Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Freeman-on-the-Land


  • Please log in to reply
169 replies to this topic

#101 hutch

hutch

    Shaman's Apprentice

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,325 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Haiku
  • Climate or location:Wide Bay Aust

Posted 02 August 2010 - 12:55 PM

Here is a similar case in australia, it goes down as i imagined it would.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_oIR_nhV5s&feature=PlayList&p=925142A94156EC65&playnext=1&index=27

Good on them...least they had some balls....I would love to know what happens next. Could he sue for wrongful arrest? Cop was a prick and I would love to see him sued.....
In a trivial situation I might just give it ago....when my house is on the line...too risky
Be smart....don't be a smart arse.....

#102 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 03 August 2010 - 06:52 PM

Quite a contrast between redneck australia and civilised england, I am an aussie and I liked the way the man spoke and I suppose the judges attitude was not uniquely aussie, he just had a tough crowd this time round. I think we can do better with our unique way of speaking, the english were all uptight, but that guy was like "nah, listen, we have rights" and I was like yeah his right mate, fair dinkum (sp?)lol ...a real connection.
All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#103 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 14 August 2010 - 11:39 PM

Freeman are being noticed, so I welcome the criticism. Even if it is false; "above the law", what you mean like every politician.

http://www.infowars....titutionalists/

"In the latest release the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) identifies, ďthe number of people who now consider themselves sovereign citizens, Americans above the law who adhere only to the Constitution and follow a revised history of the United StatesĒ.
All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#104 Slybacon

Slybacon

    Soup Nazi

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,024 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Hunter Region, Coastal

Posted 15 August 2010 - 10:19 AM

I dont think it is as easy here. Who do u complain to when the cops and the judges don't accept your status. Short of actually fighting for your rights its a brick wall in this country.
Thetasonic DJ Set 2010

http://soundcloud.com/thetasonic/anamnesis-engine-thetasonic-dj

Last Track Change - 11/05/2012

#105 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 26 August 2010 - 01:51 AM

It's a process, we may not be able to live as real freeman now, but lets pretend to make real. We keep pushing and it will come to pass, I think it will anyways, still many dont believe, but when they do it will change faster.
All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#106 AndyAmine.

AndyAmine.

    Superfly

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,685 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Subtropics, ZoneTemp 10

Posted 26 August 2010 - 11:56 AM

I love the freeman concept but one thing I have an issue with (I feel the flames already) is why a person once becoming a practising 'freeman on the land' would be happy accepting services paid for by the taxes given from others that are choosing to take part in a government run society such as ambos, fire brigade, bulk billing healthcare, driving on the roads, using public transport etc?

Isn't it a bit hypocritical to want your bread buttered on both sides?


"Whether drugs lead to illumination or degradation depends on the spirit in which one takes them."
George Andrews

 


#107 Slybacon

Slybacon

    Soup Nazi

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,024 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Hunter Region, Coastal

Posted 26 August 2010 - 01:27 PM

I hear ya, but it isn't exactly the case. When you go freeman you are living to the constitution only. You disregard anything corporate and not in the constitution. Im sure they would still call the cops if there was a crime being commited, or an ambo if you needed help. They may even pay for the ambo if they dont have a health care card. Its a grey area but they still feel part of the system just the old part.
Thetasonic DJ Set 2010

http://soundcloud.com/thetasonic/anamnesis-engine-thetasonic-dj

Last Track Change - 11/05/2012

#108 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 06 September 2010 - 10:42 PM

So the fuzz approach.
police "take your hands out-of your pockets" very direct, trying to take power over me.
me "I am a soveriegn man, I do not consent to anything"
a little shicked police "ha, what's a soveriegn man" smirk
me"look it up, it's not my job to educate you" there was also some tit tat where he tried to get a name unsucessfully.
police"where are you from"
me"here"
police"whats your address"
me"i dont have to give you my address unless you tell me what the problem is, understand" always best to throw a couple 'understand' in there.
Bit of riff raf, female police officer bitching, them driveling on... about break-ins, I reply that "any intelligent individual can see that i have not stolen anything"
More drivel
me"stop, you're going to tell me what the problem is now or im free to go"
male police officer tried to drivel on again, trying to say the opposite which is a lie. I turn to female and say
me"are you acting as a peace officer or as a.."
she cuts me off "im acting as a person"
as soon as she said that I walked away, turned around and said "go fuck yourselves"
continued to walk as they got in their police car, as they drove past I spat in their direction and they waved.

I won. yes i did tell them to get nodded. No it wasn't freeman techniques but it does show that you should NEVER give police any information unless they confirm that it is as part of their duty as a peace officer, otherwise, if there is no case against you, you're free to go and dont have to answer any of their questions.
I made it very clear that he serves me and that he was wasting my time(i said this directly during some of the riff raff), I also made it clear that I, as a soveriegn, have more power then the commercial entity whoes policies he blindly enforces. Made clear when I asked under what capacity they were acting.

Yes some wimpy nay sayers will say "next time they'll... you were just lucky", but what do they know.

Edited by ref1ect1ons, 06 September 2010 - 10:49 PM.

All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#109 drgibbon

drgibbon

    Psychonaut

  • Members2
  • PipPip
  • 71 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:SA

Posted 11 October 2010 - 12:00 PM

Yes, so lets use a different form of currency? Would it crash the system, if we stopped using their currency?

You gotta be a real cool cat to bring your own currency into circulation, like this guy :)

The whole thing works on trust / belief. If you could create trust & belief in people for a new currency, then yeah, you could do it. But that's not easy, and then there's the issue of control, if it's too easy to create, then people will start making their own. If the market was flooded with currency you'd get hyper-inflation, since it's all over the place it loses value.

#110 synchromesh

synchromesh

    is having a break

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 16 October 2010 - 03:14 AM




We often feel like hapless atoms, running endlessly according to the blueprints and programs of unseen masters, whether itís the banking industry, Madison Avenue, whoever. We tend to disempower ourselves. We tend to believe that we donít matter. And in the act of taking that idea to ourselves we give everything away to somebody else, to something else.
Terence McKenna


Posted Image

#111 synchromesh

synchromesh

    is having a break

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 16 October 2010 - 03:15 AM




We often feel like hapless atoms, running endlessly according to the blueprints and programs of unseen masters, whether itís the banking industry, Madison Avenue, whoever. We tend to disempower ourselves. We tend to believe that we donít matter. And in the act of taking that idea to ourselves we give everything away to somebody else, to something else.
Terence McKenna


Posted Image

#112 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 24 October 2010 - 03:25 PM

Council tax, rebellion, and a day in court


A man challenges validity of British Courts.
http://centurean2.wo...a-day-in-court/

Posted on October 16, 2010
by centurean2| 13 Comments
Council tax, rebellion, and a day in courtPosted on October 10, 2010 by Ian Parker-Joseph

Friday 8th October 2010 Ė A Friday October morning at the Magistrates` Court in the small Welsh town of Brecon seems an unlikely setting for a case that promises to have a fundamental effect on the entire British legal and tax-collecting system. Amongst the usual run-of-the-mill cases that turn up in a small rural community was one involving Powys Council`s application over the non-payment of Council Tax, issued against John Hurst and his wife Tina.

Before anyone jumps to the wrong conclusion, John Hurst is no free-loader. He is a highly responsible and patriotic citizen, a former police officer with an impressive record. His decision not to pay is based on thorough research indicating that councils have no legal right whatsoever to levy such a tax on its citizens. Believing this to be true, John would have therefore committed an offence by actually paying the tax, as the majority of us already have. Given that ignorance of the law is no defence, it places the overwhelming majority of hitherto respectable British citizens in an invidious situation and the courts in an even worse one.

John, a committed supporter of Lawful Rebellion, arrived at the court with his wife, along with her Mackenzie Friend. The court official took down the details but then returned some time later stating that Tina Hurstís case was no longer listed. This was an extremely odd development, given that Tina is registered disabled with visual impairment and would have hence qualified for a Council Tax rebate, which had not been awarded and for legal aid should she decide to take the case further. It would appear that suspicions of skulduggery would not be entirely unfounded. The official was challenged over this and shortly afterwards brought out a more senior figure, a pleasant young man, who invited the little party into a private office. There he declared that on checking his information, Tina Hurst was on the list after all!

Much later, the group was invited into Court. John Hurst, representing himself, immediately questioned as to why there were only two magistrates on the bench instead of the required three. The Council`s solicitor stated that he had to agree but that this was not contentious. John immediately retorted that it was and insisted on exercising his legal right to have three magistrates present. The court officials had to concede and the group was asked to leave the Court whilst a third magistrate be found.

Amongst John Hurstís contentions, was the fact that this court had no jurisdiction to make a firm decision on his case. Therefore, it was welcome when the council solicitor appeared, telling John that the court had decided that the matter should be passed to the Court in Llandrindod Wells for trial on Friday 5th November at ten a.m.

The group re-entered the Court shortly afterwards for the formal decision to be announced, but John consequently and successfully challenged the by now hapless and bewildered clerk of the court over a number of legal and procedural issues.

It was not all over, as John stated that he had not yet received disclosure of the Council`s documents. The Council`s solicitor conceded that they had only been posted on 29th September, two days earlier. The clerk then stated that in order to enable Counsel to examine the Hurstís skeleton argument, the time of the coming hearing would be delayed by thirty minutes. John immediately stated that he failed to understand how this would allow Counsel to assimilate the information as it consisted of thirty pages. The clerk again seemed baffled by this, as she was unaware of this attachment. The Council`s solicitor was immediately questioned and became somewhat incoherent. He asked if John had actually sent the documents with the attachment, to the Council. John stated that he had and furthermore had a printed e-mail acknowledgement from the Council to prove it.

Hence, it was established that the Council`s solicitor must have knowingly or recklessly failed to disclose vital evidence to the Court, a criminal offence.

The Court was hastily concluded and the officials and the solicitor were assured that a formal complaints would be issued, including one to the police requesting the arrest and charge of Powys Council`s solicitor for withholding evidence from the Court, which, moreover, would have not have been discovered but for the unfortunate clerk`s statement.

It must be said that John Hurst`s performance in Court was magnificent, assured, authoritative and knowledgeable at all times, invariably leaving the court, including the magistrates, trailing along hopelessly out of their collective depth. He and his wife deserve every possible support for their courageous stand, which is an important stepping stone on the way to exposing the inefficiency, unlawful conduct and even possible corruption on the part of those responsible for administering our legal system and the behaviour of other state-funded officials, particularly in this instance, those employed by Powys Council.

This court report was originally written by journalist Robert Green.

read comments at pjc journal link below

http://pjcjournal.wo...a-day-in-court/

Council Tax rebellion Ė John Hurst StatementPosted on October 11, 2010 by Ian Parker-Joseph

Following the court report published yesterday, John Hurst has issued the following Statement for publication:

So much for the events at Court. The significance of this case to us all is the reason why a local authority, or any other revenue gathering body, no longer has lawful authority to tax us. It is because The Crown, and all officials who act in the name of the Crown, have breached the contract with the people of these islands to rule us according to our laws and customs.

.
That contract was acknowledged in the peace treaties know as Magna Carta and the Declaration of Rights. The present Queen publicly swore to uphold those laws and customs at her Coronation in 1953. In 2009 she gave Royal Assent to the unlawful pretended statute which gave effect to the Lisbon treaty and allowed foreign potentates of the European Union to issue directives and regulations which her officials then impose as if they had the authority of Parliament.

.
From that moment the UK changed from a constitutional monarchy to a tyranny, and we were subjected to the abuse of the stateís coercive force in the absence of the rule of law.
This is not the first time this has happened in history and our ancestors successfully resisted using our common law right to the protection of duress of circumstances confirmed in Chapter 61 of Magna Carta.

.
The ďSkeleton ArgumentĒ that is before the Court explains what is at stake:

i. The respondent resides in a rented cottage in Powys and the Claimant has presented him with a bill for Council Tax for £900 in the name of The Queen.

ii. The Respondent has made a conditional offer to pay if the claimant can produce evidence that the claim is made lawfully. In the absence of such evidence, he is asserting that breaches of treaty obligations between The Crown and the people and the activation of the procedure specified by Ch. 61 of Magna Carta 1215 and, alternatively, the Common Law defence of duress of circumstances justify his withholding of the payment.

iii. The first matter at issue is the authority of The Queen (and Her officials) to issue demands for taxes at a time when she is under the supervision of a Barons Committee lawfully constituted under Ch. 61 of Magna Carta 1215. If the demand was made in the name of a Corporation and not The Queen then the Respondent has no contract with them and therefore no liability.

iv. The second matter at issue, which the Respondent alternatively and independently relies on, is the Common Law right of the subject to invoke the defence of duress of circumstances because The Queen has breached her Common Law treaty obligations with the people that were confirmed in Magna Carta 1215 and the Declaration of Rights 1688 and as a consequence the Respondents life, liberties and property are threatened.

i. The respondent has been a legal researcher for the Magna Carta Society (the MCS) since 1998 and helped produce the research paper on the possibility of raising a Barons Committee in 1999.

ii. Michael Burke, also a member of the society, petitioned the Courts to uphold the Declaration and Bill of Rights in 1998 and 1999 without success. The Judgments were referred to in the research paper and were part of the material relied upon in its arguments.

iii. Members of the public were invited to send postcards to The Queen urging her not to give Royal Assent to any statute which purported to give effect to the Nice Treaty in the UK. Several hundred thousand did so.

iv. The Queen failed to respond to public petitioning and there was no evidence that the then Prime Minister intended to change his counsels.

v. Members of the society petitioned each member of the Houses of Lords and Commons not to give their support to any statute relating to the Nice Treaty.

vi. 65 Peers selected a quorum of 25 of their number to address the petitions from the MCS and members of the public. They were satisfied that the conditions required to justify the use of the procedure specified in Ch. 61 of Magna Carta 1215 were established. Four of their number served the petition on Her Majesty on 7th February 2001.

vii. No response was made to the Barons Petition within the specified 40 days or has been to date. The conditions for Lawful Rebellion came into effect.

viii. The then Government used a purported statute (the House of Lords Act 1999) and the Rules of Parliament to deny a majority of the Hereditary Peers access to the House which prevented them exercising their Common Law right to be consulted about and vote on statutes. Officials took possession of their Letters Patent. They were replaced by hereditary Peers, many in dubious circumstances (the cash for Peerages scandal).

ix. The Queen gave Royal Assent to a purported statute giving effect to the Nice Treaty on 26/2/2002.

x. The Queen gave Royal Assent to a purported statute giving effect to the Lisbon Treaty on 19/06/2008. Direct rule from the European Union commenced in late 2009.

xi. Displaced hereditary Peers challenged the validity of the House of Lords Act and obtained an admission that it was invalid from a Government Minister, Baroness Ashton, on 20th September 2008. To date, no remedial action has been taken. This is described in the submission listed at Para 4. i. Above.

1. The Respondents Submissions Opposing a Liability Order.

i. I am a British subject of good character and have twice sworn the Oath of Allegiance, as a soldier and as a police officer. Both of those oaths require allegiance to the law, not an office holder, and require the individual concerned to make judgments about the lawfulness of his, or her, actions. So does the Judicial Oath.

ii. Regarding Ch. 61 of Magna Carta, I submit that a Baronís Committee was lawfully raised, that their Petition was served on The Queen on 7th February 2001 and that the provisions of Ch. 61 of Magna Carta 1215 apply until the Committee or a duly constituted Constitutional Convention decides otherwise. I have sworn allegiance to that Committee. In these circumstances I submit that Powys Council has no authority to issue a tax demand to me.

iii. Regarding the defence of ďduress of circumstancesĒ, I have an honestly held belief that my life, liberty and property are at risk because laws that are repugnant to the Common Law are being applied within the UK. I did not place myself voluntarily in this position. Refusing to pay taxes to The Queen, who, together with certain evil counsellors, is responsible for this situation and is in breach of the Common Law and her Coronation Oath is an act of self defence on my part. Any refusal by Crown Officials to acknowledge the restraints that they are subject to will be further evidence that my beliefs are well founded.

iv. The Judicial Studies Board document referred to at Para. 3. iv. above confirms that it is for The Crown to prove beyond reasonable doubt the defence of duress does not apply.

2. Remedies Sought by the Respondent.

i. For the reasons given above I respectfully submit that no properly directed Court has authority to try me for refusing to pay Council Tax. If the Brecon Magistrates are unable to make a ruling on this I claim my right to have the issues that I have raised put before a lawfully constituted (complete with all hereditary Peers and without post 1999 Life Peers) House of Lords in order for a case to be stated. That is because the defects in the House of Lords Act 1999 noted above call into doubt the validity of the new ďSupreme CourtĒ.

ii. If the Brecon Magistrates are unable to do that I ask for these matters to be put before the Supreme Court for a case to be stated. I reserve the right to challenge the validity of that Court for the reasons given.

Respectfully submitted,

John Hurst.

As reported yesterday, the Brecon court has decided that the matter should be passed to the Court in Llandrindod Wells for for a new hearing on Friday 5th November at ten a.m, and I am sure that John would welcome support.

(note: it is not a trial, but a hearing before an administrative court which is hired for the day by the Council, including the magistrates).


All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#113 ref1ect1ons

ref1ect1ons

    ref1ect1ons has left the building

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:warm humid

Posted 24 October 2010 - 03:26 PM

https://acrobat.com/...A3swFyU7DOM1SIA
A link to a document that has been sent to many British politicians.
It warns them to think carefully about what they do in the future.

Edited by ref1ect1ons, 06 November 2010 - 01:03 AM.

All that is seen and can be seen is but a three-sided shadow, unseen there is a mystery and power beyond anything seen. This is why efforts to control Man will fail, if they know of the mystery then they know of the power, and it may work through them, with great knowing, beyond even their knowing. This force is dangerous to the fearful, an unseen brilliance to wash away our darkness.

#114 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 23 November 2010 - 01:38 PM

I love the freeman concept but one thing I have an issue with (I feel the flames already) is why a person once becoming a practising 'freeman on the land' would be happy accepting services paid for by the taxes given from others that are choosing to take part in a government run society such as ambos, fire brigade, bulk billing healthcare, driving on the roads, using public transport etc?

Isn't it a bit hypocritical to want your bread buttered on both sides?



To me, I am happy to accept those services (health, education, police, fire), because I pay for them.. I pay GST, income tax just like everybody else.

What I do not accept is the use of police to bring citizens to minor courts (magistrates court) over trivial matters like speeding, growing prohibited plants, jaywalking etc. If there is no injured party, there is no crime.

Fortunately for me, I have used these freeman principals in the South Aus magistrates court (civil division) and by not giving the court jurisdiction, the case was aborted. I cant say exactly what happened, because I didn't go to court that day of the hearing. I just sent the court a registered letter stating that I did not wish to attend the hearing, that they did not have my approval to continue in my absence, and that any descision they made would be appealed on the grounds of them not having subject matter jurisdiction. Any magistrate knows that making a ruleing without juristiction removes thier indemnity, and they can be sued in a higher court.

So I can assure you that this works in minor courts in Australia, I just havn't had the chance to use it in the criminal court yet, but I am giving the police every opportunity to try thier luck.

#115 Slybacon

Slybacon

    Soup Nazi

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,024 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Hunter Region, Coastal

Posted 09 December 2010 - 01:46 PM

So I can assure you that this works in minor courts in Australia, I just havn't had the chance to use it in the criminal court yet, but I am giving the police every opportunity to try thier luck.

I love u man
Thetasonic DJ Set 2010

http://soundcloud.com/thetasonic/anamnesis-engine-thetasonic-dj

Last Track Change - 11/05/2012

#116 synchromesh

synchromesh

    is having a break

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 15 December 2010 - 05:19 PM

Fortunately for me, I have used these freeman principals in the South Aus magistrates court (civil division) and by not giving the court jurisdiction, the case was aborted. I cant say exactly what happened, because I didn't go to court that day of the hearing. I just sent the court a registered letter stating that I did not wish to attend the hearing, that they did not have my approval to continue in my absence, and that any descision they made would be appealed on the grounds of them not having subject matter jurisdiction. Any magistrate knows that making a ruleing without juristiction removes thier indemnity, and they can be sued in a higher court.

Awesome, man. You wouldn't happen to have a spare copy of the letter would ya? :wink:
We often feel like hapless atoms, running endlessly according to the blueprints and programs of unseen masters, whether itís the banking industry, Madison Avenue, whoever. We tend to disempower ourselves. We tend to believe that we donít matter. And in the act of taking that idea to ourselves we give everything away to somebody else, to something else.
Terence McKenna


Posted Image

#117 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 04 January 2011 - 10:54 AM

Awesome, man. You wouldn't happen to have a spare copy of the letter would ya? :wink:


This is the final letter I sent, but there was a bit of to-and-fro before, regarding the directions hearing before the trial. I did show up to the directions hearing twice, but refused to follow the order to 'make discovery of documents'

There was a financial institution trying to sue me in S.A. Magistrates court for an alleged debt.
After I didn't show up to the court hearing, the next statement I got from the financial institution was for about $200 less than the previous statement, so I assume the court refunded thier summons expenses.

The way I see it, is do not enter the court room, because you enter thier juristiction, and have to play by thier rules. Just send them letters saying you don't agree to thier terms and conditions, and do not want to trade with thier business.

Attached File  shaman court reply.JPG   93.14KB   74 downloads

The only change I would make to the letter I posted, is adding that thier reply would be ignored without dishonour (instead of just ignored), but I think they got the message anyway :)

Edited by rogdog, 04 January 2011 - 11:01 AM.


#118 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 04 January 2011 - 12:40 PM

To add some context, and for the lulz, here are the two previous letters sent before the final letter posted above.

Attached File  sha court pic1.JPG   100.83KB   78 downloads

and the reply
Attached File  sha court pic2.JPG   89.34KB   76 downloads

#119 vual

vual

    ॐ Dragonologist ॐ

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 738 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Subterranean
  • Interests:Magna Cum Laude
  • Climate or location:Elsewhere

Posted 04 January 2011 - 07:52 PM

wow... i cant wait to see progress and future updates on this thread you have big balls dude.
I know the secret to everything.............

#120 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 04 January 2011 - 08:23 PM

wow... i cant wait to see progress and future updates on this thread you have big balls dude.


Big balls, well sure...but not really.

All I want to do is grow my garden in peace. I find it offensive that someone can come into my yard and pull up my garden, just because they wear a uniform. It happened to me (re: busted in adelaide thread), and I am pissed off.

I happen to be in a suitable place (ie: no car, no job, renting), that makes it very easy for me to tell the powers that be to fuck off. You can't get blood out of a stone..If I had more possessions, maybe I wouldn't have done what I did

Regardless, even when I was earning some good money, I felt the same way, fuck the police telling me what I can do in my own home.

I guess my point is, don't be scared, always question authority. The police and courts always assume authority, and because most of us get our legal advice from Judge Judy and CSI, we never seem to challenge thier assumptions.

I hope everybody who reads this can see, that my letters were polite, non-confrontational, and just asking reasonable, simple questions. And what I got in return was being ignored or deflection ('your letter has no legal effect in this state')...who gives a shit about legal...I'm talking about lawfull.

Thats all the powers that be have folks, bluff and bullshit.

Stand up for your rights....this is what people mean when they say freedom isn't free, not a big deal, all you have to do is just question presumed/assumed authority, make them earn it

And in this case, they chose to give up to my challenge... When the powers that be are confronted with real law, the law of the land, all the bluff and BS disappears




But I want to add, my court case was about money, but this is an ethnobotanical website. I would like to keep this topic in the direction of avoiding/ getting out of trouble with prohibited plants and the like

Edited by rogdog, 04 January 2011 - 08:31 PM.


#121 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 04 January 2011 - 09:06 PM

Or...to save a great wall of text,....It's that simple, just question authority. If somebody says they have the authority to make you do something, ask where they think they get the authority from.

I'm not talking about a get out of jail free card, just stand up for your rights. FFS learn your rights before you get into trouble

Edited by rogdog, 04 January 2011 - 09:06 PM.


#122 Sheather

Sheather

    ŅSinner?

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Brisbane

Posted 04 January 2011 - 10:05 PM

And remember that even flesh and blood men have to obey common law. Which really isn't asking much.
Whether you think you are wrong, or think you are right, you are correct.

#123 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 04 January 2011 - 11:24 PM

And remember that even flesh and blood men have to obey common law. Which really isn't asking much.


Nicely said Sheather..very nice indeed





edit..removed rude comments about so called authorities

Edited by rogdog, 07 January 2011 - 11:09 AM.


#124 rogdog

rogdog

    Spice Cadet

  • Members2
  • PipPipPip
  • 450 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 05 January 2011 - 12:20 AM

and this is why I work my majik with letters and not emails...because the hatred and vitriol come to the surface when I'm under the influence :)

#125 synchromesh

synchromesh

    is having a break

  • Members2
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,765 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Climate or location:Mediterranean

Posted 05 January 2011 - 04:12 AM

:lol: Excellent, dude... Thanks a lot! These could definitely come in handy some day! :)


I hope everybody who reads this can see, that my letters were polite, non-confrontational, and just asking reasonable, simple questions. And what I got in return was being ignored or deflection ('your letter has no legal effect in this state')...who gives a shit about legal...I'm talking about lawfull.

Thats all the powers that be have folks, bluff and bullshit.

Yeah, I've received a reply like that before. It was to a letter which got me out of a parking fine. :wink:


Or...to save a great wall of text,....It's that simple, just question authority. If somebody says they have the authority to make you do something, ask where they think they get the authority from.

Too right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCZ3SZLj5yo

:lol:
We often feel like hapless atoms, running endlessly according to the blueprints and programs of unseen masters, whether itís the banking industry, Madison Avenue, whoever. We tend to disempower ourselves. We tend to believe that we donít matter. And in the act of taking that idea to ourselves we give everything away to somebody else, to something else.
Terence McKenna


Posted Image