all sorts of advice, representation, education etc etc.
There are already groups organized to help defend land and property grabs from foreign investors.
But many of these helpful groups are separated by intent.
It seems sensible to combine them. I think..

It sounds like a union now.
It could even have a state of the union address every year to update members.
Hmm.. that also sounds familiar

On some recent replies.
I would think any split would not be agreeable at all with the current state.
Personally I visualize it as a community growing inside of the state and eventually having so many benefits and good intentions, it will become a major part in expressing and acting on the will of the people of the land.
Maybe 20 years later, it would eventually turn into the state...

Another route might be the idea of Brehon law as a way to reinstate the native Irish, within this state we call IRELAND.
If such a community grew, how can you deny them their native rights and history?
I believe it's possible for the courts to work perfectly fine if they stop using commercial law to prosecute citizens and just kept it to business affairs.
The threat of Brehon law might go some way to rectifying the courts.

As you might have guessed by now, my intent is to search for a way to give the people of Ireland their land and resources.
Which seems the best method so far?
Please don't suggest voting haha!

From replies it looks like creating a new state is a difficult route that has already got a legacy.
In the long term I think maybe a union of some kind would be more secure from political and financial attacks. While still having the ability to grow, effect change and bring support for the most vulnerable.

Really at the end of the day, the most important part for me, is the unification of those who are left behind( I guess about 40-60% of the country) and a resurgence of organized community activity.
There are people right now trying to break into abandoned houses all over the country, in order to help those families living on the streets.
These people risk legal action against them and physical violence from gardai.
Who will defend them in court? A court appointed barrister? No offence to barristers here intended. I view the system and it's process, not so much the persons trained and educated within it.

Again thanks for all replies and clarifications!

Courts do not appoint barrister to defend people in this country. An accused has a full right to defend himself, or to have any solicitor or barrister act in his defence if he can not afford to pay the said solicitor and if necessary barrister and if necessary SC they will be paid be the state. In your imaginary state who is going to train the lawyers and how are those lawyers going to be any different to lawyers in this state.

Torakx

Where a person(I hate that word) cannot afford a legal defence and does not want a state appointed representative or advisor, maybe a community of researchers and intellectuals can manage a good compromise.
There are already groups or at least one I have stumbled across, that assist people who are being brought to court and threatened with losing their home. Sometimes over a couple of euro in arrears from what I have heard.

My thought is that it would be a community of people with common goals, more than a business or corporation.
The main reason I first sought corporate or state status as a solution, is the problem of past debts and other similar ties, treaties etc.
A possible way to break away from decisions made on behalf of an ignorant populace of voters and non voters.
The second vote on the Lisbon treaty highlighted for me the need for education and community and of course a need to break away from the European Union as a political entity.

I do recognize a rather big issue with international pressure from corporate run states.
Iceland has shown they can defect. I do not understand fully how they managed this.
But I'd like to explore as many solutions as possible.
Worst case I will at least be more educated on many areas of politics and law.
I don't see international relations as state run only.
There should be ways to contact other countries and work together. I don't see why not. It could expand knowledge and create better more effective strategies.
Am I thinking too small? Would an international solution be more efficient for growth and stability?
That would add a whole lot more to research, education and funding.
I would even consider a kickstarter type funding idea, for future strategies.

It's not like I am yet intent on doing this.
But maybe I will get enough information to know which route is most efficient and come up with a plan later to act on.

GM228

Torakx wrote: »

As you might have guessed by now, my intent is to search for a way to give the people of Ireland their land and resources.

Torakx wrote: »

It's not like I am yet intent on doing this.
But maybe I will get enough information to know which route is most efficient and come up with a plan later to act on.

I'm not certain if your idea is purely hypothetical or something you actually want to try to achieve?

Pro Hoc Vice

Torakx wrote: »

Where a person(I hate that word) cannot afford a legal defence and does not want a state appointed representative or advisor, maybe a community of researchers and intellectuals can manage a good compromise.
There are already groups or at least one I have stumbled across, that assist people who are being brought to court and threatened with losing their home. Sometimes over a couple of euro in arrears from what I have heard.

My thought is that it would be a community of people with common goals, more than a business or corporation.
The main reason I first sought corporate or state status as a solution, is the problem of past debts and other similar ties, treaties etc.
A possible way to break away from decisions made on behalf of an ignorant populace of voters and non voters.
The second vote on the Lisbon treaty highlighted for me the need for education and community and of course a need to break away from the European Union as a political entity.

I do recognize a rather big issue with international pressure from corporate run states.
Iceland has shown they can defect. I do not understand fully how they managed this.
But I'd like to explore as many solutions as possible.
Worst case I will at least be more educated on many areas of politics and law.
I don't see international relations as state run only.
There should be ways to contact other countries and work together. I don't see why not. It could expand knowledge and create better more effective strategies.
Am I thinking too small? Would an international solution be more efficient for growth and stability?
That would add a whole lot more to research, education and funding.
I would even consider a kickstarter type funding idea, for future strategies.

It's not like I am yet intent on doing this.
But maybe I will get enough information to know which route is most efficient and come up with a plan later to act on.

There is a community of researchers and intellectuals, already they are called lawyers. Who is going to verify that those people have the required skill and knowledge to act on a persons behalf in very important matters. O we already have that its called the Law Society and the Bar Council.

The Courts have often allowed a friend of any person in Court to help in the preparation and or presentation of the case either as Applicant or Respondent or even as Defendant. But in Criminal matters a court would be very careful in allowing a non legal person take risks with a persons good name and liberty.

Other than that your ideas are aversion of lets have a new way of running the "State" lets get rid of all the bad ideas "banking, Law, etc." forgetting that a state requires on banking and law for it to function.

Torakx

@GM228
Both.
If I see a good way to end homelessness and the general suffering of people, I might just take a chance and stick my neck out.
That would require a pretty solid and flexible game plan.
But I don't take myself too seriously either.
I am barely surviving myself and it's unlikely I have the ability to do this alone.

mrs vimes

Torakx wrote: »

Another route might be the idea of Brehon law as a way to reinstate the native Irish, within this state we call IRELAND.
If such a community grew, how can you deny them their native rights and history?
I believe it's possible for the courts to work perfectly fine if they stop using commercial law to prosecute citizens and just kept it to business affairs.
The threat of Brehon law might go some way to rectifying the courts.

As you might have guessed by now, my intent is to search for a way to give the people of Ireland their land and resources.

Should this thread be merged with the main Freeman thread?

OP clearly believes much the same stuff.

Torakx

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

There is a community of researchers and intellectuals, already they are called lawyers. Who is going to verify that those people have the required skill and knowledge to act on a persons behalf in very important matters. O we already have that its called the Law Society and the Bar Council.

The Courts have often allowed a friend of any person in Court to help in the preparation and or presentation of the case either as Applicant or Respondent or even as Defendant. But in Criminal matters a court would be very careful in allowing a non legal person take risks with a persons good name and liberty.

Other than that your ideas are aversion of lets have a new way of running the "State" lets get rid of all the bad ideas "banking, Law, etc." forgetting that a state requires on banking and law for it to function.

The law society is just that. An isolated society, where the self educated individual is seen as an idiot in that arena.
It's my view that an active community of researchers have the ability to learn and teach. Not over night, but with time.
I believe that people who are educated to work inside a system, by the same system are confined in their ability to think outside the box as it were.
They will follow protocol, without thinking or questioning.

It is already being done. People are defending themselves with the help of small communities of researchers and activists.
They have prevented families from losing their homes already. Or at least that is the impression I get from independent news.
Situations like this I would think will eventually set a precedent for the idea of representation and advice from a community not involved in the law society.

You bring up a brilliant topic with criminal law.
For the most part I have no issues with criminal law and the practice of it here in IRELAND.
I think commercial law is the issue. It is being applied to persons like they are commercial entities, when they are not corporations, they are humans.
And so I don't forsee much issue with such a community and criminal law.
There is no reason to take away trial by jury for crimes. There is not usually much profit to be had in locking someone up or punishing them.

Commercial courts however make a ton of revenue from the public. In the more extreme cases, people lose their family home. Even after banks have been bailed out, said banks still go to court and take peoples homes.

Regarding banks. I believe a currency based on interest for it's creation to an outside entity is ridiculous.
Especially a currency that is allowed to inflate at such a rate.
I would be more in favour of creating a new or old currency, which would be created and issued from a bank owned by the people.
But that is a whole other complex issue.
I am familiar with some general principles in economics. Fractional reserve banking being one that comes to mind here.
I'm aware also how much our economy is tied into others and the banking system.
These are hurdles I would not try to jump alone though.
That kind of planning is for a dedicated group of researchers.

I'm still a young enough man, to be able to plan for another 20years if needs be

Torakx

mrs vimes wrote: »

Should this thread be merged with the main Freeman thread?

OP clearly believes much the same stuff.

I read that thread. It is a bit of a joke if I can be honest and nothing like what I believe or think.
I'm referring to the actual courts and laws, corporate entities and how they function.
My research is based on real things that exist.
I use information from people who have worked inside this system and know the laws.
I am not a freeman. I'm a human and citizen.
I acknowledge I have at least two roles in society. As a person and as a human.
A freeman does not acknowledge their person or the state.
So they cannot start a corporation or interact with the state and be a freeman, they must also be a person to do that.
The reference to Brehon law might have given you that idea.
Brehon law did however exist and is the native law of this land(before british rule) if I remember correctly.
I think it has some legitimacy, in my opinion more as a threat for a good change, than a viable solution.

Victor

hullaballoo wrote: »

The Republic of Ireland is a soccer team.

Harsh, dude, harsh.

For Forks Sake

moyners wrote: »

Spotted in Cork

I've seen the exact same poster tacked to the walls around a shopping centre in Portlaoise as well. i wonder have they tried it when presented with a 'notice' or 'bill' if you will, for their groceries in Tesco?

For Forks Sake

TJJP wrote: »

Midland Topic a few weeks back.

Murphy has little to be doing, and the Topic must be desperately short of news if they're featuring the village idiot on the front page.

cobhguy28

Torakx wrote: »

Commercial courts however make a ton of revenue from the public. In the more extreme cases, people lose their family home. Even after banks have been bailed out, said banks still go to court and take peoples homes.

This is very suprising since the court service has been closing courts all over the Country for the last few years and waiting times have been increasing.

ohnonotgmail

when i first read the OP I had an idea where this would end up. i wasn't disappointed.

hullaballoo

Threads merged.

OttoPilot

Torakx wrote: »

The law society is just that. An isolated society, where the self educated individual is seen as an idiot in that arena.
It's my view that an active community of researchers have the ability to learn and teach. Not over night, but with time.
I believe that people who are educated to work inside a system, by the same system are confined in their ability to think outside the box as it were.
They will follow protocol, without thinking or questioning.

Have you ever been part of a professional body or are you just assuming members always follow protocol?

Please nobody scare away Torakx. We haven't had a good kool aid merchant since Derry packed up and married his legal fiction.

Grolschevik

Deleted User wrote: »

Please nobody scare away Torakx. We haven't had a good kool aid merchant since Derry packed up and married his legal fiction.

I was enjoying that thread. It almost verged on speculative political philosophy: "what is a state?"; "what makes it so?"; "what if...?".

Serjeant Buzfuz

Grolschevik wrote: »

I was enjoying that thread. It almost verged on speculative political philosophy: "what is a state?"; "what makes it so?"; "what if...?".

What is de stars Joxer, what is de stars....

Esel

Serjeant Buzfuz wrote: »

What is de stars Joxer, what is de stars....

De wuddeld is in a 'state' of chassis.

Serjeant Buzfuz

Esel wrote: »

De wuddeld is in a 'state' of chassis.

A pint of plain is yer only man

Torakx

Well I was hoping this wouldn't go into the "after hours" thread of this forum, but that time has arrived
I will try to play my role accordingly. We couldn't have a non binary anomaly!
I'm well used to all forms of mockery, abuse, sarcasm and misdirection through forum discussions.
If you don't take the topic seriously, I hope to see some new tricks at least!

Apologies in advance, I seem unable to figure out multi-quoting, without creating a mess.
I am predicting I will be having several diffferent conversations at once also.
@ cobhguy28
I did hear something about courts closing down around the country.
I am unsure what type of courts though and still do not have enough information on how the courts are structured.
For instance are they district courts? Does that mean they use commercial law only?
Do counties have their own higher courts for common law?
What other type of courts or setups should I be aware of?

@OttoPilot
I'm not part of a professional body and have only ever had the experience of attending for fines, which was both an enlightening and enjoyable experience!
My general view is that most secular bodies that require it's members to be trained, have a habit of teaching in a linear fashion,similar to most educational systems, like schools and colleges.

The result for a majority of students is an inability to think critically outside of the framework they have been trained to work in.
Which is understandable, since the tools are there and everything moves according to plan. Common routines and even unspoken practices become embedded through culture within said societies.
I was generalizing for the most part when I mentioned protocol.
I think this is commonly agreed upon though.

@Kayroo LOL
I appreciate that one
Thanks for the idea also haha

@Grolschevik Yes! That is my intent as well. I want to get to the heart of it. i still do not fully understand the real practical differences between state, union, corporation and person.
Any more info much appreciated.
Got to feed the trolls, to get them to dance for you

---

If it helps get things going, maybe some of you could start breaking down my arguments and opinions.

The first point I made was relating to the state being a juristic person.
This was needed in order for a person to sue the state.
I'm surprised it took all the way to 1973 for this to come about.

I'll presume we all agree that the state is indeed a juristic person.
If a fictional entity is a juristic person.
Is a juristic person a fictional entity?

Esel

^ Like the last two lines.

I'm good enough with lyrics, can hear the melody in my head.
You hum it, I play it - 50/50 we can slice the bread.


Being megamerged is not always a bad thing
. .. . ..

Serjeant Buzfuz

Torakx, the Flann o'brien of the freeman movement?

whippet

@tordx .. unfortunately when you open a discussion / debate with incorrect assumptions as the foundation of your argument you will find that people won't really want to get in to a discussion.

For instance, your incorrect assumption that all educated professional people are in essence brainwashed and forced in to a fixed set of thoughts is the basis of your argument. Unless you can offer any substantive evidence (not hearsay or your own anecdotes) your view point is dead in the water others will not be in a position to enter in to a proper discussion.

It is a tactic that is used quite a lot by pseudo legal types and conspiracy theorists. Usually their positions hold no weight unless based upon a false assumption.

ArmaniJeanss

Serial loon Harry Rea had his Supreme Court appeal against LisbonII yesterday. What sort of time scale will it take for a result?

Slightly surreal to see so many of the usual XYZ Says No groups and The Hub/LandLeague types posting their support of him, about hows he's a modern hero and the media is ignoring the most important court case in decades - do they not do some basic research and see that he's a serial litigant whose ultra Catholic views place him somewhere on the far side of Opus Dei & Alive magazine?

From various sites on the internet he seems to be a former Catholic Democrat election candidate and is anti abortion, anti SSM, anti contraception, anti divorce (his wife divorced him and he refuses to recognise it through multiple court appearances), anti sex-before-marriage, and as the cherry on top believes that men should automatically get custody when families split and has some other generally 1950s views on the role of women in society.

Robbo

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Serial loon Harry Rea had his Supreme Court appeal against LisbonII yesterday. What sort of time scale will it take for a result?

Slightly surreal to see so many of the usual XYZ Says No groups and The Hub/LandLeague types posting their support of him, about hows he's a modern hero and the media is ignoring the most important court case in decades - do they not do some basic research and see that he's a serial litigant whose ultra Catholic views place him somewhere on the far side of Opus Dei & Alive magazine?

From various sites on the internet he seems to be a former Catholic Democrat election candidate and is anti abortion, anti SSM, anti contraception, anti divorce (his wife divorced him and he refuses to recognise it through multiple court appearances), anti sex-before-marriage, and as the cherry on top believes that men should automatically get custody when families split and has some other generally 1950s views on the role of women in society.

The magical thinking behind this is as follows:

• Lisbon 2 ratification declared void
• Entire Treaty collapses
• EU disbands shortly thereafter and a gloriously independent Ireland now has to find it's way in the world
• Banking collapse somehow reversed and all money paid in bailouts retuned as cashmoney payments to Irish citizens (in Punt Nua or Zimbabwean Dollars, whichever is worth more)
• Harry Rea installed as Potentate of Holy Catholic Ireland, declares Archbishop McQuaid as a "dangerous liberal"
• Our last trading partner, Saudi Arabia, finds his treatment of women "a bit much" and stops buying beef. Civil unrest is quelled with oversized rosary beads

Torakx

@Serjeant Buzfuz
Thanks, I think haha.
I have become much like a philosopher/artist. Guess it shows ^^
Actually I did meet up with those Freeman folks many years ago.
I walked away after a few weeks. I disagree with their methods and beliefs.
There was an interesting altercation(with my one and only meeting with them) in Stephens Green park. Where we were sitting on the grass chatting and told to move by park uniforms.
This caused a scene as some people decided to stand up for their rights, over some grass..
I choose my battles much more carefully and only for gain,not loss.
Sun Tzu- Art of War 101 :P

@whippet
To be clear this is what I wrote
"I believe that people who are educated to work inside a system, by the same system are confined in their ability to think outside the box as it were.
They will follow protocol, without thinking or questioning."

Maybe a little rash. Only a little mind.
I am talking about culture within societies as well as certain forms of education.

I found a random article that might explain my thinking better than I have previously.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-shmuly-yanklowitz/a-society-with-poor-criti_b_3754401.html

Many teachers have observed that students sitting in classrooms today are bored by the frontal authoritarian model of learning. For years, as a student, I was told to take out my notebook and copy what was written on the board. A curriculum in which they are active participants and engaged in democratic, and cognitively challenging for students works better. In the frontal model, teachers provide the questions and answers. In the argument model, the students provide the questions and the answers while the teachers provide the structure, the facilitation, and the guidance

You are welcome to prove me wrong and in some cases I would obviously be wrong there. It was a general statement in my mind. I am sure there are a few who break the mold.

But I do not see how a comment like mine can prevent a discussion.
I do not know who anyone here is really. I don't need to know, because I will check everything you say that I find of importance.
Who you are should not make one difference to me. What you say does.
On the reverse side, I am seen here as some sort of loonatic and have had my thread merged with another one, that is full of abuse and disrespect for other peoples thoughts and beliefs.

How do I enter into the discussion of my own thread, when there is so much disrespect and dismissal?
Because I fully understand the mechanics of what we are referring to here.
Forgive me, as I have forgiven others
Besides I am not in the law society and have no training or formal education(besides apprenticeship and unrelated college) past junior cert..
Some ignorance should be expected.

Can anyone bring some light on my last open question?
If a fictional entity is a juristic person, is a juristic person a fictional entity?