LEGAL "FACTS" MOST PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW, BUT SHOULD

[BADecker]

^^^ Now you are calling American law the silliness.    

your bullet points are not american law
they are a copy and paste of some dude you made loads of silly points(not law) and then what appears more likely just threw in some random cases.
your actions are the same as if told you cigarettes are healthy by cutting out a food label for vegetable soup and stick it on a pack of cigarettes.. but it dont make them healthy in reality


again the cases do not tally to the points. and many people have told you this. .. just accept it
this makes the pointd irrelevant which makes your topic irrelevant which makes your context silly and irrelevant

you really would be better off researching more or copy/pasting freeman stuff less
im trying to do you a favour here by trying to catch you up with stuff people knew a decade ago
if you want to take the slow route. see you in 10 years
or you can just wake up and realise your info is freeman misbeliefs

in short just stop copy/pasting freeman crap

When are you going to wake up and realize that when a freeman wins in court, they don't call the joker a freeman any longer? No wonder you don't win in court. All you use is freeman stuff... the stuff that didn't win.

Why don't you show us how to use the law in ways that work better... if you're so smart?

[franky1]

you still have not realised the whole 'la la la la' stuff of the karl lentz example that you thought was a freeman win...
seriously.. do the friggen research

figure out for yourself what was behind karl lentz's 'la la la' and you will realise he did not freeman win at all. and his freeman chest rubbing was not even applicable to what became the result. h did not have to evn say the freeman script that he tells others to say. if he instead actually told viewers what was behind his la la la section people would know how to win a case like the scenario.

its like saying
here is how to pal an orange
go up to an orange and argue with it to unpeal, shout and scream and then la la la. then you will find it has unpealed
where the la la la = and then grab the orange and peal the skin off

he metaphorically hid the need to peal the skin off to make people think it became unpealed by arguing nonsensically for hours was the solution

just do the research
realise the flaws then realise whats ben hidden from you. then realise why you are blindly following the speaches

P.S
you can always spot the religious followers by the way they respond with excuses not to do the research and instead try to fight for why they should just believe in what they have been preached

[BADecker]

you still have not realised the whole 'la la la la' stuff of the karl lentz example that you thought was a freeman win...
seriously.. do the friggen research

figure out for yourself what was behind karl lentz's 'la la la' and you will realise he did not freeman win at all. and his freeman chest rubbing was not even applicable to what became the result. h did not have to evn say the freeman script that he tells others to say. if he instead actually told viewers what was behind his la la la section people would know how to win a case like the scenario.

its like saying
here is how to pal an orange
go up to an orange and argue with it to unpeal, shout and scream and then la la la. then you will find it has unpealed
where the la la la = and then grab the orange and peal the skin off

he metaphorically hid the need to peal the skin off to make people think it became unpealed by arguing nonsensically for hours was the solution

just do the research
realise the flaws then realise whats ben hidden from you. then realise why you are blindly following the speaches

P.S
you can always spot the religious followers by the way they respond with excuses not to do the research and instead try to fight for why they should just believe in what they have been preached

You talk about doing research. But I don't blame you for not realizing that Karl Lentz isn't freeman. Who wants to check into stuff that he thinks is junk?

Here is how to see that Karl Lentz's "stuff" isn't freeman. It's easy.

Freeman people file hundreds of pages of documents in their "briefs." They talk about God, the rights of mankind, freedom, and all kinds of stuff that doesn't have anything to do directly (most of the time) with their case.

Karl is different. Karl files one or two pages in his claim. All they have to do with is who the parties are, what the other party has done wrong, and what Karl wants as payment for the wrong they have done to him. If there are other docs or pictures, they are referred to as attachments, and they don't go into any more detail than necessary to back up Karl's case.

What Karl does is the same as attorneys and DA's do all the time. It's to the point, and let's get this thing done and over with.

I'm starting to think either that you are completely ignorant of court operations, or that you are out there to keep the people from recognizing how fast a case can be handled by the courts. And especially that people don't need attorneys.

All your blab about freemen is pointless. But it sounds like you adore them and their stuff, even though it all failed you somewhere along the line.

[franky1]

your still stuck not realising it. and just blindly following karl lentz's preaching like your his religious follower

goodluck with that

p.s i never followed the freeman stuff you spout out because i can see passed your preaching and copy and pastes. i instead research beyond your preaches and do things you are apparently too afraid to do

many people have seen your flaws and seen you lack the first person experience/knowledge/research
i have no idea why you are just a copy and paste drone follower of the stuff you read. but hey, goodluck with your narrowminded vision to refuse to stand back and do independant research

enjoy your life in la la la land

and no dont just auto reply with the empty response of why you should continue believing the crap you believe. atleast take a step back and research whats behind the la la la
and then look at your first topic post and truly research every numbered point of your topic post and verify each bit.
dont just be a blind drone. DO SOME RESEARCH
and no dont auto respond pretending you done the research...this topic has proved you just copy and pasted without verifying
and no dont just auto respond that im just 'wrong cos im wrong'. as a drone response of many usually write. DO THE RESEARCH
and no dont respond with some typical offensive reply .. just do the research

you can insult and say anything. but in the end.. just do the research and learn..
..or stay a drone

[BADecker]

your still stuck not realising it. and just blindly following karl lentz's preaching like your his religious follower

goodluck with that

p.s i never followed the freeman stuff you spout out because i can see passed your preaching and copy and pastes. i instead research beyond your preaches and do things you are apparently too afraid to do

many people have seen your flaws and seen you lack the first person experience/knowledge/research
i have no idea why you are just a copy and paste drone follower of the stuff you read. but hey, goodluck with your narrowminded vision to refuse to stand back and do independant research

enjoy your life in la la la land

and no dont just auto reply with the empty response of why you should continue believing the crap you believe. atleast take a step back and research whats behind the la la la
and then look at your first topic post and truly research every numbered point of your topic post and verify each bit.
dont just be a blind drone. DO SOME RESEARCH
and no dont auto respond pretending you done the research...this topic has proved you just copy and pasted without verifying
and no dont just auto respond that im just 'wrong cos im wrong'. as a drone response of many usually write. DO THE RESEARCH
and no dont respond with some typical offensive reply .. just do the research

you can insult and say anything. but in the end.. just do the research and learn..
..or stay a drone

There you go again. Attorney's do what Karl does all the time.

Take a look at any attorney court case. You have the attorney for the plaintiff, and the attorney for the defendant. One of them loses the case. Does that make him a freeman, simply because he lost?

When you talk about the things that I talk about, if you want to ignore the law, that's okay. But other people don't ignore the law. Take Judge Judy on TV. She runs common law courts of record, except that there is an appeal to a jury. You are missing a whole lot of law.

And when you say that I am wrong just because I am wrong, you are really talking about yourself.

Do some research into the law. You only seem to know about freeman stuff.

I admit that you have a really good format in not capitalizing the beginnings of your sentences, your personal pronoun "I," and that you don't use much if any punctuation. This is good common law writing... showing that you are not in their jurisdiction at all, by not using their grammar. Are you sure you're not really a freeman, and that everything that you write is common law freeman style?

You do a good enough job without punctuation for anybody to follow what you are trying to get across (most of the time). But if you really want to get out of their jurisdiction, stop putting spaces between your words. Nobody writes like that. If you dropped the spaces, you would be completely outside of their jurisdiction in court. It might be a little difficult for folks to follow, but I bet they could work their way through. (I know. It's the booze that makes you write this way. But it's almost in perfect form for filing a common law claim.)

[franky1]

your info is not the law.. your knowledge is the freeman misbeliefs of real law
the reason i know your using freeman crap is because YOU use all the freeman links and buzzwords
your copy and pastes are from folks that are into the freeman stuff
your mindset is stuck in the freeman stuff

just because freeman say the word common law. and then stir in their own mix does not make what they say the real common law.
you still have not learned the difference
as evidenced by your 'capitalised' crap you just said

your topics first post proves it.
you didnt even bother to research what you copy and pasted

you are a dim whit by thinking the capitalisation has significant meaning
you have drunk too much of the freeman coolaid

i am the one that knows more about the real common law than you.
every single post you make has the pretense of the freeman variant/misconception

just do the friggen research and wake up
you have no clue and shouldnt be giving advice. all you do is copy and paste from someone else, bu you have truly no personal experience and its rally obvious

[BADecker]

your info is not the law.. your knowledge is the freeman misbeliefs of real law
the reason i know your using freeman crap is because YOU use all the freeman links and buzzwords
your copy and pastes are from folks that are into the freeman stuff
your mindset is stuck in the freeman stuff

just because freeman say the word common law. and then stir in their own mix does not make what they say the real common law.
you still have not learned the difference
as evidenced by your 'capitalised' crap you just said

your topics first post proves it.
you didnt even bother to research what you copy and pasted

you are a dim whit by thinking the capitalisation has significant meaning
you have drunk too much of the freeman coolaid

i am the one that knows more about the real common law than you.
every single post you make has the pretense of the freeman variant/misconception

just do the friggen research and wake up
you have no clue and shouldnt be giving advice. all you do is copy and paste from someone else, bu you have truly no personal experience and its rally obvious

You just can't get it through your head, can you? When a freeman uses all the "freeman crap" and "all the freeman links and buzzwords," and wins in court, it isn't called "freeman crap" and "links and buzzwords" any longer. Rather, it goes down in the court records as a win.

Did you catch that? "Freeman crap" and "links and buzzwords" is law. Wake up... or not. You are too deluded to come out of your silliness. Stay there so you don't corrupt "freeman crap" and "links and buzzwords" that are law.

[franky1]

karl lentz did not win due to the freeman crap rhetoric
remember he la la la'd over the real law stuff

if lents did not mention the freeman stuff you love so much and just done the law stuff he la la lad over he would still have won
thus the freeman stuff you love was not the cause of the win

its like i can tell you the real law stuff.. then karl lentz tells you to wear a pink dress to court.. you win the case. and you decide the pink dress won the case and suddenly your a pink dress preacher
atleast realise it has nothing to do with the pink dress as the pink dress is the freeman mascarade

the whole point of freeman stuff is to cause so much drama and disruption in the hope of not being convicted by reason of insanity/stupidity
that is not a true win, as the consequences could see YOU locked up in a mental home, should you dare try it

and funnily enough your many topics have shown your lack of first person knowledge, meaning even you wont try it
so one last tip. dont provide info if you have not fully researched, vetted, checked, understood and ofcourse dont give info unless you have first person experience of it

in short. dont be a copy and paste drone.. learn about stuff before you try to promote it
learn consequences

[BADecker]

karl lentz did not win due to the freeman crap rhetoric
remember he la la la'd over the real law stuff

if lents did not mention the freeman stuff you love so much and just done the law stuff he la la lad over he would still have won
thus the freeman stuff you love was not the cause of the win

its like i can tell you the real law stuff.. then karl lentz tells you to wear a pink dress to court.. you win the case. and you decide the pink dress won the case and suddenly your a pink dress preacher
atleast realise it has nothing to do with the pink dress as the pink dress is the freeman mascarade

the whole point of freeman stuff is to cause so much drama and disruption in the hope of not being convicted by reason of insanity/stupidity
that is not a true win, as the consequences could see YOU locked up in a mental home, should you dare try it

and funnily enough your many topics have shown your lack of first person knowledge, meaning even you wont try it
so one last tip. dont provide info if you have not fully researched, vetted, checked, understood and ofcourse dont give info unless you have first person experience of it

in short. dont be a copy and paste drone.. learn about stuff before you try to promote it
learn consequences

How in the world dense are you? There might be a few people who have won every time so far. But now and again they all lose one... even Karl Lentz.

But you are right. I need typing practice, so I should cut down on my "copy and paste."

This is a forum. How in the world ignorant are you? Copy and paste is a part of active forum members.



EDIT: Are you really trying to say that you don't know how to copy and paste?

[franky1]

keep trying your pink dress strategy.. it a good laugh but wont get the results you want

[BADecker]

keep trying your pink dress strategy.. it a good laugh but wont get the results you want

Oh no! We've been franked! Check out "The advantages of unfranked dividends" at https://www.chan-naylor.com.au/advantages-unfranked-dividends/.

 

[franky1]

being frank (straight to the point no kissing ass) has nothing to do with tax
being frank(a name) has nothing to do with tax

having a message franked(postal) has nothing to do with tax

the reason im not a penny pinching person with a bitcoin address in my footer(unlike you) is that i dont even need to consider that payments are needed for my posts.

i self frank, (self authorise and send my own posts) thus dont need to pay or get paid
i got a nice hoard of coins i ben sitting on for many years now so i dont ned to penny pinch or kiss ass

there are other funny word plays for why i chose this name.. but you wiil never grasp the subtle details. as demonstrated by many examples of you not checking things or thinking hard about things.

but anyway
keep having a nice day mis-understanding things

[BADecker]

^^^ Actually, the government franked you by calling you a person. Then you franked yourself by agreeing with them.

[franky1]

^^^ Actually, the government franked you by calling you a person. Then you franked yourself by agreeing with them.

you have no clue

for all intense and purposes i could identify myself as a shemale that uses the pronouns: helicopter chopper and swirly whirly bird
but i am not on of those crazy people that demand to be identified as a particular thing because in the end when you actually bother to get into the details it does not matter if you call yourself a helicopter a person or a human or a pink dress wearer.

 in court someone just needs to point in your direction no matter what you identify yourself as

and the accuser does not nd to be the victim. the accuser can be a forensics expert, a witness, a police officer a security camera operator a legal advocate a family member.. anyone
so even you trying to fight over WHO is accusing you is empty. your not fighting the evidence itself

your waffle is just as bad as them odd people saying 'im not a number im a human being' and an employer just stares at you and says just get back to work. you wont get out of doing work by arguing that you want to be identified as something. at most you will just get sacked. (but foolishly in your eyes you'll consider that a win)

playing the 'you cant identify me so i am invisible and not here and dont have to answer to my actions' game is not real common law practice

your freeman stuff about birth certificates and governments is your mis-understood pink dress. you are only seeing like 5% of it because you only believe the freeman stuff which is 95% fluff with the random spray of common law stuff spread in to make it kind of sound meaningful.

emphasis you believe the 95% fluff but dont understand the real 5% they la la la over. and that has been proven in other topics
you ignore and mis-understand the la la la

[BADecker]

^^^ Actually, the government franked you by calling you a person. Then you franked yourself by agreeing with them.

you have no clue

for all intense and purposes i could identify myself as a shemale that uses the pronouns: helicopter chopper and swirly whirly bird

your freeman stuff about birth certificates and governments is your mis-understood pink dress. you are only seeing like 5% of it because you only believe the freeman stuff which is 95% fluff with the random spray of common law stuff spread in to make it kind of sound meaningful.

emphasis you believe the 95% fluff but dont understand the real 5% they la la la over. and that has been proven in other topics
you ignore and mis-understand the la la la

Yeah, yeah. I know. It's all freeman stuff until it wins in court.

Are you really a shemale?

 

[franky1]

Are you really a shemale?

trying to dumb thigs down to your level, hoping something actually getss into your head and makes you realise stuff

i have a penis. .. but i also have a vagina between my legs far more often then you(via having a spouse). so for all intense and purposes i could say that.

also lesbians are attracted to women, that must make me lesbian because i like women

point is anyone can identify themselves as anything they like. but it doesnt change reality.
you cannot get away with a crime by fighting that you are really a helicopter or a shemale or a lesbian or just some invisible monkeyboy

[BADecker]

Are you really a shemale?

trying to dumb thigs down to your level, hoping something actually getss into your head and makes you realise stuff

i have a penis. .. but i also have a vagina between my legs far more often then you(via having a spouse). so for all intense and purposes i could say that.

also lesbians are attracted to women, that must make me lesbian because i like women

point is anyone can identify themselves as anything they like. but it doesnt change reality.
you cannot get away with a crime by fighting that you are really a helicopter or a shemale or a lesbian or just some invisible monkeyboy

LOL! That's really good stuff. Do you have any legal sites for it, or is it all freeman?

 

[franky1]

LOL! That's really good stuff. Do you have any legal sites for it, or is it all freeman?

all YOUR stuff has been freeman rhetoric .. and your soo inept/narrow minded, that you either dont realise it or are just soo arrogant in your ignorance that you are suddenly trying to back track and pretend your not freeman but suddenly the rest of the world is..

sorry dude but YOU ARE THE ONE quoting freeman stuff.. no one else JUST YOU

now here is a tip for your escape route out of your beliefs of the limited freeman stuff
research tresspass and contracts
these are part of common and constitutional law. and you should start to see the flaws of your previous freeman rhetoric once you open yourself up to stuff outside your freeman box

happy researching.
and no need to reply with any more random defensive waffle. just do the research

[BADecker]

LOL! That's really good stuff. Do you have any legal sites for it, or is it all freeman?

all YOUR stuff has been freeman rhetoric .. and your soo inept/narrow minded, that you either dont realise it or are just soo arrogant in your ignorance that you are suddenly trying to back track and pretend your not freeman but suddenly the rest of the world is..

sorry dude but YOU ARE THE ONE quoting freeman stuff.. no one else JUST YOU

now here is a tip for your escape route out of your beliefs of the limited freeman stuff
research tresspass and contracts
these are part of common and constitutional law. and you should start to see the flaws of your previous freeman rhetoric once you open yourself up to stuff outside your freeman box

happy researching.
and no need to reply with any more random defensive waffle. just do the research

You are finally getting to the REAL point. You are absolutely right! All MY stuff is freeman rhetoric. But it seems that you haven't figured out why, yet. Here's why.

All MY stuff is based in the way the government operates. And government is set up to operate with the idea of giving freedom to people. This is why it is freeman stuff, and not slave stuff.

What this means is that you have it a bit backward. The so-called freemen that you are talking about didn't have to go through all the BS they went through to attempt to get what they wanted. They acted out of ignorance to some extent, but possibly out of being duped by government plants inside their organizations.

True freemen use government laws to remain free. But before they use these laws, they learn how the laws work by looking at examples of what works... and understanding why it works the way it does.


Do you remember my point in the OP? Let me repeat it here: "What I am looking for is comments regarding the below info. Is it right? Is it wrong? Has it been discarded in law? Has it been overruled by various court cases? Are the legal sites accurate? What does anyone think? The points are numbered, so it should be easy to answer them point-by-point."

You seem to think that I am supporting some faulty ideals by asking questions. You seem to think that it is a bad idea to show some laws and court cases to people. You seem to think that I am somehow bad for pointing out some things to other people so that they can make up their own minds.

It's like you want to condemn me for investigating and asking others to do the same. You want people to be like ostriches, and stick their heads in holes in the sand, so that they can be attacked from behind. What kind of a sick dips**t are you? Wake up and start learning so that you have something to protect yourself with should you ever need it.

[franky1]

firstly your not asking questions. your trying to make points. using references that have nothing to do with the points as many have informed you

secondly freeman rhetoric is not law or real. it is th same as where a cult mis-understands religion/science to form a group of people that believe in something that others dont. and yes cults are not the ones in the right.

your defense of the freeman stuff shows your still not seeing the flaws of it. you are still trying to find excuses to carry on thinking that you can lawfully drive on a public road without a driving licence or pretend your a corporation brand instead of a human to get out of court fines

just expand your eyes beyond the copy and paste crap of freeman and start to see the whole picture and maybe you will see the HOLE in the freeman picture

it is rather amusing to see cultists defend their stance to the death.
you talk about rights but avoid understanding the responsibilities and consequences that come with it

you title 'legal facts'  are not facts
many have told you this. so its time to wake yourself up

freeman stuff is not the plain meaning law nor is it the common law of common knowledge/common sense. freeman stuff is the mis-interpretation and trying to convince people that something means something else

sorry but your name is not a corporation
your name is an identifier of you. no matter if you identify yourself as a corporation a helicopter or a shemale. your name is still you. so you can play all the games you like. its still you

the whole freeman "person" stuff is about you can pretend your business is liable but your not by trying to detach yourself, you can pretend you go by different pronouns to escape the law

but you the human being known as whatever thing you present yourself as are still liable
so just stop pretending that your a corporation as thats not what the plain meaning/common law is.

i stiil laugh that one of your points was thinking there are no judges in courts.