It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's illegal to use a legal name. Odd billboards appearing in UK with cryptic message.

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

And if you don't give your name, or give a false name, it is fraud. The whole "free men of the land" thing is about not giving a name so you can't be charged. It doesn't work.

Research it people.




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Azureblue

And if you don't give your name, or give a false name, it is fraud. The whole "free men of the land" thing is about not giving a name so you can't be charged. It doesn't work.

Research it people.


Failing to give a name is not fraud.

If this is not a legitimate tactic to use in court why are people are having success with it?

Would appreciate your view on why the magistrate refused to give a simple yes no answer? '

Why did the magistrate not charge the bloke with fraud and or with contempt of court and put him away for the maximum permitted by law?

Perhaps you might like to go to loosethename.com and listen to some of the success stories people have had with it.

There is an opportunity to learn something at that site and further one knowledge. Your choice friend, either way is fine with me.
cheers



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: grainofsand

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: paraphi

But it's true many travellers get away with stuff that others get fined for precisely because of this.

Only because the cops and local authority can't be arsed with them, and just hope they move to the next county soon with little fuss or expense lol.
Various family groups stop for a week or two in my parts every year and usually leave before the council has to waste money on any legal fees...it seems to be a reasonable arrangement to me.

...parked in my front yard or blocking my street then I would have an issue.



Also because they have "gypsy liaison officers" who come to their aid over any thing and claim racial harrasment" it's easier for the cops to let them off than deal with the additional paperwork.

I know a few gypsys and they say the liason officer is like a get out of jail free card.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

So you want people to go check it out so they can get out of paying fines?

How about this....don't break the law and you won't be in court in the first place.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
A bloke appeared in court in the UK recently and he was asked to state his name so he said "before I can answer that I need you to tell me if I can use the legal name? The magistrate refused to answer and eventually walked out of court.


Cite? Which court? Which magistrate? What was the bloke's name?


When they ask you "do understand," you think they are asking you if you comprehend but this is where a little deceit comes in. They are asking you if you "Stand Under" the jurisdiction of the court so when you say 'yes' they've got you by the short and curelys.


Your reference for that silly claim is what?

rationalwiki.org...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
why are people are having success with it?


They are? Of course you are able to show proof that people are having success with it.... by showing a actual court case?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Azureblue
why are people are having success with it?


They are? Of course you are able to show proof that people are having success with it.... by showing a actual court case?



I looked into this a few years ago and actually met quite a few "freemen". Any "evidence" is anecdotal at best, it's all based on misinterpretation of old laws and skewing the truth to attempt to avoid owning up to responsibilities.

The one guy I knew best who was a "freeman" talked a good talk but when it came to the crunch he bottled it and paid his fines like a good little monkey.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Kester




I think they traded them to private financiers as security for loans of fiat currency subject to interest, mathematically un-payable under the current system and therefore resulting in ever-increasing perception of national debt. The debt is payable by creation of government issued fiat currency handed back to the private financier


I have been lately thinking there may be some element of truth behind this. Governments are encouraged to borrow money making promises to the electors with unfunded schemes. After compounding interest and little incentive for governments to pay off the accrued debt, when all the Public assets are sold off (privatization) why does the Banker keep lending money. Obviously the prudent Banker knows that there must be some mechanism to be repaid. Enter the future "taxpaying ability" of the worker.

If through statistical analysis a persons "labour/taxation" is known to be about 40-50 years, the Bankers knows based on people of working age and GDP that the Loan will be serviced. Its funny how they rarely demand the original capital be repaid.

After privatization what does the Baker fall back on - The Citizen (taxpayer) - makes you think hmmm.....



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue





A bloke appeared in court in the UK recently and he was asked to state his name so he said "before I can answer that I need you to tell me if I can use the legal name? The magistrate refused to answer and eventually walked out of court.

All that was required of the magistrate was a plain and simple yes or no answer but they refused to answer at all, why??????


Can you point me to the particular case - names, magistrate dates. I am really keen on investigating this further - I've always had trouble finding an actual case that got thrown out.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Azureblue





A bloke appeared in court in the UK recently and he was asked to state his name so he said "before I can answer that I need you to tell me if I can use the legal name? The magistrate refused to answer and eventually walked out of court.

All that was required of the magistrate was a plain and simple yes or no answer but they refused to answer at all, why??????


Can you point me to the particular case - names, magistrate dates. I am really keen on investigating this further - I've always had trouble finding an actual case that got thrown out.


I agree, lots of anecdotal evidence but I never came across an actual case that was thrown out and the sole reason was because of the freeman argument.

It is a few years since I looked into it though so maybe there has been some success in the mean time.

I would not hold your breath for some evidence however.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue



Why did the magistrate not charge the bloke with fraud and or with contempt of court and put him away for the maximum permitted by law?


Id like to read more about this particular case! Do you have any information on it that I could look into? Id like to be able to show other people the undeniable evidence
Cant WAIT to see the looks on their faces!
The names of the magistrate and the man in court, the case number, you know, stuff like that so I can give people the information and tell them "Go look it up if you don't believe me! Its right there on the official government website!" Or maybe some kind of FOIA request could be done, in order to get the details? Do you have anything like FOIA in the UK?



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: Azureblue





A bloke appeared in court in the UK recently and he was asked to state his name so he said "before I can answer that I need you to tell me if I can use the legal name? The magistrate refused to answer and eventually walked out of court.

All that was required of the magistrate was a plain and simple yes or no answer but they refused to answer at all, why??????


Can you point me to the particular case - names, magistrate dates. I am really keen on investigating this further - I've always had trouble finding an actual case that got thrown out.


Losethename.com - Scroll down to "Victories" and watch, listen, & read stories from all around the world, including a one Australian blokes experience.

kate of gaia (.com) linked on Losethename.com. Apart from that feel free to choose to do; or not do; your own research.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 03:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

Already done my research.

What I found was amazing. All of those success stories.

But no information to see if they were real cases or just literal stories.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
Losethename.com - Scroll down to "Victories" and watch, listen, & read stories from all around the world,



So in fact there are no court cases, just claims by people with nothing to back them up!



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: Azureblue

So you want people to go check it out so they can get out of paying fines?

How about this....don't break the law and you won't be in court in the first place.


I don't 'want' anything mate apart from making people aware of something that may benefit from.

What I dont understand is why you come across as somebody who feels they have to 'defend' something? You need to understand that I don't care what you think about loosing the name or anything else. I merely seek to inform and alert.

Seems that with you I have stuck a soft spot. Please note that you do not need to defend anything, you have my permission to believe or disbelieve anything you wish, if you feel you need it. No one is attacking you, there is no reason to be afraid and be defensive.

Other than that I can only conclude that you feel you are a defender of the public good or, that you feel this loose the name thing poses a threat to in some way.

Take it easy and breathe.

best of luck for the future.



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 04:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
I merely seek to inform and alert.


You have done neither, just pointed out a site where people have made claims, that they are unable to back up with any evidence!

Just like all the other times other gullible people have been pushing the freeman woo here.

edit on 17-3-2016 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue

So you want to inform people it's ok to commit fraud to get out of fines?

What about identity theft? Is that ok?

What about having a car with no insurance? If I hit a child and kill them is it ok for me to just give a false name?

I also noted you failed to give any evidence that was asked for. Is that because there isn't any?



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Azureblue




Apart from that feel free to choose to do; or not do; your own research.


Why should I? You're the one saying the "guy appeared in a court somewhere...."



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 06:18 AM
link   
Evidence v anecdote, what a load of bollocks.

All evidence in these cases are anecdote because under English law, if the accused or the respondent is not found guilty, the case must be expunged from the court records, meaning there is no evidence available for public consumption!

Total stitch up to prevent Truth surfacing and con the common man into compliance.



posted on Mar, 18 2016 @ 06:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: teapot
because under English law, if the accused or the respondent is not found guilty, the case must be expunged from the court records,


Of course you can show us this "English law"....



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join