Ha ha ha... I was never married so I have not read this act.
Sure,
My thoughts...
Registration - Much like at birth when you register your child and a person (legal fictional entity) is created. Your marriage is seized under Admiralty law (law of the water) and becomes property of the government. You are now married to two entities and that is unlawful. (Anytime something is registered you give up ownership. This includes cars, children, homes...etc)
I disagree 100%. I offered to you a place of discussion under terms and you agreed. I am participating with honour and you sir are in dishonour. You have chosen to make a mockery of this discussion and are acting malicious.
You have a remedy here. Until that is cured I will not discuss this with you further.
Arguing with you, sir, is like trying to argue with a dining room table!
~See Barney Frank Thread.
__________________ “The fact is that censorship always defeats it's own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.”
I disagree 100%. I offered to you a place of discussion under terms and you agreed. I am participating with honour and you sir are in dishonour. You have chosen to make a mockery of this discussion and are acting malicious.
You have a remedy here. Until that is cured I will not discuss this with you further.
See.. I think he's frustrated by the lack of debate that you've engaged in previously. You've made wild claims, then told people who question you to look it up on their own.
Personally, I don't have the time to wade through all that crap to find out what you're actually talking about, or sort out the details. You may call it "holding hands" but the rest of us just think you're a wacked out nutcase who can't present a decent argument to save his life.
What BBS has done here is present you with an extreme example and argument to engage you in debate. You have taken this as mockery, and refuse to debate until he provides you with a rock, bag of feathers, and a crayon.
Grow up and have a debate.
__________________
Who is in charge of this product and why haven't they been fired yet?
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tower
I disagree 100%. I offered to you a place of discussion under terms and you agreed. I am participating with honour and you sir are in dishonour. You have chosen to make a mockery of this discussion and are acting malicious.
You have a remedy here. Until that is cured I will not discuss this with you further.
See dude, at this point I'm not trying to be malicious. I admitted it was an extreme example but one that makes my point.
You said in your post that someone can't be a slave in Canada.
I 100% agree, and I've cited a specific reason. I brought up the Slavery Abolition Act (not to mention the Charter of Rights and Freedoms) that specifically states that I cannot own a slave, nor can I be one.
You claim that you are only bound under common law and that Acts have no relevance to you. So if that is the case then can you please show me the portion of Common Law that states that you cannot own a slave, nor can you be taken as a slave by another Freeman-on-the-land.
In this particular sense, I am very much protected by these Acts. I'd like to know where I can find in Common Law those same principles.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
Attorney Richard W. Stevens writes in Dial 911 and Die:
"It was the most shocking thing I learned in law school. I was studying Torts in my first year at the University of San Diego School of Law, when I came upon the case of Hartzler v. City of San Jose. In that case I discovered the secret truth: the government owes no duty to protect individual citizens from criminal attack. Not only did the California courts hold to that rule, the California legislature had enacted a statute to make sure the courts couldn't change the rule."
SPECIAL NOTE TO LAWYERS AND RESEARCHERS: Dial 911 and Die provides full citations to all statutes and cases for all 54 jurisdictions referenced in the book. There is also a citation list of relevant secondary authorities. All of these legal materials are available on-line and in full-service law libraries everywhere.
Dial 911 and Die is a book that should have been written a long time ago. The enormity of the facts its author, attorney Richard Stevens, reveals is almost too much to take in. The notion that the police have no legal obligation in most instances to protect the life, property, and rights of any given individual -- while at the same time spending unthinkable amounts of time and energy attempting to deprive that individual of the means and legal right to self-defense -- puts the lie to every claim for government that statists have ever made.
L. Neil Smith,
author The Probability Broach, Pallas, and The Mitzvah (with Aaron Zelman)
So what have you been TOLD about your protection.
Stevens cites laws an cases for every state — plus Washington DC, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Canada - which reveal the same thing.
See.. I think he's frustrated by the lack of debate that you've engaged in previously. You've made wild claims, then told people who question you to look it up on their own.
I made an offer to contract and discuss and it was accepted. You are a third party and not of coincidence. If you wish to discuss further you can agree to my terms or be ignored. Makes no difference to me, but I make you the same offer.
I (not you) took obvious offense and an injury was created. You sir might be fine with being name called a slave. I am not.
You must look it up for yourself. Accept ownership and question those who seem to believe they have power over you. It is an illusion. You call it crazy I call it freedom.
Quote:
What BBS has done here is present you with an extreme example and argument to engage you in debate. You have taken this as mockery, and refuse to debate until he provides you with a rock, bag of feathers, and a crayon.
He has broken the contract (name calling) and is in dishonor. There are many ways to remedy a dishonor. Pulling out your jokes certainly isn't helping.
Quote:
Grow up and have a debate.
I am very grown up and have spent more time than YOU can imagine on this topic and I'm still a rookie. But my debate is still open upon a cure from BBS.
I wish to be open honest and clear, as I will no longer speak to you or anyone else on this topic until YOU and anyone else that comments or questions has agreed to my communication terms. (now modified)
"So I'll offer to you, if you are truly inclined to care, that I'll post what I think on each topic I brought or bring up and then you can comment and question constructively and without malice what I post. If a response is posted with malice or not constructive I will ignore it."
You must look it up for yourself. Accept ownership and question those who seem to believe they have power over you. It is an illusion. You call it crazy I call it freedom.
See, here's the thing. If I were of a certain religious persuasion, and I were trying to convert people, I wouldn't just tell them to "look it up for themselves". I would spend every waking moment finding evidence to support the theory that my religion was best.
__________________ “The fact is that censorship always defeats it's own purpose, for it creates, in the end, the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.”
Henry Steel Commager (1902-1998)
The Following User Says Thank You to bcb For This Useful Post:
You must look it up for yourself. Accept ownership and question those who seem to believe they have power over you. It is an illusion. You call it crazy I call it freedom.
He has broken the contract (name calling) and is in dishonor. There are many ways to remedy a dishonor. Pulling out your jokes certainly isn't helping.
1. In debate, it is common that the arguments you present are supported by yourself. Simply presenting a location by which someone may look it up for themselves is not sufficient in my opinion. You require someone to wade through piles and piles of accusatory and inflammatory speak to find out the details that you're talking about. 90% of which is inconsequential and only serves to attempt to enrage the reader about the so called injustices of those who are behind these conspiracies.
2. BBS didn't call you a slave, he used an extreme example to illustrate the point of his argument. Your failure to understand that does not qualify as reason to abandon debate with him. It's petty on your part.
People have repeatedly asked you to provide direct evidence pertaining to your claims. This is common place in any form of argument, especially when engaging in written debate. Until you provide a direct link to the information you're speaking about rather than the main page of a website that may or may not be true (you can always trust everything on the internet 100%) you are not engaging anyone.
Engage us in a proper debate. I don't have time to read through all the mindless stuff you post to find out what you're talking about.
Example: The water thing. You posted a quote from the main page of the site you linked to. But when people asked you to name the judges/people who had been murdered, you just told them to find out for themselves. Well.. I tried. I found two names and that took me 15 minutes trying to decipher the stuff that was on that site, and there was no evidence as to the claims other than these people supposedly died while otherwise being completely healthy.
I mean come on. There are a lot of people who suddenly die of stroke, heart related problems, underlying conditions that were not previously discovered. There is no proof. Why do you believe it simply on the merit of the statement and not without direct evidence? These people don't have autopsy reports, and even if they did, your lot would claim that they were manipulated by the people trying to cover up their murderous tracks, again without proof, so how do you possibly believe this stuff to be true?
__________________
Who is in charge of this product and why haven't they been fired yet?
The Following User Says Thank You to kermitology For This Useful Post:
if you're no longer willing to debate people Tower perhaps we should close the thread?
Your choice - you can discuss the questions being posed or refuse to do so at which point we will lock it up.
The ball is in your court now.
Hardly, it is called an ultimatum. You are forcing an issue and allowing others not to be responsible for what negative things they say. I am holding them accountable if they wish to talk to me. One who wishes to communicate with me they must be respectable and agree to communicate as I'm not putting up with the hate anymore. That is how I play going forward. I have offered to continue discussion and it is called a conditional acceptance. Your comments are dishonorable as you wish to ignore that acceptance to discuss (which is odd that you'd make threats to shut this thread down as this only helps moderators by keeping peace),but I am not a mod and lack that programing control to stop you...
Quit the victim crap. If you are offended by a post report it - we will assess if it is against forum rules. And if you are no longer willing to debate the issues or answer questions then I see no reason to keep this open.
From what I see here everyone is treating you well enough - you seem to be finding an excuse not to answer valid questions.
Hardly, it is called an ultimatum. You are forcing an issue and allowing others not to be responsible for what negative things they say. I am holding them accountable if they wish to talk to me. One who wishes to communicate with me they must be respectable and agree to communicate as I'm not putting up with the hate anymore. That is how I play going forward. I have offered to continue discussion and it is called a conditional acceptance. Your comments are dishonorable as you wish to ignore that acceptance to discuss (which is odd that you'd make threats to shut this thread down as this only helps moderators by keeping peace),but I am not a mod and lack that programing control to stop you...
Here's what you need to do ....
Send a letter to CP (Bingo) and each of the moderators informing them that you are a Freeman-on-the-Land. Further inform them they you are not bound by their Acts (Forum rules) and that you do not grant them the authority to close any thread you are participating in, edit or delete any of your posts, or (god forbid) ever ban you from CP.
If you want to discuss, Tower, discuss. Back up an argument. Just one.
I've already asked you to show me the legal basis for some of your claims, you've yet to respond.
I've asked you to point out which justices, premiers and other politicians have been undone by the water thing. You've refused to respond.
You've been asked numerous times to show that your "freeman on the land" theory has any basis in the real world. You've been asked to provide documented evidence that such a belief system works within Canadian law.
If you won't respond to any of these, then Jiri is right. You're just wasting everyone's time with fantasy nonsense, and this thread should be shut down.
If you want to discuss, Tower, discuss. Back up an argument. Just one.
I've already asked you to show me the legal basis for some of your claims, you've yet to respond.
I've asked you to point out which justices, premiers and other politicians have been undone by the water thing. You've refused to respond.
You've been asked numerous times to show that your "freeman on the land" theory has any basis in the real world. You've been asked to provide documented evidence that such a belief system works within Canadian law.
If you won't respond to any of these, then Jiri is right. You're just wasting everyone's time with fantasy nonsense, and this thread should be shut down.
Incorrect, you have not agreed to my offer. We (you and I) are not in contract right now, as per my agreement previously. I offered to discuss. You must agree to continue.
As far as refusing to discuss with youz!!! Many of you are not inviting no matter how you FEEL about my position. Eg:
Thanks Tower, after reading the about him page I realized that I was behind on my monthly batsh%t crazy quota - (I trust he one who typed this got an infraction for this.)
Crackpots taking aim at the President is hardly new, or news.
I don't even think that JFK was a legitimate president, he was installed as the president by Satan himself to fullfull Joseph Kennedy's contract with him for Kennedy's soul. Then once it was fullfilled, Satan as a guy with an extreme sense of human threw tragedy after tragedy at the Kennedy family. (Guess this quote is serious and I should comment here)
You're a troll. The only difference between you and the majority of trolls is you spend a lot of time at your craft. - Give it a rest and go back to putting aluminum foil on your head and digging your fall out shelter.
Ahh yes, advising someone else to go do something you yourself lack the courage to try. (You have NO CLUE what I am doing)
APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
"It is obvious that this case has the potential to be converted into a class action on behalf of all military servicemen and women who require the means of establishing the legality of their orders with certainty."
"An officer does not swear to obey the orders of the President. Rather, he assumes the obligation to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic" (from post # 471) Qotes to it "It's obviously a hoax." No it is a lawyer fighting for the law of the land not admirality law.
"As has been said, you are welcome to withdraw your consent at any time by emigrating. " Why I own a part of canada... You can not force me out.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
