Common Law knowledge is spreading...

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Tower

[COLOR=Black]

Throughout this entire escapide not ONE man or woman has looked up anything. They believe what they have been told previously through other means... Now I come along and challenge it.

The title of the thread is "Common Law knowledge is spreading". I can only assume you believe this to be a good thing, but you ain't doing any spreading yourself. You are just saying it is happening, and when people ask how you say "look it up, I'm not going to hold your hand".

You just don't seem to be doing your part in spreading this revolutionary news. Why not?

Say I started a thread about a completely legal way to get free whiskey. I'm a FreeWhiskeyman. I want to spread the word and champion the cause of FreeWhiskeymen everywhere.

But then I don't tell anyone how I get free whiskey, or even if I actually get free whiskey myself. I talk about this incredible whiskey loophole that most people don't even know exists, but I ignore any requests to explain it. I wax philosophical about "the movement" but I don't offer any concrete advice on how to get the whiskey. I claim to want to spread the news, but I don't actually spread the free whiskey news. I just say that it is there and don't offer anything in the way of proof.

If someone asks me how to get free whiskey I say "that's your problem, not mine, I'm just saying the news is spreading and people are waking up" and someone says "wake me up" and I say "wake yourself up, the free whiskey is out there, we can all get it".

And then, at the end of it all, I say "I'm challenging the idea that you have to pay for whiskey and I know that you don't have to pay for whiskey. Slaves and gullible people pay for it. My eyes are open. I know the score. But I'm still not going to tell you if I pay for whiskey or not".

That's a thumbnail of the routine you've gone through here. I don't like to pile on, but the smarmy tone you use and the clear suggestion that you know something the rest of us don't and that we are all in the Matrix and you are sitting in the ship next to Neo, well, it just invites the piling on.

[CaptainCrunch]

Sorry Rouge everything else became a blur once I hit free whiskey.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by bcb

Hey Man, He's got rights, you know!!!!

I wish he'd exercise his right to remain silent

[onetwo_threefour]

Originally Posted by kermitology

What?

Fractional banking is the basis by which our monetary system works. It works on credit. What a bank actually holds in it's inventory at any given point is a fraction of what each person who banks with the bank has held by the bank. (Hence fractional)

The money that is deposited into a bank by a person is then held in trust by the bank under the condition that it can be reclaimed by the person at any time, and then the duty is on the bank to provide those funds.

Now, it wouldn't make much sense if all the banks just kept that money in the vault, no, it make far more sense to loan it out to other people in need of credit, mortgages, cash, etc.

So they don't make money out of thin air. They just transfer credit.

If every single person went to a bank and demanded their money in cash, then likely the bank would ask each person they've loaned money to for the money back. But doing so would destroy the financial system.

And while I realize that this is all a ploy for you to get attention, I still feel compelled to attempt to enlighten you.

You do realize the effect that all persons in society living in a pure cash based system would turn into? It's anarchy. I'm pretty sure you're into that, but it's ANARCHY. It's not a way to actually live.

Actually, although I am not an expert, this is actually the only thing I 'sort of' agree with Tower on. Financial institutions do create money out of nothing whenever they issue unsecured debt such as credit cards and unsecured lines of credit. If banks and credit card compaies were required to hold as much in assets as they have issue in credit it is arguable that the economy would be better off.

However, even though I agree that it is problematic for the long term health of the economy, it's not up to me to say that it's illegal, even if I am a member of the Law Society.

[jammies]

I guess I'm never getting my free slurpee. Too bad, I could've really gotten behind a movement that promised: "One Nation; One Folk; One Slurpee."

[Tower]

Originally Posted by jammies

I guess I'm never getting my free slurpee. Too bad, I could've really gotten behind a movement that promised: "One Nation; One Folk; One Slurpee."

Guess you're going to have to suck up your own knowledge....

Just so we are clear... You are responsible for you... However, I help my friends... Believe your jail... Slurp your crap.

After that, peace be to you. And I mean that.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Tower

Just so we are clear... You are responsible for you... However, I help my friends... Believe your jail... Slurp your crap.

Well I'm glad you were "clear", if by "clear" you mean vague and borderline illiterate.

You don't even understand the rules of grammar, or how to convey an idea in a clear and concise manner, and yet you expect people to believe you have a deep understanding of the rules of law and society? Muddled prose is much more often the sign of a muddled mind than that of a genius whose ideas cannot be easily encompassed by language; if you are such a genius I've seen zero evidence of it so far.

Anyway, do you, or do you not, use money to pay for goods? You can answer this question with a "yes" or "no" - there is no need for mystical blathering, unless you want to expand upon your answer with some more hilarous non-sequiturs. I'll even give you an example of how to answer a question so that people can understand what the answer means; all you need to do is cut and paste the format, then modify appropriately.

Tower: Jammies, do you like looking at pictures of naked women?
Jammies: Yes, I do. I find the images soothing and invigorating in the nether parts. I highly recommend you try looking as well; you can reference this site http://i_like_looking_at_naked_wimmen.com/nekkid/pics.html.

See how my answer addresses the question directly, with no evasions or irrelevant jibber-jabber that aspires to a tattered profundity? So, one more time: Do you, or do you not, use money to pay for goods?

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by jammies

Tower: Jammies, do you like looking at pictures of naked women?
Jammies: Yes, I do. I find the images soothing and invigorating in the nether parts. I highly recommend you try looking as well; you can reference this site http://i_like_looking_at_naked_wimme...kkid/pics.html.

Hey. That link doesn't work.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

Hey. That link doesn't work.

Sure it does. Try again. I wouldn't lie to you unless you were a woman, and somehow it would lead to you being naked. Even then I'd try the truth first in the unlikely event it would work.

[Tower]

Originally Posted by jammies

Well I'm glad you were "clear", if by "clear" you mean vague and borderline illiterate.

You don't even understand the rules of grammar, or how to convey an idea in a clear and concise manner, and yet you expect people to believe you have a deep understanding of the rules of law and society? Muddled prose is much more often the sign of a muddled mind than that of a genius whose ideas cannot be easily encompassed by language; if you are such a genius I've seen zero evidence of it so far.

Anyway, do you, or do you not, use money to pay for goods? You can answer this question with a "yes" or "no" - there is no need for mystical blathering, unless you want to expand upon your answer with some more hilarous non-sequiturs. I'll even give you an example of how to answer a question so that people can understand what the answer means; all you need to do is cut and paste the format, then modify appropriately.

Tower: Jammies, do you like looking at pictures of naked women?
Jammies: Yes, I do. I find the images soothing and invigorating in the nether parts. I highly recommend you try looking as well; you can reference this site http://i_like_looking_at_naked_wimmen.com/nekkid/pics.html.

See how my answer addresses the question directly, with no evasions or irrelevant jibber-jabber that aspires to a tattered profundity? So, one more time: Do you, or do you not, use money to pay for goods?

Jamms... Or should I say Raspberry Jamms...



NOBODY GIVES ME Raspberry.

See I just made up a word!!!! Now.... Disprove it! I will put it in a dictionary and create a society that will follow this meaning and tell you blueberries mixed with strawberries makes Raspberry JAM!
Now you will tell me Blueberry's mixed with strawberries makes BLUEBERRY AND STRAWBERRY JAM, but not to my dictionary these mean something different you crazy silly man!
The point is my dear Jamms... Sticky as you may be, is that you believe the Law society uses is English. Funny as it is as it is not the case.

Once you UNDERSTAND that it is not English and is an language that mimics but is actually meaning something entirely different you get that you are being manipulated... So continue what you believe. I have already pointed you in a direction that can help and thanks to others who have assisted me...

I've pretty much given the decoder ring for free.... Jamms.... For one who claims to have a brain... You seem all Jammed up.

[Montana Moe]

All quotes from ADL page:
http://www.adl.org/Learn/ext_us/SCM....ked=4&item=sov

OKC Bombing accomplice Terry Nichols:

Nichols, for instance, several times repudiated his allegiance to federal and state governments. He tried to pay a credit card debt with a fictitious financial instrument called a "certified fractional reserve check." Brought into court in Michigan in 1993, he refused to walk to the front of the courtroom and denied the court's jurisdiction over him.

The trick was that people did not even realize they were signing contracts: these included items like Social Security cards, drivers' licenses, car registrations, wedding licenses or even, as Terry Nichols noted, hunting licenses and zip codes.
The sovereign citizen solution to this problem is the one that Nichols used.Since these contracts were made without people's knowledge, they could be declared invalid and torn up. Social Security numbers, licenses and permits, even birth certificates could be revoked, allowing people thereby to become "sovereign citizens," freed from the jurisdiction of the "de facto" government and courts. They were once more subject only to the "common law."
The development of this theory resulted in a movement whose members believe not only that virtually all levels of government have no jurisdiction over them whatsoever, but also that acceptance of any government regulation or permit means entering into a "contract" with the government that results in the loss of liberty and freedom. Consequently, committed sovereign citizens resist, sometimes with violence, nearly every form of governmental authority, from police enforcing traffic regulations to inspectors enforcing building codes. Unsurprisingly, they end up in constant conflict with the law.

Posse Comitatus

Posse ideology had developed into an elaborate theory involving an original, utopian form of government based upon "common law" (the "de jure" government) that had been subverted and replaced with an illegitimate, tyrannical government (the "de facto" government). Americans obeyed the de facto government, because they had been tricked into believing it was legitimate.

Is this the "English" you speak of Tower?

David Wynn Miller. This Milwaukee, Wisconsin-based sovereign citizen is one of the most unusual of the "common law gurus" who travel the country holding seminars and offering legal advice. Miller has created his own unique version of English grammar, one that even many sovereign citizens find hard to understand or accept. He has also been active in Canada.

Charles Weisman. Based in Burnsville, Minnesota, Weisman is a prolific author on "common law" topics like martial law, the right to travel (unfettered by traffic laws or automobile regulations) and so forth. A Christian Identity adherent, he is also currently one of the most visible white supremacists promoting sovereign citizen doctrines.

Sounds like quite the crew to be associated with...

[BlackArcher101]

I'm starting to worry about Towers health.

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Tower

Throughout this entire escapide not ONE man or woman has looked up anything. They believe what they have been told previously through other means... Now I come along and challenge it.


Take a Blacks Law dictionary - This is what Lawyers use to study Law among other law dictionaries.

Look up "driver" - Driver - One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car. DBlack's Law Dictionary, 3rd Ed

Okay, I'll look it up. Black's released its 9th edition in 2009. The 3rd edition, cited by Tower, was published in 1933. I am curious which edition of this esteemed and venerable tome is to considered authoritative by the Freeman movement. I only have the 8th edition from 2004 on hand.

driver. 1. A person who steers and propels a vehicle.
2. A person who herds animals, a drover. Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Ed

Originally Posted by Tower

''Motor vehicle'' means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo;

vehicle 1. Something used as an instrument of conveyance.
2. Any conveyance used in transporting passengers or things by land, water or air. Black's Law Dictionary, 8th Ed. ["motor vehicle" does not appear in this edition of Black's]

“motor vehicle” means (i) a vehicle propelled by any power other than muscular power, or
(ii) a moped,
but does not include a bicycle, a power bicycle, an aircraft, an implement of husbandry or a motor vehicle that runs only on rails; [Traffic Safety Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. T-6, s. 1(1)(x)]

[Jason14h]

Financial institutions do create money out of nothing whenever they issue unsecured debt such as credit cards and unsecured lines of credit. If banks and credit card compaies were required to hold as much in assets as they have issue in credit it is arguable that the economy would be better off.

If they didn't banks would own the entire money supply over time, as they charge a higher rate of interest then they pay out. (Assuming their operating costs are not exactly equal to the diffference between the interest they charge and the interest they bring in)

[Rerun]

[bcb]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

I'm starting to worry about Towers health.

I'm starting to worry about my own health...yet I can't stop reading

[CaptainCrunch]

This thread is full of fail, first a mention of free whiskey thats not free whiskey, then a porn link that goes nowhere.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

[KevanGuy]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

I'm starting to worry about Towers health.

Me too. Tower, I think you should seriously consider talking to a Dr. I'm not being flippant, I'm being serious.

[Royal Eagle]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

The Freeman movement is a bunch of social anarchist freeriders with the intellect and logical reasoning capacity of 6-year olds. "I want to be free! I don't want to have to listen to the rules! You're not the boss of me! Your rules don't count because you you didn't have my consent since I had my fingers crossed under the desk!"

If you really don't want to adhere to society's laws or the consequences of modern life, go become a hermit and live in a nudist colony. You can't expect to not pay taxes and avoid laws and still accept the services and protections provided by tax dollars and laws or even expect to be able to drive your car without having to pay the price for gas.

Exactly, they want civil rights and the privileges of modern society without the responsibilities of it. I personally think this is generally symptomic of our narcissist and individualist society where hard work, sense of duty and citizen's consciouness are neglected.

It's like getting sex from the wife/girlfriend all the time and living a life of leisure and at the same time expecting to do nothing after.

[longsuffering]

The thing I love about supporters of this 'movement' (like Tower), is the denial.

When confronted with a fact: Deny it! The Freeman/Income Tax defense has NEVER worked? "No matter, I never agreed to be bound my that judge's ruling." or "The defendant made the wrong argument". I imagine that even as they are being led away to jail, they continue to spout their mantra "I'm a Freeman" "I never consented to be bound by societies rules" and they continue to hold this position throughout their incarceration, doubtless 'bragging' on their release "The authorities had to release me because I told them I was a Freeman" all the while the reality is that their sentence was finished.

One really does have to worry about the mental health of 'true believers' and their head in the sand approach when confronted by ANY evidence that their 'belief' is nothing more than some cult leaders massive joke on the gullible.

Being a Freeman is like being an Oilers fan. There's that same level of denying reality.