up home page mail me! Add to Technorati favourites bottom

French German version Spanish version Italian version

header image

Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument (OPCA) Litigants

In the Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571 case of 2012 from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke, wrote the following opening statement:

“This Court has developed a new awareness and understanding of a category of vexatious litigant. As we shall see, while there is often a lack of homogeneity, and some individuals or groups have no name or special identity, they (by their own admission or by descriptions given by others) often fall into the following descriptions: Detaxers; Freemen or Freemen-on-the-Land; Sovereign Men or Sovereign Citizens; Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International (CERI); Moorish Law; and other labels – there is no closed list. In the absence of a better moniker, I have collectively labelled them as Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument litigants [“OPCA litigants”], to functionally define them collectively for what they literally are. These persons employ a collection of techniques and arguments promoted and sold by ‘gurus’ (as hereafter defined) to disrupt court operations and to attempt to frustrate the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals.”

Interestingly, prefacing this case document was a series of quotes from Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (Forgotten Books, 2008):
“Where there is no common power, there is no law, where no law, no injustice.”
“Force, and fraud, are in war the two cardinal virtues.”
“The laws are of no power to protect them, without a sword in the hands of a man, or men, to cause those laws to be put in execution.”
“And law was brought into the world for nothing else but to limit the natural liberty of particular men in such manner as they might not hurt, but assist one another, and join together against a common enemy.”

Further into the Case there is a meaty examination of the many arguments/concepts that are brought before the courts by what is refer to as “OPCA litigants”.

Here is a partial copy of the table of contents of the case documentation:

VI.. OPCA Concepts and Arguments……………………………………………………………………….. 60

A. The Litigant is Not Subject to Court Authority………………………………………… 60

  • 1. Restricted Court Jurisdiction…………………………………………………………… 61
  1. a. Admiralty or Military Courts………………………………………………… 61
  2. b. Notaries are the Real Judges………………………………………………… 62
  3. c. Religion or Religious Belief Trumps the Courts……………………….. 63
  • 2. Defective Court Authority……………………………………………………………… 65
  1. a. Oaths………………………………………………………………………………… 65
  2. b. The Court Proves It Has Jurisdiction and Acts Fairly………………. 66
  3. c. Court Formalities……………………………………………………………….. 66
  4. d. The State is Defective…………………………………………………………… 67
  5. e. Conclusion – Defective Court Authority………………………………….. 67
  • 3. Immune to Court Jurisdiction – Magic Hats………………………………………. 68
  1. a. I Belong to an Exempt Group……………………………………………….. 69
  2. b. I Declare Myself Immune……………………………………………………… 71
  3. c. I Have Been Incorrectly Identified…………………………………………. 72
  4. d. I Am Subject to a Different Law…………………………………………….. 73
  5. e. Conscientious Objector………………………………………………………… 75
  6. f. Tax-Related Magic Hats………………………………………………………. 76
  7. g. Miscellaneous…………………………………………………………………….. 78
  • 4. The Inherent Authority of Provincial Superior Courts………………………… 79
  1. a. Superior Courts of Inherent Jurisdiction…………………………………. 79
  2. b. Procedural Jurisdiction……………………………………………………….. 80
  3. c. Subject Jurisdiction……………………………………………………………… 82
  4. d. Inherent Jurisdiction vs. OPCA Strategies and Concepts………….. 84

B. Obligation Requires Agreement………………………………………………………………. 85

  • 1. Defeating Legislation…………………………………………………………………….. 86
  • 2. Everything is a Contract…………………………………………………………………. 86
  • 3. Consent is Required………………………………………………………………………. 89
  • 4. Conclusion – Obligation Requires Agreement……………………………………. 91
  • 5. Court Misconduct by Everything is a Contract and Consent is Required Litigants 91

C. Double/Split Persons……………………………………………………………………………….. 92

  • 1. Unshackling the Strawman……………………………………………………………… 94
  • 2. Dividing Oneself……………………………………………………………………………. 94
  • 3. In-Court Behaviour of the Divided Person………………………………………… 96
  • 4. Conclusion – Double/Split Person Schemes……………………………………….. 98

D. Unilateral Agreements…………………………………………………………………………….. 99

  • 1. The Legal Effect of a Foisted Agreement……………………………………….. 101
  • 2. Common Uses of Unilateral Agreements………………………………………… 105
  1. a. To Create or Assert an Obligation……………………………………….. 105
  2. b. To Discharge an Obligation or Dismiss a Lawsuit…………………. 108
  3. c. Foisted Duties, Agency, or Fiduciary Status………………………….. 110
  4. d. Copyright and Trade-mark…………………………………………………. 110
  • 3. Fee Schedules……………………………………………………………………………… 112
  1. a. Disproportionate and Unlawful Penalties…………………………….. 114
  2. b. The Targets and Intended Effect of Fee Schedules…………………. 115
  • 4. Effect of Unilateral Agreements……………………………………………………. 116

E. Money for Nothing Schemes………………………………………………………………….. 117

  • 1. Accept for Value / A4V……………………………………………………………….. 117
  • 2. Bill Consumer Purchases………………………………………………………………. 120
  • 3. Miscellaneous Money for Nothing Schemes……………………………………. 121

F. Legal Effect and Character of OPCA Arguments………………………………….. 121

  • 1. OPCA Strategies that Deny Court Authority………………………………….. 121
  1. a. An OPCA Argument that Denies Court Authority Cannot Succeed Due to the Courts Inherent Authority……………………………………………………………… 121
  2. b. An OPCA Argument that Denies Court Authority is Intrinsically Frivolous and Vexatious……………………………………………………………………………………….. 122
  3. c. An OPCA Argument that Denies Court Authority May Be Contempt of Court Authority……………………………………………………………………………………….. 123
    i. Denial of Tax Obligation Evades Tax……………………….. 123
    ii. Denial of Firearms Restrictions Proves Intent for Illegal Possession 124
    iii. Denial of Court Authority May Prove the Intent to Engage in Contempt of Court…………………………………………………………………………….. 125
    iv. Other Government Authorities…………………………………. 127
  • 2. Other OPCA Strategies………………………………………………………………… 127
  • 3. Responses to OPCA Strategies……………………………………………………… 128
  1. a. Strike Actions, Motions, and Defences………………………………….. 128
  2. b. Punitive Damages……………………………………………………………… 128
  3. c. Elevated Costs………………………………………………………………….. 129
  4. d. Order Security for Costs…………………………………………………….. 131
  5. e. Fines……………………………………………………………………………….. 132
  6. f. One Judge Remaining on a File………………………………………….. 132
  • 4. Responses to OPCA Litigants and Gurus……………………………………….. 133
  1. a. Vexatious Litigant Status…………………………………………………….. 133
  2. b. Deny Status as a Representative………………………………………….. 133
  • 5. Conclusion – Responses to OPCA Litigation and Litigants……………….. 134

As you see, there is plenty to examine, as the view from the Bar is an extensive commentary, which is cross referenced to other case precedence and rulings..

And this case is itself, a precedence for newer cases, as illustrated by the remarks of Justice Fergus ODonnell, in the case of R. v. Duncan, 2013 ONCJ 160 from the Ontario Court Of Justice:

“As I left court that day and contemplated returning in the autumn to finish the trial, it occurred to me that I would have to write rather a lot to address the various procedural issues raised by Mr. Duncan in his tome and his verbal arguments. Now, don’t get me wrong about this; I’d be happy to write until the cows came home about matters of substance relating to the guilt julietta casino online or innocence of the defendant and the liberty interests of a citizen vis a vis the constabulary, but the idea of having to disentangle all of the palaver, nonsense and gobbledygook in the document Mr. Duncan presented to me was not particularly appealing. ”

… and then…

“If December 7, 1941 is a day that will live in infamy, for anyone faced with “freemen on the land”[6] or similar litigants, 18 September, 2012 is a day that will shine in virtue. On that day, Mr. Justice J.D. Rooke, the Associate Chief Justice of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, delivered a judgment in the matrimonial case of Meads v. Meads 2012 ABQB 571 (CanLII). Given that the judgment weighs in at a mammoth 736 paragraphs, I wonder if these litigants are perhaps more prevalent in wild rose country than they are in Ontario. Be that as it may, Justice Rooke’s comprehensive judgment on what he labels “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument Litigants” (of various iterations), wonderfully frees me from having to address any more effort to the jurisdictional arguments raised by Mr. Duncan. As I have said, there is a lot of patent rubbish on the internet; if Mr. Duncan wishes to while away a few hours more productively on something that actually makes sense, I commend Justice Rooke’s judgment on CanLII.org to him.”

Again, there is much to learn about the courts view on the validity of any and all arguments/concepts that someone referring to Freeman-on-the-Land concepts might be looking into.

And therefore, again, to the point of the previous post, how can we re-create a meaningful and purposeful site on this domain, that would bring more social value to context, and clarity.

The Freeman-on-the-Land Controversy and the Evolution of its Social Value

Why is the Freeman-on-the-Land such a controversial idea? Lets take a look at the issue here from both sides..

From one perspective, we have people that may perceive governments and the established systems of law, as being suppressive and in some ways unjust. They believe that the system may be ‘rigged’ against them, as some would put it. Such people are looking for an understanding of their natural rights, and a deeper understanding of how they can protect themselves from charges, harassment, limitations, and controls that are seemingly unjustified and undue.

For the people who have sensitized themselves to this perspective, there is the belief that within a deeper understanding of the common law, and a historical context of how those governments and those systems of law were established, there is a way to present the view, to the system of law and governance itself. Much of the understanding of people who study the ideas of Freeman-on-the-land is geared towards pointing to rights and reason, working from an interpretation of legalities and potential fallabilities in the references upon which they are structured, which are seemingly up for discussion. With this core belief, many people are looking at how open-to-re-interpretation is this system of legalities in some frames of reference, and, are there significant adjustments to be made? And in so much as the system is stable, people who follow a further extension of what some may call natural common law, would possibly move us even further towards an abiding by even higher ideals; personal honorability, widely informed common sense, judicial intelligence, and altruistic good will. Generally speaking, people do not want to feel oppressed. They do not want to be manipulated by the systems around them, and they do not want to be bothered by trivial legalities which serves limits on rights and freedoms while taxing their time and expense.

From the other perspective, there is the ideal of law and order. Common laws that create law and order must reach far and wide. And to encompass that distinction, the writ of the law, must be based upon itself, and it must be laid out in as non-ambiguous and clear a language and reason as possible. And in that sense, it must be constantly evolving. However, the courts are now facing a mirror of sorts. Can todays judicial systems continue to examine core truth values, differential contexts, and historical references to the rhyme and reason of the system itself? Understandably, it doesn’t want to face off with itself; it wants to help govern, hold the peace, uphold the law, and maintain the system as upright and infallible, as possible. After all, it’s a system of law that is not unlike a blockchain of information, all tied together, and evolving in real-time, seemingly working as optimally as it can to serve the greater good.

Though understandably, references come from both perspectives. So where is the real value in the ideas professed by self-learned Freeman-on-the-land advocates?

When people stand up for their rights, no doubt, they have to look deep into the laws that they are facing. When this is done correctly, one may find modern interpretations not always in perfect alignment with classic definitions of laws, and statutes may open up into a grey zone that calls into question some of the foundational principles, and methods being used.

People would like the law to protect them, but they don’t always like the way it has to work to achieve that goal. Sometimes the level of the lowest-common-denominator, will create pressure of obedience, on those to whom the lowest-common-denominator principles, may not be neccessary, as they would constitute natural upheld common sense. Most of us will generally over-look and accept the deeper context of the law, but if the letter of the law is to be followed precisely, it may lead to some alternative interpretations.

Whose duty is it to examine those issues at the core of the law? We would think that it is the higher courts, however people do examine the issues, and freeman-on-the-land has presented issues in the courts. Not much to the liking of the courts, but none-the-less it is there facing them.

It’s all set out on a fine line called the bar, and not all issues are well served by the approach that some self-professed Freeman have taken, but there is certainly something to consider in that grey zone. And as the courts become more exposed to the concepts presented by free-man-on-the-land, walking to the start of that of that fine line, is the time to figure out if there is a chance of presenting a coherent argument to back up any prospective issue that one is dealing with. It’s about having the arguments substantiated, with clarity, reference, and truth.

There is nowhere better to see the outcome of a non-optimally considered approach, than the judicial and social commentary that arises, when a professed Freeman becomes what the courts deem as a ‘vexacious litigant’, and or when the outcome leads to charges even greater than than the original issue. After such commentary, it becomes even easier for the media to portray the ideas of Freeman-on-the-land in a pejorative light, creating even more social pressure leading to the limiting of freedom of debate and expression of concepts not commonly held. There are many instances of media that feed the social perception that ‘freeman-on-the-land’ is an unacceptable and invalid system of beliefs and ideas, held only by ‘freeloading’ social misfits. And the thought of attempting to bring such ideas into the process of defending ones self on the streets, or in a court of law, might be labelled as “craziness”.

To see someone place these FMOTL principles, ideas, and interpretations of ‘truth’, before the modern system of law, is very telling. People, whether in the right or not, are trying to speak truth to power, and quite often, it does not always play out in the right way, even when one might think it will. It’s all deeply disconcerting to those who believe they are protecting the law, and supporting the governance and order, of law. It is also becoming somewhat viewed as a waste of the courts time and resources.

Perhaps not to the best outcome, some of the Freeman-on-the-land ideas and concepts have become commercially espoused as a sortation of systemic documentation and process that will work for anyone. Some may even get the understanding that it will put one beyond or even above the law. And in a few cases it raises more than a simple point of contention with the system, when it clashes more dramatically with it. And these are the issues that will often make the news and potentially cast the whole FMOTL movement in a negative light.

The controversy is deep. It is subtle, it is sensational, and it divides opinions very strongly.

There are two forces of human nature at work here.. The desire to have the freedom to act in accordance to natural ‘common’ law, and the desire to control the freedom of all, for the sake of law and order.

Ultimately, the ideas that arise from the understanding of what freeman-on-the-land really speaks to, show clearly that there is a need for a far greater public discussion about how people are governed, and how they are treated in the face of a system that deals out the judgements, as its form of order.

Most people don’t really understand the whole of the law. Every nation and every state, has instituted their system of governance within a system of particular laws. And to own a piece of the right to speak from that perspective, one must separate themself from all, and deal from behind the bar in order to pass judgements. The system of law is inherently based on a separation of man from man, and that separation is upheld by the deep legal precedence and lexicon that most are not fully informed of. The law defends and prosecutes people. Both sides are facing the bar. And the bar is the separation that presides over man in modern society as we have it.

There is so much information about what Freeman-on-the-land is trying to present, as its truth, and foundation, that it becomes unclear as to what it is. Whatever validity it has in the courts, maybe muddled in the efforts of those trying to present it to those who don’t much want to hear it. And whatever effectiveness it has on the streets, when dealing with the law officers, has a questionable effect if misused or used in a manner that is oppositional.

Ultimately, giving people an ideal, that directly appeals to the greater sensibility of self-governance, natural common law, and natural human rights, seems like a good thing, but it can easily fail in a system that does not allow people the right to control the court with the deeper and more embedded connotations of those laws, and aspects of the law that lay beyond the bar.

It is a very delicate situation. A very controversial situation, and one that many people are testing. Finding for themselves, and for others, the limits and successes of such a perspective is challenging and maybe a greater risk than just accepting the laws as it may be..

This site is by definition of its domain, is a naturally suitable forum for the ideas of the Freeman-on-the-land. We can continue to explore the value of the controversy of what freeman-on-the-land stands for, and the validity of the concepts be espoused. The FreemanOnTheLand.com site has been wanting more, for some time now. It has been curated by a few, and of those ideas and links presented,  some are personal experiences, and some are referencing external materials and videos, but it perhaps is not the clear reference point that it could potentially be. Naturally, it is a place that many ideas can be referenced, and explored. In fact, its a great place for a greater discussion. We want it to have a greater value to our audience, and to have a key role in clarifying fact from fiction, truth, from semi-truth and falsity. We also want it present the cases where people take the ideas of Freeman-on-the-land (FMOTL) to court, and to the peace officers who enforce the laws on the street.

In order to get the most from the evolution of this site, we need to preface its value by design. As mentioned above, a forum is a format that would suit the site, and get discussions going.. However, the way forums are created today, they are often high maintenance, and need to be actively moderated. Especially, since we can safely assume that the divisive and controversial nature of the topics presented, would have a high potential for oppositional energy, trolling, and argumentation. So, the question is.. How can we redesign this site, and how can we restructure the site, to give a clearer and more approachable interface for the meeting of two worlds of thought and perspective, without losing the value of a deeper discussion between a variety of people, with a variety of knowledge?

We think it is time for a redesign, and time for a new approach..

Perhaps an approach that will foster a new definition of what Freeman-on-the-land even means.. And if such a question should arise…why redifine Free-man-on-the-land? Then let it be clear that the ideal of what a free man on the land really stands for, is peace, equity, social responsibility, and living a well lived life.. Imagine a man, woman, family, living on the land, peacefully, naturally law abiding, caring, well meaning, naturally cultured and capable to uphold the highest morality and personal standards of conduct ..

So, what must a society know, within the hearts and minds of each man, woman and child, to uphold the ideal of a free man on the land… What evolution of our humanity must we affirm in order to achieve this ideal? What transitions do we need to manage to create this kind of a society? Where in our visions can we see a society in which we can agree to be relatively even more free..?

Those are big questions, and even bigger dilemmas. The layers upon layers of human evolution have brought us this variety of society; the one we see around us.. Can we ever be as free as to say we are a free man? Who in fact, is ever free.. It is so completely relative. Perhaps we are as free as we are alone, because once we are living within a society, we are only as relatively free as we abide by the legally enhanced limitations on any freedoms that we perceive. Society is a co-created commons of far greater complexity than a free man can be.

~

Question

~

So what do you think? Will we redesign the site, and create a nice, modern forum and lexicon, with opinion pieces to create meaningful conversational ‘precipitation’?

Will we partner with others to bring in new ideas..or…Will we hand over the site, to someone else.. and let it go the the way they want it to be?

We are open to suggestions, offers, and ideas.

Ideally the site will move into the hands of someone who would really love to curate the content and foster the discussion in the very best of ways. This is potentially a landmark site that can appeal to a much wider audience, and serve a far greater good than perhaps it does now.

We would love for it to evolve in the very best direction.

A freeman-on-the-land must eventually find within their hearts to be part of an evolving society, of people working together to bring greater value to the greater good, for there is no being alone in a world like this. But perhaps we can still find the kinds of freedom we are yearning to see.

From controversy to value.

How can we make the best of it?

Comment or drop us a line with your thoughts

The Natural Man Speaks In Court

Know the System of Law

Every one who values their freedom and their natural personhood, should know the legal system. The first step is understanding the language. One very good resource, and training package is the Jurisdictionary, by Dr. Frederick David Graves. ORDER the course so you can easily and affordably learn “How to Win in Court”…one way or the other.

Jurisdictionary FlowChart of Legal Process

Jurisdictionary FlowChart of Legal Process

Visit Jurisdictionary® to get step-by-step tips and tactics for winning … with or without a lawyer.

Freeman Documentation Tour

Mission:

Given the biased job the canadian media has been doing, I have decided to take an eastward journey to interview and document successful stories involving Canada’s “freemen”. A few years back while traveling with Mr. Menard I didn’t seem to come across a lot of documentation regarding pleasing outcomes from an interaction with the crown. I am quite capable of documenting any stories people wish to tell. Stories WITH PHYSICAL DOCUMENTS will be given the highest priority. I have until Canada Day to plan and get any interested parties lined up. So please contact me if you wish to share the story of your interaction with the crown. No one will be ignored from anywhere in Canada. fmotl.com@gmail.com

Crowd Sourced Funding:

I would like to have a three thousand dollar buffer for the journey. This includes video/electronic equipment, vehicle maintenance, gas, food and I will sleep in my car if necessary. All donations will be noted and a running total will be posted by myself every two months before departure (three reports)

We are up against a runaway corporation (Canada). The corporation is better organized, much better armed and ridiculously over funded. I seek to facilitate an organization of the like minds that will keep this land peaceful long after the crown’s reign is over. There are of course other projects I have in mind such as centralized document storage (FTP) and chatting forum (IRC) but such things are in the distant future and happen when it is more than I that seeks this organization.

Paypal: I would like to take this opportunity to thank our two donors. I left out your full name of course. I took a screenshot to illustrate the funds you donated are still there and that they will remain there until something can be done with them to advance the cause. Please see the donation section for the paypal button.

Cheque/Silver/Gold: I can appreciate that many people connected with this ideology use these forms of consideration. Please e-mail me if you need a postal address for your donation.

Bitcoin / Litecoin:

The Bitcoin Donation Address is : 1F8eGFvTTRPQbeaNkadfMyq91dEyseyUzX

If you are a bitcoin miner and can spare the use of your equipment for any period of time to mine for this cause please e-mail me and I will get you something set up on a BTC pool. Regards!

The Litecoin Donation Address is : LgqQzFGRLqYcj7YeQNpmJPuLrntebjVT8p

If you happen to be a scrypt miner I have set up a mining account for donations with wemineltc.com If you are not a miner be aware with some high end video cards you can be apart of the development of a new decentralized unregulated currency (and make money participating). CPU miners are of course welcome! Every little bit counts. Just be sure to use the smallest variable user “free1.1” 🙂

I sincerely hope this project gets off the ground. The demonization of the freeminded in the media needs to be counteracted with some type of documented evidence that the crown has indeed recognized freemen. Not only recognized but given some kind of remedy. I look forward to reading all of the input.

Cheers,

McGoo

Squamish Nation

Website

This happened awhile ago. Good to get it out there though. Go humanity! 😀

British Freemen Seize Court

Video uploaded to youtube March 07, 2011
British freemen seize the court. Peace officers I would like to take this opportunity to remind you of whom you serve.

This video has been censored in the UK from what I understand. If we could get confirmation of this that would be cool.

Stay free people. Eventually we can teach people to think with their heart.

RCMP Brief

On August 3rd an internal document was circulated to RCMP. I had to jump in and make points I felt valid. Stay safe people…

“not subject to the laws of canada” Laws and statues are different. Of course people choosing to ignor corporate policy look lawless. They should however be aware of the self evident guiding principles of the heart. (No harm or loss to any other human being). Blindly following corporate policy is a serious problem on this planet. Turning a blind eye is destroying the earth and stripping our children of their future.
“They also believe that they have the right to use force, including deadly force, in defence of their land, property, and family.” Uhh yes and if you don’t feel like defending what matters most to you prepare to lose it. Anyone that has had life experience knows this.
Mad As Hell

“Subjects refer to themselves as Given Name of the Family Surname (e.g. John of the Family Smith),”

“When writing their name, subjects use the format Given Name: Surname (e.g. John: Smith), which may be followed by “the man” (e.g. John: Smith the man),”

Your parents gave you a name yes and the family name was handed down. The last name is always needed for institutions to make money. (self perpetuated debt exchange via consent, signature)

“Subjects claim to be living as a “Son of God” or to have status as a “Son of God”,”

“Subjects refer to themselves as human or flesh and blood beings,”

It is quite a common belief that we are children of god I don’t know why cops are supposed to be on the lookout for this.Yes I am a human, flesh and blood human being. I challenge anyone to say the contrary.

“Subjects refer to Canada as a corporation or a corporate entity and may refer to driver’s licenses and other forms of government identification as “corporate issued”,”

Canada certainly is a corporation CLICK HERE for proof. By logic anything issued by a corporation or subsidiary is corporate issue yes.

“During traffic stops, subjects refer to their common law right to travel on the land, which they believe allows them to operate a vehicle for non-commercial purposes without having to register or insure the vehicle and without being licensed as a driver,”

This is clearly a sensitive area for the police. I would hope agents of the RCMP would notice that when investigating a driver the majority of his/her concerns are to do with liability. If someone is driving a car and creates damage or injury, they are certainly liable to fix the problem. If something is not insuring them it becomes a karmic responsibility to make it right. Any free being caught drunk driving you are disgraceful. Self responsibility is not easy, nor is an addiction to depressants.

“Subjects ask to see a police officer’s “Bond Number”,”

When conducting business one has a bond or a  business card whatever. Something you can take with you to ID the agent.

“Subjects present or reference a “Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right”, a document they believe exempts them from the authority of police and other officials and entitles them to charge fees if they are detained , questioned, or “otherwise regulated”,”

“Subjects make continued use of nonsensical legal/quasi-legal jargon,”

You can present management your view of the corporation and how it relates to you however you want. Many use these methods but do what your heart tells you I say. Just grasping the birth certificate and the level of consent granted at a time you were completely unaware of the implications of said agreement makes it null and void. I use simple to understand language and ask questions that seem to never have answers.
I am in hopes that any potentail investigatiors of “freemen” come across this message. At the beginning of this document you will notice how the corporation has disconnected liability from your actions by stating the following. “Recipients are encouraged to SELF VERIFY all information contained in this report before using it for any investigative/enforcement action, evidence or other legal proceedings.” You are liable for your actions. Under man’s law or divine, what goes around comes around. I appreciate your due dilligance to duty of self verification if that is what brings you here.
“Let him who wishes to be deceived, be deceived.”

There is an energy picking up worldwide and it should be coming to our shores as soon as our money turns into the paper that it is. Money only has the power that you give it. Perpetuated by your peers, this infinite growth, cyclical consumption paradigm has got to go!


ISRAEL

‎”Israelis in masks shout slogans during a protest against the high cost of living outside the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem, Israel, 10 August 2011.”


India

August 12, 2011

Chile

Should be quite the Fall, season.

God Bless,

McGoo

Ray tells his Story

Power to yah Ray! Its good to see people speaking up for their rights. I don’t think I’d be wanting to piss off ray. It would also seem ray is not one to easily be set off.

Update:

Silver

With the financial system mathematically bound to fail, there is a high likelihood we will start seeing more and more people in need. Those people in need are your brothers and sisters. As always one must practice discernment, but helping expand perspectives on the reality of our situation is key to change. Taking back your will and energy from corporations will assist in their failure.

Remembering that corporations can’t feel like human beings, and that the only motive for a corporation is to sustain itself is crucial in these uncertain times. The only thing that makes an institution good or bad are the people that serve it. Each and every one of us serves a corporation at one point or another. Being more mindful that there is absolutely no concern for your well being from these fictional entities is imperative.  When observed from a bird’s eye view, the corporation, if considered a human as it is under the law, has the behavioural patterns of a psychopath. This is crucial to note and observe when these patterns show up in your own life. You may be taking home the corporate mind!

Taken from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy :

Factor 1

Aggressive narcissism

  1. Glibness/superficial charm
  2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
  3. Pathological lying
  4. Cunning/manipulative
  5. Lack of remorse or guilt
  6. Emotionally shallow
  7. Callous/lack of empathy
  8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

Factor 2

Socially deviant lifestyle

  1. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
  2. Parasitic lifestyle
  3. Poor behavioral control
  4. Promiscuous sexual behavior
  5. Lack of realistic, long-term goals
  6. Impulsiveness
  7. Irresponsibility
  8. Juvenile delinquency
  9. Early behavioral problems

10.  Revocation of conditional release

Your actions shape the people around you, because humans are only the sum of their experience. Making their experience as stress free as possible allows for a much better lifestyle. Most often sail by people on the street without considering the spirit behind the eyes. There is also a lack of consideration for the experiences that shaped these people and why we see aggression and other types of unacceptable behaviour almost on a daily basis.  We all live under one sun! The perception of being better or worse than any other human can only be a manifestation of the ego. We are all equal under God/Yahweh/Allah/Creator, and we are all entitled to an equal portion of the earth’s resources.

As the economic collapse occurs, I would hope you have made preparations, and watch with joy as all of our theoretical liability melts away. The international bankers will of course want to hold Canada Corporation Liable for all kinds of debt. We can revoke our consent for the corporation to accumulate debt on our behalf, or we can continue to allow the bankers to rule our lives. This will most likely look something like one world currency. Personally I recommend you take an interest in storing wealth in something other than cash, something that exists in reality. Silver is portable and has industrial uses as well. There are all kinds of people on the silver train and it is only picking up pace. Now is a great time to buy as it is down to $36 an ounce from $50. Catch the wave before it goes back up.

Good Luck, God Bless,

McGoo

The Ontario Ombudsman on G20

Freeman Goes to Court

This happened in my hometown of Guelph, and a week or so in Kelowna I did essentially the same thing after consulting Keith.  Quite the scene, Sheriff’s from outside the courtroom rushed to the courtroom like an emergency room and crowded me, talk about intimidation.  lol  Almost got arrested but they couldn’t justify the lack of logic at their end.  The courts do not like this at all!!!