Catch ABC World News tonight? 3/8/12 - Soveriegn Citizens and U.S Militias Segment

reply to post by DavidWillts


Who is so ashamed they cannot show a name?.....

stop...you are not among enemies..you are just stronger inclined than others....relax and talk normal.....we can and will fix this problem....but gunfire and radicalism/extremism is absolutely out of the question and totally unnecessary...and if you don't believe that...go back to 8th grade and read history again....peace can change things....

Originally posted by GhettoRice
reply to post by DavidWillts

 

So.............. wait wat?

"you are not obligated to comply" Is this not the essence of the argument at hand? Did you just agree with the freeman stance?

No, i was talking about me personally telling someone something. The Freeman Stance is a forever failing legal defense.

Anyone claiming to be a "sovereign citizen" obviously doesn't understand exactly what sovereignty is. The term is a complete oxymoron. You can't be sovereign while being a citizen. As being a citizen is to yield to the governments authority, which is the complete opposite of sovereignty.

Check out Dean Clifford's videos. They explain trust law which is actually what is being carried out in most courts.

Originally posted by Damrod
reply to post by DavidWillts

 

Who is so ashamed they cannot show a name?.....

Your argument fails considering I am using my real name and you are using a screen name,

stop...you are not among enemies..you are just stronger inclined than others....relax and talk normal

is...this...normal...and...re....laxed........................................................................????????????????????????

reply to post by DavidWillts


What actually do you think is the 'Freeman Stance"? Honest question as I would like to know your idea about who Sovereign and Freeman are in your mind. Alittle more than saying that they think they are 'above the law'.
On what basis do you claim? Most Freeman/Sovereigns that I have known refer almost exclusively to the Constitution/Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence, and the writings of the ''founding' 'fathers.

The sovereignty in any country lies with it's people. The government acts on behalf of the people and so only borrows power/authority from us. That is the fundamental basis of the freeman/sovereignty movement. They are correct in this belief, if not always accurate in their method. But it's a learning curve, not one quick fix to avoid responsibility for ones actions. If anything it is taking responsibility for ones self and saying no I do not consent anymore thanks all the same. I choose to grow up instead of asking someone, group or organization to nanny me.

reply to post by DavidWillts


I don't quite think you can draw the line between yourself saying something to another and what goes on in politics. They are still living beings as you or I and given your line of thinking for an individual being to impose will on others is just free speech and is not "obligatory" (legal term, how that applies to a living being can be debated). The only reason this is followed in society is because we agree by action or inaction (consent). There are certain beings on this planet that will not harm or hurt anyone else and can live in peace with their fellow man, these are freemen in the essence of the word.


So again to put it short, tell me what gives a man in a suit in a building somewhere not knowing my plights of issues the right to tell me what to do if it does not harm others physicality,property, or persona?

P.S the previous poster is right, you need to have your name visible in the avatar as per T&C (I didn't realize this myself when making mine at first and had to darken the background at the top so my white text could be seen)

reply to post by EarthCitizen23


They are basically a group of people that think they are above the law, they try to prove their claims by cherry picking quotes from founding the founding fathers.
Like this

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, Penalty on libelling the governmentThat if any person shall write, print, utter or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them, or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to stir up sedition within the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against the United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

Locking people up for talking crap about the government and the president, no it is not out of the patriot act. This was a law written by some of the founding fathers. Do the freemen support this law? I mean, founding fathers DID write them.

I have a few questions for the "Sovereigns"


Is there a link or other resource you can provide where I can examine the final verdict in cases where "sovereign citizens" are able to use the ideals of the movement to actually avoid prosecution for a crime? I see a lot of videos that "sovereigns" put up which show a recess being declared which are labeled as a final victory but when I research the public records show the "sovereign" actually was convicted and complied with the punishment(s).

There are more than a few sovereigns on ATS which often speak of achieving such a victory. I do hope someone can provide the resource/link I have been searching for.

*******DISCLAIMER**********

I've done a great deal of research to find successful uses of the "sovereign" defense and have found none. I do not intend to spend more time digging around. If you know of a site please provide it and do not encourage me to do my own research.

reply to post by DavidWillts

Do the research, begin with your own city, like I did. I will not do it for you. After a lot of investigation, I got the city attorney to admit to me that the whole city was in fact a corporation, and even named it for me. I do not read "manifestos," and am not the least interested in them. But I do know how to read, study, and research, and I know who to ask questions too. Case Law does not lie, or make things up. The Constitution, and the Articles of Confederation are real documents, and the Law of the Land. When a Town incorporates it becomes a corporation, charged with making a profit. All employees are, by definition, corporation employees. The only real Law Enforcement is:
County Sheriff. Elected Official with more power than the President in their own County.
Notary Public. Can be used for the Service of Affidavits and Orders to sell at auction.
State Police. Hired by the Governor's office, they are State Law Enforcement.
Federal Law stops 10 miles past Washington D.C. city limits.
Federal Law can only be applied within a State with State permission, 10th. Amendment of the Constitution.
Some reading for the unknowing....

The 'Lectric Law Library

THE LAWYER'S SECRET OATH

NOTARY CERTIFICATE OF DEFAULT QUESTIONS

Uniform Commercial Code

COMMERCIAL LIENS: A MOST POTENT WEAPON

The U. C. C. Connection

UNDERSTANDING COMMON LAW

The Two United States and the Law

reply to post by DavidWillts


And what authority do the founding fathers have over your life today? Why are giving up your own sovereignty? It's your life no-one elses. You are the highest authority in your life. Government only has the claim of authority. If you accept that claim then fair enough that is your choice. But I don't see why you would let a group of people you have never met decide what is best for you.

Sovereigns do not believe they are above any laws. They understand that made up legislation is not law but a series of corporate policies. They understand that to break a law means there has to be a crime committed. By that I mean there has to have been some kind of harm done to someone else. You are showing up your own ignorance.

reply to post by DavidWillts


press-pubs.uchicago.edu...

Please read more on the quote you posted, it's not as clear cut as you may think

reply to post by autowrench

Do the research, begin with your own city, like I did. I will not do it for you. After a lot of investigation, I got the city attorney to admit to me that the whole city was in fact a corporation, and even named it for me.

That is being misleading at best a municipal corporation is not a corporation like Sears.

A municipal corporation is a city, town, village, or borough that has governmental powers.

You did not achieve any great feat by getting the city attorney to "admit" anything to you. It is on the same level as getting a physics teacher to "admit" water is wet.

Federal Law can only be applied within a State with State permission, 10th. Amendment of the Constitution.

What????
You should really "research" the constitution.

www.senate.gov...
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

(The "supremacy clause" is the most important guarantor of national union. It assures that the Constitution and federal laws and treaties take precedence over state law and binds all judges to adhere to that principle in their courts.)

Our society, country and the the neighborhoods we call home are based on simple fundamentals THAT MUST be adhered to...."Life Liberty and the pursuit of happiness"

As long as what I do does not inflict bodily injury or financial depression to you...you have no say in how I choose to live my life. This is the founding principle of Liberty.


Nothing says there are no laws or that someone is "above the law"...it is simple...as long as I am not causing actual physical or financial harm to someone...screw them...their philosophy is theirs and mine belongs to me.

The problem wings in when someone decides they disagree with my value system and therefore should be allowed to inflict rules and constraints...this is not liberty.

I might disagree with the person that believes it is ok to constrain another persons beliefs and freedoms but he thinks buggering his kids or his neighbors kids is ok.....I might have an issue with that persons line of thinking....

People should be free to live as they feel as long as they adhere to a basic fundamentals....'do no harm to others"...that might be a seemingly wide open statement but it is not. You might not like something so it's existence seems harmful to you...but that is not how it is meant...if I don't bloody your nose or rape your bank account...you have nothing to say...live and let live....

I am free to do whatever I want....this is what our founding fathers intended....people are trying to repeal us back to the dark ages and I refuse to let that happen.

reply to post by DavidWillts


I find it sadly humorous that you would,, cherry pick the Sedition Act section to illustrate your point, which is well taken.
Freedom of speech has a long history of evolution and change within America, and given that Sovereigns and Freeman are basically labeled 'seditious' and homeland terrorist because they wish to address the basics of what it means to be an American I concur.

Again, it may very well be time for Humans to realize that America was the Experiment in Freedom. Now here in the 21st century we find ourselves subject to powers that have destroyed our basic document to the point that more laws are heaped upon more laws to CONTROL the population not FREE them.
I again return to what it means to have Basic HUMAN RIGHTS, even if the Constitution and other founding documents are failing in that task, I suggest an upgrade as our division is based on a misunderstanding of what it means to be a FREE HUMAN BEING.
If that puts me in a position to say I am above the Law of the Land, so be it. Because I guess my liberal reading of such documents only instilled in me an urge for more FREEDOM not LeSS.

a side note Jefferson freed many of those who were fined and imprisoned by this act,,,, even as he supported it.

The Evolution of our founding documents took a wrong turn,,, be it at the end of the civil war, when the Federal Gov. became more powerful, or at the PATRIOT Act, which nose dived our freedoms,, or the most recent laws enacted which allows our Government to Kill us without Due Process of the Law they say the Federal Gov upholds.
Our slippery slope is now a ice covered path, chilled with the Authoritarian foundations of truth. That I do not agree with or will I abide as they ignore basic Human dignity and rights.
You would follow a government regardless of the moral ethics they produce? That is what happened to Germany if I remember my history correctly,,, which I know very well and am sure of the difference between Fascist and Free states.
Our Tribalism/Nationalism will destroy us,, thus again I refer you to your own Humanity ,,, not any Laws that you may think supercedes it.

reply to post by Dilligaf28


This link takes you to a case concerning the 7/7 scam here in the UK
Case won and walked free.

mtrial.org...

Well worth the read.

reply to post by illuminnaughty


I did not specify within my post that I was interested in a case within the United States. I will read over your link but I'm primarily interested in cases within the U.S.

Edit to add:

I read over that and its not at all what I'm interested in. I don't want to see blogs or videos I want to see an official transcript or a "court file" of a case where someone successfully used "sovereign" methodology to prevail in that court within the United States. This is a matter of public record and should be easily available yet in my years of research I have not found it. Surely someone has one of these cases that I can study?

Originally posted by Dilligaf28
reply to post by illuminnaughty

 

I did not specify within my post that I was interested in a case within the United States. I will read over your link but I'm primarily interested in cases within the U.S.

Edit to add:

I read over that and its not at all what I'm interested in. I don't want to see blogs or videos I want to see an official transcript or a "court file" of a case where someone successfully used "sovereign" methodology to prevail in that court within the United States. This is a matter of public record and should be easily available yet in my years of research I have not found it. Surely someone has one of these cases that I can study?

edit on 9-3-2012 by Dilligaf28 because: (no reason given)

www.adl.org...
There are a bunch of losing cases and I have yet to see or find anyone who has successfully convinced anyone that they were personally "sovereign".

I found this one to be extra lulz worthy

www.splcenter.org...
Sovereign citizen Richard Ulloa was to be sentenced for terrorizing police and bank officials in upstate New York with fake bills he hoped would stop a foreclosure on his home. Then he had an odd sort of epiphany.

“I’ve come to the realization I need therapy,” Ulloa, 52, told U.S. District Judge Thomas McAvoy during a sentencing hearing on Tuesday. He then went on to confess that a jail therapy program for alcoholics and drug addicts helped him realize he had a “delusional disorder” and that he never should have represented himself in his trial.

reply to post by DavidWillts


I've ran across that list in my research but thank you for the link. It is intriguing that I cannot find examples of this defense being successful.

Our gov't should know that when you point a finger, you point three right back at yourself. If our gov't wasn't TERRIFYING, there would be no need for "domestic terrorism."

Of course, instead of painting "sovereign citizens" in the same light as our national fathers fighting to end tyranny in the Revolutionary War, they paint them in the same light as "terrorists." Our government is a terrorist organization, by its own standards.

I don't even agree with what these American terrorists are doing, though I do believe that they are being left without many other options and their fears and frustrations are boiling over. They're becoming cornered animals with no choice but to fight the oppressor or face enslavement and death. It's tragic, but what can really be done? I hope our military has our back, but seeing how the propaganda machine in this nation operates, I'm sure many of them will be convinced that these so called American terrorists are actually national threats.

No wonder America is now an official terrorist battleground, the gov't saw this coming a mile away.