Alberta pensioner fights to reclaim home declared an embassy by 'sovereign' man

They are both wrong. A sovereign person cannot own anything. But himself

The lady who thinks she deserves 2 homes while people die in the street is also wrong.

We DO NOT OWN LAND. First thing you have to realize before u can really believe in equality.

The selfishness on this planet never ceases to amaze me

I feel sorry for the young couple who live in the other half of the duplex.

Knowing this nutjob lives next door and there are people who have made threatening statements about wanting to drag him out has to be worrying.

That there is an outstanding warrant from Quebec for his arrest for allegedly pushing a landlady down a flight of stairs wouldn't help.

Its always interesting to me that there is people out there who claim the laws of the land dont mean anything to them and that they wont abide by them yet they hide behind those same laws, Contradiction only showing the lack of sanity for this guy, ive been following this story since day 1 because I know a couple "freemen" and I can never get any useful helpful information out of these guys, you use my roads and infrastructure yet you wont pay taxes to support them etc etc I could keep going on. Im interested to see what happens after the Friday eviction goes past without him leaving unless he is going to tuck tail and run at night. I do know the address has been put on social media through commenters on the news article and people have been showing up uttering death threats. This could escalate quite quickly.

I would enter his newly found free land with yet any established laws and have my way. It's not murder if there's no law for it right? In his free land.

No person would last 5 minutes in my house without a welcoming Hello at the start.

reply to post by MDDoxs


seems like a drastic situation ....I would employ drastic measures. The loss of life usually is enough of a threat to deter a person like this.

Peace has been robbed of this woman.....there is no peace, she is at war....she should act accordingly ...

When we broke free from British rule, we did it to be free, or not be ruled by another. That is freedom, liberty is another thing all together. You must not forget how powerful words are in this legal world of paper we live in. The FBI calls them paper terrorists, but then again, so is the government and banks when they strip rights away.

Being sovereign just means you aren't under the rule of another, in the most plain context. You can't be told what to do without a prior agreement or unless you came under the jurisdiction of another by means of trespass, tort, etc. you are the king of your castle, that is almost too literal. When you are sovereign, you make the rules, but you can't forget those rules have rules, in that they are supposed to not trespass another. You can make rules all day and hold people accountable for breaking them, but you probably wouldn't be able to enforce them in court. The state enforces rules it makes up all the time, it's because the states are sovereign entities, and the rules they enforce, well, people accept them. Silence is the same as accepting.

I like when people say their taxes pay for roads, yet I never get a receipt for it. That may be asinine, but when it comes down to it, the phrase "show me [proof]", holds much more power than you might think.

Most people live in a world of assuming we live in this take-for-granted, defined machine that treats people the way it's meant to and is allowed to do. Of course I would ask that person to "show me". I will show you where you are most likely incorrect.

I would never file a lien on someone's house or property, that is just paper terrorism, but liens can be used for the right reason. Putting a lien on your own home, if its being foreclosed on for missed payments, is a good idea. That forces the bank to pay out the equity you've invested into it before they can take it. That's the Law of the land. You could also argue that the bank never "offered" anything in the purchase contract anyways, since banks loan money that never existed in the first place. All contracts require an offer, consideration and acceptance. In the offer, both parties must put something up so that they each have something to gain. However the banks can be the only winner. If you can't loose on a contract, it's basically invalid to begin with.

Those that sleep on their rights do not have any. None of this helps you in court if you don't speak up and know the rules they play by.

Thai69
I would enter his newly found free land with yet any established laws and have my way. It's not murder if there's no law for it right? In his free land.

Laws have been evolving for millennia, and the ones that stay strong, even when there aren't any written ones, have been passed down through the ages. The golden rule that holds in any court is treat others how you would like to be treated. You'll never win a case harming anyone without cause.

Another_Nut
They are both wrong. A sovereign person cannot own anything. But himself

The lady who thinks she deserves 2 homes while people die in the street is also wrong.

We DO NOT OWN LAND. First thing you have to realize before u can really believe in equality.

The selfishness on this planet never ceases to amaze me

edit on 26-9-2013 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

Sovereigns can't own anything, tell that to al the states and countries that own property. Being sovereign is the epitome of owning property, land included, you need someplace to live and call yours after all, it's how you are protected from unreasonable searches an seizures.

Rychwebo

Another_Nut
They are both wrong. A sovereign person cannot own anything. But himself

The lady who thinks she deserves 2 homes while people die in the street is also wrong.

We DO NOT OWN LAND. First thing you have to realize before u can really believe in equality.

The selfishness on this planet never ceases to amaze me

edit on 26-9-2013 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

Sovereigns can't own anything, tell that to al the states and countries that own property. Being sovereign is the epitome of owning property, land included, you need someplace to live and call yours after all, it's how you are protected from unreasonable searches an seizures.

Easy mistake to make. But you are wrong.

Sovereign can ONLY apply to oneself.

Yes. You need a place to sleep. But who is to tell me where?

The person who "owns" the land right?

Land can't and shouldn't be owned by individals. Period.

The "its mine mentality" is what u suffer from

Ps who is there that should be allowed tosearch or seize anything? Who an i being protected from? If i am walking and aNYONE tries to search me or tries to seize me is infringing on my sovereinty and

Another_Nut

Easy mistake to make. But you are wrong.

Sovereign can ONLY apply to oneself.

Yes. You need a place to sleep. But who is to tell me where?

The person who "owns" the land right?

Land can't and shouldn't be owned by individals. Period.

The "its mine mentality" is what u suffer from

Ps who is there that should be allowed tosearch or seize anything? Who an i being protected from? If i am walking and aNYONE tries to search me or tries to seize me is infringing on my sovereinty and

edit on 26-9-2013 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

Show me.

Black's Law 9th Edition:
sovereign, adj. (Of a state) characteristic of or endowed with supreme authority .
sovereign, n. (13c) 1. A person, body, or state vested with independent and supreme authority. 2. The ruler of an independent state. — Also spelled sovran. See SOVEREIGNTY.

state sovereignty
2. The supreme political authority of an independent state. 3. The state itself.

"It is well to [distinguish] the senses in which the word Sovereignty is used. In the ordinary popular sense it means Supremacy, the right to demand obedience. Although the idea of actual power is not absent, the prominent idea is that of some sort of title to exercise control. An ordinary layman would call that person (or body of persons) Sovereign in a State who is obeyed because he is acknowledged to stand at the top, whose will must be expected to prevail, who can get his own way, and make others go his, because such is the practice of the country. Etymologically the word of course means merely superiority, and familiar usage applies it in monarchies to the monarch, because he stands first in the State, be his real power great or small." James Bryce, Studies in History and Jurisprudence 504-05 (1901).

sovereign power. (15c) 1. The power to make and enforce laws. 2. See sovereign political power under POLITICAL POWER.

Oxfords dictionary of Law says:
sovereign n. See Crown
Crown n. The office (a corporation sole) in which supreme power in the UK is legally vested. The person filling it at any given time is referred to as the sovereign (a king or queen: see also Queen ). The title to the Crown is hereditary and its descent is governed by the Act of Settlement 1701 as amended by His Majesty's Declaration of Abdication Act 1936 (which excluded Edward VIII and his descendants from the line of succession). The majority of governmental powers in the UK are now conferred by statute directly on ministers, the judiciary, and other persons and bodies, but the sovereign retains a limited number of common law functions (known as royal prerogatives ) that, except in exceptional circumstances, can be exercised only in accordance with ministerial advice. In practice it is the minister, and not the sovereign, who today carries out these common law powers and is said to be the Crown when so doing.
At common law the Crown could not be sued in tort, but the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 enabled civil actions to be taken against the Crown (see Crown proceedings ). It is still not possible to sue the sovereign personally.

Bouvier's Law Dictionary:
SOVEREIGNTY. The union and exercise of all human power possessed in a state; it is a combination of all power; it is the power to do everything in a state without accountability; to make laws, to execute and to apply them: to impose and collect taxes, and, levy, contributions; to make war or peace; to form treaties of alliance or of commerce with foreign nations, and the like. Story on the Const. Sec. 207. 2. Abstractedly, sovereignty resides in the body of the nation and belongs to the people. But these powers are generally exercised by delegation. 3. When analysed, sovereignty is naturally divided into three great powers; namely, the legislative, the executive, and the judiciary; the first is the power to make new laws, and to correct and repeal the old; the second is the power to execute the laws both at home and abroad; and the last is the power to apply the laws to particular facts; to judge the disputes which arise among the citizens, and to punish crimes. 4. Strictly speaking, in our republican forms of government, the absolute sovereignty of the nation is in the people of the nation; (q.v.) and the residuary sovereignty of each state, not granted to any of its public functionaries, is in the people of the state. (q.v.) 2 Dall. 471; and vide, generally, 2 Dall. 433, 455; 3 Dall. 93; 1 Story, Const. Sec. 208; 1 Toull. n. 20 Merl. Repert. h.t.

I don't know how many years you have studied this, but it only takes a minute to see what this one word means, it may take longer for you to understand the definition. In response to only being applied to ones self, you are clearly wrong. I understand your hippie mentality, but allow a hippie to live in a house, and I guarantee he will want a doorbell and a lock to keep non hippies out to ensure his safety. I know hippies who love owning their home.

I am all for your "oneness" goody goody feelings. I take my spiritual journeys with the recommendations of Terrence Mckenna, but I live in a world where love can be applied where it needs to be, and where being able to object to someone is vital. If everyone was like you, then someone would take advantage of it and claim authority at some point, then they will see that none of you claim ownership of your land. BAM, oligarchy. I hope you have more sense than that.

Peace bro.

reply to post by Another_Nut


Also, I don't know if you know this, but I'm sort of confused by your words. When one starts speaking of sovereignty, I get super literal, its important to be. So when you do that, the words begin to "reset" to their literal meaning and not their everyday usage. The words, person, individual, people, citizen, and almost every word your use could be slang, or more likely, formal English. Try to use "legal" English to get your point across so there aren't any misunderstandings, although substance is more important than form, that doesn't apply when trying to suss out meaning. We aren't drinking ayahuasca tea, so we can't collaborate our minds on this without a stable form of English.

reply to post by Rychwebo


Definitions change all the time. Who is black or oxford? Its about a state of mind.

I live in my van . I don't want house or a doorbell. I am sovereign.

And if i did decide to settle and build a house i have no more right to that land than anyone else. So why would i want to keep anyone out who may need that roof for the night ?

Or belly of food?

Forget your possessions. What do you really need?

Selfishness begets selfishness

Compassion begets compassion

You continue in your ways ill continue in mine nd we will see whom has a more positive impact on those around us and in the later scope the planted in gentle

Forget your definitions. One u quote a book for your governing you have already lost your sovereignty. U have give the power to someone else to dictate your life.

I look to no book or man to tell me what and who i am

Sounds like this Freeman on the land wants to become a deadman under the land.

Another_Nut
reply to post by Rychwebo

 

Definitions change all the time. Who is black or oxford? Its about a state of mind.

Show me. Maybe in your world, but not in the one where we have to make legal decisions.

I live in my van . I don't want house or a doorbell. I am sovereign.

Okay. That is your prerogative.

And if i did decide to settle and build a house i have no more right to that land than anyone else. So why would i want to keep anyone out who may need that roof for the night ?

What is your house on, I hope it's not land, do you have a garden, or farm perhaps that you tilled that land your food is now in, I hope you know where this is going. Why would you want to keep anyone out? If you have no answer for that, then let me assure you, there are people you would want to keep out. If someone need the roof, or your head, that is your prerogative, its a verbal agreement. As a sovereign, your right to contract is unlimited.

Forget your possessions. What do you really need?

Okay Papa Roach, you need your van, a place to piss. Seriously? You need the things that you need (to live). Also, sometimes people want things, like the device you use to post your words that change definitions.

Selfishness begets selfishness

Compassion begets compassion

I know this, some people are so selfish they want others to not have things they want. YOU. So be compassionate and let others have their way, so long as it doesn't interfere with you or anyone else. That's such a beautiful form of self governance that has been evolving for millennia and your perverting it to your own desires.

You continue in your ways ill continue in mine nd we will see whom has a more positive impact on those around us and in the later scope the planted in gentle

I don't pride myself in knowing what the future holds, you seem to believe you do know you'll have a more positive impact. I don't know, and neither do any of us.

Forget your definitions. One u quote a book for your governing you have already lost your sovereignty. U have give the power to someone else to dictate your life.

I don't even know where to begin on this one. You say forget definitions, yet you use words. Where do you draw the line on what they mean? Do you only let words mean what you want them to up until the point someone disagrees with you, don't they have a right to use words as they are intended as well, or are you the boss of words now? This is why we have legal dictionaries and books on words and phrases. They help keep language consistent and NON CHANGING, old dictionaries are still applicable today. Dictionaries don't get issued to change definitions and confuse people. What kind of world would that be? So what will the words; it, the, to, a, me, I, you, is, be, and the other 1,000,000 words mean tomorrow or the next day? I hope they mean the same thing, just like the word sovereignty has kept the same meaning. You change language to pervert it, to be the ruler of words, to tell others what things mean because they are wrong. You are the almighty god of language. If I am blowing this up, let me know, but that's what it leads to mean.

I look to no book or man to tell me what and who i am

You don't have to, that's done by self inquiry, I never said anything that disagreed with this. But if you want to talk to others, who says what the words mean, if you don't agree, then you can't communicate.

The individual was arrested this morning by Calgary police on outstanding assault warrants from Quebec. Other charges are pending.

We haven't been free since governments have existed.

None of us really own anything. If you don't pay your property tax, your land is taken away.

If you don't pay your debts, your physical assets can be seized. So, in all reality no one owns anything, no one is truly "free" in the sense that they can do whatever they want without consequence.

reply to post by Restricted


It's not a matter of the size of their junk in question. It's a matter of judicial laws - criminal vs civil. UPDATE ... he WAS arrested yesterday under a criminal charge in another province of assault against a former landlady who was a senior. She received multiple injuries after being pushed down a flight of stairs by this A-hole. Arrangements are being made by Calgary police for his transfer back to Quebec to appear on these charges. Once the police got the grounds to move on the criminal matter he was bagged up in the middle of the night.