New Zealand Freeman-on-the-land

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 6 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Mythkiller
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 



Kiri Lee Campbell $15 Million Court Case settled in ‘Private’”
pbr2013i2e.wordpress.com...




doesn't look like it to me - all your page says is that she "notified" the authorities that the case was settled privately - nothing at all about the courts then backing off - in fact she was sentenced to 200 hrs community service

the bank involved wasn't party to the case as they suffered no damage, and no doubt didn't want to bother with the BS - but there's a lit of very ordinary very real people who this stupid cow ripped off who have every right to be persisted off at her!

Myth I hope you get everything you deserve!




posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by xenanz
 


cannot access your video because it is private can you help me to view please



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Mythkiller
Also the OPPT (one peoples public trust) are doing some amazing work



Oh dear, have you fallen to the OPPT scam? You must not realise all their UCC filings were cancelled, and anyway the UCC is a USA code, it has no effect in New Zealand!

Care to show us this "amazing work" the OPPT are doing?
Have you got your $5billion in gold yet?

I still have not seen that Boehner is the interim President.... did the OPPT lie about that also?

As for Kiri Campbell - you seem to have missed where she pleaded guilty to fraud, and was sentenced to 200 hours community service!
www.stuff.co.nz...


There has been a whole thread about it here
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 12-10-2013 by hellobruce because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Mythkiller
 


Hi, first I want to say I am a supporter of the FMOTl movement, I believe it is a valid thing.

I have to wonder however about the drastic nature of lawful rebellion however, as I do believe there is scope to be a FMOTL without rejecting sovereignty.

That being said, I want to question you on one inconsistency.

you said


So the fact is that no laws passed by Britain are valid in New Zealand or Australia, nor have they been since 1920 and yet we still operate under the Crown British law system,


However, this includes the Magna Carta from which right of the FMOTL were derived, and which all but 2 articles have been superseded. However even if intact, and no British law is valid by definition in Australia, this cannot be used as a basis of right to lawful rebellion against the Sovereign. Instead you would have to look to the "articles of Sovereignty" of New Zealand, to determine the rights and responsibilities of the person within that Sovereignty.

Would be interested to see what you have found in this regard.

Cheers, and keep it up
JF



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   
For anyone incline to go down this path, I recommend a thorough reading of the following judgement; Even tho this is a Canadian case it will still be used as persuasive for any future prosecution of similar "Free-Mans" or "Sovereign Citizen" cases occurring within common law jurisdictions:

www.albertacourts.ab.ca...

Its a long judgement, but it addresses several points of law relating to these types of cases.



posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 04:44 AM
link   
I'm a freegan, freeman, , hippy, philosopher, shaman, Tibetin fire yogi..... so don't mess with me!




posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 04:58 AM
link   
For an interesting take on how to define and achieve "freedom" lagally, I did an analysis on this tread.

ATS - Nexum & Public Vessels




posted on Oct, 12 2013 @ 05:01 AM
link   
More on NZ sovereignty:

Although it remains a matter for ongoing constitutional and legal debate, the weight of evidence suggests the Statute of Westminster did more than simply give legal form to New Zealand’s sovereign status. A number of legislative difficulties – both constitutional and in the international fields – were resolved by the Statute.

Before the Statute was passed by the British Parliament – and arguably until the New Zealand Parliament passed the Statute of Westminster Adoption Act in 1947 – the New Zealand Parliament was not a sovereign parliament. It did not have the capacity to make all law, and there were some laws that it could not unmake.

Emphaisis mine, but please note that this is the NZ governments own website:
www.parliament.nz...

I'm Australia so I don't know much about NZ legal history, but I'm intrigued to read more...



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   

JakiusFogg

However, this includes the Magna Carta from which right of the FMOTL were derived,


no they were not.

they often quote section 61 of the Magna Carta as justifying "lawfull rebellion", but there's a couple of problems with that interpretation:

1/ clause 61 applied only to 25 Barons!
2/ Clause 61 was only valid for 3 months!! It was then renounced by king John and the Pope allowed him to renounce his oath to obey it. This led to the First Baron's War, during which King John died. His successor was his son Henry III. The Magna Carta was subsequently resigned in 1216 - but Clause 61 was no longer in it (nor was there any equivalent)

Myth's inability to comprehend the difference between "law" and "legal system" is also indicative of the general lack of knowledge of the ACTUAL law (as opposed to what they want it to be) FMOTL exhibit.

Rationalwiki has a sometimes amusing but mostly just sad article on Freeman-ism
edit on 14-10-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

cartenz
For anyone incline to go down this path, I recommend a thorough reading of the following judgement; Even tho this is a Canadian case it will still be used as persuasive for any future prosecution of similar "Free-Mans" or "Sovereign Citizen" cases occurring within common law jurisdictions:

www.albertacourts.ab.ca...

Its a long judgement, but it addresses several points of law relating to these types of cases.


that is excellent - both informative and entertaining all at once - thanks!



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


No worries


Please bookmark it and share it when appropriate, the more informed we are the better.



posted on Oct, 19 2013 @ 05:21 AM
link   
this whole world is corrupt liers and thiefs protect the bank



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Is that was true then why is EVERY single act of lawful rebellion as the main stay of the FMOTL movement anchored to the now superseded acts of the Magna Carta.

You miss the point, there IS another way!



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by JakiusFogg
 


Because FMOTL have no idea what they are talking about of course.



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Ahhh, they have an idea, problem is they dont move with the times. they LOVE to quote old revisions.

There is an EASIER way



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Aloysius the Gaul

JakiusFogg

However, this includes the Magna Carta from which right of the FMOTL were derived,


no they were not.

they often quote section 61 of the Magna Carta as justifying "lawfull rebellion", but there's a couple of problems with that interpretation:

1/ clause 61 applied only to 25 Barons!
2/ Clause 61 was only valid for 3 months!! It was then renounced by king John and the Pope allowed him to renounce his oath to obey it. This led to the First Baron's War, during which King John died. His successor was his son Henry III. The Magna Carta was subsequently resigned in 1216 - but Clause 61 was no longer in it (nor was there any equivalent)

Myth's inability to comprehend the difference between "law" and "legal system" is also indicative of the general lack of knowledge of the ACTUAL law (as opposed to what they want it to be) FMOTL exhibit.

Rationalwiki has a sometimes amusing but mostly just sad article on Freeman-ism
edit on 14-10-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)


Good post. The FMOTL dont seem to realize that the Magna Carta only applied to 'freemen' and did not apply to the serf. in other words allowed for slavery. Further it is statute law; something that FMOTL claim is not lawful. That said it was still one of the first pieces of legislation that limited absolute royal power.
edit on 24-10-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by JakiusFogg
 


Such as?...



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 02:17 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by JakiusFogg
 


Nice, I can agree with a lot of that and favor nationalisation not just of central banking, but also key infrastructure. Its not so much that i think the capitalist model is wrong so much as obsolete, it has served its purpose of wealth creation, to enable a more socially owned system. However the main problem with such systems is the complete lack of competition, prevents effective technological development. FE, microsoft need to constantly keep developing new software in order to stay in business. That said monopoly can have a similar effect.

I have just started reading your thread so will hopefully be able to comment when I am done.



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Redarguo
 


There is a lot in there, especially when I start talking about Registration and vessels, that's when the FMOTL stuff starts to get really interesting





top topics
 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum