Freeman Megamerge

Brother Psychosis

so these people think that by harrasing secretaries with random legalese Bulls**t they are proving a point? the bar councilis not supposed to have any authority, they have no impact on daioly court proceedings, yet these delusional people think that this backs up their argument of nonsense? i dont know whats scarier, the fact that people dreamed up of this nonsense or that people actually believe it

MungBean

MungBean wrote: »

What the hell was he trying to ask ? Where barristers got the authority to operate ?

He thinks the Bar Council have some sort of authority over the law. The fact that they don't doesn't seem to have occurred to him.

Grolschevik

Finnbar01 wrote: »

You can quite clearly hear the window being broken at 2:06 in.

I also hope he was dragged out.

I missed that so. Poxy speakers...

benway

benway wrote: »

That McCann Fitzgerald thing is an absolute disgrace as well, they ought to be ashamed for outright lying to people. This will not end well.

Every word out of their mouth about Freemanism is a lie to people. They're hardly gonna stop now.

benway

I thought for a while that they actually believed this stuff. Less funny and harmless now that they've shown their true colours.

Don't like that the Rossport thing is getting lumped in there with them either, two very, very different phenomena.

Finnbar01 wrote: »

Rubbish. You're man was begging for a response and he got it. The garda took no crap whatsoever and rightly so.

This is in the context of a long and bitter dispute. Tbh, if I had a massive police presence pushing through a controversial development on my doorstep, after a couple of years of roadblocks, bordering on intimidation, I'd get a bit uncooperative as well. In fairness, he started to pull to the left just as the second cop from the van came towards his car. Can't understand why people think this is all fine, the cop went way overboard.

Anyway, well done fremen, soon enough any protest is going to be tarred with your looney brush.

berrypendel

Finnbar01 wrote: »

Rubbish. You're man was begging for a response and he got it. The garda took no crap whatsoever and rightly so.

Why did he refuse to open the window and then claim it was broken? Why didn't he open the door? Why didn't he pull in when directed?

Rubbish the garda res;ponse was not reasonable . three of them with pepper spray and batons. Did not have rto smash windows. Garda was a thug. He is the person who would tell someone they must meet a house breaker with reasonable force. Is he one of the so called shell thugs?

berrypendel

alinton wrote: »

But the cop did lose it pretty quickly. Unless he suspected the guy was up to no good he didn't have the right to get as heavy-handed, even damaging the guy's property.

The guy was obviously gunning for a confrontation, so the best thing the cop should have done was not give him one. Instead he played right into his hands.

One would have thought that their training went some way towards teaching them not to lose their cool like that.

freemen crap does not excuse the fact the cops were thugs

berrypendel

Originally Posted by Finnbar01
Rubbish. You're man was begging for a response and he got it. The garda took no crap whatsoever and rightly so.

cops do not have the authority to take no crap. that is emotional ****e

berrypendel

MungBean wrote: »

They are not monks, occasionally everyone gets wound up. In this instance a Garda got wound up and broke a car window after the driver refused to move his car when directed, refused to open the window to deal with the Gardai (could have also opened the door if the window was genuinely broken) and refused to produce his licence when requested.

A broken window and him dragged out and dumped in a cell for a few hours for wasting everyone's time sounds about right to me.

you do not know much law do you?

MungBean

berrypendel wrote: »

cops do not have the authority to take no crap. that is emotional ****e

They do however have the authority to forcefully remove someone from their vehicle when they refuse to cooperate in any manner.

Roll down the window/open the door and exchange a couple of polite words and he'd have been on his way. Instead he deliberately wastes Garda time by being an idiot and considering he had a dash cam on I'd wager he set out with the express purpose of drawing a reaction. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever and I dont see that the Gardai did anything wrong considering the position he put them in.

benway

MungBean wrote: »

They do however have the authority to forcefully remove someone from their vehicle when they refuse to cooperate in any manner.

Roll down the window/open the door and exchange a couple of polite words and he'd have been on his way. Instead he deliberately wastes Garda time by being an idiot and considering he had a dash cam on I'd wager he set out with the express purpose of drawing a reaction. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever and I dont see that the Gardai did anything wrong considering the position he put them in.

Or he was sick of getting hassled and bullied by the cops every time he goes through a roadblock because he's the head of one of the local, and I emphasise local, protest groups, so he wanted a record. Seems equally plausible to me.

Whatever you think about it, can we take all of this to another thread, please? It has nothing to do with the Freeman nonsense.

MungBean

benway wrote: »

Or he was sick of getting hassled and bullied by the cops every time he goes through a roadblock because he's the head of one of the local, and I emphasise local, protest groups, so he wanted a record. Seems equally plausible to me.

Whatever you think about it, can we take all of this to another thread, please? It has nothing to do with the Freeman nonsense.

We have proof of his actions but none of any bullying on the part of the Gardai. I'm only going by what I see in the video and he didnt seem to have any intention of cooperating from the moment he pulled up. So if he didnt have the cam on for that purpose then he was very aware that the cam was on and he was trying to get a reaction for it.

This was in another thread I think but was moved in here so I assume its ok.


Edit: Sorry I was thinking of the eviction clip. Perhaps it would be better moved somewhere else.

Grolschevik

benway wrote: »

Whatever you think about it, can we take all of this to another thread, please? It has nothing to do with the Freeman nonsense.

True enough...

berrypendel

MungBean wrote: »

They do however have the authority to forcefully remove someone from their vehicle when they refuse to cooperate in any manner.

Roll down the window/open the door and exchange a couple of polite words and he'd have been on his way. Instead he deliberately wastes Garda time by being an idiot and considering he had a dash cam on I'd wager he set out with the express purpose of drawing a reaction. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever and I dont see that the Gardai did anything wrong considering the position he put them in.

The gardaacted like a thug. Show me where in law they have the power to go to the exten of smashing a window without trying to talk him out.That is way over react if it was traffic blues when cops are on tv it would be please sir open the window.

benway

snow ghost wrote:

If you're going about your business surely you would rock up the check point say 'how ya Gaurds, ****ty enough weather how can I help you' they say 'miserable enough isn't it, have you your licence' you show it to them have a bit of banter and off you go whistling away to yourself?

Last word from me on this ... on this thread. If you're the head of a protest group who's no doubt had previous run ins with the Gardaí, and you're passing through checkpoints every other day, I could see how you might get a bit of "friendly banter" from the cops on account of who you are, could get a bit wearing. In fact, you might even think of it as harassment. On the other hand, the guy could be getting in the faces of people just trying to do their jobs, and maybe it's the cops who'd had their fill.

I wouldn't say on that evidence that either the cops or the driver are entirely right or entirely wrong, although to my mind there was no justification in smashing the window at that point, needlessly aggressive. The point people need to bear in mind that there's a wider context here - it's not a case of just some driver pulling up to just some random checkpoint.

None of which belongs on this thread.

Getting back on topic, I think that call apparently proves that the Bar Council aren't a simple professional body at all, but the British Accredited Regency which creates the legal fiction of each person's corporate identity by issuing birth certificates. And that last guy he spoke to was hiding the conspiracy, rather than being an amiable office worker willing to indulge a crank caller. Jesus. Bleedin'. Wept.

Got a Birth Certificate? You are a Fictitious Corporation Created by the British Accreditation Regency (BAR Association)

squod

snow ghost wrote: »

What amazes me is why anyone would be driving around making video recordings anyway?

Dashcams are very popular. Ask the motors forum.

snow ghost wrote: »

If you're going about your business surely you would rock up the check point say 'how ya Gaurds, ****ty enough weather how can I help you' they say 'miserable enough isn't it, have you your licence' you show it to them have a bit of banter and off you go whistling away to yourself?

I don't know the context of the vid. They seem to be both in the wrong. It's not uncommon to record incidents like these on dashcams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXukKBpz_To

Corkblowin

So if I don't have an Irish birth certificate then I'm exempt from the law? Cool!

On a serious note, dont have a large number of Facebook friends, mostly extended family, but that 'Fitzgerald' letter has been posted by at least 10. God knows how many will be taken in by it.

Tom Young

This is what a Freeman on Land is:

Our man in Havana

squod wrote: »

Dashcams are very popular. Ask the motors forum.



I don't know the context of the vid. They seem to be both in the wrong. It's not uncommon to record incidents like these on dashcams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXukKBpz_To

Typical dispute between an alleged speeder and the police. The driver stood his ground and the cop backed down. Happens every day here.

FreudianSlippers

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Typical dispute between an alleged speeder and the police. The driver stood his ground and the cop backed down. Happens every day here.

Our man in Bulgaria!

benway

Thick people, with a core group of people who aren't half as clever as they think they are.

snow ghost

I have just a read of a few freeman-of-the-land forums and noticed a pattern:

There are basically lots of threads boasting of 'spanking the banks' or other creditors and letters are posted that have been sent to the debt collection agencies prior to the same debt collection agencies negating the same debt by failing to answer questions about it (if that makes sense).

What is interesting is that these posts go on for months (sometimes years) and letter sent to the debt collection agencies / creditors are posted and the responses that come back... then suddenly as it gets near the end nothing, the poster stops posting just as you get to the juicy bit about whether there was any court action.

It would appear, to me anyway, that there is a good chance they were taken to court and prosecuted for the debt - hence why the threads more often than not have no conclusion and come to a sudden stop.

That said I don't doubt that some debt collection agencies are dodgy and use nefarious means that should be challenged at times. So I can see why people in debt are attracted to the defiance of the freeman techniques.

I also don't doubt that if some people give creditors enough hassle over a debt it is easier to write it off than to pursue a costly court case. And I presume this is what is happening over the debt being written off rather than them being written of by denying the debtors are their 'legal fiction', etc?

I'd be interested in any freeman's take on this matter??? If any are reading?

Robbo

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Skeleton's Paradox:

What if you don't consent to the law of fremenism?

Also, one for Conspiracy Keanu: What if fremenism is a conspiracy to boost the price of gold since they argue that the debts aren't real because they're not backed up by gold/silver?

Finnbar01

snow ghost wrote: »

I have just a read of a few freeman-of-the-land forums and noticed a pattern:

There are basically lots of threads boasting of 'spanking the banks' or other creditors and letters are posted that have been sent to the debt collection agencies prior to the same debt collection agencies negating the same debt by failing to answer questions about it (if that makes sense).

What is interesting is that these posts go on for months (sometimes years) and letter sent to the debt collection agencies / creditors are posted and the responses that come back... then suddenly as it gets near the end nothing, the poster stops posting just as you get to the juicy bit about whether there was any court action.

It would appear, to me anyway, that there is a good chance they were taken to court and prosecuted for the debt - hence why the threads more often than not have no conclusion and come to a sudden stop.

I've noticed that as well. I've specifically join their sites just to query for an update and I've never gotten any.

I'd be interested in any freeman's take on this matter??? If any are reading?

It's hard to believe anything freemen say as they are prone to lies, half truths and fantasies.

murrayp4

Tom Young wrote: »

This is what a Freeman on Land is:

Funnily enough the Mayo Garda video reminded me of a Jam sketch...

benway

snow ghost wrote: »

What is interesting is that these posts go on for months (sometimes years) and letter sent to the debt collection agencies / creditors are posted and the responses that come back... then suddenly as it gets near the end nothing, the poster stops posting just as you get to the juicy bit about whether there was any court action.

It would appear, to me anyway, that there is a good chance they were taken to court and prosecuted for the debt - hence why the threads more often than not have no conclusion and come to a sudden stop.

That said I don't doubt that some debt collection agencies are dodgy and use nefarious means that should be challenged at times. So I can see why people in debt are attracted to the defiance of the freeman techniques.

I also don't doubt that if some people give creditors enough hassle over a debt it is easier to write it off than to pursue a costly court case. And I presume this is what is happening over the debt being written off rather than them being written of by denying the debtors are their 'legal fiction', etc?

I'd be interested in any freeman's take on this matter??? If any are reading?

Doubt it. Doubt it heartily. It might put off maybe some watery private creditors chasing very small debts. But even if there's no money there, the banks can claim tax relief for judgments they obtain, so they're pursuing people relentlessly. I'd say that the banks' debt collection solicitors have received some interesting tomes on the true nature of the law. Doesn't change the end result one iota.

I can see why this stuff is attractive to people, for sure. But they'd be in a better position if they faced up to reality.

I really think that some kind of debt forgiveness regime is necessary, I think that the personal debt crisis is going to keep the economy, particularly the retail sector, in the quagmire for the next decade or more without it.

This is what annoys me most about the fremen. They've co-opted legitimate (to my mind) protests with their nonsense, where a more sane approach could actually leverage some action on personal debt. And more rational protesters are going to get tarred with the same brush.

They've already destroyed Occupy Dublin, at this stage their facebook feed is just full of fremen baloney and David Icke 17-foot-lizard stuff.

snow ghost

benway wrote: »

Doubt it. Doubt it heartily. It might put off maybe some watery private creditors chasing very small debts. But even if there's no money there, the banks can claim tax relief for judgments they obtain, so they're pursuing people relentlessly.

I'd have to disagree with you there benway (although I don't know). Even with tax relief on judgements I can't believe that creditors will often pursue debts that will prove too costly to them in legal fees and time. I have no doubt they regularly write off many such debts using simple cost - benefit analysis.

I hear what you are saying about debt forgiveness, but I'm not sure that is the answer. It would create unrest among those who don't have large debts and would feel hard done by. It is a difficult balance for the government to get right.

All said and done considering the economic mess we are in it should be no surprise that groups such as the freemen are on the rise. I'm sure in the past there have been similar such movements such as in the great depression, etc. They are most likely symptomatic of the adverse economic environment many people face.

Corruptable

benway wrote: »

Last word from me on this ... on this thread. If you're the head of a protest group who's no doubt had previous run ins with the Gardaí, and you're passing through checkpoints every other day, I could see how you might get a bit of "friendly banter" from the cops on account of who you are, could get a bit wearing. In fact, you might even think of it as harassment. On the other hand, the guy could be getting in the faces of people just trying to do their jobs, and maybe it's the cops who'd had their fill.

I wouldn't say on that evidence that either the cops or the driver are entirely right or entirely wrong, although to my mind there was no justification in smashing the window at that point, needlessly aggressive. The point people need to bear in mind that there's a wider context here - it's not a case of just some driver pulling up to just some random checkpoint.

None of which belongs on this thread.

Getting back on topic, I think that call apparently proves that the Bar Council aren't a simple professional body at all, but the British Accredited Regency which creates the legal fiction of each person's corporate identity by issuing birth certificates. And that last guy he spoke to was hiding the conspiracy, rather than being an amiable office worker willing to indulge a crank caller. Jesus. Bleedin'. Wept.

Got a Birth Certificate? You are a Fictitious Corporation Created by the British Accreditation Regency (BAR Association)

My last note on it, too, is that the person involved was John Monaghan, a resident of Rossport who is opposed to the project, and according to his version posted here, once he stepped out of the car after the incident and showed his driver's license, the gardai backed away and there was no more about being under arrest.

He reasons that they may have misidentified him as one of the blow-in, rent-a-mob protesters which led to what could be disproportionate force from the Garda, and seemly left him when an injury to his hand from the breaking of the glass.

He further asserts that he wants to show that this kind of stuff happens in Mayo in the heated atmosphere that's there, and that people have no redress when this happens. Surely he's wrong in this, even while he obviously has no faith in the GSOC, he could take a civil case?

I would like to note however that I'm not overly sympathetic having watched the video more than once. It's clear that Mr Monaghan refused to co-operate when he could easily have done so and continued on his way. Possibly a ploy to get a propaganda video or to block the haulage vehicle which later appears on the road.

derry

@snow ghost
You noticed a trend that often the thread on non payment of debt collectors tailed off

several issues
1/ Freemen say the contract is with the other person example bank of XXX for mortgage. If a debt collector come the free man has no contract with the debt collector so he tells him to take a hike.
As this is true most debt collectors return the debts to the origin source . Some purse this but often the court system wont even it let it get to court as there is too high a risk the debt company will lose .
That for the court system isn´t good for them

2/ Most debt repayment failures are from stuff like loss of work and wasn't the intention of the the person to not pay the debt. As it is built in to the lending system that some loans will fail the freemen main challenge to the debt is their inability to pay and the they are calling on the system to remove the excessive debt as per the debt forgiveness rules that exist in the debt system of license to loan out debts .
However some debt companies don't seem to want to follow their own rules and would rather have their pound of flesh .just before the issue comes to court either the court or some lawer from the debt company sees that the freeman isnt going to roll over and will search for this rule on debt forgiveness have a serious risk to get what he asks for so the debt company often abandon the court case solution .However in many cases they will negotiate a very much lower rate the person can pay and many freemen will agree this much reduced payment .
Most Freemen try to stay in honour and pay all debts if they can but if the work is reduced or stopped they must cut back on debt repayments. Equally so many freemen will if the work comes back to normal rate of pay try to increase repayments in line with income increases.
However some debt companies resist this solution at every possible turn even if it means the borrowers have to suffer starvation or homelessness to repay these loans

3/ Many debt companies have taken out insurance against no payment of debts. To collect on these debts they must folow certian steps .often these steps are to get debt collection companies to make some attempts to recover the outstanding loans . often once the debt company has sent several letters and got as far bringing the debt person owner to the steps of the court or sometimes into court then all reasonable steps have been done to get the money owed .Then the Insurance company pays out and often chooses to write off the costs.Some Insurance companies however may again employ another debt agency to try to recover this debt.
As the debt goes further down the chain of the debt collection companies the original amount of the debt often will shrink.
EG the first debt company might get 10% of the debts they collect.
Often if the debt collection .company is offered 95% of the debt they will take it as they make a 5% profit instead of 10%

As the debt get further into the system the debt collection company may be offered as much as 50% of the debt . If the debt owner offers 55% for the debt many debt companies will take that and make 5% profit as sufficient for them .

That´s horse trading of debt really and not so much a freeman strategy. Many business men will know these rules and will strive if they are in a jam short on cash flow to find the figure they can pay .
Its standard practice in the business world sometimes called a hair cut the debt owner tries to get back what he can and sometimes can lose as much as 90% of the dept or more.

Freemen take a different view on this they dont set out to accumulate debts they cant pay .
However if freemen are being picked on often unfairly harshly as for example often companies in business would get less harsh treatment on loans they are merly going to fight back with the tools the law gives to them.
the basic law is that a man (without a corporation) cannot be held to any corporation laws made for the solving of disputes between corporations .All laws for corporations are Statues and Acts .The Statues and acts apply to the corporation or the person of the corporation. the judge in commercial court can only judge two corporations who have a dispute in a contract. No man can sign a contract with any corporation unless he agrees to become a PERSON with a corporation eg he represents the corporation MR JOE BLOGGS . Any contract done in deceit is null and void .Any contract where it was not explained that that the man had to convert to a corporation to make the contract using the methods of leaving out vital facts is also null and void .most freemen only find out decades later after they signed the mortgage or similar the contract was deceitful
Most often these cases are settled on the steps of the courts too high a risk to lose for the debt companies

Derry

snow ghost

Many thanks for taking the time in responding in such depth derry.

You make some interesting points - some of which I would agree with, i.e. businesses writing off debts 'haircuts' etc, that's very standard practise and I agree that if someone on a personal level is burdened by suffocating debt through no intention of their own then they deserve to be afforded similar negotiated reduction in debt.

Other points I'm wary off - and as I said earlier I'd like to see precedents on such matters that have been tried in court. But as someone pointed out, if freemen don't recognise the court how can that happen?

For example could someone actually challenge in court under the common law such freeman maxims such as the 'legal fiction' name thing?

Or have any freemen gone to court armed with their trademark name fees and prosecuted the debt collection agency for breach of trademark? If not why not if it was legit?

Have any freemen been taken to court for a debt and had it successfully discharged with their estoppel thingy?

It is fascinating stuff all said and done.

I try to keep an open mind and remain objective, thankfully I am fortunate enough not to have any debts I cannot service otherwise I would also be as angry as many are with our banking system.