Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby Dreadlock » Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:33 pm

@Musashi

You are correct of course but you are talking about capacity in the sense of aptitude.

I am talking about capacity in the sense of role/function/position etc. Which are entirely different concepts to aptitude, yet still of vital importance in court. For example earlier wanabefree asked

12. Doesn’t a court have to have jurisdiction prior to any issues of capacity being raised ?.


The answer to that is "yes", in the context of capacity as "aptitude".
But the answer is "no", in the context of capacity as "role". Indeed, role comes before jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is derived from the capacity (role, position, function etc.) in which one was acting at the time of any alleged offence.
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby bustachemtrails » Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:42 pm

OK some of you may accuse me of being boring or monotonous but I would like to make this point anyway.

This country is in lawful rebellion according to the constitution right?

How then can ANYBODY have 'legal capacity' when the legal system is treasonous and unlawful? without giving credulity to that unlawful regime??

I wont play in their corporate arenas and if others did the same, then they would have NO customers to rip off, just saying.
bustachemtrails
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:19 pm
Location: Devizes, wiltshire

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby Dreadlock » Mon Mar 31, 2014 3:09 pm

@ busta

If you think you have a valid point to make keep repeating it and it might eventually sink in with some people. I'm guilty of doing the same.

How then can ANYBODY have 'legal capacity' when the legal system is treasonous and unlawful? without giving credulity to that unlawful regime??


The answer is simply that they can't. I'm sure your question was rhetorical.

I wont play in their corporate arenas...


Neither will I. This is why I ALWAYS challenge capacity (role) when it comes to PCNs or any other offences which are purely statutory in nature.

The "authorities" assume a capacity (role) for us which places us in their "corporate arenas". If they cannot prove their assumption (VERY difficult for them to do) and you challenge them on it, the charges will be quietly dropped and a complaint won't even be filed at court. Simple.

This is why I consider Mark Stevens' approach to be "making a mountain out of a molehill". Why go to court, thereby giving the court at least some credibility, when you don't have to go to court at all?

Of course some people claim that I'm talking crap - yet don't have the spine to challenge me or the evidence to support their claim...
Dreadlock
 
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:08 am

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby Too Far Gone » Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:05 pm

This country is in lawful rebellion according to the constitution right?


In theory but not in practice.
User avatar
Too Far Gone
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:59 pm

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby musashi » Tue Apr 01, 2014 6:50 pm

Too Far Gone wrote:
This country is in lawful rebellion according to the constitution right?


In theory but not in practice.


Some of us are active in the matter, by living it, with a part of our activity being to spread the rebellion by spreading the information and as well as living the life and, as Busta has all too frequently to do, repeat it, repeat it, repeat it. It is a well established fact that, for most people, learning something is no more than a prelude to forgetting it.

While debates about capacity, or evolution, or providing working legal processes may be okay the real action is in getting us out of EU control and regaining sovereignty. This requires real effort and real sacrifice. I humbly suggest that any other action does little to nothing in furthering that effort.

When you work for A do not expect a reward from B.
We are rewarded according to where we direct our efforts, and even the (legitimate?) satisfaction of having proved a point or gotten someone to accept our view of certain matters when he previously held another, opposing view, will be cold comfort when we are inescapably held in the unyielding and mercilous grip of the tyrant.

Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby bustachemtrails » Wed Apr 02, 2014 11:26 am

I appreciate the responses from you all. I know I'm like a broken record at times but I make no apologies.

It is an evidential fact that the country is in lawful rebellion it is not just a theory if we abide by the constitution. If we do not then we deny our own sovereignty and accept slavery and occupation by the EU.

I have found (as others have found) that when we bring up the treason matter and file the evidence with the claim within notices to individuals, they tend to back off as Dreadlock quite rightly states...

I know others who have had similar results so its more than just a theory, and so far I have been allowed to get away with not appearing in their corporate hearings and not paying the ransom demands for over 18 months... I am gathering support to attempt further action as I demand my day in court (a propeer court of course), but we need numbers to support this akin to the Birkenhead lawful rebellion. That day proved to me that we can mobilize en masse when necessary, and many others would have attended if they had been aware of it.

I also (now) see the benefit in bringing claims against individuals who transgress against us, and using the 'system' to file such claims in commercial lien procedures which I struggled to accept for quite some time. I suppose I still have a cognitive dissonance with regard to using their system but if it works? well its lawful rebellion just the same.

If we can dispose of public servants in such ways by taking their bonds then it would send a poweful message to others to act according to the rule of law.... I have my doubts as to whether 'they' would allow such procedures to reach fruition however, as they know how devastating that would be for their rotten empire, time will surely tell.

Peace.
bustachemtrails
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:19 pm
Location: Devizes, wiltshire

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby Too Far Gone » Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:53 pm

I would love to see the lawful rebellion work as intended.

One of the aspects I was following regarding lawful rebellion was the ability to with hold tax in all its forms. This to me is the most significant threat to any unlawful government. Take away theor funds and they're on their own. No support from the people. The problem I personally had with it was twofold.

How do you declare that you're in lawful rebellion in a way that is recognised by law (or the government).
How to with hold the taxes that lawful rebellion entitles you to do?

Speaking as someone who is actively looking into various ways to defend myself and hold other accountable, I found extremely difficult to find anyone who has successfully entered into lawful rebellion and had the right recognised in law. If I am having this difficulty, then the average clueless guy has no chance. Furthermore, in order to sell this idea to the public at large, we need some solid information that is tried and tested in order for them to get involved. Don't get me wrong, I know you guys and others are fighting in this way and I'm not knocking it. I'm just saying that while this method is limited to (shall we say) skilled individuals, it isn't going to catch on.

I would offer any support I can to anyone attempting this, so if there's anything I can do to help out, just ask. I want this for the masses.
User avatar
Too Far Gone
 
Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:59 pm

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby bustachemtrails » Wed Apr 02, 2014 3:25 pm

Lawful rebellion is indeed a massive falure because everyone seems to want to see it working before they take it up....it only has to be taken up by a determined minority and it would work..... It becomes a moral issue in the end. I have no choice but to take up LR or be guilty of agreeing to my own demise and the demise of innocent people abroad as we allow our so called public servants to kill them. Not only that, but I will never pay into a regime that commits sexual crimes on minors, its a moral choice.

The fact is that Lawful rebellion HAS been invoked LAWFULLY according to the constitution. The Queen HAS breached the Coronation Oath contract and is therefore deposed of the office according to the rule of law.

Even though we all know the crown corporation is what we are dealing within the maritime courts they still claim to be acting as representatives of Elizardbreath 11, who is no more than a European citizen in these treasonous times.

They will not recognise lawful rebellion of course, all they will do is ignore you but that speaks volumes in itself. I have declared myself in lawful rebellion which they did not deny and, I have successfully NOT paid the £700 ransom they demand (a fine is a form of tax is it not?).

I find that people tend to make assertions and assumptions as to why they are leaving me alone, yet my affidavits and notices speak for themselves. How much more evidence do people need I ask myself? Even the groups I attend want me to repeat the process I have done, before they will accept it.... I ask why else would they withdraw the arrest warrant and refuse to arrest me? Who else can make that claim? who else has done what I have done? I don't Know anybody! but the process is not difficult to do it is in fact really simple, you don't need to be an expert, it is all evidential they have no recourse to the truth.

With respect it will never catch on until people act on it themselves. Institutionalised treason can ONLY be overthrown by the people there is no other way.
bustachemtrails
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:19 pm
Location: Devizes, wiltshire

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby musashi » Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:42 pm

Some time ago I got a parking ticket from the council. I did this deliberately and I dealt with it the usual freeman way and ended up with bailiff and police to deal with. It was dealt with very successfully in the end and I learned a lot more by doing so. The result of that was posted up here under the title "The Bailiff, the Police and Musashi."

The fine I later got was from the police for speeding in a controlled area on the M62 and I went the lawful rebellion route, sending treason notices and a lot of background info. I have heard nothing in the two or so years since it happened and when they sent me their demand. Coincidence? Councils often give up - but the police? Not usually.

Look at any rebellion, uprising, revolt etc and you will soon see that only a tiny percentage of the population ever gets involved - whether that be the Scottish Wars of Independence, the French Resistance or any other you can name. It will be the same here with us.

Do you want the beauty of the full blown rose?
If so, you must accept the thorns.
Do you want the glory of dawn and a bright new morn?
If so, you must live through the dark hours of the night.
Do you want the joy of liberty and the solace of freedom?
If so, you must pay the price, and the price of freedom is suffering and sacrifice.

Musashi.
It's still fucked, isn't it?
User avatar
musashi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Challenge to DREADLOCK prove capacity matters ?

Postby wanabfree » Mon Apr 14, 2014 9:45 pm

Dreadlock wrote:@ busta

If you think you have a valid point to make keep repeating it and it might eventually sink in with some people. I'm guilty of doing the same.

How then can ANYBODY have 'legal capacity' when the legal system is treasonous and unlawful? without giving credulity to that unlawful regime??


The answer is simply that they can't. I'm sure your question was rhetorical.

I wont play in their corporate arenas...


Neither will I. This is why I ALWAYS challenge capacity (role) when it comes to PCNs or any other offences which are purely statutory in nature.

The "authorities" assume a capacity (role) for us which places us in their "corporate arenas". If they cannot prove their assumption (VERY difficult for them to do) and you challenge them on it, the charges will be quietly dropped and a complaint won't even be filed at court. Simple.

This is why I consider Mark Stevens' approach to be "making a mountain out of a molehill". Why go to court, thereby giving the court at least some credibility, when you don't have to go to court at all?

Of course some people claim that I'm talking crap - yet don't have the spine to challenge me or the evidence to support their claim...


I know I said I was finished with this thread, but I do have to respond to this, as it throws up yet aging more contradictions and straw man attacks.

Dreadlock states,

“The "authorities" assume a capacity (role) for us which places us in their "corporate arenas".

So you’re making a premise as if it is already founded on fact, that “authorities” assume “capacity”, the way you believe it ?.

So I have to ask, based on what evidence and facts ?.

You have already admitted you don’t have any case law on the issue, were the bureaucrats have specifically said that’s what they assume, and neither can you be bothered to look for it ?, so how is it you know what they are assuming ?, you don’t have their legal opinions, so what exactly do you have ?.

Just because you claim you challenge them on the issue, does not make it a fact, that it is therefore an issue for them, or that they give a toss?

He also states,

“Of course some people claim that I’m talking craps - yet don't have the spine to challenge me or the evidence to support their claim...”

I will say I think you’re full of crap, based on the fact you still have not presented anything on this issue, as far as verifiable evidence is concerned.

I don’t have to force somebody into partaking in a wager or deliberately provoke a bureaucratic attack, to prove what I am saying is true, and self evident, so why can’t you ?.

I gave you your challenge, you implied you wanted me, or anybody else with half a brain, because maybe it’s not an issue for them in the first place, and they won’t have clue what you’re talking about ?, as is demonstrated in many of the freeman concepts.

I don’t give credit to anybody to continues to promote, and give credit themselves; to a system that forces people against their will to turn up in court or else, and then bleat, and/or behave, in the manner, and way they prescribe and demand, because they say so; no matter how ridiculous or irrational it may be ?.

I can’t believe or maybe I can, how other people posting on this thread, have tip-toed around you on this, and still won’t hold your feet to the fire.

You have already admitted to not having the courts opinions, i.e. case law on this issue, which would at least make a prima facia case of your claims, and yet you insist as if it were fact, that they assume, your capacity, i.e. the role you play in court, as demanded by them, has any truth or validity to it ?.

Last chance put up or shut up,

If you can’t or won’t, or reply to this in your usual insulting and evasive manner, I’ll show why I know your wrong, and full of crap, and present the evidence; no one will have to be forced into a parking ticket fight with their council either, how’s that ?.

39 posts so far, tik- toc :wink:
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Freeman related questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests