Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Freeman-on-the-land idiocies

captainmission said:
You can find a 192 page judgment by a Canadian judge in the case of a brave freeman seeking to avoid having to pay maintaince to his wife and children here - http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

The judgment basically provides a detailed and reference guide to the history of various freemen movements and tactics and details how these have consistently been rejected under the Canadian legal system and left the litigants facing increased costs, punitive damages or contempt charges.

as for 'acceptance for value' this is characterised as
Click to expand...
try this one:

(not nearly so long as the A4V video)

 
That magistrates can be bamboozled because they are lazy tories with a sense of entitlement rather than expertise in wanky old laws.
 
Jazzz said:
A4V success - perhaps the most extraordinary maneuver in the freeman's armoury is the accepted for value. We could have a whole thread devoted to acceptance for value. It is utterly incredible - in a nutshell, it involves taking a bill, and turning it into cash with some banking ju-jitsu, and then returning it as the payment for the debt.
Click to expand...

You are a clown.

"Accepted for Value" is a reference to a real concept in Contract Law. It is a description of what happens when a debtor offers the holder of the debt something (usually a lower sum of money) instead of full repayment of the debt and the holder of the debt agrees to that. The holder of the debt agrees to accept your new offer for the value of the money originally owed. It is the formation of a new contract superseding the old one. For that to happen has to be agreement between both parties.

You cannot unilaterally force someone else to accept your offer. There is no "banking ju-jitsu" that allows you to get around the need for agreement. The only accurate part of your post quote above is the sentence "It is utterly incredible". It is incredible because it isn't true.

But please, I don't want you to think that you have to take my word for this. You should feel free to experiment with fraud to whatever extent you feel inclined. If you choose to do so, for all that I recommend that you do not, please do us all the favour of posting up an account of the results.
 
Nigel Irritable said:
You are a clown.

"Accepted for Value" is a reference to a real concept in Contract Law. It is a description of what happens when a debtor offers the holder of the debt something (usually a lower sum of money) instead of full repayment of the debt and the holder of the debt agrees to that. The holder of the debt agrees to accept your new offer for the value of the money originally owed. It is the formation of a new contract superseding the old one. For that to happen has to be agreement between both parties.

You cannot unilaterally force someone else to accept your offer. There is no "banking ju-jitsu" that allows you to get around the need for agreement. The only accurate part of your post quote above is the sentence "It is utterly incredible". It is incredible because it isn't true.

But please, I don't want you to think that you have to take my word for this. You should feel free to experiment with fraud to whatever extent you feel inclined. If you choose to do so, for all that I recommend that you do not, please do us all the favour of posting up an account of the results.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the whole point is that - as the theory goes - the creditor/debtor position is actually the inverse of the one we think it is. Briefly, this is my understanding of it. All the corporations are joined at the hip - this includes your 'strawman' (commercial entity which is known by your name) and all the government bodies. As there is a national debt which can never be repaid, this corporate entity is bankrupt. The creditors of the bankruptcy are the flesh and blood humans who have actually created everything. So, these bills presented to you are actually those of the corporation humbly requesting that you (the flesh & blood creditor) forgive the debt. So when you 'accept for value' you (as the flesh & blood human) are actually accepting the offer of the bill issuer and forgiving the debt so they can be a little less bankrupt! However, what we normally do is transfer debt money - which someone has taken out at interest from the banks - thereby increasing the total debt.

That's as good as I understand it right now pretty much. I did say it was incredible :)
 
Nigel Irritable said:
You are a clown.

"Accepted for Value" is a reference to a real concept in Contract Law. It is a description of what happens when a debtor offers the holder of the debt something (usually a lower sum of money) instead of full repayment of the debt and the holder of the debt agrees to that. The holder of the debt agrees to accept your new offer for the value of the money originally owed. It is the formation of a new contract superseding the old one. For that to happen has to be agreement between both parties.

You cannot unilaterally force someone else to accept your offer. There is no "banking ju-jitsu" that allows you to get around the need for agreement. The only accurate part of your post quote above is the sentence "It is utterly incredible". It is incredible because it isn't true.

But please, I don't want you to think that you have to take my word for this. You should feel free to experiment with fraud to whatever extent you feel inclined. If you choose to do so, for all that I recommend that you do not, please do us all the favour of posting up an account of the results.
Click to expand...
Do read the arse end of this thread for similar fantasies.
 
Jazzz said:
Yes, but the whole point is that - as the theory goes - the creditor/debtor position is actually the inverse of the one we think it is. Briefly, this is my understanding of it. All the corporations are joined at the hip - this includes your 'strawman' (commercial entity which is known by your name) and all the government bodies. As there is a national debt which can never be repaid, this corporate entity is bankrupt. The creditors of the bankruptcy are the flesh and blood humans who have actually created everything. So, these bills presented to you are actually those of the corporation humbly requesting that you (the flesh & blood creditor) forgive the debt. So when you 'accept for value' you (as the flesh & blood human) are actually accepting the offer of the bill issuer and forgiving the debt so they can be a little less bankrupt! However, what we normally do is transfer debt money - which someone has taken out at interest from the banks - thereby increasing the total debt.

That's as good as I understand it right now pretty much. I did say it was incredible :)
Click to expand...

The problem with all of this is that it isn't true. Any of it. It was made up my American scam artists trying to get some money out of resentful, desperate and ignorant people and then latched on to by resentful, desperate and ignorant cranks. There is no "strawman" entity which really owes your debts. There is no universal conspiracy consisting of all of these imaginary "strawmen" companies, along with all of the corporations, all judges and lawyers and the government itself dedicated to conning you into paying back debts that you have in fact entered into. There is no "humble request" from the people you owe money to for you to forgive a debt that they owe to you. Because there is no debt that they owe to you.

It's worth noting that the original variant of this scam was rooted in rather particular claims about the American legal system, involving an origin myth in which "Common Law" was replaced by "Admiralty Law". As cranks have exported the idea to different jurisdictions, the few of them who are bothered by issues of coherence in the first place have had to come up with all kinds of other origin myths to explain why this or something analogous happened in their own countries. Sometimes they don't even bother with the new origin myth and just parrot garbled nonsense based on paranoid fantasies about American law.

I know that you are pretty much a born sucker when it comes to this sort of gibberish, but do yourself a favour just this once and actually think. Most of the tinfoil hat foolishness you love so much is essentially harmless. This stuff could really fuck your life up if you start acting on it. It is a fantasy created by entrepreneurs in the business of selling false hope to desperate people.
 
Nigel Irritable said:
This... is a fantasy created by entrepreneurs in the business of selling false hope to desperate people.
Click to expand...

Whoa. I hadn't looked beyond the conspiranoid level. It's an actual meta-conspiracy?

Have any of these entrepreneurs been prosecuted, yet?

I feel a novel coming on. I don't think Umberto Eco will mind. Shame the settings will probably be offices above disused strip-malls, not the real publishing house in a little square in Venice that must be the inspiration for Foucault's Pendulum...
 
Nigel Irritable said:
I know that you are pretty much a born sucker when it comes to this sort of gibberish, but do yourself a favour just this once and actually think. Most of the tinfoil hat foolishness you love so much is essentially harmless. This stuff could really fuck your life up if you start acting on it. It is a fantasy created by entrepreneurs in the business of selling false hope to desperate people.
Click to expand...
So far, I've seen about £70K of debt held off with 'freeman' stuff. Not A4V though, and I haven't seen an account reset to zero.

I think your warning should stand though here. I don't want to recommend anyone else tries it on the basis of anything I have posted.
 
Nigel Irritable said:
The problem with all of this is that it isn't true. Any of it. It was made up my American scam artists trying to get some money out of resentful, desperate and ignorant people and then latched on to by resentful, desperate and ignorant cranks. There is no "strawman" entity which really owes your debts. There is no universal conspiracy consisting of all of these imaginary "strawmen" companies, along with all of the corporations, all judges and lawyers and the government itself dedicated to conning you into paying back debts that you have in fact entered into. There is no "humble request" from the people you owe money to for you to forgive a debt that they owe to you. Because there is no debt that they owe to you.
Click to expand...
There is an unrepayable debt. That's the whole basis of the money system. So, for instance, here in the UK, the modern pound sterling is based on a debt taken out by the crown to a bunch of investors who founded the Bank of England. There's nothing particularly mystifying or sinister about it, though.
 
laptop said:
Whoa. I hadn't looked beyond the conspiranoid level. It's an actual meta-conspiracy?

Have any of these entrepreneurs been prosecuted, yet?
Click to expand...

A Judge in Canada wrote an extremely detailed account of its history, origins and the legal travails of many of its founding figures as part of a judgment a couple of months ago. I think someone already linked to it in this thread.

http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

It seems to have been written with the express intention of explaining to other Judges and lawyers what these incoherent crazies are babbling about, what they think they are doing, and why it has no legal basis whatsoever. It's very useful. Of course, you'll never convince the kind of people who latch onto this shit to read it.

The short answer to your question is that there is not one centrally organised "conspiracy". Rather these techniques originated with various entrepreneurs and gurus, although they do draw from each other's ideas and techniques. One of the features of these sort of movements is that the same techniques and magic words show up being used by people who subscribe to wildly different "origin myths" to explain their power. Some of these gurus have indeed been prosecuted, and details can be found in the case report above.

By this stage it seems that these ideas have something of a life of their own and are spread by "honest" cranks as well as entrepreneurs.
 
Jazzz said:
The creditors of the bankruptcy are the flesh and blood humans who have actually created everything. So, these bills presented to you are actually those of the corporation humbly requesting that you (the flesh & blood creditor) forgive the debt. So when you 'accept for value' you (as the flesh & blood human) are actually accepting the offer of the bill issuer and forgiving the debt so they can be a little less bankrupt! However, what we normally do is transfer debt money - which someone has taken out at interest from the banks - thereby increasing the total debt.
Click to expand...

I would take issue with this characterisation. You are 'humbly requested' not to demand your 10 quid from the crown, but that's not a problem as long as everyone recognises the symbolic value of the denomination. Money can only operate with confidence, after all - money exists in our heads, essentially. But I don't quite see why you have such a problem with this. It works as a system of exchange. And you omit to mention that the person borrowing from the bank will also be repaying to the bank, thereby destroying that money again. Money represents debt, and repaying the debt destroys the money. The national currency is created by the state taking out a debt, and that particular debt cannot ever be repaid as it is the basis of our money system. Again, there's not particular problem with this.
 
littlebabyjesus said:
I would take issue with this characterisation. You are 'humbly requested' not to demand your 10 quid from the crown, but that's not a problem as long as everyone recognises the symbolic value of the denomination. Money can only operate with confidence, after all - money exists in our heads, essentially. But I don't quite see why you have such a problem with this. It works as a system of exchange. And you omit to mention that the person borrowing from the bank will also be repaying to the bank, thereby destroying that money again. Money represents debt, and repaying the debt destroys the money. The national currency is created by the state taking out a debt, and that particular debt cannot ever be repaid as it is the basis of our money system. Again, there's not particular problem with this.
Click to expand...
I think discussion on whether the money system is okay or not is one for another thread - we've already had it a few times, sure we'll have it again. But this is about whether commercial redemption processes have any basis or are completely hatstand. Due to A4V being utterly bizarre and highly complex you might have to ride with a few things a bit, like entertaining the assumption that there is a global financial conspiracy.

Indeed with the abolishing of the gold/silver standard, money simply exists as debt. As we pay for things in the normal way, we are simply shuffling debt around (and increasing it to the bank via interest which isn't created when loans are taken out). So, the only way any debt can really be paid is for the debt to be forgiven. It does seem back to front!
 
Jazzz said:
Thanks Giles. I feel my understanding of the freeman movement, if not compete, exceeds that of your reference.

"it is true that we generally consent to being part of the country that we live in" it appears that you are saying this as if it happens simply by us being here. That's not the case. An example off the top of my head - Julian Assange is currently within our shores, yet is within the jurisdiction of Ecuador.

"living in any country involves obligations to chip in and pay for things" - I take it you are not seriously proposing this as a maxim of law. Who to? You? Me? The Queen? Who decides?

I've had a little experience with freeman stuff. I am not without criticisms of the movement. However, you are incorrect if you think that the stuff never works. I've seen first hand evidence of quite a bit. You can check out the posts on the forum www.getoutofdebtfree.org/ - plenty of people 'getting out' of parking fines, smaller bank loans, etc.

A4V success - perhaps the most extraordinary maneuver in the freeman's armoury is the accepted for value. We could have a whole thread devoted to acceptance for value. It is utterly incredible - in a nutshell, it involves taking a bill, and turning it into cash with some banking ju-jitsu, and then returning it as the payment for the debt. example -

The fact that people have got A4V to work appears to prove that we are subjected to an extremely complex financial scam by the powers that be.

However, it is certainly the case that just turning up in court and saying a few tricks is likely not going to work. If people are going for the harder stuff - they really need to know their stuff, and they likely have a big learning experience.
Click to expand...


Why do people think it is a good or honourable thing anyway to try to find sneaky quasi-legal fiddles to avoid paying their share of taxes, debts that they openly got into, and avoid driving legally etc?

If most people did this (and if it worked) what would happen?

You'd get ill, go to a hospital, and find it closed, because everyone wrote "A4V" on their tax bills, surely?

It seems that all of these "magic" techniques are, at heart, just supposed ways of cheating people out of money.

A bit like, for example, me setting up a business, taking people's money off them for some product that I promise to deliver in a month's time, then me just trousering all the money and putting the business into receivership. And telling them that I have legally no obligation to pay them anything.

Why do you suppose that "they" have created this gaping hole in the law that supposedly entitles anyone using the correct "magic" (freely vailable for download from numerous web sites) to renege on pretty much any financial commitment that they have?

And do you think it would generally be "a good thing" for you to successfully avoid paying for anything?

Giles..
 
Blagsta said:
Jazzz, if you ever go to Paris, that big metal tower? It's not for sale, OK?
Click to expand...

He doesn't need it.


He already owns this:

family-vacations-brooklyn-bridge.jpg
 
Nigel Irritable said:
A Judge in Canada wrote an extremely detailed account of its history, origins and the legal travails of many of its founding figures as part of a judgment a couple of months ago. I think someone already linked to it in this thread.

http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

It seems to have been written with the express intention of explaining to other Judges and lawyers what these incoherent crazies are babbling about, what they think they are doing, and why it has no legal basis whatsoever. It's very useful. Of course, you'll never convince the kind of people who latch onto this shit to read it.
Click to expand...

Thanks, yes. Bookmarked: I have several other judgements to read first :(

From what I have read, Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke would be an ornament to these boards and appears to have been having a sort of pedantic fun with which I can identify :)

Nigel Irritable said:
The short answer to your question is that there is not one centrally organised "conspiracy". Rather these techniques originated with various entrepreneurs and gurus, although they do draw from each other's ideas and techniques. One of the features of these sort of movements is that the same techniques and magic words show up being used by people who subscribe to wildly different "origin myths" to explain their power. Some of these gurus have indeed been prosecuted, and details can be found in the case report above.
Click to expand...

My "meta-conspiracy" was a kind of joke :)

Nigel Irritable said:
By this stage it seems that these ideas have something of a life of their own and are spread by "honest" cranks as well as entrepreneurs.
Click to expand...


:(
 
Nigel Irritable said:
A Judge in Canada wrote an extremely detailed account of its history, origins and the legal travails of many of its founding figures as part of a judgment a couple of months ago. I think someone already linked to it in this thread.

http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

It seems to have been written with the express intention of explaining to other Judges and lawyers what these incoherent crazies are babbling about, what they think they are doing, and why it has no legal basis whatsoever. It's very useful. Of course, you'll never convince the kind of people who latch onto this shit to read it.

The short answer to your question is that there is not one centrally organised "conspiracy". Rather these techniques originated with various entrepreneurs and gurus, although they do draw from each other's ideas and techniques. One of the features of these sort of movements is that the same techniques and magic words show up being used by people who subscribe to wildly different "origin myths" to explain their power. Some of these gurus have indeed been prosecuted, and details can be found in the case report above.

By this stage it seems that these ideas have something of a life of their own and are spread by "honest" cranks as well as entrepreneurs.
Click to expand...

I see the 'freeman' in this case appears to be trying to avoid having to pay child support to his ex wife. Really challenging the establishment there.:facepalm:
 
Jazzz said:
Here's an A4V success - nice pic of the zeroed account - on the getoutofdebtfree.org site:

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=135&t=40439
Click to expand...

How on earth can you possibly be convinced by someone showing a bill which looks to have been payed is actually a company writing a debt off because the person allegedly told some bailiffs to fuck off? Where in that letter does it say what you are claiming has happened? That letter doesn't even show a company name. You are convinced by that, but not the Obama birth cert? I could knock up an exact forgery of that in seconds.

Mental.
 
The Free Man of the Lands are awesome. I love the way they are really thick and weird and selfish nobodies.
 
Nigel Irritable said:
A Judge in Canada wrote an extremely detailed account of its history, origins and the legal travails of many of its founding figures as part of a judgment a couple of months ago. I think someone already linked to it in this thread.

http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html
.
Click to expand...

"This category of litigant shares one other critical characteristic: they will only honour state, regulatory, contract, family, fiduciary, equitable, and criminal obligations if they feel like it. And typically, they don’t."

Lol!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rob Ray
The collapsing media landscape
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
hitmouse
hitmouse
Serene
Rosslare to Dunkirk ferry route announced as businesses urged to avoid UK landbridge
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
andysays
andysays
Tooter
Look what landed on my doormat...
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Sasaferrato
Sasaferrato
editor
Who owns Britain? Map displays unregistered land in England and Wales
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
StoneRoad
StoneRoad
BristolEcho
Scum Landlord Watch
Replies
17
Views
1K
wemakeyousoundb
wemakeyousoundb
Back
Top Bottom