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.

 

Important Freeman On The Land Definitions And Information

page: 2
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 03:54 AM
link   
YES!!

I am glad that I found this thread! Especially since it seems that everyone has been posting on here recently.

Star and flag OP, also I added everyone on this thread as a friend. This is serious stuff and we need to ban together and protect one another and our republic.

Right now I am tired but I am going to post some information relating to this topic tomorrow.




posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Alright, I am going to start with the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence to lay the groundwork for what I believe to be the original idea of citizenship in these united states:


WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


First off I would like to talk about the concept of "Rights." The biggest question is,"where do our 'Rights' come from?" I have heard many responses from people, everything from the Constitution, to the President, to the Military. To set the record straight it is important to note that we were endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights.

Online Dictionary

en·dow (n-dou)
tr.v. en·dowed, en·dow·ing, en·dows
1. To provide with property, income, or a source of income.
2.
a. To equip or supply with a talent or quality: Nature endowed you with a beautiful singing voice.
b. To imagine as having a usually favorable trait or quality: endowed the family pet with human intelligence.


So we were equipped by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights. Now the concept of a "Creator" is the concept of an absolute, highest authority. That there is no man, nor institution of man, with the authority necessary to strip you of your Rights...unless of course you volunteer them away for which you have every Right to do so.

So think of this in terms of jurisdiction, we the people fall under the jurisdiction of our Creator and Natural Law, with the Government falling under our jurisdiction because they derive their just Powers from us.

So what happened? The answer to that question is actually quite simple because it all goes back to the Fourteenth Amendment Section 1.


The Fourteenth Amendment "Civil Rights"

The Fourteenth Amendment was proposed on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


I have a copy of Black's Law Dictionary, Third Pocket Edition, so lets take a look at some of these terms:


jurisdiction, n. 1. A government's general power to exercise authority over all persons and things within its territory.



privilege. 1. A special legal right, exemption, or immunity granted to a person or class of persons; an exception to a duty.



grant, vb. 1.To give or confer (something), with or without compensation. 2. To formally transfer (real property) by deed or other writing. 3. To permit or agree to. 4 To approve, warrant, or order (a request, motion, etc.).


Now it is interesting to note that the Fourteenth Amendment was originally meant for the slaves that had been freed right after the Civil War. It was designed for them a new citizenship that placed them under the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. Black US Citizens were some of the first people in the United States to have gun permits, marriage licenses and voter registration. Reason being is because the unalienable Rights that sovereign white men enjoyed were being granted to the newly freed slaves.

Now in regard to marriage licenses, if two white people "got married" it was considered a Common Law marriage:


common-law marriage. A marriage that takes legal effect, without license or ceremony, when two people capable of marrying live together as spouses, intend to be married, and hold themselves out to others as a married couple.


When to black people got married it was considered "animal husbandry." But when a white person wanted to marry a black person they had to have "State permission" because of the two different citizenship statuses at play.

Also, a marriage license is a contract and the children between the two parties being wed are considered the "the contract bearing fruit." The children of such contracts became the lawful property of the State who had a vested interest in the education of their property.

So, in a nutshell, we have used our right to contract to unknowingly volunteer ourselves as Fourteenth Amendment citizens.

If you have a marriage license.

If you have a driver's license.

If you have a gun permit.

If you have a Social Security Number.

If you are a registered voter.

You are volunteering yourself as a US Citizen under the jurisdiction of the Fourteenth Amendment and you do not have "unalienable Rights." You have "privileges" and "immunities" GRANTED to you by the Federal Government.

And what the Federal Government Granteth they can taketh away.






[edit on 2/16/2010 by dalan.]



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Yes! Please post MORE information! I have been researching this stuff for years and I want to do it! I have a question:

I am living in a foreign country. I don't really want to go back to the police state of the USSA, but I will if I have to. Would I be able to perform the entire redemption of my strawman through the mail without having to appear in person?

I've been out of the country for over five years. Any driver's licenses are expired by now. I have never registered to vote. I've always been against the system, I could tell it was all crooked since I was a little kid. I always had under the table type jobs. I am over forty and I have NEVER filed a tax return. I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN. I was also a licensed Merchant Marine officer but that is expired too.

Can I do this just through the mail? I could have a buddy in the US actually do the registered mail thing etc. after emailing him the documents. Is this possible?



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?


Dereks do not come here and derail this thread, if you have something to say add to the discussion and skip the insults.

So what about the Freeman Movement is nonsense?



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?


I was not asking you, Mr thread derailer. And I will give up the US passport if that's what it takes. I'm never coming back.

Now, any REAL information here?



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptChaos

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?


I was not asking you, Mr thread derailer. And I will give up the US passport if that's what it takes. I'm never coming back.

Now, any REAL information here?


Here is a good website for you to look at:

www.notmygovernment.us...



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Excellent thread. Have wondered about the lack of freeman and strawman an similar info on ATS.

I have some links to add myself;

www.tpuc.org - great discussion forum and links and info about freeman status, legalese speak... most stuff you'd need.
www.fmotl.com -straight cut and straightforward basic wake em up site.

John Harris - it's an illusion. All about freeman and how to deal with the system.




I am in the process of discovering the matrix of consent in New Zealand...

[edit on 18/2/10 by GhostR1der]



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by sybiss0705
 

Just wondering what part of Canada are you in? Im looking to get some core people together to discuss and share experiences. Give me a shout.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Amazing information. I am wondering what if any of it would apply to a Uk citizen. Much of your information concerns US laws and your constitution, so Im wondering how would any actions of support for such a stance be legal in the UK?


Respects



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
The OP has a misconception about what the common law and how it operates. The Common Law is the law that developed in England during the middle ages. It came to America and continued to flourish in state courts to this day.

The very basis of the common law are writs the kings issued. The writs were not very specific. This gave the common law judges plenty of room for interpretation. Over the centuries, judges interpretations became more complex. Judges began to take these interpretations as binding precedent, thus these interpretations ended up becoming rules with the force of law.

The common law is still influential in US courts today. US courts are still bound by precedent. US courts will still follow common law rules unless a Legislature makes a rule contrary to the common law rule. The US and state constitutions only give courts the authority to interpret rules, not make them. Thus, a legislature's rule will trump a common law rule because a common law rule is merely an interpretation of a writ issued by a king centuries ago.



posted on Mar, 7 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


Are criminal or civil cases based on Common Law or are they based on contractual Law?

I think you are a lawyer, correct?

Also, a question, on what basis of the Constitution did the IRS Courts eliminate the basic tenet of jury trials?

If you could answer I would appreciate it. Thanks in advance.



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 28 2010 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by dalan.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?


Dereks do not come here and derail this thread, if you have something to say add to the discussion and skip the insults.

So what about the Freeman Movement is nonsense?


Oh, no you don't. You don't get to do that, buddy. He's not derailing anything. It's all or nothing when declaring yourself a freeman. There are many truths, and the one you pick is the one that parallels your beliefs. How about telling everyone what they DON'T get as a freeman on the land, i.e. insurance for you and your family? Don't sugarcoat it. Being a freeman is a hard truth that not everyone, myself included, is willing to do to their family.

/Q

[edit on 28-8-2010 by Quaght]



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quaght

Originally posted by dalan.

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by CaptChaos
I think the only thing they have on me is the birth certificate and SSN.


Are you also going to give up your USA passport and citizenship? Or just the freeman nonsense?


Dereks do not come here and derail this thread, if you have something to say add to the discussion and skip the insults.

So what about the Freeman Movement is nonsense?


Oh, no you don't. You don't get to do that, buddy. He's not derailing anything. It's all or nothing when declaring yourself a freeman. There are many truths, and the one you pick is the one that parallels your beliefs. How about telling everyone what they DON'T get as a freeman on the land, i.e. insurance for you and your family? Don't sugarcoat it. Being a freeman is a hard truth that not everyone, myself included, is willing to do to their family.

/Q

[edit on 28-8-2010 by Quaght]


The only thing that you don't get is Government Benefits. He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantage. But that does not seem like such a bad thing. And figuring that you do not have to pay an income tax, so your labor is not being stolen from you, you will provide just fine for your family without their benefits. Insurance, though, is something else entirely. Insurance is a service that one pays for, and is also a private contract between you and your insurer...so uh, even freemen can buy insurance.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Nice work!

Iv just started looking into this and I find it verry usefull.

I cant understand why more peopel on here havnt looked into this? A lot of people on here complain about the govts wrong doings to them selves and others but none of them have to consent to any of it.

I think it gives an understanding of why we have these conspiracy sites in the first place.



posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I am glad I found this post. Been looking in to this for a few weeks, I think it will be a great path to follow.. Just have a few things on my mind about my family... Now, can you use the system when you want to better the transition??? hmmmmm



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: kozmo
NICELY DONE!!! S&F for you friend! I have been preaching this for nearly a decade and people are finally beginning to understand what is happening here. Most are not aware that they are being governed as a corporation simply because they have entered into contract with USG (The corporation representing the US government) at the time of their birth and have created and reaffirmed that contract dozens of times over.

When their birth was "Registered" as opposed to "Recorded" they became the surety and property of USG to use as collateral. As a result they were issued a Social Security number which is the same thing as a companies EIN. This gave the USG the legal authority to use each "Citizens" personal exemption as collateral to borrow money from the Federal Reserve.


Where is the evidence for this?


Something happened in 1933 that changed everything in the United States. Roosevelt ammended the "Trading With The Enemies Act" with Executive Order 6102 that made owning gold illegal.


Not really, it simply restricted the amount that people could own. ANyway this all changed between 1964-1974, when Roosevelt's amendments were repealed:


The private ownership of gold certificates was legalized in 1964. They can be openly owned by collectors but are not redeemable in gold. The limitation on gold ownership in the U.S. was repealed after President Gerald Ford signed a bill to "permit United States citizens to purchase, hold, sell, or otherwise deal with gold in the United States or abroad" with an act of Congress codified in Pub.L. 93–373, which went into effect December 31, 1974.


(Source).

So Executive Order 6102 is now abrogated, and completely irrelevant.


A few days later, HR 1491 was passed by the legislature solidifying the President's executive authority over the banking sector.


No, HR 1491 was the Emergency Banking Relief Act.


Finally, in June of that same year Roosevelt signed HJR 192 which basically states that only the government can discharge debts and as a result, holds ALL title to all property. In other words, you own nothing and hold only "Allodial Title".


Evidence please. I cannot find any record of HJR 192 from a legitimate source.


The next piece of this complex puzzle occured in 1938 with the US Supreme Court ruling in the Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins decision which basically made Contract Law the supreme law of the land overturning nearly a century of civil legal precedent.


No, the ruling on Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins established the basis of diversity jurisdiction, which became the law of the land. The Wikipedia article even states this. It has nothing to do with contract law.


Next, Title 5 - United States Code - Chapter 5, sections 511-599 the Administrative Procedures Act solidified our governance under commercial law and effectively ended the fullredress of grievances and empowering agencies outside of the courts to create, interpret and enforce their own laws.


Wrong again. The Administrative Procedures Act actually 'governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations' and 'grants the judiciary oversight over all agency actions.' The agencies covered under this Act are all government agencies, and they are subject to the courts.


A little more than a decade later, the final stones were laid creating the foundation of a government run almost exclusively under the Uniform Commercial Code. This code sets forth the notion that all behavior is commerce-related and subject to the full jurisdiction of the laws, regulations, statutes and codes contained in the UCC.


No, that's completely false.


In 1965 Silver was removed as a means of paying debt


No, the 1965 Coinage Act simply 'eliminated silver from dimes and quarters, and reduced the silver content from 90% to 40% in the Kennedy Half Dollar.'


and, as a result, UCC became the supreme governing law relating to all banking and fiduciary functions. The courts were permanently joined in admiralty/administrative and civil law.


No, that's completely false.


Next, in 1966 the Federal Tax Lien Act brought the full monetary and taxation system under the UCC.


No it didn't, that's nonsense. This is what the Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966 achieved:


Prior to passage of the Federal Tax Lien Act in 1966 the Internal Revenue Service took the position that its lien had priority over an interest under an after acquired property clause with respect to all assets acquired by the taxpayer after recording of its notice of lien.

The Federal Tax Lien Act created a limited exception to that rule. A secured lender under an after acquired property clause will have priority over the federal tax lien with respect to any property acquired within 45 days after recording of the notice.

Therefore, to assure continued priority in inventory, accounts receivable or other after acquired collateral lenders would be well advised to check for filings every 45 days and to take immediate collection action if a tax lien notice is recorded.


(Source).


This is cumbersome legal wrangling that essentially places you and anything you think you own under full authority of the federal government via the IRS and other "administrative bodies" as appropriate. In other words, the ability to levy tax and lay lien were now governed by the laws of commerce.


Completely untrue.

You have not provided a single piece of evidence for your claims. Where is the evidence?
edit on 17-9-2016 by MongolianPaellaFish because: fixed broken bbcode tag

edit on 17-9-2016 by MongolianPaellaFish because: fixed typo



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: dalan.To set the record straight it is important to note that we were endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable Rights.


How do you intend to prove this? And which Creator are we talking about? The Creator of Buddhism? Of Hinduism? Of Judaism? Of Christianity? Of Islam? Of...???

If you believe we were given rights by our Creator, can you show me the evidence that this Creator gave us the right to bear arms? Where is the evidence for this? Oh wait: no you can't show me the evidence, because there isn't any, because the right to bear arms was an amendment written by humans!
edit on 17-9-2016 by MongolianPaellaFish because: added some other stuffs



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
The freeman woo has not worked anywhere. see


In the Canadian court case Meads v. Meads, Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Associate Chief Justice John D. Rooke used the phrase "Organised Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments" (OPCA) to describe the techniques and arguments used by freemen in court[3] describing them as frivolous and vexatious.[4][5][6] There is no recorded instance of freeman tactics being upheld in a court of law;[7] in refuting one by one each of the arguments used by Meads, Rooke concluded that "a decade of reported cases, many of which he refers to in his ruling, have failed to prove a single concept advanced by OPCA litigants."[8]


Remember the OPPT scam, pushed here and on the internet a few years ago? As was forecast, that collapsed into nothing
edit on 17-9-2016 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join