Rory Daniel Hawes - who the heck is Regina?

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

So, how about a new west coast subject? I spotted a news report in “The Now”, a newspaper serving the Coquitlam area in British Columbia, which concerns a Rory Daniel Hawes, a.k.a. “Rory-Daniel House of Hawes”, who managed to get himself jailed for contempt of court (http://www.thenownews.com/news/man-jail ... t-1.800365):

Rory Daniel Hawes was slated to appear in Port Coquitlam provincial court Wednesday for driving-related charges in Port Moody. By the afternoon, after spending four hours in a cell, the defendant was apologizing to a judge.

Hawes found himself in trouble with Judge Rory Walters for his conduct during court proceedings that morning.

According to Crown, the events began when the judge asked Hawes a question and the defendant, who goes by the name Rory-Daniel House of Hawes, said he was looking for information from the court. Specifically, he wanted to know who Regina was.

Regina is the word used to refer to the Queen in legal cases. After a back and forth, the judge decided to hold Hawes in an apparent contempt of court.

Brought back before the judge later in the day, Hawes initially began his apology, suggesting his "court" is never looking to offend another court.

Standing in the prisoner's box, he told the judge the court had information he wanted to get and he wasn't trying to offend.

But the judge replied to Hawes: "Is that what you call an apology?" Hawes once again apologized to the judge and was let go.

Bing bing bing! I think we have a customer!

The report continues to indicate that Rory is facing various motor vehicle and criminal charges.

He sure is. A trip to the British Columbia Courts website identified lots of stuff for a Rory Daniel Hawes born in 1978 who uses the alias “HOUSE OF HAWES, RORY Daniel". I believe that’s our lad!

In 1997 Rory was charged with two counts of Criminal Code, s. 266, assault. These old court records don’t show the result.

In 2002 Rory was charged with Criminal Code, s. 810(1), fear of causing injury or damage. It appears he did not dispute the charges, and was released on a 12 month recognizance with a $500 fine.

In 2011 Rory was charged with a trifecta of stereotypic Freeman-on-the-Land motor vehicle offences: failing to stop for police, driving without insurance or a licence. This proceeding ended on August 16, 2013 with a “Deemed to not be Disputed” finding on all three charges. Rory’s penalty is not recorded.

Then on Oct. 16, 2012 Rory was charged with three offences in Coquitlam:

• - Criminal Code, s. 129(a) - resisting a peace officer
  - Criminal Code, s. 249(1)(a) – dangerous operation of a motor vehicle
  - Criminal Code, s. 249.1(1) – flight from a peace officer.

These charges have not yet reached trial, but they’re close, with a March 2014 pretrial conference. Warrants issued for Rory’s arrest on March 20, 2014 and April 2, 2014.

Next we have a set of 8 related charges. I’m a bit confused by how the records appear, but at a minimum it seems that Rory on Dec. 21, 2013 was in Port Moody, British Columbia, and charged with:

• - Criminal Code, s. 253(1)(a) – driving a motor vehicle while impaired
  - Criminal Code, s. 254(5) – failure or refusal to provide a sample (probably a breathalyzer alcohol sample)
  - Motor Vehicle Act, s. 24(3)(b) – driving without insurance (like any good Freeman!)
  - Motor Vehicle Act, s. 24(1) – driving without a motor vehicle drivers licence (but I was travelling!)
  - Criminal Code, s 145(5.1) – breach of an post-arrest undertaking

As well, Rory has two more charges that relate to alleged misconduct in New Westminster on Feb. 19, 2014:

• - Criminal Code, s 145(5.1) – breach of an post-arrest undertaking
  - Criminal Code, s 145(3) – breach of an undertaking or recognizance

Looking at the court records there have been many appearances and adjournments, along with multiple applications to have Rory’s bail revoked. The last activity was on March 20, 2014, where a warrant was issued for Rory’s arrest.

Then we have three more charges, all dating from Feb. 19, 2014, each alleging Rory was driving while prohibited or had his licence suspended. A warrant issued for Rory’s arrest on March 5, 2014 on those charges. My bet is this was the trigger for the two other Feb. 19, 2014 charges above.

So it looks to me that Rory has three outstanding sets of criminal and motor vehicle offences approaching trial, and on all three he has outstanding arrest warrants. Busy guy!

I did not locate any reported judgments for Rory.

But the name Rory Hawes sounded familiar – and a Quatloos search identified why – he is one of those who led the outraged protests of Alexander Ream’s psychiatric detention (viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9388&p=165793#p165793). At that point I had summarized his lengthy Facebook posting (sadly now deleted) on the gross mistreatment of Mr. Ream in this manner:

Mind control drug needles in his ass! In his ass! All because you voted for Queen Elizabeth II, you bastard Canadians!

Fortunately Rory’s entire post is preserved at the Quatloos link above.

So this is Rory’s Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/RORYHAWESTM). Note the “TM” in the URL – how clever! It contains reams and reams of anti-police and anti-government copypasta, but also a few comments on the in-court oppression faced by Rory. For example Rory observes (http://www.facebook.com/RORYHAWESTM/pos ... 3291011332):

Rory Hawes
March 12
So the people that claim to have education and knowledge that gives them authority over me are not even organized enough to cancel a court date in another jurisdiction. The degree of their incompetence never ceases to amaze me. Their "mistake" has pirates all over the place trying to put me in a cage. A warrant has been falsely made for my arrest. I wonder how long they will keep me caged before they say "Oops". Maybe they aren't incompetent, maybe they just set me up. Big mistake if the try that though. I have so many witnesses and the recording that will prove them wrong. The sad part is that if I sue them they pay me with the money they stole from you. They are never held to account for their actions. What a fucking load of shit the "justice" system is.

Rory is also featured in a number of “alternative media” sources. One is this report by “JUAN” concerning what appears to be the same court appearance documented in the news story that began this post (http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/exp ... ters/21010). It has a somewhat different flavour. There is also a set of messages on the “National Cyber Security” website, entitled “Educating the RCMP on the constitution of Canada”, which date back from 2012 (http://nationalcybersecurity.com/tag/rcmp/) but I don’t see the linked videos mentioned:

This is a report of what happened with court after Thomas Roberts from the Coquitlam RCMP broke his oath to the sovereign Elizebeth Alexandra Mary House of Windsor by lying under oath, saying Rory-Daniel House of Hawes said he was a “sovereign citizen” (oxymoron) and by saying Rory-Daniel House of Hawes ran a stop sign so Thomas Roberts could get the warrant that he could not get for 3 weeks.

And last I offer a couple videos, one of Rory and buddy with impressive facial hair recounting their Port Coquitlam Court adventures in asking “Who is Regina? Who really is Regina?” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPrSAR1 ... e=youtu.be). The video description offers this summary:

This is the update from our 49th court visit, since Royal Colonial Pirates Thomas Roberts, Danik Nolet, Ray Monsef, Sergey Ostepenko and others took it upon himself to break the Law to steal our property, kidnap and enslave us.

Ray Monsef, who is alledgedly a Corporal and was some sort of a supervisor, stated that he will get us deported just like they did with my brother, who filmed them committing crimes. My brother had to leave the country, but thanks to the footage he streamed live to the internet, the pirates could not delete it afterwards and Crown council could see what the pirates accused us of and what really happened.

Of course the charges were dropped, however we also had to find out that those accusations stayed in the files and according to "Provincial Court Judge" Schmidt from the Richmond Court, it's perfectly fine if Crown Council, in that case Jeffery LaPorte, omitts that all the "witnesses" meaning the pirates were proven already to have lied.

This day we went for under the threat of death again to the Port Coquitlam Court, hoping to get Questions answered, ended up in jail instead.

49 court visits, Rory?! You ought to be getting pretty good at this by now. The attitude of the duo is rather smarmy.

Then we have another video update – this time only with facial hair dude, ‘cause Rory’s back in jail (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du0k7AjWYsM). Facial hair dude sounds much less enthusiastic this time.

So, Burnaby49, I believe we have a new customer for you. I’ll keep an eye on the B.C. Courts website to see if we can identify the next appearance of Rory of the House of Hawes. I presume he will, at some point, be picked up, refused bail, then have his trials scheduled.

And that's what we get for voting for Queen Elizabeth II.

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

I'm getting old, a little vague about things but, but, ok I'll admit it, I don't remember voting for Queen Elizabeth. I can't even remember the election. Sorry. I guess younger more vibrant people like Rory Hawes have an advantage over me on that one.

Keep me posted, perhaps a new courthouse to visit.

[Quixote]

Ignorant American that I am, I have always thought the Queen was just a figurehead. It's nice to hear that she takes a personal interest in the traffic laws in British Columbia.

[Burnaby49]

Ignorant American that I am, I have always thought the Queen was just a figurehead. It's nice to hear that she takes a personal interest in the traffic laws in British Columbia.

She (or at least the crown she represents) is an absolutely key figure in Canadian Freeman mythology. One branch, exemplified by Belanger, thinks she has had her authority revoked for not following the laws in the King James Bible thereby violating her coronation oath to be the "defender of the faith". These types (Nanya is another) believe that, because of this, all laws in Canada are invalid since they all flow from the crown.

Others seem to take the opposite tack, that the crown is the real ruler of Canada (defacto rather than dejure) and are always suing the provincial Lieutenant Governors or the federal Governor General for various things under the belief that the crown can, and is required to, grant them if asked.

My position? Nice lady, very dedicated to her duty, but just a figurehead. If I ever get another traffic ticket I don't plan to rely on her to get me out of it.

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

Whoops, we had one slip through our fingers. Rory Daniel Hawes a.k.a. Rory Daniel House of Hawes (soon to be a leading comedy club) was back in court on Monday, June 2, 2014 in Port Coquitlum Provincial Court. He had been scheduled to appear in court to fix a date for trial, but it seems the matter has ended with him being found guilty. My guess is that means he pled guilty.

So here are the results:

Docket 90014-1

• Charge 1 – Criminal Code s. 129: willfully resisting or obstructing a peace officer - $200 fine
  
  Charge 2 – Criminal Code s. 249.1: flight from a peace officer - $200 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle
  
  Charge 3 – Criminal Code s. 249.1: dangerous operation of a motor vehicle - $400 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle

Docket 91618-5-A

• Charge 1 – Criminal Code s. 145(5.1): breach of a bail undertaking – 1 day jail, $100 victim impact surcharge
  
  Charge 2 – Criminal Code s. 145(3): breach of a bail undertaking – 1 day jail, $100 victim impact surcharge

Docket 91618-4-C

• Charge 1 – Criminal Code s. 253(1)(a): driving while impaired - $500 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle, $150 victim impact surcharge
  
  Charge 2 – Motor Vehicle Act s. 24(3)(b): driving an uninsured vehicle - $1 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle, $0.15 victim impact surcharge
  
  Charge 3 – Criminal Code, s. 145(5.1): breach of a bail undertaking - $1 fine, $0.30 victim impact surcharge
  
  Charge 4 – Motor Vehicle Act s. 24(1): driving without a licence - $1 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle, $0.15 victim impact surcharge
  
  Charge 5 – Criminal Code s. 254(5): failure to provide a breach sample (drunk driving) - $500 fine, 1 year prohibition from operating a motor vehicle, $150 victim impact surcharge

I can’t tell from this whether or not some of these offences are consecutive vs. concurrent, but at worst Rory has accumulated 2 days in jail, $2403.60 in fines, and a six year prohibition from using a motor vehicle.

Rory has three more outstanding charges, all of which are him driving while prohibited. The next hearing for those is set for June 18, 2014 in the New Westminster Provincial Court. I’d put my money on some more guilty pleas.

Rory has said nothing about this on his Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/RORYHAWESTM), though that page does present him in a May 22 photograph with that most dapper of not-really-a-journalists, Gregor Fpic Jahn. Gregor too has nothing to say about this on his Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/gregor.jahn).

Hmm. Where else could I find reporting. The “National Cyber Security” ‘truth!’ news website that previously reported on Rory is suspended. Nothing at Vancouver Media Co-Op. Oh – but here’s something, it turns out Gregor Fpic on May 27, 2014 recorded a video about Rory entitled “wft? Rory is in jail AGAIN? – day 4 and counting…” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BN8Gy9MnGo).

Gregor’s not wearing his trademark red shirt and black tie combination! Gregor seems really on edge, and rather downbeat. Here’s some highlights:

• 0:45 - Rory Hawes apparently voluntarily stayed in jail to avoid Provincial Court judge Rory Walters “who is known to be unfair, in the least!”
  
  1:45 – Rory (the judge) said he’s going to throw Rory (House of Hawes) in jail for at least half a year.
  
  2:15 - Rory (the judge) threw Gregor (the Dapper) in jail for asking why Rory was in jail. This was all a result of inquiries as to “who is Regina!”
  
  3:15 – How could this happen!? The Crown Prosecutor had admitted Rory (HoH) had filed his paperwork properly so “he doesn’t fall in the jurisdiction of Canada”.
  
  4:15 – Rory (HoH) is very conscious of not wanting to be a slave, and not having to do things he doesn’t want to, and “they” legally can’t make him do things – it’s all forced at gunpoint.
  
  5:20 – “We’re all living under a military occupation, it’s not about right or wrong”
  
  7:15 – Judges want to get paid, they want power, and that’s why they won’t admit they really have no legal right “to wage this war against us.”
  
  8:00 – Rory (HoH) got arrested, and appeared in Court on May 27, with a next appearance May 29.
  
  8:30 – Lots of people should show up for Rory’s hearing but … it won’t really do anything. At least we will have witnesses.
  
  10:20 – Rory (HoH) is only in court because his life is being threatened by People With Guns.
  
  11:15 – If only the People With Guns wouldn’t follow judges' instructions…
  
  12:15 – Yes, attending won’t do much but at least Rory (HoH) would like to see you.

I have to say this – Gregor Fpic seems pretty much as lost about the legal system/world as Alexander Ream. Kind of a ‘lowest common denominator’ thing, I guess.

SMS Möwe

[Burnaby49]

Sadly it's not the same without the red shirt and black tie. Appearances matter when you are trying to be authoritative. Gregor also sports, on formal occasions, a pair of sparking polished black leather shoes. I'll bet he's wearing runners in this video. Nice location though, a downtown Vancouver balcony, heading towards sunset on a clear spring afternoon, English Bay in the background.

I'll try and answer Gregor's call for witnesses to this criminal travesty of a trial but it all depends on the hearing time. I have a doctor's appointment in downtown Vancouver in the early afternoon, a last poke and prod at my ribs (doing great, thanks for asking). However Skytrain provides almost door to door service from the New Westminster courthouse to my doctor's office so I can make my appointment if I leave the court a little after noon. So if it a 9:30 and a guilty plea no problem.

As far as missing the June 2nd hearing is concerned I might have skipped it in any case. The Vancouver and New Westminster courthouses are very conveniently located for public transportation (I don't drive) but the Port Coquitlam Provincial court is a real pain in the ass to get to.

The picture of Rory and Gregor on Rory's Facebook page has been cropped. The original has Alexander Ream sitting to Gregor's left. The full picture can be seen here;

https://www.facebook.com/alexander.ream ... =3&theater

While Mowe said;

I have to say this – Gregor Fpic seems pretty much as lost about the legal system/world as Alexander Ream. Kind of a ‘lowest common denominator’ thing, I guess.

I don't know if that is even possible. I saw Alex in action in court. He set an extremely high bar for cluelessness.

[Fmotlgroupie]

Interesting indeed! I'm curious about Rory's $1 fine for driving without insurance. BC is very lenient, relatively, with this offence, but still had a $300 minimum fine. I wonder if it was reduced because he got the driving prohibition, or he actually pleas out to a lesser offence.

Similarly, the minimum penalty for both the impaired driving and breathalyzer refusal as set out in the criminal code is $1000. I really don't understand how Rory got $500 on each.

Finally, it's remarkable that Rory seems to have pled guilty to /everything/. Not something you get with normal people, let alone someone with his "special" mental status. It's certainly a win for society to get the deserved convictions without a freeman circus-trial, so whatever magic the Crown had to use, well done.

As to the driving prohibitions, I'm pretty sure they can be concurrent, so my instinct is that they are mostly concurrent. On the other hand he'll be suspended provincially /indefinitely/ (until he renews his licence, which is forever in Rory's case), and so he will face the same charges and impoundings as if the court gave him a lifetime driving ban. Being a Freeman has its "privileges".

[notorial dissent]

He may well have plead down to avoid the more serious versions of the charges he was facing, and in acceptance of an uncontested guilty from him they dropped or lowered some of the other charges. He doesn't sound like the sharpest knife in the block, and this may well have been the one smart thing he's done in recent history.

[Arthur Rubin]

Finally, it's remarkable that Rory seems to have pled guilty to /everything/.

May I suggest, perhaps, that Rory "refused to enter a plea" or "refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the court", but that he admitted doing (whatever it was) in open court, so the judge read it as a "guilty" plea.

I guess you would have had to have been there.

[Lambkin]

I have to say this – Gregor Fpic seems pretty much as lost about the legal system/world as Alexander Ream. Kind of a ‘lowest common denominator’ thing, I guess.

With a denominator that low, I think we are looking at a divide-by-zero error.

[Fmotlgroupie]

I have to say this – Gregor Fpic seems pretty much as lost about the legal system/world as Alexander Ream. Kind of a ‘lowest common denominator’ thing, I guess.

With a denominator that low, I think we are looking at a divide-by-zero error.

Bear with me, I think this really works:

They have negative knowledge about the legal system.

And what's the (square) root of those negative quantities of knowledge? You guessed it, imaginary knowledge! (Insert rim-shot smiley here)

[Burnaby49]

You Quatloosians are spoiled, two on-the-spot trial reports in two day even if mine can't compare with morrand's reporting of Cherron Marie Phillips' fiasco. Today was Randy Hawe's turn to face three charges of driving while prohibited/ license under suspension. The hearing was held at 9:30 in courtroom 206 of the new Westminster courthouse, a familiar spot since Alexander Ream's trial had also been held here.

When 9:30 came around nothing happening, a bit of a late start. What was of concern was that there was a list of defendants being heard in the courtroom that day and Randy wasn't on it nor was Randy in evidence. Then the judge came on scene and an impressive sight indeed! Looked like an undernourished Santa Claus with a big flowing white beard that went down almost to his waist when he sat, a big bushy mustache that covered most of the rest of his face and full sideburns. However he turned out to be a no nonsense guy who kept proceedings moving briskly.

It turned out to be just a session for assigning court dates, hence the big list of names. First three up to bat were video feeds from remand. The first miscreant was a very matter of fact guy who seemed to take incarceration with equanimity. However he was subject to some confusion,we were in the New Westminster courthouse over charges in New Westminister and he thought that he was dealing with a Vancouver Provincial Court hearing. So judge asked him what the Vancouver charges were. Breaking and entering, car theft, no big deal, his lawyer was negotiating for a guilty plea and a two year sentence. So judge asked him if he wanted to continue with New Westminster trial or wait on Vancouver events. All the same to him, he said he was doing penitentiary time regardless of how it went so logistics irrelevant. So he was held over until Vancouver plea concluded.

Second guy some apparently trivial mischief issue but he was being held for breach of probation. While they were working through his problems Randy walked in, saw his name wasn't on the board, asked the sheriff something then wandered out. I gathered my stuff to follow and see where he was going but by the time I got out he was out of sight. I went down to the lobby to confirm courtroom; 206 correct, so back up and wait. Sat through a couple of assignments then Randy walked back in just in time to be called up.

Mowe had mused that Randy might be considering a guilty plea, not a bit of it! He was feisty, he's going down swinging! First off he was very unhappy that that he was being forced to face trial on what was a clear case of mistaken identity. He had changed his name to place himself outside the jurisdiction of Canada. He was no longer the Rory Hawes the Crown was prosecuting, different guy entirely, and did not want to identify himself under that name. However he reluctantly agreed that if he didn't he would probably, based on prior experience, be "thrown in a cage". So under duress he agreed that he would answer to the name Randy Hawes.

Then he started demanding some evidence from Crown that Crown had apparently refused to give him. Seems he had been brutally assaulted by a six man police undercover "Attack Squad". They had burst into his house, assaulted and injured him, damaged and stolen his property, and tossed him in jail. Serious stuff! He said there was a video and he wanted it as part of his defense because it was a violation of the Unite Nations Declaration of human Rights (actually called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ). Rory said he planned to rely on the UN Declaration and the Constitution of Canada at trial. So the judge asked Rory if he agreed that he was also bound by the Constitution of Canada. Rory waffled. Judge said he wanted a yes or no answer. So Rory said everybody on earth was bound by the Canadian Constitution. Judge said that he thought that Americans would be surprised to hear that. Rory went on and on about how he'd show everybody what parts of his Constitutional rights and UN Charter rights had been violated but, sadly, nobody really cared.

As an aside every Freemanish/sovereign type trial I've reported has had the United Nations Declarations of Human rights brought up as a magic talisman that purportedly allows the defendant to interpret everything he does as a fundamental allowable human right under the Declaration. Yankson, Holmes, Ream, Smith, Lange, Simpson, all of them have used it as a defense. In every case the judge has noted that the Declaration has absolutely no force of law in Canada. Yet they persist.

Then the judge asked Crown counsel "Does the New Westminster RCMP have a unit called the "Attack Squad."" No your honour. Hawes said this happened in Coquitlam. So judge asked the Crown counsel if the Coquitlam RCMP has a unit called the "Attack Squad"". No your honour. Are you aware of the video defendant is referring to? No your honour. So judge told Rory he was out of luck, the judge couldn't order the production of an alleged video by a non-existent police unit.

In any case judge questioned relevance. He asked when the video was taken; before, around, or after the alleged traffic offenses. After. How much after? Rory was cagey, just after. Judge persisted, days, weeks, months? Turns out months so judge said he failed to see any relevance to charges Rory was currently facing.

Then Rory went on how the government was trying to bind him to a contract and since he was too sharp to fall for that one the Crown had no authority over him. Judge asked Crown counsel if the case involved a contract. No your honour. Rory said that since the Crown had admitted there was no contract the case was over and he could walk. Judge brought up the awkward point that Rory was charged under statutory law of British Columbia not contract law and he would have to deal with the charge as legislated. Rory had the answer to that! He said he was going to argue at trial that the province of British Columbia did not exist and the laws of British Columbia were therefore invalid. He based this position on the argument that the government had not successfully managed to finalize valid treaties with the original natives and this meant they still owned and controlled it, not some fictitious provincial entity. Judge said that argument had zero merit and a complete waste of time. There was going to be a trial regardless of Rory's opinions on whether the laws existed or attached to him and he should focus his energies on defending his case on its merits.

Judge then noted that they were only there to determine a trial date (remember?) and asked Crown how long it anticipated was required. Counsel said she had two or three witnesses and an hour and a half should do. Not Rory! He said he needed much more time, he wanted at least ten police witnesses and a batch of "civilian" witnesses. Apparently friends who shared his views. Judge told Rory to remember that it wasn't up to the courts to get the witnesses for Rory, he would have to subpoena them and some might challenge the relevance of their claimed evidence.

Judge told Rory to go to room 213 (I believe trial management) and they would arrange a trial date. Then Rory started going on how he was demanding that he wanted the name of someone in government who "accepted liability" for all of the problems Rory was facing. Judge said "go to room 213" and we were done.

[The Observer]

As an aside every Freemanish/sovereign type trial I've reported has had the United Nations Declarations of Human rights brought up as a magic talisman that purportedly allows the defendant to interpret everything he does as a fundamental allowable human right under the Declaration.

This is another thing I never quite understand about the Freemna/Sovurn movement: they are usually quite vocal in denouncing the UN as some sort of NWO conspiracy that is going to send in black helicopters and ship people off to FEMA death camps, yet the minute the sov get into a courtroom, they immediately start citing UN documents that supposedly protect them. Why would a NWO conspiracy have laws that actually protect the people they want to persecute?

[Famspear]

.....Why would a NWO conspiracy have laws that actually protect the people they want to persecute?

Oh, but that's to confuse the people (or, it is the "sheeple"?) even more! Ohhh....... the nefarious, shape-shifting lizard - New World Order international banksters are sooooo evil!

[Hilfskreuzer Möwe]

No no - you're confusing the good United Nations with the bad United Nations.

The good United Nations operates under common law, and has its own common law world court! The bad United Nations is the corporation operated by shape-shifting reptiles.

And the 13 Illuminati Satanic Bloodlines - especially the Bundys. They're heavy into operation of the bad corporate United Nations.

SMS Möwe

[LordEd]

I've thought a few times and believe that these 'grand conspiracies' like freemanism, NWO, chemtrails, smart meters, etc. are a great control mechanism to keep those with, shall we say, a less focused mind busy wasting their time watching the skies for slow dissipating jet contrails (or more likely pictures of them on the internet from a basement) instead of getting involved in more extreme activities.

[notorial dissent]

But...but...but that would require like work and perspiration and things........

[Burnaby49]

As an aside every Freemanish/sovereign type trial I've reported has had the United Nations Declarations of Human rights brought up as a magic talisman that purportedly allows the defendant to interpret everything he does as a fundamental allowable human right under the Declaration.

This is another thing I never quite understand about the Freemna/Sovurn movement: they are usually quite vocal in denouncing the UN as some sort of NWO conspiracy that is going to send in black helicopters and ship people off to FEMA death camps, yet the minute the sov get into a courtroom, they immediately start citing UN documents that supposedly protect them. Why would a NWO conspiracy have laws that actually protect the people they want to persecute?

I think hating the UN is limited to your American Freemen. Our Canadian variants don't seem to have any problems with the UN. We don't have a Black Helicopter/Death Camps mythology or equivalent. I don't think American sovereigns rely on the UN much in court, they seem to favour the Constitution.

[ontobserver]

I think hating the UN is limited to your American Freemen. Our Canadian variants don't seem to have any problems with the UN. We don't have a Black Helicopter/Death Camps mythology or equivalent. I don't think American sovereigns rely on the UN much in court, they seem to favour the Constitution.

An acquaintance of mine here in Ontario is a big Dean Clifford fan. Several months ago, this gentleman told me that Dean's court case was going to prove that the FMOTL ideologies are valid or "they" were going to "suicide" Dean before that happened. I haven't talked to him in a while to see what he thinks of Dean now.

While this gentleman isn't a practicing freeman, I can see it in his future. I'm not sure who his influences are beyond Dean, but this gentleman is definitely in the "UN is Evil" camp...everything from de-population to the Agenda 21 Conspiracy! The odd thing is, I think he also mentioned the "United Nations Declarations of Human rights". However, I shouldn't be surprised as about 1/3 of the conspiracies he tried to explain was almost a complete contradiction of another.

[JamesVincent]

I think hating the UN is limited to your American Freemen. Our Canadian variants don't seem to have any problems with the UN. We don't have a Black Helicopter/Death Camps mythology or equivalent. I don't think American sovereigns rely on the UN much in court, they seem to favour the Constitution.

I don't know that the FEMA camp and black helicopter group is the same as the anti-UN group. A lot of what I've seen with most especially FEMA is anti-Obama or even just anti-government whereas the anti-UN group is more of a UN world de-population by starving, anti-anti-gun rights (most especially after the UN resolution banning firearms sales globally, which doesn't apply to us anyway), things of that nature, or, just plain old UN keep your noses out of our roses. I've seen quite a few demanding the UN be thrown out of the country (which sounds hard considering, technically, the UN is the UNs property, is it not?). Not saying the two can't mix but mostly what I've seen is they tend to be two different groups.