Freeman Megamerge

Reg'stoy

Robbo wrote: »

Brilliant. That's the first time I've seen our local Freemen invoke the "coloured ink" theories.

My two dogs like all dogs are colour blind, as am I slightly (blue-green spectrum), does that mean because we legally can't distinguish different coloured inks; that we don't need a dog licence for them.

Pawwed Rig

What is the relevance of the blue ink?

johnnyskeleton

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

What is the relevance of the blue ink?

Possibly a misinterpretation of popular psychology:

http://readinggestures.com/meaning-of-ink-color-and-prefence-for-writing-with-pencils-in-handwriting-analysis/

Blue ink, according to them, shows that it is a living person who signs the document. Maybe it's an anti-fraud measure in some places i.e. to prove that it is not a photocopy.

But legally, no significance whatsoever. Just don't sign your name in pencil.

Pawwed Rig

They must have thought it up from somewhere though?
I do remember a case in Dublin Corporation where a stamp was used to sign documents and these were held to not be legal as the signer could not prove he read them before he signed so maybe that is where it comes from.
This guy in the video made alot of statements. And to me, tbh, it sounds like a load of b****x. However he doesn't strike me as a conman and seems to believe what he is saying. Alot of posters here are just having a go but only a few have actually come up with any kind of rebuttal of the arguments put forward.

Tom Young

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

They must have thought it up from somewhere though?
I do remember a case in Dublin Corporation where a stamp was used to sign documents and these were held to not be legal as the signer could not prove he read them before he signed so maybe that is where it comes from.
This guy in the video made alot of statements. And to me, tbh, it sounds like a load of b****x. However he doesn't strike me as a conman and seems to believe what he is saying. Alot of posters here are just having a go but only a few have actually come up with any kind of rebuttal of the arguments put forward.

Chapter V of this decision adequately deals with the lunacy spouted in courts, etc. re. Freeman and sovereign soil merchants: http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

ResearchWill

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

They must have thought it up from somewhere though?
I do remember a case in Dublin Corporation where a stamp was used to sign documents and these were held to not be legal as the signer could not prove he read them before he signed so maybe that is where it comes from.
This guy in the video made alot of statements. And to me, tbh, it sounds like a load of b****x. However he doesn't strike me as a conman and seems to believe what he is saying. Alot of posters here are just having a go but only a few have actually come up with any kind of rebuttal of the arguments put forward.

Most freemen I have come across really believe what they are saying. For some its almost like faith. For many they are unhappy with the status quo so the freeman theories appeal to them. For others usually young men the ability to drive cars without, tax, insurance, driving licence carries understandable attractions.

The problem with trying to argue with freeman beliefs is almost the same as trying to argue with someone's faith. An example freemen believe that all statute law is under the law of contract/the law of the sea. So they believe that unless each person consents to the particular statute then it has no bearing on them. When faced with the argument but what about stealing or assault, they then say a but a freeman must do no harm if he does that is covered by the common law. Well I can tell you that's all incorrect, but how do I prove a persons faith in a fairy tale is incorrect, well I really can't can I. I know its wrong anyone with a simple understanding of society, democracy and basic legal principles knows that you just can't say I don't want to obey that law.

If enough people in society disagree with a law, and demonstrate against that law then it may be overturned, an example is the poll tax in the UK.

Freemen also misinterpret things in a very simple way. They often misrepresent the constitution for example. In the YouTube video Mr. Banks makes assertions and statments with nothing to back them up. He says the State is the constitution, he says everything must be stated in the constitution and if its not stated its not part of the state. What does that even mean, in fact lets see what the constitution says about the State.

THE STATE

Article 4

The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland.

Article 5

Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state.

Article 6

1. All powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive, under God, from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State and, in final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy, according to the requirements of the common good.

2. These powers of government are exercisable only by or on the authority of the organs of State established by this Constitution.

Article 7

The national flag is the tricolour of green, white and orange.

Article 8

1. The Irish language as the national language is the first official language.

2. The English language is recognised as a second official language.

3. Provision may, however, be made by law for the exclusive use of either of the said languages for any one or more official purposes, either throughout the State or in any part thereof.

Article 9

1. 1° On the coming into operation of this Constitution any person who was a citizen of Saorstát Éireann immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution shall become and be a citizen of Ireland.

2° The future acquisition and loss of Irish nationality and citizenship shall be determined in accordance with law.

3° No person may be excluded from Irish nationality and citizenship by reason of the sex of such person.

2. 1° Notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, a person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, who does not have, at the time of the birth of that person, at least one parent who is an Irish citizen or entitled to be an Irish citizen is not entitled to Irish citizenship or nationality, unless provided for by law.

2° This section shall not apply to persons born before the date of the enactment of this section.

3. Fidelity to the nation and loyalty to the State are fundamental political duties of all citizens.

Article 10

1. All natural resources, including the air and all forms of potential energy, within the jurisdiction of the Parliament and Government established by this Constitution and all royalties and franchises within that jurisdiction belong to the State subject to all estates and interests therein for the time being lawfully vested in any person or body.

2. All land and all mines, minerals and waters which belonged to Saorstát Éireann immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution belong to the State to the same extent as they then belonged to Saorstát Éireann.

3. Provision may be made by law for the management of the property which belongs to the State by virtue of this Article and for the control of the alienation, whether temporary or permanent, of that property.

4. Provision may also be made by law for the management of land, mines, minerals and waters acquired by the State after the coming into operation of this Constitution and for the control of the alienation, whether temporary or permanent, of the land, mines, minerals and waters so acquired.

Article 11

All revenues of the State from whatever source arising shall, subject to such exception as may be provided by law, form one fund, and shall be appropriated for the purposes and in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities determined and imposed by law"

Even from a pure logical reading of the above how can the constitution which defines the state be the state. God its making my brain hurt.

Sorry this is so long, but go listen to Mr. Banks, then read the above what he says is in fact rubbish. The main thing they hope for is that people won't research for them selves, and fall for the rubbish.

Robbo

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

What is the relevance of the blue ink?

It's apparently Royal and red ink is living, apparently. Of course these are all the theories of Green Ink types...

Pawwed Rig wrote:

This guy in the video made alot of statements. And to me, tbh, it sounds like a load of b****x. However he doesn't strike me as a conman and seems to believe what he is saying. Alot of posters here are just having a go but only a few have actually come up with any kind of rebuttal of the arguments put forward.

Some Freemen are earnest, some believe it genuinely and passionately, some are complete conmen who are peddling it to vulnerable types. My personal theory on the rise of Freeman dittoheads is a lot of it is people who now have a lot of time on their hands (unemployment), a bad financial situation, limitless access to the internet and the general feeling that things are rigged against them. Couple to that a bit of Dunning Kruger effect and an autodidacts grounding in legal sounding nonsense and you have someone who'd rather validate their own wasted hours by copy and pasting Freeman guff than seeking proper professional advice on how to deal with their own problems.

Regarding rebutting the chap in the video, he has something of a Cargo Cult knowledge of the Constitution. His belief that you have to have a licence as a corporation to enforce any contractual debt is just plain wrong and he goes downhill from there. If he could spell sovereign rights, it might be worth debating him on them but until then, he can go on claiming that a book is the State.

Pawwed Rig

ResearchWill wrote: »

The main thing they hope for is that people won't research for them selves, and fall for the rubbish.

You would imagine it would be fairly simple to convince a Freeman otherwise then by going through their beliefs one at a time and debunking them.

Tom Young wrote: »

Chapter V of this decision adequately deals with the lunacy spouted in courts, etc. re. Freeman and sovereign soil merchants: http://www.canlii.ca/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

Cheers I'll have a read through it when I get time. I did like the quote 'This category of litigant shares one other critical characteristic: they will only honour state, regulatory, contract, family, fiduciary, equitable, and criminal obligations if they feel like it. And typically, they don’t.'

Robbo wrote: »

My personal theory on the rise of Freeman dittoheads is a lot of it is people who now have a lot of time on their hands (unemployment), a bad financial situation, limitless access to the internet and the general feeling that things are rigged against them.

This is I think the important part. It is something that disaffected individuals can get involved in and it is not too difficult to understand. They don't use overly technical language and the reasoning can sound logical to someone who will take statements at face value. I think it is a seaction to the perception, as I said earlier, of the inequality before the law. They see themselves as victims who get punished whereas the really wealthy guys get off scott free.
If you look at the youtube videos from UK there is an element of truth in this as the actions of bailiffs, TV licence inspectors and the Police Force (enforcing search warrants) often leave alot to be desired.

Pawwed Rig

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

You would imagine it would be fairly simple to convince a Freeman otherwise then by going through their beliefs one at a time and debunking them.

Irrational people don't respond to rational argument.

GRMA

Might have some of these guys in the Dáil one day, Ben Gilroy of DDI is a freeman

LoveCoke

GRMA wrote: »

Might have some of these guys in the Dáil one day, Ben Gilroy of DDI is a freeman

How did he accept the rules/law re running for a Dail seat?

jd

GRMA wrote: »

Might have some of these guys in the Dáil one day, Ben Gilroy of DDI is a freeman

He said he wasn't on PT - I think he said it (FOTLerism) is nonsense.
http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/10126589/

GRMA

jd wrote: »

He said he wasn't on PT - I think he said it (FOTLerism) is nonsense.
http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/10126589/

Yeah well he is,lying - take a look at his videos its freeman crap 101. I imagine the videos are inthis very thread.

DDI has big support from freemen and lots of freemen members, they promote it on their websites

Pawwed Rig

GRMA wrote: »

Yeah well he is,lying

He was fairly emphatic about not supporting the Freeman movement. He even described it as nonsense.
He has a point about segregation of duties too.

GRMA

Point remains that he was lying, look at his videos for yourself

You have freemen supporters on their websites posting stuff like this:

I can't believe some of the comments in response to the primetime show. What difference does it make if he believes in Jesus or the black and white minstrals or the tooth-fairy!? Nobody totally agrees with everybody., but if a persons general perspective is in line with mine., then I would have to side with him even though I don't agree with some of the things he says.

Ben Gilroy has entered the political arena, much in the same way a black man has joined the KKK.
Should he take his hood off and declare what he is underneath and be lynched.
Or should he get established and prove his credentials, gain support and when the time is right.......??

I don't know.., but if the freedom movement (not the 'freeman') is to get anywhere then we have to apply some of the language and tactics that the opposition use, and trust that our chosen representatives have hearts that are true., even if their words say differently.
By their fruits shall you know them. So give this man time to ripen before judging him too harshly, he may just be what we have being waiting.

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/ben-gilroy-direct-democracy-ireland-meath-east-by-election?id=3214356%3ATopic%3A377717&page=3#comments

valleyoftheunos

I've come to the conclusion that the freemen are a mix of the deluded, the conniving and the desperate. there are those who genuinely believe that everything is a conspiracy by the British Accredited Registry et al to sell the plain people of Ireland into slavery, those who know they can take advantage of others less informed than themselves and others who are in such difficulty both financial and otherwise that they will try anything to solve their problems.

Its the last group that I worry for, people who are in danger of losing their homes or having utilities cut off. When a person is in dire straights and an "expert" comes along peddling easy answers telling them they dont have to pay their taxes or mortgage because of the constitution its only natural that they will at least investigate. Sadly its all nonsense and lies.

The law is complicated enough to those of us who have studied it and practice it that its no wonder that so many people feel alienated by it. The danger posed by freeman "Experts" and "Lay Practitioners" is that honest and innocent people will find themselves in worse positions than they would had they engaged with the law to resolve their problems.

MilanPan!c

GRMA wrote: »

Yeah well he is,lying - take a look at his videos its freeman crap 101. I imagine the videos are inthis very thread.

DDI has big support from freemen and lots of freemen members, they promote it on their websites

Indeed the DDI website says that they are for helping "sovereign citizens" which is just another way to say "Freemen" more or less.

And of course Ben has repeatedly given interviews to Freeman blogs and online "newspapers"... and has been interviewed on Freeman "radio" and in fact DDI was promoted by all the freemen websites, and fora, leading up to the election.

And on top of all of that, the PT interview includes Ben saying that he doesn't use "freeman language" when he clearly does.

So, yeah, a liar, supported by liars and nutters.

Ken.

This is old but good.
http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man_questions_district_court_but_is_jailed_1_1940175

A man who questioned the legal powers of the District Court after he was charged with driving without insurance was jailed for six months at Kilcock District Court last Thursday.

Stephen Sutton, 67 The Walk, Moyglare Hall, Maynooth, who described himself as “Stephen of the family Sutton”, was jailed for six months after the Court found he had driven without insurance in the Moyglare area of Maynooth on 3 December last.

In handing down sentence, Judge Zaidan said he would direct Mr Sutton to get “psychiatric treatment as appropriate” while in prison.
As Mr. Sutton was escorted out of the courtroom, he said: “You are breaking the law here.”






Judge Zaidan takes no sh!t from noone.

MilanPan!c

ken wrote: »

This is old but good.
http://www.leinsterleader.ie/news/local/man_questions_district_court_but_is_jailed_1_1940175

A man who questioned the legal powers of the District Court after he was charged with driving without insurance was jailed for six months at Kilcock District Court last Thursday.

Stephen Sutton, 67 The Walk, Moyglare Hall, Maynooth, who described himself as “Stephen of the family Sutton”, was jailed for six months after the Court found he had driven without insurance in the Moyglare area of Maynooth on 3 December last.

In handing down sentence, Judge Zaidan said he would direct Mr Sutton to get “psychiatric treatment as appropriate” while in prison.
As Mr. Sutton was escorted out of the courtroom, he said: “You are breaking the law here.”






Judge Zaidan takes no sh!t from noone.

Psychiatric treatment for Freemen could be a growth industry in Ireland...

johnciall

MilanPan!c wrote: »

Psychiatric treatment for Freemen could be a growth industry in Ireland...

I was just about to post that same link, couldn't make it up

MilanPan!c

johnciall wrote: »

I was just about to post that same link, couldn't make it up

Sadly, the DDI Ireland brand has so far escaped adequate scrutiny. It, like UKIP, seems to be arguing that its simply a popularitst brand.

I hope that some of the media outlets will start demanding real answers from Gilroy and his, to quote the DDI website, "sovereign citizens" movement.

Robbo

I see in the Times today (can't find it online) that Household Charge Challenger [REDACTED] (or Peter Anthony Keegan) had his appearance for non-payment in the District Court adjourned again due to his ongoing "proceedings" in the High Court.

Regarding Ben's conversion, he can't really claim to have only heard of the Freemen when they've been interviewing him on a regular basis and promoting his musings on the Constitution for some time now. TNS Radio is to the Freemen as Pravda was to the Communist leadership.

MilanPan!c

Robbo wrote: »

I see in the Times today (can't find it online) that Household Charge Challenger [REDACTED] (or Peter Anthony Keegan) had his appearance for non-payment in the District Court adjourned again due to his ongoing "proceedings" in the High Court.

Regarding Ben's conversion, he can't really claim to have only heard of the Freemen when they've been interviewing him on a regular basis and promoting his musings on the Constitution for some time now. TNS Radio is to the Freemen as Pravda was to the Communist leadership.

The sad thing is that a chunk of the media will just accept his lie... Err... statement ... In which he claimed to not only be a freeman, but also that he never even used their language.

Even the Irish Law Society has called him a liar (in retrospect) about those claims.

But, as long as the media keeps putting him on national tv and radio without questioning his past/present... Well, his pseudo-populist nonsense will gain more traction.

MilanPan!c

Might be of interest to some that the "Sovereign Citizen" movement is considered a terrorist group in the US, by the FBI...

AND

Check out this little nugget. This is from the US Southern Poverty Law Centre. Here's a description of one of the tactics used by Freemen/Sovereign Citizens to sucker people in:

Some have exploited the nation's foreclosure woes by falsely promising desperate homeowners certain scams can save a person's home or eliminate mortgage debt.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/sovereign-nation/

That page has a lot more about the danger of these groups... The "Commercial Appeal" is the main newspaper in Memphis TN.

You couldn't make that up if you wanted... it's a perfect description of Gilroy's tactic: "falsely promising desperate homeowners certain scams can save a person's home or eliminate mortgage debt"

If I was one of the businesses that he "represented" I'd consider some legal action... consider... it depends what he did, but many times the actions of these jokers make things worse... if that happened... well... they should know that they're potentially dealing with a con artist, not just some bumbling fool.

MilanPan!c

I'm putting this here, before it "disappears" off the internet.

Direct Democracy Ireland shares a logo with the Irish Freeman groups:



But, what I didn't realise until yesterday is that someone else is using that logo.

On the PeopleForEconomicJustice page, if you "donate" to Ben you get a "free" copy of a book, by a guy names Marcus Mc Keown:



the ACTUAL cover of that book is this.



Notice the "Key" on his cover?

Same logo.

Markus Mc Keown is a conman, by my estimation.

His book promises to free you from all debt you owe to the bank (remember Ben used to use the URL www.freedomfromalldebt.com which still redirects to the PEJ page - Ben's Youtube username is also "freefromalldebt - http://www.youtube.com/user/freedomfromalldebt).

And how can you be free from all debt?

Why, just stop paying your mortgage and credit card bills, because "all debt is an illusion".

If you want to know how exactly to be free from this illusion, just buy his book for the details.

Or attend one of his "self actualisation" seminars.

You can see him swindling OAPs and other vulnerable people here:

Watch that, and you'll hear a lot of the same "sovereign citizen" crap that Ben spouts.

You can also find Ben pointing people to Freeman websites on this page:

https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/sheriff-breaks-into-house/

On that page Ben admits that it was HE that called the Freemen out to his media stunt:

Vin from TNS Radio took a trip out to 171 Beaumont Road in Dublin today, camera in hand, at the request of Ben Gilroy.

In the comments section he compares Gardai to Nazis and makes the "sovereign citizen" claim that there a secret difference between the words "lawful" and "legal" - and sarcastically tells a commenter:

You maybe right, he may be legally right but he’s lawfully wrong and if you don’t know the difference you need education fast.

We live in a common law jurisdiction not a common legal jurisdiction thank God.

https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/sheriff-breaks-into-house/

Honestly, the Guards probably should have a look at Mc Keown, as he's selling a scam... selling for profit.

Robbo

Top digging there, MilanPanic.

Given that it's an offence to pretend to be a solicitor, where do we stand with those that will act as your pseudo-lawyer, abuse the McKenzie friend system to represent your in court and quite possibly take a few quid off you in the process? First call would be a deception offence.

Amusingly, I saw on Facebook over the weekend a Freeman wanting to be free of pesky statutes but in a way that preserved his dole payments. The consensus was that the dole was his trust and therefore he could collect it without running foul of Freeman logic.

MilanPan!c

Robbo wrote: »

Top digging there, MilanPanic.

Given that it's an offence to pretend to be a solicitor, where do we stand with those that will act as your pseudo-lawyer, abuse the McKenzie friend system to represent your in court and quite possibly take a few quid off you in the process? First call would be a deception offence.

Amusingly, I saw on Facebook over the weekend a Freeman wanting to be free of pesky statutes but in a way that preserved his dole payments. The consensus was that the dole was his trust and therefore he could collect it without running foul of Freeman logic.

Of COURSE he could

And thank you.

I don't know about your question re: pretending to be a solicitor... if you watch the rest of the videos (hard work to be sure) he also claims that the Guards have basically just never been able to pin anything on him...

He ALSO claims, in a different interview, that all reality is an illusion, and that we can transcend conciousness and visit other realities, "as real as ours"...

So that's the guy who's book Ben is pushing... shocking stuff...

It should ALSO be noted that the same graphic designer is being used for all the DDI web stuff/brouchures/logo as is being used for the TNS freeman site:

http://www.projektscribble.com/portfolio.html

ynotonavillus

Robbo wrote: »

Top digging there, MilanPanic.

Given that it's an offence to pretend to be a solicitor, where do we stand with those that will act as your pseudo-lawyer, abuse the McKenzie friend system to represent your in court and quite possibly take a few quid off you in the process? ........

Care should be taken not to lump all McKenzie friends in with the nutter brigade,

I doubt that anyone acting as a McKenzie friend is pretending to be a solicitor.

It is a fact that it is becoming more and more difficult to retain a solicitor and Counsel without first putting a lot of money on the table,

I have seen a few people being helped by friends in court and in fairness they have frequently succeeded, albeit that they have not the eloquence or gravitas that comes with experience and training.

I did once see Gilroy represent an individual, he was allowed to speak on his feet on behalf of the applicant as if he was representing him rather than helping him to represent himself, and he succeeded albeit that it was an ex-parte application before the vacation judge.

I think that it is a testament to the quality of the members of the Judiciary in this country that they can identify the difference between genuine lay litigants and Nutters, it is for them to ensure that the system is not abused.

MilanPan!c

ynotonavillus wrote: »

Care should be taken not to lump all McKenzie friends in with the nutter brigade,

I doubt that anyone acting as a McKenzie friend is pretending to be a solicitor.

It is a fact that it is becoming more and more difficult to retain a solicitor and Counsel without first putting a lot of money on the table,

I have seen a few people being helped by friends in court and in fairness they have frequently succeeded, albeit that they have not the eloquence or gravitas that comes with experience and training.

I did once see Gilroy represent an individual, he was allowed to speak on his feet on behalf of the applicant as if he was representing him rather than helping him to represent himself, and he succeeded albeit that it was an ex-parte application before the vacation judge.

I think that it is a testament to the quality of the members of the Judiciary in this country that they can identify the difference between genuine lay litigants and Nutters, it is for them to ensure that the system is not abused.

In fairness to all involved, many of these people are con artists... which is why they're typically treated as criminals first in the US. And a good con is like a good magic trick, even if you know where to look, the trick can be hard to spot.

I hope that Ireland, the police and the justice system, come to their senses and start treating in the way they would treat organised crime, etc.

There's very little difference, IMO, between a mobster stealing your pin and robbing your bank, and a con man promising you "freedom from all debt" for a fee... esp as some of the people that push this end up in worse trouble than if they'd simply interacted with "the system" normally.

ynotonavillus

MilanPan!c wrote: »

...... many of these people are con artists...

That is the point many..... not...... all.

Its part of the price we pay to live in this society, that some criminals go free instead of locking up some innocents.

I think it is fair to say the Americans use a slightly different approach, and not sure I would advocate their methods over here.