Freeman-on-the-Land - Mark of Toronto Truth Seekers

[/tab]

.


Freeman-on-the-Land

Mark of Toronto Truth Seekers
 

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--5iFc2Ng0[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM_7gVN780Q[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkqnNOMOp_w[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5EV0rN_JwU[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoOLF7wWY9w[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2usSD6sHMsg[/youtube]387w7wox]

[youtube:387w7wox]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aWwbQixez0[/youtube]387w7wox]

.
.

[/tab]

.


[youtube:1t2kzoow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aO1E8HEeF4[/youtube]1t2kzoow]


[youtube:1t2kzoow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS3_JyQmShM[/youtube]1t2kzoow]


[youtube:1t2kzoow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zzokkeAmV0[/youtube]1t2kzoow]


[youtube:1t2kzoow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR-2LfftYxU[/youtube]1t2kzoow]


[youtube:1t2kzoow]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiczTwQp-4w[/youtube]1t2kzoow]


.
.

[Christopher Marlowe]

My Black's Law dictionary, seventh edition, does not have an entry either for "human" or for "monster". It does have an entry for "natural person", which is a human being, and "artificial person", which is an entity created by law, such as a corporation, that is given certain rights and duties.

There is no entry for "job". There is an entry for "jobbery", which is "the practice or act of perverting a public service in a way that serves private ends; unfair means to serve private interests." That is close to what he asserts, but "jobbery" is obviously a different word from "job".

"employ" is not "deceit", but "1. to make use of. 2. to hire. 3. to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business. 4. to commission and entrust with the performance of certain acts or functions or with the management of one's affairs."

How can this guy make assertions that are plainly false?  Does he have a Black's Law Dictionary for Homeless people?

I'm a little suspicious of people who are so careless with the facts.

[/tab]

My Black's Law dictionary, seventh edition, does not have an entry either for "human" or for "monster". It does have an entry for "natural person", which is a human being, and "artificial person", which is an entity created by law, such as a corporation, that is given certain rights and duties.

There is no entry for "job". There is an entry for "jobbery", which is "the practice or act of perverting a public service in a way that serves private ends; unfair means to serve private interests." That is close to what he asserts, but "jobbery" is obviously a different word from "job".

"employ" is not "deceit", but "1. to make use of. 2. to hire. 3. to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business. 4. to commission and entrust with the performance of certain acts or functions or with the management of one's affairs."

How can this guy make assertions that are plainly false?  Does he have a Black's Law Dictionary for Homeless people?

I'm a little suspicious of people who are so careless with the facts.

Dear Chris, it depens on wich version/year/edition of Black's Law Dictionary we are looking at in relation to wich "law/by year" it applies, i e

at minute 01:04:50 they are commenting exactly this very same matter here

http://gnosticmedia.podomatic.com/player/web/2010-07-31T15_33_40-07_00
http://gnosticmedia.podomatic.com/playe ... 3_40-07_00



Here is more on Black's Law Dictionary differents editions:


[youtube:27ipx6us]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvMu9CUoJug[/youtube]27ipx6us]


Myself, I am very curious about knowing some particular editions, specially to grab the Black's law Dictionary editions of the years 1913 and 1933 because of the implications of what happened those very same years in the US and compare to what was on 1912 and 1914 editions and then 132 and 1934, and do some DIFF between those editions, what was then changed (by design) just to be "LAWFUL" and at the same time doing ILL on earth and humanity, makes me just wonder.


Bottomline: Like the Sea, this Law of the Sea is always changing, when identificating all the changes in this MAIN DICTIONARY you can very quick almost "feel" the deception on this one, a VERY BIG ONE

.
.

[targa2]

Definitions do not tell the whole story however. It all applies to the " status " of an individual and the acceptance of benefits,privileges, opportunities and immunities.  You can separate yourself from the system by rescinding your status as a citizen but as long as you accept any governmental benefit etc you are deemed to be acting as a citizen by virtue of your acceptance.   There is a Maxim in law regarding staus that says " you cannot go from something to nothing ".  If you renounce citizenship then what is your status as recognised by the court system you are pleading your case too.  There are over 100 benefits attached to the S.I.N . alone. Just having mail delivered to your home is accepting a benefit. There is a lot more to all of this that is not expressed in any statute.  It is an implication related to your action.  Your actions will snare you even if you think you are not a "person" in law.  If you act like a person you will be deemed to be one when confronted in a court.  If you act like a person and accept the benefits of a "person" then you are a peron.  Period.  I like Rob and I have spoken to him a couple times but I have also been shut out of his forums for telling people the deeper truths about law that he and his followers refuse to acknowledge.  

Try George Gordon instead.  He is light years ahead of Menard and the Think-free gang.  Sorry guys but I have been at this longer then Menards group has existed so I am not just blowing smoke here.  Maybe Rob can " frustrate " the legal process by being a vagabond, pot smoking Gypsy but try it with a home , wife and children and you'll soon get a dose of reality.  If you are not prepared for detaching yourself from your citizenship. bank account, mail service, O.H.I.P. ( thats Ontario Canada ) etc then forget this law stuff.  It will land you in bankrupcy, or maybe even prison.  This subject is esoterica extrodinaire and I do believe that the Illuminati  ( if there is such a thing ) are the holders of the secrets of the law.  That is the great secret we must learn to be set free.  These guys only have part of the puzzle.  Keep looking ,as I am though.  It's a step in the right direction.  Just don't be so sure you have " arrived" because you learned a little esoteric legal knowledge.  It's like learning a little Karate and then trying to beat up the  bouncer with a couple of roundhouses at the local bar when you are drunk. You will FALL DOWN !!!!!!  I DID !!!!!!!!!!!

[Christopher Marlowe]

targa2,

I am very interested in finding out more about this subject.

The main thrust of one video I watched seems to focus on getting out of any violations based on statutory law. The assertion is that statutory law is contract based, and the defendant is claiming not to be a party to any contract of that sort. Or something.  

Do you have any books you could point to that show the basis of the Freeman-on-the-Land-type Law?

I would appreciate any help here.
Thanks.

CM

[targa2]

Like I said. Go to George Gordons School of Law web site.  Just type in George Gordon and it will be in the top listings.  Listen to his " Introduction to George Gordon " series to start and then go from there.  He has won at the Supreme Court level and will really clear up this Patriot Mythology stuff that is rampant on the net. He has been at this for 30 plus years .  This is sound advice. Take it  and save yourself some harder lessons.

[Christopher Marlowe]

Who Is George Gordon?

 

George Gordon is the nation's foremost teacher of pro se courtroom strategy and procedure, a pioneer who taught himself the ins and outs of defending himself in court when Big Brother put him out of business. He is an author, lecturer, father and former corporate president. In 1979, he created Barrister's Inn in Boise, Idaho to teach civil law and courtroom strategy and procedure. In 1985, he moved to Isabella, Missouri, and created George Gordon's School of Law, which has been a leader in teaching individuals to successfully represent themselves in the civil court system.

George's experience over the years includes six cases of his that have gone to the U.S. Supreme Court and numerous others that have gone the distance in various state or federal courts. These have ranged from custody cases involving grandparents' rights, through Title 42 suits over civil rights violations by local or state authorities (one of which was even settled in gold), to cases on personal status. Some have even affected national courtroom procedure such as Gordon v. Idaho, 778 F2d 1397, in which the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an individual no longer has to take an oath or affirmation in court, if his reason for not taking it is based on the fact that the Bible (which they so kindly provide for you to swear on) says that you shouldn't swear oaths. If you add in the cases where students of his were parties to the action, the number goes into the hundreds, if not the thousands. Many questions as to an individual's status and his relationship with various governmental bodies have first been answered in cases involving George or his students.

In addition to teaching pro se litigation, George is also one of the nation's few teachers of the Mosaic Law. In fact, he is one of the only people in the United States, if not the world, to practice this Law in its entirety. This adherence to a Law and its attendant moral code (which was not done away with, no matter what is being taught in the churches out there) has made George a target of, yet virtually untouched by, both governmental and religious groups--something few people can claim.

George is a subsistence farmer using organic methods to practice land stewardship pursuant to the Scriptural land laws. He and his family are living peacefully in the Ozark Mountains of Missouri and are doing so without any Social Security Numbers, marriage licenses, business permits, insurance, innoculations, bank loans, credit cards, public school, government inspections, in fact, without any government intrusion into their lives. He observes the Mosaic Law and does not advocate, nor teach, anarchy, civil disobedience, or racism.

While he has successfully used common law pleadings in both state and federal courts, he is not now, nor has he ever been, associated with the erroneous 'common law courts' that have been springing up over the past few years, nor with such groups as the Montana Freemen or the 'Republic of Texas.' He is an individual and, as such, belongs to no groups. Also, contrary to what has been reported, he is not in hiding, he is not in prison (in fact, he has never been in prison, particularly not over taxes; his only confrontation with the IRS resulted in a win), and (to paraphrase Mark Twain) the reports of his death are greatly exaggerated. He is alive, doing well, and teaching classes in Isabella, Missouri.http://library.georgegordon.com/WHOIS

Mosaic Law?

Clueless.

[§N9sh2bj]

Great thread.

He's not clueless, and here's why:

I know we have a problem with jews and just consider, these people, specifically their group of rather nasty priests, who picked up the mantle of what we might suppose were the israelites and turned it into whatever it is today, have pushed into our heads there is only one definition of mosaic law, and that is their 'Mosaic Law (TM)'

Like you, I held reservations upon hearing and seeing people use the term 'mosaic law' for the first time outside of the rabbinical-messianic realm, from people who were definitely not behaving like jews at all. I was also willing to hear out what the other party had to say, since the particular man introducing it made some sense, and had no sense of deception about him. Like most people with (active) accounts at TIU, familiar with satanically-inspired mental trickery from past experiences.

Maybe 'original' perceptions of 'Mosaic Law (TM)' I had been handed, like their strict and monopolized definition of the 'Holocaust (TM)', was not the only one.

If from the word 'Mosaic' you innocently instead see 'moses', moses is an accepted father of the law throughout the middle-east, and I feel from research this has nothing to do with present day 'Ashkenazi's', and/or their the jewish priestly class who take the laws of moses (even their own colourably suspect versions) and turn those on their head. Then the dirty priests claim it's 'Mosaic Law (TM)' and certainly create the impression there is no other interpretation. The concept or existence and teachings of abraham and moses, while the present-day priestly class of rabbis would like to monopolize on it, just like they would like to monopolize on our concepts of medicine, law, teaching, media, and politics, is not theirs to monopolize on, no matter how they obscure the history or try to.

I tend to separate the present day rabbis and their claimed monopoly of 'Mosaic Law (TM)', from the peaceful and powerful people who are using what they claim is mosaic law, while creating surveys of themselves and putting themselves back into the correct dejure surveys, taking on the old land surveys and updating them as necessary, rediscovered the old original dejure land surveys and have easement into the UNITED STATES CORPORATION survey (U.S. CORP most obvious by the use of ZIP codes out of D.C.). And these processes are happening on australia, Oz, many commonwealth areas, and will most likely spread to other areas of the earth as well or have, as it knows no limits except the natural boundaries, which zionism/radical jewry seem to ignore to their self-injury.

I have not seen one rabbi ever referenced in the claims of people of the natural law / mosaic law perspective or 'camp' of george gordon or others (and there are many others in this field).

What these people do throughout their history is not so much as take over something as create a colourable fake and then get people to believe that is the real mccoy.

 

[§N9sh2bj]

In a system of bankruptcy, what do you have?
How is common law extended into a system where there is no money?

 

Targa2 might know.
I'm thinking /tab might know also.




What is common law replaced by in a system where there is no money?

Yes, Statutes and Codes exist on the surface, they are for the public, for the zombies.
And you can study them with your free time as these 'freemen' do.
Which is not to put them down I applaud their merit.

When the UNITED STATES went into another cycle of bankruptcy, and the people had stopped doing their own private surveys, instead doing corporate BIRTH CERTIFICATES, in exchange for a pittance of benefits designed to sucker them in, the future labour of the people was leveraged (by creation of the person, the U.S. Citizen, out of american nationals, then bundling and selling those on the banker's markets as 'agricultural investments', using them to finance war and debt and who-knows-what), there was no more money in circulation, there was only fiat.

I've given a whole bunch of hints hopefully without beating a dead horse.

[targa2]

We all must know by now that the Mosaic law is not practiced by the Jews If it was they would not have their Synagoges registered with the state for tax exemption. The state is " The Beast "   spoken of in Revelations and Daniel. The Jews practice Talmudism which is is a distortion of Mosaic law. Christianity does not practice they law because most of what they believe has been adopted from Mithraism.  George Gordon has got it right.  I have been studying " The Law " for 12 years and have faced the fire of bankruptcy and am still suffering for it. Since then I have dissected the flawed arguments proposed by these well meaning patriots ( some of them ) and have found that there is a real shortage of lawfully accurate info out there.  I was married to these flawed arguments and simply believed the justice system to be totally corrupt.  It is a bitter pill to swallow when you must finally face the prospect that it is " I " who am wrong and not the law.

The law is Biblically based LIKE IT OR NOT. The rest is the history of the practice and usage of the law and our refusal to follow some basic guidelines.  You cannot avoid the imposition of some sort of Law on your life any more than you can get around the Law of Gravity.  The question is, which law will I  ( or have I ) pledge ( d )  allegiance to and how did that happen.  The Mosaic law speaks to the flesh and blood " MAN ".  You will never see the term  " MAN " used in a Statute.  Never !!!!!!!!!!   You are a " person, individual, natural person, human " etc in statute law.( all legal fictions )  Never a man or women.  How can this be an accident?  How can man made law write millions of statutes and never slip up crossing this boundary " BECAUSE THE FUCKING LEGISLATORS KNOW " that they can't cross that line. They deal in fiction, not flesh and blood.

God deals in flesh and blood " because HE CREATED IT ".  Mans law deal in FICTION and FICTIONAL CHARACTERS............THEY CREATED THEM.

Forget about God and think....CREATOR.   What we create ....we own and control.

The term human is used only once in the end of the book of Jonah and it is clear why when you read it.  It says several times that " god is no respecter of "persons " in scripture. Why ? Because the Greek term " Persona " means " the mask of the actor " which is not the " Man " that God knows. It is an actor.  Funny thing is.....that the first three words in almost every statute are "  IN THIS ACT !!! ".....  ACT ..... ACTOR ?....FICTION.....ALL THE WORLDS INDEED A STAGE AND WE ARE MERELY PLAYERS ?....  Ever wonder what the origins of the word " world " are.  It is far two old Germanic terms that translate to " Old Man "  "OLD MAN ?...... NEW MAN ? AS IN... BORN AGAIN ?  Christ ( or more accurately Emmanuel ) said I am not of " THIS WORLD ".  Did he mean the world of Natural Man. The carnal world of primal beastly, unlawful man. The " OLD Man".... before " The Law " was imparted to him..


This stuff is not easy to understand from the thumbnail sketches of an armchair internet warrior such as myself, but mark my words  , the Law is where the secret to our freedom lies and if you spent a week with me I would show you a truth you could not deny.  My new partner at work thought I was nuts 6 months ago. Now he hangs on every word I say because I broke through his former notions.  He laughs when he hears me debate with groups of people and comments on the outcome afterward.  The truth is hard to hear and impossible to deny.

[targa2]

Answer to the question " what replaces the common law in a system of bankruptcy ."  I would have to say " the Law Merchant"  However. There is a distinction between " The Common Law " and " Anglo Saxon Common Law"  from what I have studied.  If you read the beginning of the Bills Of Exchange Act it says that it comports with " The Common Law " and " The Law Merchant " .

  If you read the  " History of the Court of Saint Ives " you will see how the practice and usage of the merchant law eventually infiltrated the Anglo Saxon Law.  

The Norman Conquest was another pivotal blow to Common Law.  Again , the Jews brought their unique form of commercial law into England again and it tore apart the fabric of their society.

[§N9sh2bj]

HI TARGA2

For god's sakes, someone with brains responding with solutions.

It's not that many others don't have brains, it's that they don't work on the solutions! And there are more than one solution, while the jew/criminal disinfo campaign would have you think it's "just existentialist or nutters with their guns and butter. (TM)" as the only one.

" what replaces the common law in a system of bankruptcy ." I would have to say " the Law Merchant"

Equity exists in the private, when there is no remedy 'at law' / in the public. Benefits only exist in the public, and rights only exist in the private. And the easiest way into equity is with private trusts. (Not post-1933 statutory equity, this is something colourable the public agents and officers came up with probably to further obscure common law remedies.)

The common law is superseded by equity in a system where their is no lawful money, however only in the private. You can't go blazing into a court challenging jurisdiction, for instance. I mean, you could but the judge will at first give you a warning, then maybe 'recommend' up to a psych evaluation if you persist in a public courtroom cause YOU MUST BE CRAZY IF YOU THINK YOU CAN TALK ABOUT COMMON LAW RIGHTS AMONGST A BUNCH OF ZOMBIES IN THE SEATS IN THE BACK WHO BROUGHT THEIR BAG LUNCH AND ARE 'CITIZEN/VOTERS' and think Federal Reserve Notes's are 'money'. Do you want to cause a riot?

Also, you are probably being adversarial.

You have to get out of the adversarial and creditor/debtor mentality. Why would you fight if you are the boss? Those are both in the public. Right - don't they have a bread and circuses approach, like the 'forced vaccine' approach, for the swine, for the zombies? I'm not saying people are swine, but basically too many of them behave often enough as the jew kissenger says 'Useless eaters'. They don't educate themselves.

Now its changing slightly as many have lost their warm place to sleep at night.
Frankly, I'm glad. I've been suffering many years with the zombies and slow erosion, waiting for them to wake up.


Study the equitable maxims (of all places, on wikipedia there is a helpful page). Those enumerate your rights in the private you can call upon them to move the court into the private 'when there is no remedy at law, invoke equity'. Then you are the boss, as in reality, it is your commercial credit, your energy, the whole system runs on. The general deposits I wrote about earlier, the birth certificates, the marriage licenses, have been bundled up and sold through the DTC on the market as 'Agricultural investments'.

In the private, at-law attorneys cant speak (or you can object if they do) fictions can't be heard, only real men. Just the opposite of the public, where only fictions can be heard (who wants to stand in for position of 'defendant'?).
http://21silver.com/guests/alfred_adask/beneficiaries_vs_trustees.html
READ THIS

A lot of the patriot stuff daryl is posting is accurate but a little old as far as actual technique, for the above reasons.

For instance, with the video posted from '93 of 'John Quade' - when you transfer to god's law, the god of nature, of nature's law, you transfer to a different survey. You should have your own survey documents (nativity documents, lawful union documents, something similar to how houses used to write the information in the Bible). If you are just out there, with no survey, then the first thing the police want to do is take your height, weight, eye colour, hair colour. They are doing a survey of a 'foreign object' which has no survey of it's own. Similarly, you must resurvey your land, in the traditional way of metes and bounds, take the street address and mailbox off of it. There is some work in that direction being done to recover the rural routes. I imagine if daryl looked hard enough, he could find the pre-Société (pre-corporate) survey of his land, and since he possesses the farmhouse and land in-fact, he is entitled to move to that survey. No more the public agents telling him whether he can use his well for water. My understanding is it infers the same level as diplomatic immunity, creates a country, or maybe more accurately, moves him back to the lawful region of france (the parish) and out of the de facto democracy. However, it is important not to breach the trust; some people had de jure vehicle plates but were carrying de facto identification which they presented; you can't try and mix and match jurisdictions as they probably had no idea (Zombies are not a good fit for the de jure, they belong in the de facto), it's one or the other. Like john said, it's the law of nature's god/god's law/mosaic law/not to be confused with rabbi law/the law of nature, or man's Codes.


One guy is having a lot of success shutting down cases filing a Notice of Withdrawal, however, it looks like he may not know the rest of it. The full thing is summarized as a Notice of Withdrawal, and then once into the private side, claiming, withdrawing, and redepositing as a special deposit, whatever it is they are holding with your signature. You never intended the traffic ticket, the birth certificate, or the marriage license to be used as a check for whatever purpose they want. You intended it to be used as a special deposit for a special purpose, in the case of a ticket, to be merged with the public side of the case, and extinguish the debt, since there is no money in the public, there is only your credit in the trust in the private which everything rides on. You are the grantor, baby!

The Notice of Withdrawal is the first step, however it is surmised the Court cases have been shut down by the Judge, (keep in mind he really only makes recommendations the whole time, as he is an administrative judge only), because 'in the Court's opinion', that kind of information cannot be let out into the public / to the zombies.

Maybe they will be ready for it soon, who knows? I hear of people being offered article III judges, as we get ready to move to a common law currency.

                   

[targa2]

John Quade is another guy who had it right.   The best way to get an understanding of the nature of the Adhesion Contract " Is to read the book " Invisible Contracts" by George Mercier.  Google it.  Although George was  Mormon his analysis of the problem was dead on.  Turns out his connection to the Mormon Church , with it's 501 c3 status ,was part of his undoing in his battle, but his knowledge of the law was right.  

 I will repeat something I said before about " Status" in law. " You cannot go from something to nothing ".  This is a Maxim of law.  A Maxim of law , for those of you unschooled in this area, is a basic premise that has been adjudicated with consistent results so many times that is not debated any longer. An absolute , unyielding truth that never varies. These span the boundaries of all jurisdictions as foundation premises.  

If your status in law is " citizen " and you accept the benefits of citizenship, then all the  trickery in the world ( commercial paper trickery included )will not change that status. You would have to have a different status, that is recognizable to the court you are pleading to in order to make a claim that you are " something" .....other than a citizen.  Otherwise you would be nothing....and " you cannot go from something to nothing"  Just claiming that you are not a citizen or some other legal fiction means you are now " nothing" and you cannot be nothing ( no-thing ). You would have to be an idiot to stand in front of a judge and claim that you are no-thing. You are some- thing or who the hell is he talking to. The judge would have to be suffering from a massive hallucination to believe that you are no-thing.    So then.....if you are NOT a citizen.......then WHAT ARE YOU ?    What did the Oracle in the movie The Matrix say to Neo about this.  Her sign said " Know thyself ".   Most of us have no idea what we are in terms of law , and that my friends, is the basis of the whole problem.  What difference would it make to a man who was totally unplugged from the system and completely self reliant which way the "Political Wind " was blowing.  Not much .

Problem is..... the topic of law is dry, confusing and full of downright nonsense on most of the internet sites, so it is hard to sift through the bulls--- to get any real truth. Most people end up getting hurt following bad knowledge and advise.   I have " been there , done that" and won't be making that mistake again.